Before the wires go up... Prepare for double-deckers?

[krus_aragon]

indeed I am.

and thelem, lower floors also means lower centre of gravity, like articulation, and it also means that the train can be wider from lower, facilitating 3+2 seating, but with decent size seats and leg room.

All english trains look "perched" to me

Still no-one answering 'why' the floor is so high and we always have to step down onto a platform.

Not all platforms are high. Some rural platforms in Wales are much lower than today's standard carriage height: Valley, Aberdyfi and Roman Bridge are examples that come to mind. An LNWR autotrain working on the Red Wharf Bay branch on Anglesey had fold-down steps for use at halts, and I dare say this happened elsewhere too. Could it be that it was easier to raise major platforms to a common height than to lower them?

Also, would any GWR fans happen to know if Brunel used lower carriages on his broad gauge?

 

[GB]

I think he means using wagons similar to those used in America, where the bottom container is right down between the bogeys

We do, they are known as "pocket" wagons mainly to alow W10 traffic on a W8 or W9 route, though admittedly we don't use them to the same extent as the US.

But even these wagons have their own drawbacks as there is not the usuall 60ft of loading space.

Double stacking of containers is all well and good, but aside from the obvious guage clearance issues, the weight of the train would usually far exceed what the infustructure could handle as said previously. It would also take an age for the train to get up to a decent speed and would have trouble maintaining it due to nature of the signalling and the high frequency levels of passenger trains.

But on a brand new route then I dont see why it can't be built with double stacking or double deckers in mind.

The reason why current passenger stock floors are "high" I imagine is to accommodate all the electrical and on board equipment.

 

[Yank 119]

There's quite a few North American companies running double decker;

It's safe to say that the majority of North American passenger operators use bilevel equipment. It's also safe to say that the UK is one of very few European countries not to currently operate bilevel equipment. Luxembourg even manages to do it! China, Israel, and Japan also come to mind.

 

[thelem]

I think he means using wagons similar to those used in America, where the bottom container is right down between the bogeys, so they can have a second one on top, and keep the centre of gravity as low as possible. They are also often articulated.

http://4rail.net/4rmedia/nam/usa_seattle_stackstrain1_L.jpg

Hmm, stacking containers clearly has some advantages then, but what are they compared to a single height train with twice the length? I would have thought longer, lighter trains would reduce track and train wear.

 

[jopsuk]

Hmm, stacking containers clearly has some advantages then, but what are they compared to a single height train with twice the length? I would have thought longer, lighter trains would reduce track and train wear.

Twice the length of those trains would be quite, quite mental. I would guess the primary reason though for not going longer is the length of the marshalling yards.

 

[LucaZone]

Route Clearance isnt the deciding factor for double deck trains in the UK. I thought it was track construction. The track we have on most lines is the cheapest stuff possible to do the job. Anything heavier would crush it.

The baine of uk development is lack of forward planning because we can save money doing only exactly what was asked.

As soon as we want to do something extra...its a case of rip it up and start again!

 

[j0hn0]

The reason why current passenger stock floors are "high" I imagine is to accommodate all the electrical and on board equipment.

I'm not so sure, I can understand with a diesel MU but surely not electric trains? Pendos yes because they have the tilting mechanism, but a 321? a Desiro? or any others, it just doesn't make sense to have such high floored trains.

I don't get it

 

[Aussie_Rail]

Where are you getting that from?
All of the CityRail AC units are currently double deck, as are the next ones (the A sets, I think?). The only single deck ones are the diesel units running on certain lines (Hunter line and one other IIRC).

AFAIK, all other railways in Austrailia are all single deck.

Correct. Sydney is the only City in Australia that operate with double-deck trains now, a few years ago a 'Tangara' type double decker train called the '4D' operated in Melbourne for a few years before being taken out of service and scrapped a few years later.

Info about Sydney's train fleet can be found here:

http://www.cityrail.info/about/fleet/

And a wiki-page about Melbourne's infamous '4D' can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4D_(train)

 

[tbtc]

I'm not so sure, I can understand with a diesel MU but surely not electric trains? Pendos yes because they have the tilting mechanism, but a 321? a Desiro? or any others, it just doesn't make sense to have such high floored trains.

I don't get it

...but the 321s etc have to use the same platforms as the 390s, so they have to be around the same height - it'd only work on a "closed" network (e.g.
C2C)

 

[jopsuk]

I'm not so sure, I can understand with a diesel MU but surely not electric trains? Pendos yes because they have the tilting mechanism, but a 321? a Desiro? or any others, it just doesn't make sense to have such high floored trains.

I don't get it

Larger wheels, and this goes in general for all forms of transport, will generally give better, more stable and smoother ride, especially at speed. So, whilst the tilting trains do have smallish wheels to allow the tilt, all other units, stock and locos have wheels that are as big as will fit, given a design floor height appropriate to the network.

 

[90019]

Correct. Sydney is the only City in Australia that operate with double-deck trains now, a few years ago a 'Tangara' type double decker train called the '4D' operated in Melbourne for a few years before being taken out of service and scrapped a few years later.

I quite like the style of most of the Cityrail fleet, but the Tangaras just look odd.
I remember going on the upper deck of one train (not sure what it was) and the top of the windows was curved, which I though was horrible, and I couldn't look through that bit
Also, with some of the older , the formations seemed to be a bit random.