Broad gauge and carriage width

[jas_sl]

Hi all - I know that broad gauge is 7ft 1/4inch wide, which is quite a bit more than standard gauge. But looking at pictures of the carriages and locomotives running on broad gauge I can work out in how much extra space the inside of a carriage had.

Standard gauge carriages overhang the boogies quite a bit whereas the pics of broad gauge trains shows them almost inline with the wheels. Is it the case my commute wouldn't be that much better if I was in a broad gauge train?

And how much wider did the loading gauge have to be for bridges and tunnels?

 

[Daimler]

If it was a broad gauge train circa 1850, you could be right about there not being much more space. However, I should think that had we stuck with broad gauge, we'd have seen the same sort of evolution as we did with standard gauge coaches, and they would overhang also.

Whether it would be better or not for your daily commute, I don't know...I keep getting images of 4+3 seating!

 

[route:oxford]

Whether it would be better or not for your daily commute, I don't know...I keep getting images of 4+3 seating!

I'm thinking 2+2+2...

 

[jas_sl]

The pics I'm looking at are around the time broad gauge was abandoned, just before 1900. And wouldn't tunnels and overbridges have been built to a particular broad loading gauge meaning any widening would have been limited?

Also, are there any broad gauge carriages still in existance? I know FireFly has been rebuilt but that looks pretty early - I'm more interested in the last incarnation engines and carriages.

 

[jopsuk]

given the bridges and tunnels are mainly pretty much intact along the GWR, it surely should be pretty easy to see if the loading gauge is much different?

I don't think we'd have seen the loading gauge be proportionately wider (as compared to UK standard gauge loading gauge) with broad gauge- I personally reckon we might have ended up with something roughly similar to the European, American and Japanese (standard gauge) loading gauges, and have used the extra width between the wheels to speed advantage.

 

[merlodlliw]

given the bridges and tunnels are mainly pretty much intact along the GWR, it surely should be pretty easy to see if the loading gauge is much different?

I don't think we'd have seen the loading gauge be proportionately wider (as compared to UK standard gauge loading gauge) with broad gauge- I personally reckon we might have ended up with something roughly similar to the European, American and Japanese (standard gauge) loading gauges, and have used the extra width between the wheels to speed advantage.

Suppose the only semi broad gauge near by is in Ireland (NR & IR) I recall IR then CIE, before splitting, bought in some ex BR carriages & put plug doors on them,anyone know if the current stock is wider inside. I refer to the small five foot 3 inch gauge.

 

[jopsuk]

The (now almost all withdrawn) Irish Mark 3s were almost all* specially built to order (with the powered plug doors). The body shell is exactly the same size as UK Mark 3s.

*they also bought the special demonstration "International" set from BREL and had it refitted for normal use. This had originally been built as a demonstrator rake to try and sell Mark 3s abroad.

 

[Old Timer]

The Loading Gauge in Ireland was certainly constrained by the fact that the first Railway, the Dublin and Kingston Railway built in 1834 was built to the Robert Stevenson guage of 4' 8 1/2". This meant that the carriages were built to the then standard vehicle gauge. Out of interest this is 2 & 1/2 times the track gauge

The nature of the line, built through the populated part of the City meant that when the track was widened to 5' 3", the structure and loading gauges could not be altered without immense cost and disruption.

This has so far resulted in the use of vehicles that meet the BR loading gauge, albeit with wider bogies.

Incidentally the D&KR was one of the first railways built specifically for commuter traffic.

 

[jas_sl]

So do you know what the vechicle gauge was for GWR in broad gauge days?

 

[Old Timer]

Sorry I dont have that knowledge but I am sure one of the GWR Societies will be able to help, or alternatively you could address your enquiry to the NRM at York.

It was originally the case that the height of rolling stock could not exceed 2 & 1/2 times the track gauge, which would make the naximum height about 17'. This is based on Centre of Gravity / overturning / stability calculations. I am sure it is somewhat more scientific these days !

The width would really be a function of the longest vehicle, in order to take vehicle side throw into account.

From experience of having travelled about, the width of the rolling stock on pretty much all the railways I have visited never much exceeds the end of the sleeper. This makes sense because the sleeper stands just off the platform wall and it is this measurement that sets the side throw on a vehicle and thus its maximum rigid length.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I think the GWR invented it and they were the only ones to use it?