Trains.com

WIDE gauge RRs in the USA?

18643 views
83 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Friday, August 28, 2009 9:40 AM

dredmann

New Orleans' streetcars run on broad-gauge track. IIRC, it's maybe 5'2"?

It was not uncommon for streetcar lines to be built to slightly larger or narrower gauge than standard gauge. As noted, this was often done to assure local residents that the line wouldn't / couldn't be used for hauling freight cars, only the trolleys.

Similarly I believe Russia set up 5' gauge not because the wider gauge allowed for larger cars etc. but because it made it harder for an invader, because the invading countries trains wouldn't be able to use Russian rails without them taking the time to re-gauge the track or change axles on the cars.

Stix
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Friday, August 28, 2009 11:20 AM

wjstix

dredmann

New Orleans' streetcars run on broad-gauge track. IIRC, it's maybe 5'2"?

It was not uncommon for streetcar lines to be built to slightly larger or narrower gauge than standard gauge. As noted, this was often done to assure local residents that the line wouldn't / couldn't be used for hauling freight cars, only the trolleys.

Similarly I believe Russia set up 5' gauge not because the wider gauge allowed for larger cars etc. but because it made it harder for an invader, because the invading countries trains wouldn't be able to use Russian rails without them taking the time to re-gauge the track or change axles on the cars.

 During the early part of the Cold War the US ARMY purchased a small fleet of 13 EMD MRS1 diesel locomotives with multigauge trucks which could be adapted to most track standards worldwide,including the Russian broad gauge.

 One explanation for the fact that much of the Spanish railway network uses  a broad gauge of 5'5"3/4 is that when it was built in the 19th century it was though that it would make it more difficult for an invader to attack Spain from France. a more dubious story is that during the postwar years Franco could have ordered the system to convert to standard gauge but didn't for the same reasons..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Friday, August 28, 2009 8:04 PM

carnej1
..........

 One explanation for the fact that much of the Spanish railway network uses  a broad gauge of 5'5"3/4 is that when it was built in the 19th century it was though that it would make it more difficult for an invader to attack Spain from France. ......

 

In Canada, when the Grand Trunk Railway was being built from Portland Maine through Montreal, Toronto to Sarnia around 1850, the government mandated a gauge of 5'-6" for any railway that wanted financial assistance.  It was intentionally different from the typical standard gauge US roads to the south of the border.  The War of 1812-1814 had occurred only 35 years before, and invasion was still a real concern.  By having a different gauge, transportation logistics for any new invasion would be a lot more difficult. 

Of course instead relations between the two countries became a lot more friendly.  It soon became obvious the commercial need for easy interchange was far more important than a dwindling military threat and most lines were standard gauged in the 1870s.  The Grand Trunk Railway ended up in dire financial trouble, mostly as result of its transcontinental extension to Prince Rupert, and disappeared into the formation of Canadian National Railways around 1920.  Only its lines in the USA retained the name, presumably as a public relations exercise.

John

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Saturday, August 29, 2009 5:56 PM

Random comments and questions:  the "Map of the Month" in the October 2009 Trains is great.  It could have been aided by another fold page -- it is quite crowded, no?  I have taken an orange 'Hi-Liter' to mine and noted the active narrow gauge lines.  That helps a lot.  Please note that abandoned narrow gauge lines are not shown.  There were oodles of them in New York and Pennsylvania alone.  Chad Walkers atlas series notes these.

Wasn't the idea of the use of broad-gauge in Russia to discourage invasion from the west?  Didn't they develop a reliable, albiet labor-intensive, gauge-shifting wheel set for interchange of passenger cars?

I was stationed at Fort Clayton, Canal Zone, right across from the Miraflores Locks, in '75-'77.  I never did investigate the gauge of the "mules", but the PCR was 5'-0" then.  There was a huge awkward-looking offset swing bridge over the canal that had tracks and roadway on it.  The "mules" were isolated, especially those between the two canal lanes, so I don't think interchange was an issue.

CN's Newfoundland Railway, later Terra Nova, changed freight car trucks at Port-aux-Basques, NL.  The passenger cars and locomotives were "captive".

