Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="carnej1"] [quote user="Bucyrus"] Today, standard gauge seems like the perfect choice because it emerged as the consensus over a century ago, nobody questions it, and it appears to work perfectly.  The larger reality, however, is that there is no point in questioning it because it cannot be changed.    Before the consensus, when there was freedom to choose the gauge, there were many opinions on what the ideal gauge should be, all based on the cost of construction and operation for each individual railroad.  This engineering and operating cost analysis was quite complex, and there were some brilliant minds working out the problem.  Even for an individual railroad company, the choice of gauge was a big commitment.    But more important than an ideal gauge for individual railroad economics was the need for consensus for a common or standard gauge because it was an absolute necessity for interchange compatibility.  So they picked what seemed like the best gauge on average for their 1800s era, and put the matter to rest.     Since the adoption of standard gauge, however, the physical dimensions of locomotives, rolling stock, and track components have increased considerably while the gauge has remained the same.  There never has been a consensus on those equipment and track component dimensions simply because there never was a need for one.  Had there not been that need for the standard gauge consensus for gauge compatibility, I believe that gauge would have evolved right along with the other physical dimensions.  So while standard gauge may seem like the optimum now, it is actually likely be as obsolete as the 30-ft. boxcar.    The evolution of increasing locomotive, rolling stock, and track component dimensions is strong evidence suggesting that the perfect gauge for today would be larger than today’s 56.5”-gauge, if the matter were not permanently frozen by a decision in the pioneering era of the 1800s.  Therefore, it is quite possible that today's standard gauge might be railroading's greatest flaw. [/quote] Following your logic then, is the 8 and a half foot lane width on the interstates over the road truckings "biggest flaw"? After all, a tractor trailer built to run in a 12 foot wide lane would carry considerably more cargo than what we have currently..  I would love to see some actual numbers that would support the claim that re-gauging the rail network (with the corresponding increases to the loading gauge/clearances) to some sort of super broad gauge would make any economic sense at all, especially considering the fact that freight (and passenger) equipment has increased in size by several orders of magnitude since the 19th century.   [/quote]  carnej1, With all due respect, I believe you are missing my point.  For example, there is nothing analogous between railroad gauge and interstate lane width that pertains to the point I am making.  On the contrary, freeway lane widths are not frozen by a long-standing consensus to be identical for the purpose of interchange.  They don’t need to be since lanes do not have to specifically match the features of road vehicle running gear the way that railroads do. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> You say that you would love to see some actual numbers that would support the claim that re-gauging the rail network to some sort of super broad gauge would make any economic sense at all.  I don’t know of anybody who is making that claim let alone trying to support it.   <o:p></o:p> The point has to be moot since it cannot possibly make any economic sense because everything would have to be converted, and the conversion would have to be simultaneous and nearly instantaneous.  The horse has left the barn when it comes to the selection of a standard gauge. <o:p></o:p> And if somebody did make an economic study showing that a different gauge would be preferable within the context that we were hypothetically starting from scratch with no prior commitment, that person would be wildly debated by others coming to different conclusions as they crunched the numbers of component size, equipment capacity, wear, stress, etc.   Overall, my point is that standard gauge was developed according to engineering criteria as it stood over a century ago.  If we were free to develop a standard gauge today on the same criteria, I bet the result would not be 56.5-inches.  So the fact that standard gauge today is prevalent is not evidence that it is optimum as is widely presumed.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag