Double-deck trains

[Domh245]

Would HS1 be able to take double decker stock? If not, why?

It would seem like a good idea when one day the Javelins get replaced.

I think that it would be able to take double decker stock, however what would you do beyond Ashford/Ebbsfleet? You definitely won't be able to fit double decker stock on all of the current Javelin routes.

 

[175mph]

I think that it would be able to take double decker stock, however what would you do beyond Ashford/Ebbsfleet? You definitely won't be able to fit double decker stock on all of the current Javelin routes.

Why not? I thought all the Javelin routes were to European loading gauge and height clearance etc?

 

[class387]

Why not? I thought all the Javelin routes were to European loading gauge and height clearance etc?

The HS1 lines probably are, but 'Javelins' also run on classic lines in Kent, which definitely aren't.

 

[al78]

How tall are double decker trains compared to standard trains? If they are taller, would they be able to go through tunnels?

 

[HH]

How tall are double decker trains compared to standard trains? If they are taller, would they be able to go through tunnels?

I'm amazed that no-one has brought this and other height considerations into the thread before. All the OHLs would also need raising or the track bed lowering. There is also the question of speed - taller vehicles are necessarily less stable and therefore are likely to face more speed restrictions. I doubt whether we could get tilting ones, for example.

First/NED's bid for SW in 2001 included a proposal for DD trains I know, but I don't know any of the engineering details. The bid was unsuccessful.

 

[Pakenhamtrain]

How tall are double decker trains compared to standard trains? If they are taller, would they be able to go through tunnels?

In Sydney a Waratah is 4.410m high.

 

[James James]

Not quite. While the all-station "Sprinter" services provide level access (if operated with SLT or FLIRT), if you want to get into an intercity train (VIRM, DDZ, ICR, ICM) you still have to step up from the platform into the train. The next generation of IC rolling stock will provide level access, but these trains won't enter service until 2021.

When it comes to accessible double decker trains, Siemens have developed a hybrid platform called "Desiro HC" (High Capacity): by combining single-deck end cars with double deck intermediate coaches, Siemens aim to optimize capacity while providing a fully accessible train. Traction equipment is located in the single-deck cars, which leaves more space for passengers in the trailing cars.

The French have taken a rather interesting approach by mixing double-deck coaches with single-deck intermediate coaches. The double-deck coaches provide a lot of capacity by just offering seats. Doors, toilets, facilities for prams and wheelchairs, and traction equipment are all located in the single deck intermediate coaches.

This is the Bombardier OMNEO, also known as the Régio2N:


Could a OMNEO like design work on the British rail network?

The Swiss also have fully-accessible double-deck EMUs - but it's easy there because of the low-level platforms which are approximately the same height as the lower-deck floors. Entry is on the lower level (with a small ramp/step coming out to bridge the gap between train and platform). Those EMU's are double-deck throughout, with some seating space lost to the electrical gear in the end cars on the intermediate level. (And for the long-distance trains, there's no intermediate level: the upper level is continuous throughout the train, meaning trolleys can still operate.)

To be completely honest, if you're rebuilding the network to fit in double-deckers, you might as well lower the platforms too, to avoid the intermediate level boarding that the UK would otherwise need. I imagine having the entire lower deck of every carriage be somewhat accessible is much better than just a small area at the end of each carriage. And it makes bicycle and luggage access and storage easier.

(There was some talk of building trains with upper+lower level doors, and bi-level platforms, in order to decrease dwell times, but that hasn't proven necessary yet.)

 

[BR Boy 125]

A correspondent in today's Daily Telegraph, referring to the Bullied 4DD stock suggests that with dropped floor and sliding doors this could be an option worth revisiting.

Given Britain's low height restrictions and high platforms I'm still trying to figure out how this would work.

It would be too much of a hazard to make a double decker Stock train due to those low height restrictions. However, platform height wouldn't be a problem

 

[Tobberz]

The only place double-decker trains could come onto the UK network is on HS2, once they move beyond 'classic compatible' to confined stock. The distance between stations would be long enough in that case to warrant long dwell times if that is an issue.

 

[175mph]

And even if double decker stock was possible I wonder if the upper deck would be treated like first class, you'd have to pay extra to sit anywhere up in the upper deck, and there being complaints in disputes and prosecutions about the conductor saying their ticket isn't valid for the upper deck?

 

[superalbs]

And even if double decker stock was possible I wonder if the upper deck would be treated like first class, you'd have to pay extra to sit anywhere up in the upper deck, and there being complaints in disputes and prosecutions about the conductor saying their ticket isn't valid for the upper deck?

Why would that be the case? Unless it's actual first class, that doesn't make any sense.

 

[175mph]

Why would that be the case? Unless it's actual first class, that doesn't make any sense.