If high-wides were a big business, New York Central would never have abandoned the Putnam Division.  It was rather famous for that traffic.  It was not build as a 'wide-gauge' line.

Bill Hays -- Shelby, MT, on the old Great Falls & Canada narrow gauge. 

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:43 PM

Some folks seem to be confusing the Panama Railway (now known as the Panama Canal Railway) with the electric "mule" locomotives used in the canal's lock system......

The Railway is a freight and passenger carrier that runs through the canal zone from the Atlantic to the Pacific originally constructed in the mid 19th century and extensively rerouted when the canal was built. It was built as a broad gauge (5 ft.) railroad but was rebuilt to standard gauge in recent years. It currently carries containers and tourist trains:

http://www.trainweb.org/panama/

http://www.panarail.com/

 

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    March 2008
  • 75 posts
Posted by highgreen on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 11:56 AM
Re Mapmaker's 8-23-09 post on Pittsburgh's 5' 2 1/2" gauge T (light rail) lines, when I look down at Wheeling & Lake Erie's standard gauge trackage from a T 42 line LRV on the flyover near South Hills Jct., 4' 8 1/2" seems like narrow gauge. "Relativity" at work, I guess.
  • Member since
    September 2009
  • 30 posts
Posted by D&HRetiree on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 3:21 PM

The streetcar system in St. John's NFLD was 42" same at the Newfoundland Ry. As far as I know Toronto Transit's 4'10-7/8" gauge is unique.

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 11:27 AM

It's a Super-Train, It's a Mega -Truck.......It's an American "Euro Auto Bahn" system...

http://www.feierbach.com/18EUROAUTOBAHNE.html

Anyone want to invest (I apologize in advance for the fact that the Stock Certificates I'm issuing are handwritten in crayon)?..

 

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:36 PM

This is rather off-the-wall, but what gauge was used on the incline planes that carried canal boats over the Allegheny Mountains, west of Hollidaysburg, PA on the Allegheny Portage Railroad, before the PRR put them out of business?

Were any of the precursors of the New York City subway system other-than-standard gauge?

I am guessing that the CNJ "Ashley Inclined Planes", up near Wilkes-Barre, were standard gauge and the freight cars ran on their own trucks.  Are any remnants of that operation left?

Bill -- wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:54 PM

More "off-the-wall":  what is the gauge of the 'tramway' that connects the senate/house buildings (whatever) in its subway in Washington, DC?

I fell in love with 'narrow gauge' at the Rye, NY "Playland Amusement Park".  The tracks were there, when I was a kid in the '50s (12" or 15"?), but I never saw a train run.  Oh, well...  Off to the "Cyclone" and "Dragon Coaster" (there was one other)...  Sadly, they are gone, I think:  not PC, much to the tort-lawyers' chagrin!  Is the "Bobs" still running in Chicago?  Coney Island's coaster(s) is/are gone, too, no?  Never did ride it/them.  What gauge where they?  Roller coasters must have had some sort of a common gauge.

Bill Hays --  wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Northview, Missouri
  • 409 posts
Posted by JamesP on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 9:17 PM

In regards to roller coasters, I found the following information at  http://www.coasterglobe.com/features/quickreference-dictionary/index.cfm :

Track Gauge - The distance between the center of the rails. Wood coasters typically have a track gauge of 42 to 44 inches. Most box-section-spine steel track has a gauge of 1.2m. Arrow and Vekoma loopers use a gauge of 48 inches.

As a side note, most amusement park trains today are 2' gauge, but this hasn't always been the case.  Gauges of 12", 12 5/8", 14", 15", 16", 18", 19" and 20" were all used in addition to the common 2' and 3' gauges.  Common wisdom says that many park train manufacturers used odd gauges so that their customers would have to come back to them for future trains rather than regauge the track to fit a competitor's equipment.  Even so, some builders could deliver trains of various gauges, such as MTC's "G-16" being available in 14", 15" and 16" gauge.  Of course, these days most amusement parks that have a train need at least a 2' gauge operation to carry enough people to make it worthwhile.

