Narrow gauge allows tighter curves, smaller rolling stock, and reduced construction costs.
Broad gauge, as in the USSR railroads, was to prevent the Germans from easily utilizing their rail system for a military invasion. I think the Russian rail guage is still 5 foot.
Suggest you read the late Prof. George Hilton's book on the American Narrow Gauge. (For all the promoters claiming cheaper construction,Hilton debunked each part of those claims thoroughly)
Erie started with six foot guage. I'm sure there are plenty of references with the original rationale. In the early days of railroads, everyone had their own idea of how it should be done. And, in some ways, they were inhibited by the contemporary technologies, or lack thereof. And when it's all over, people still can't agree on why 4' 8.5" (1435 mm) ended up being the standard.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
You need to look at this from the perspective of 1830, not 2014.
Between 1830 and 1860 railroads were seen as local ventures, to connect an origin, usually a seaport with its hinterland. The Baltimore & Ohio is an example. It was more ambitious than most. The Ohio reference is the Ohio River. The other common vision was to haul a known trafic over country too rough for canals. The Deleware & Hudson started this way with the coal hauling railroad an extensioin of the coal hauling canal company. Under these conditions there was no need for uniformity of gauge, coupler height or a host of other design details. In addition, the industry was one big experiment in the sense that no one knew what would work best.
Since some early locomotives were imported from England, wich used 4' 8.5" gauge, lines planning to import power were built to fit the English equipment. The PRR, chartered in 1845 IIRC, used 4'9" gauge. Many Ohio lines used 4' 10" for reasons now lost to history. Of course many southern lines were 5', but there were also several 4' 8.5" gauge lines in the south. The Civil War demonstrated the cost of multiple gauges on both sides of the Mason/Dixon line.
Our network is standard gauge because that is what was selected by A. Lincoln who Congress delegated the task of selecting a gauge and locating the starting point of the Union Pacific. By 1862 the NYC and its affiliated CNW were both standard gauge and both wanted a single gauge route with the UP. IIRC they and others encouraged Lincoln to select "standard" gauge. This was a reasonable choice since much of the Union rail network was standard gauge already. PRR and the Ohio gauge roads converted to standard shortly after the war. Southern roads that were 5' generally converted in the 1880's.
The narrow, 36", gauge was entirely separate. In the 1870's promoters decided that it would be much cheaper to build narrow gauge lines since narrow gauge meant narrow roadbeds which meant less cut and fill given a particular alignment in rolling or mountain country. At a time when a ten ton tare box car could carry a 10 ton load regardless of the gauge, the theory was credible. What the Hilton book explains is that experience showed that in practice, construction costs were cheaper largely due to lesser standards of engineering, mostly sharper curves, which of course limited speed. The gauge itself did not make much difference. The other thing the promoters missed, which they should not have, was the cost of transloading shipments at the interchange/gauge break point. Many short lines built narrow were standard gauged shortly after they were built for these reasons. All this is forgotten now since all we see are the DRGW narrow gauge remnants and the White Pass & Yukon.
Mac
ML
width
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
But "guage" almost universally in financial documents (such as for equipment financing), for reasons that are lost to history.
- Paul North.
BART may have been carrying on another tradition - political entities requiring the people who wanted to build streetcar lines to use a gauge that would NOT allow interchange. No freight cars in the streets, thank you.
George Stephenson built the Stockton and Darlington to 4' 8.5" gauge because he had previous experience with coal mine tramways of that approximate gauge and was comfortable with it. Since he bacame England's premier locomotive builder that set the gauge for most of the early railways in the British Isles as well as some in the Northeastern US. Brunel derided Stephenson's preference as, "Mine cart gauge," and built his railroads to 7' 1/4" gauge. Fifty years later those railroads were shrunk to standard gauge by government fiat.
Railroads in the South had been built, mostly, to 5 foot gauge. The gauge was narrowed in a single mighty effort over about two days in 1886. At the same time the Erie was narrowed from six feet to standard. Earlier, Congress had decreed standard gauge for the transcontinental route, using the B&O as a template.
I once found a fascinating list of track gauges ranging from one foot to three meters put together by The Gauge Sage. Unfortunately, that link no longer works. (Three meters? Hitler's idea for a super-railroad, to be built after Germany unified Europe...)
Chuck
I suspect there are many other things besides track width that would prevent anybody interchanging with BART, for example the subway tunnel profile must surely be too small for railroad cars.
There are several gauges that seem to predominate on the world's various railroads: 3', meter, 3'6" (Cape gauge), 4'8.5" (standard), 5', 5'3" and 5'6". Cape gauge and 5'3" seem to be found primarily in former British possessions.