I just thought the upper deck would have been a potential way to make extra money from us all.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Double Deck trains would only really be able to operate on HS2 and the like.

 

[TheEdge]

I just thought the upper deck would have been a potential way to make extra money from us all.

Erm, no,just a way of fitting far more seats in less vehicles. Double deck stuff on the continent is just the same up top as down below. In fact from what I remember and felt on the DB Dosto stock the upper deck had quite a low roof.

 

[DEE-DE]

There is a modern concept, unfortunately most sources and Wikipedia are in German only.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm amazed that no-one has brought this and other height considerations into the thread before. All the OHLs would also need raising or the track bed lowering...

I know it’s included in significant detail in the NR report I linked to in post #51. Tunnels, OHLE, over and underbridges, viaducts, platforms etc etc. I’ve posted the link a few times, it convinced me it won’t be happening first time I read it...

 

[daikilo]

Double-deck TGVs have adequate headroom on both decks for most people, and are stable at 574.3km/hr. They also pass through tunnels built to allow them.

 

[AM9]

There is a modern concept, unfortunately most sources and Wikipedia are in German only.

A single axle at each coach end, wow, that's lateral thinking, - a Pacer chassis for a UK styles high-speed double deck train.

 

[Bevan Price]

Double decker trains won't happen in this country lets face it.

Talking of the 4DD trains though looking at the diagram they had 6 seats across which seems rather a lot by todays standards. Is it just me or have seats got wider since then as people have got fatter.

Almost all UK non-corridor compartment stock (except 1st class) was nominally 6 across, but unless one or more passengers were children, it often became 5 sitting plus one or more standing.

 

[najaB]

A single axle at each coach end, wow, that's lateral thinking, - a Pacer chassis for a UK styles high-speed double deck train.

To be fair, articulated high-speed trains are common.

 

[Brown]

Still don’t understand. How come half of the Europe have double deckers and we don’t . Largest rail network like India is running double deckers. Don’t understand where the problem lies.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Don’t understand where the problem lies.

Bridges, tunnels, platforms, spacing between lines in general. Double deckers wouldn't fit or if they did would only be suitable for midgets or children.

 

[al78]

Still don’t understand. How come half of the Europe have double deckers and we don’t . Largest rail network like India is running double deckers. Don’t understand where the problem lies.

I heard a long time ago that it is to do with tunnels, the UK is the only country in Europe which cannot take double decker trains because the tunnels are too low. That may come from the fact that in WWII, the rail network on the continent was so badly damaged that it was easier to start again. When starting again, you can incorporate new technology more easily, whereas in the UK, we carried on with the same network built in the Victorian days.

 

[swt_passenger]

Still don’t understand. How come half of the Europe have double deckers and we don’t . Largest rail network like India is running double deckers. Don’t understand where the problem lies.

Please read the linked report in post #51.

 

[AM9]

Most of mainland Europe had a much higher and wider (especially below platform level) loading gauge before the 1913 Berne agreement on a common European minimum standard called the PPI. This was before the first world war and with the exception of the French system largely in place at the time anyway. The smaller gauge in France was like the in UK, a consequence of being one of the first to establish their railways. It was worse in the UK not so much because Britain was the first to have a commercial railway but because the lines here were developed in an environment of intense commercial competition, the temptation to penny-pinch wherever the impact wouldn't be noticed in the short-term, was too much for many investors. Many of the systems in continental Europe were state provisioned so a more strategic view was taken.

 

[TRAX]

How tall are double decker trains compared to standard trains? If they are taller, would they be able to go through tunnels?

French double deck trains are basically the same height as the single deck ones.

 

[swt_passenger]

You don’t get much for your double deck. That example given above of 1400 passengers in a 400m DD train is very little increase over a conventional GB 2+2 layout. 3.5 passengers per metre length. Scale up a 444 type layout to 400m and it would still be carrying almost 3 passengers per metre anyway. The NR report suggests that the same gains as DD trains provide can mostly be achieved with lengthening and minor increases to frequency, without rebuilding most of the infrastructure at vast expense.

 

[swt_passenger]

French double deck trains are basically the same height as the single deck ones.

But they use mostly the full width to a much lower level, that is not possible in this country.

 

[Mikey C]

Almost all UK non-corridor compartment stock (except 1st class) was nominally 6 across, but unless one or more passengers were children, it often became 5 sitting plus one or more standing.

6 seats across with no gangway has the same width seats as 5 seats across on our current stock.

On open saloon EPBs, with the absence of gangways between the cars, the end row of seats was 6 across, it's akin to the back row of a bus having 5 seats across.

 

[furnessvale]

But they use mostly the full width to a much lower level, that is not possible in this country.

And of course, even French single deck coaches are taller than UK ones to start with.