  - James

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Thursday, September 3, 2009 3:19 PM

Another proposal for a broader track gauge of 47 feet from rail to rail:

http://members.tripod.com/~charles_W/widerr.html

....the fact that the same page contains a rant about the evils of water Flouridation is indicative of the mental state of the author, but at least he dreams big...

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Thursday, September 3, 2009 5:26 PM

I hope, for his own protection, old Charlie is ensconced in an escape-proof, organically-grown, non-Vulcanized, rubber room!  Scary guy!

Bill Hays

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Thursday, September 3, 2009 5:30 PM

I didn't get the 31 August edition of the Trains Newsletter. If there was one published, would someone please forward it to me via e-mail?  TIA!

Bill Hays --  wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Thursday, September 3, 2009 5:38 PM

Cool reference and neat information.  Thank you!

Bill Hays

  • Member since
    April 2002
  • From: Northern Florida
  • 1,429 posts
Posted by SALfan on Thursday, September 17, 2009 10:49 AM

TH&B

Ya , but give even one example that broad gage can do better the standard gage?  

Have you ever ridden rail mass transit that is standard gauge?  I did, every work day, for eight years.  The standard 2-seats, aisle, 2-seats configuration in a standard subway/light rail car doesn't provide enough seat width for today's population, especially in cold climates where everyone is bundled up in heavy jackets.  A broad gauge car with wider seats and aisle would be MUCH more comfortable.

Could a wider car be built and run on standard gauge?  I'm not an engineer and don't pretend to know.  One thing I DO know is that wider seats and more room on mass transit would be a major improvement.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:08 AM

Most current 'heavy-rail' commuter cars that I'm familiar with are 3x2 seating.  It's OK in the summer, though you're right about the winter constraints.  But 'back in the day', the Reading Railroad's electrified steel commuter cars had 2x2 seating, and there was plenty of room in them for all seasons - of course, I was smaller then, too . . . Smile,Wink, & Grin

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:30 AM

I guess the SETI array in the Arizona desert doesn't count?

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:13 PM

Rapid transit equipment is generally built to a much tighter loading gauge (clearance diagram) than conventional passenger cars.  A new rapid transit system could be built to a larger loading gauge but it would be virtually impossible to expand the loading gauge on existing systems. 

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:30 PM

True enough  - but my point, based on TH&B's challenge, is that for either version of a rapid transit system, the track could still be standard gage, and still accomodate a comfortable 2x2 seating layout.

And in response to MC's 'SETI' = 'Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence' antenna array example: Then what about the 'marine railways' that are used for running boats and small ships in and out of the water, gantry and other crane runways, and the wacky outrigger rails for the locomotive cranes at a certain large concrete cylinder pipe plant in northeastern Maryland a few years ago ?

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Friday, September 18, 2009 12:24 AM

mudchicken

I guess the SETI array in the Arizona desert doesn't count?

 

I presume you're referring to the VLA (Very Large Array) about 50 miles west of Socorro, NM? The one that was featured in Contact? (Speaking of the characters in Contact, I hung out on Kent Culler's repeater during my last year in grad school at Cal, and met him in person on a few occasions).

- Erik

Edit: The Very Large Array consists of 27 movable 82' diameter "dish" antennas, where the antennas are transported on a pairs of railroad tracks in the form of a giant "Y". The antenna spacing is varied to optimize for different observation targets, wide spacing is good for maximum angular resolution but is susceptible to "ghost" images, while narrow spacing reduces the "ghost" problem at the expense of reduced angular resolution. At the widest spacing, the VLA has the same resolution as the 200 inch optical telescope on Palomar Mountain.

Higher resolution images can be obtained through very long baseline interferometry, which has the interesting benefit of providing position information for the antennas with centimeter accuracy. A modified form of this technique is used for surveying with GPS.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Friday, September 18, 2009 10:55 AM

Yes I have indeed.  I have ridden the very small but standard gauge tube trains in London and the extra wide spacy 3+3 seating of the Copenhagen S trains wich is also standard gauge.  In Copenhagen all the new S trains are 2 feet wider then normal UIC trains in Scandinavia, wich is also about 2 feet wider then mainline passenger trains in North America, but still standard gauge track.   I have also ridden the older British compartment cars with no aisle and people are seated wall to wall in the coach.  These types are now gone.