GDRMCoGauge*
In North American Railway Engineering practice it's GAGE, which my former boss would frequently remind everyone. Check the AREMA Manual for example.
cacole I think the Russian rail guage is still 5 foot.
I think the Russian rail guage is still 5 foot.
Close but not quite. 5' it is 1524mm. Stalin did not like the gage to be an odd number in the Metric system so he ordered the railway regaged to 1520mm. This was accomplished by changing the cant on the tie plates. The Finnish gage remains at 1524. When asked what gage the Helsinki St.Petersburg trains are built to the answer was 1522mm, a gage that exists nowhere (by design anyway)!
I always go with "gage." It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?
Euclid I always go with "gage." It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?
My former boss who was somewhat of a linguist maintained that measurements are taken with a gauge such as pressure gauge or a rain gauge A fixed measurement or set of measurements such as the distance between the rails or a set of clearance measurements is a gage (as in loading gage for the clearance measurements). I could only take his word for it, but then he was a former PRR guy!
Gage--doen't that refer to greengage plums?
Johnny
You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick.
I think that's what they teach in school these days. If you can't spell it, fake it.
Norm
CSSHEGEWISCH Euclid I always go with "gage." It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five? You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick.
No Tribune Simplfied Spelling Systen; just a word with two alternate spellings.
Euclid CSSHEGEWISCH Euclid I always go with "gage." It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five? You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick. No Tribune Simplfied Spelling Systen; just a word with two alternate spellings. gage4 /ɡeɪdʒ/ noun, verb 1. (US) a variant spelling (esp in technical senses) of gauge
Its interesting to note that even the FRA Track Safety Standards use gage.
BuslistIn North American Railway Engineering practice it's GAGE, which my former boss would frequently remind everyone. Check the AREMA Manual for example.
Much as it galls me to say this -- when referring to AREMA standards (which means when discussing the technical details of track 'width') it's "gage". No need to invent a reason why four letters gets the job done as well as five.
Here is CSX official language (from their "Standard Specifications for the Design and Construction of Private Sidetracks"):
"The gage of track is the distance between the heads of rails, measured at right angles thereto, at a pointfive-eighths (5/8”) inch below the top of rail. Standard gage is 4’-8 1/2”. No change in gage on accountof curvature will be permitted without the express permission of CSXT. Gaging must be done at thetime the rail is laid."
To drive home the point, here is language from the BNSF counterpart ("Design Guidelines for Industrial Track Projects") which not only establishes the difference, but makes it in the 'opposite' direction from the semantics I learned:
"A track gauge manufactured for the purpose of measuring gage should be used ratherthan a tape measure. Gage is to be checked at every third tie. Do not strike rail directly with a maul,either on top when driving spikes, or on side to obtain track gage."
Note that these are both references provided for non-railroad personnel, for whom the word 'gauge' would almost surely be the 'accepted' normal and correct spelling... and many of whom might be inclined to complain about the spelling that has been used...
I think now that this is stronger than some other nomenclatural controversies, like "SE Mallet" for "simple articulated", or my own "ancillaries" for "auxiliaries". Perhaps one of the professionals like MC can weigh in on the correct use of 'gage' in technical contexts.
[Note: the wack formatting of the quoted sections is due to more stellar design by the Kalmbach IT people. May they get around to restoring the 'compose' feature -- preferably with the ability to edit in formatted view, about the only way to fix this kind of problem with rendering line breaks -- soon!]
Okay; just don't spell it "guage."
A check for on-line definitions shows that "gage" is a variation on "gauge," but that "gage" itself makes no mention of measurement at all:
noun 1. something, as a glove, thrown down by a medieval knight in token ofchallenge to combat. 2. Archaic. a challenge. 3. Archaic. a pledge or pawn; security. verb (used with object), gaged, gaging. 4. Archaic. to pledge, stake, or wager.
verb (used with object), gaged, gaging.
Euclid Either “gage” or “gauge” are correct. Both are equally valid spellings. It makes no difference how railroad companies or other railroad organizations spell it. Like everyone else, they are free to choose which of the two legitimate spellings to use.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding
Either am correct?
Just like the spelling of theater/theatre. Either is correct...it's just the preference of the writer.
I worked with PBTB in Atlanta (MARTA) along side many of the engineers who designed BART. I was told that the BART gauge would provide greater stability in minor earthquakes and high coastal winds. They also wanted a unique system evidenced by the "A" cars with the sloped nose.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.