 

Wider commuter cars just makes for less window seats, so it doesn't suit me , but seems to suit the transit agencies because they can jam more people in a wider train.  Wider coaches would be nice for luxery trains to give more space though.  But my point realy is that you can have wider trains without wider gauge.  It is done on certain railways around the world. Wide trains are usualy limited to certain routes because they are over dimensional on the rest of the networks.  The drawback is realy is the loading clearances, bridges and tunnels and double track are expesive to widen even if the gauge stays standard.

 

I have also ridden TTC subways and the BART , wich are both broad gauge, but nothing special about them so I hope that the decision to be broad gauge was a smart and cost effective one for these trains.  They are not the widest body, fastest nor smoothest trains I've ridden. They feel like ordinary standard gauge trains, so I remain unclear what the advantage is of being wider in gauge for these trains ?

 

PS; I'm not an engineer either, but I have seen the use of wide trains on standard gauge, even for 90+ mph regular sevice.  So that means it can be done.  Weather it is cost effective is for each railroad to decide for itself i guess.  I would like to know more about the Newfoundland CNR railways that ran long distance trains with standard plate C freight cars on 3' 6" gauge.  What the speeds and ride quality was and stuff ?

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, September 19, 2009 2:04 PM

TH&B

I have also ridden TTC subways and the BART , wich are both broad gauge, but nothing special about them so I hope that the decision to be broad gauge was a smart and cost effective one for these trains.  They are not the widest body, fastest nor smoothest trains I've ridden. They feel like ordinary standard gauge trains, so I remain unclear what the advantage is of being wider in gauge for these trains ?

 

The wide gauge for BART was chosen to provide stability for trains running on the lower deck of the Golden Gate Bridge during periods of high winds. The was mooted when Marin County voted against BART. I think it is safe to say that BART would have been better off built standard gauge.

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Bath, England, UK
  • 712 posts
Posted by Tulyar15 on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 8:42 AM

A very intersting thred!

 I think it was MurphySiding who raised the question about self contained industrial lines built to broad gauge to suit local circumstances. Well I do know of such a line, at a nuclear power station in Scotland that is built to the unique (as far as I know) gauge 5' 4". The reason for this gauge is purely and simply that the line's sole purpose is transporting containers containing nuclear material around the site. From a stability point of view the designers decided that 5' 4" was the ideal gauge, so that was the gauge to which it was built. Ironically its locomotives are two tint 48hp Ruston and Hornsby  4 wheel diesels! I gather they are the last remaining examples of their class (a standard R & H design) in commercial use but plenty others can be found on preserved railways hereabouts.

 I note with interest the point about certain streetcar system in the US being to a non-standard gauge to prevent freight trains using them. I wonder if this was why the new tram system in Dublin, Ireland was built to 4' 8.5" gauge? (In an Irish context 4' 8.5" is non standard ; the standard gauge is 5' 3"; there are also a lot of narrow gauge industrial lines and in the late 19th century some 5' 3" lines were converted to 3' gauge mainly because at that time government susbisidies were available  to those building narrow gauge lines. In  the case of the Cork, Blackrock and Passage line, narrowing the gauge enabled them to double track the line!).

The point has already been made about the new high speed lines in Spain being 4' 8.5" rather than that country's standard gauge of 5' 6"; in due course it is planned they will link with France's 4' 8.5" network. Curiously, in the northern Spanish province of Asturia up until the 1980's there was an isolated 4' 8.5" line which served the provincial capital Gijon. It had a terminus alongside the broad gauge RENFE station (RENFE is Spain's national rail road) and the metre gauge FEVE station (the FEVE system is owned by the regional government). After it was taken over by the FEVE it's line was converted to metre gauge and the former terminus is now the Asturian Railway Museum where they have locos and stock on display of no less than FIVE gauges; the above three plus some 2' and 2' 6".

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy