Height of Freight Wagon Decks

[furnessvale]

It has always seemed strange to me that, in the USA, where they have an ample loading gauge, the average height of a freight wagon deck is around 3ft. Here in the UK, where our loading gauge is extremely tight, our standard decks start at 3'6" and higher.

I know we have low level decks for container carriers, but even on those, valuable deck length is lost at the ends with a transition to out standard coupler height. This seems particularly noticeable with log carriers, where the lowest level of logs is way above rail height, losing valuable payload space.

It is too late now to start again with a new lower deck height but we in the UK will always suffer a double whammy.

 

[themiller]

It has always seemed strange to me that, in the USA, where they have an ample loading gauge, the average height of a freight wagon deck is around 3ft. Here in the UK, where our loading gauge is extremely tight, our standard decks start at 3'6" and higher.

I know we have low level decks for container carriers, but even on those, valuable deck length is lost at the ends with a transition to out standard coupler height. This seems particularly noticeable with log carriers, where the lowest level of logs is way above rail height, losing valuable payload space.

It is too late now to start again with a new lower deck height but we in the UK will always suffer a double whammy.

I would think it's to do with wheel diameter. The smaller the wheel the less time between maintenance.

 

[swt_passenger]

The freight vehicle decks still have to be clear of low curved platforms and other infrastructure such as bridge girders. The problems below deck level are basically the same as for carriages and anything else.

 

[Ships]

Lower sector gauging requirements are probably the reason you're looking for.

 

[furnessvale]

The freight vehicle decks still have to be clear of low curved platforms and other infrastructure such as bridge girders. The problems below deck level are basically the same as for carriages and anything else.

Lower sector gauging requirements are probably the reason you're looking for.

As I mentioned in my original post, we get round this problem with container flats. I'm sure more conventional wagons could have lower decks to increase payload, but we will always have to raise the buffer beams to meet all existing vehicles, a problem we are now stuck with.

George

 

[twpsaesneg]

I think you'll find that the limiting factor on most freight rolling stock is axle loading, not physical space for cargo. I'm not sure what you'd gain by building a log carrier with a low floor - if it was a useful thing I guess one of the wagon manufacturers would have done it. Oil tanks and Coal / Aggregate hoppers don't have a low deck and run at 100+ tonnes gross load which is realistically the maximum the infrastructure will take.

I'm not really sure that this problem actually exists?

 

[furnessvale]

I think you'll find that the limiting factor on most freight rolling stock is axle loading, not physical space for cargo. I'm not sure what you'd gain by building a log carrier with a low floor - if it was a useful thing I guess one of the wagon manufacturers would have done it. Oil tanks and Coal / Aggregate hoppers don't have a low deck and run at 100+ tonnes gross load which is realistically the maximum the infrastructure will take.

There are certainly two existing cargoes that tax the UK loading gauge at present, biomass and coke, even allowing for new designs of biomass wagons.

But the real question is what traffic railfreight doesn't even try to carry, because it cubes out before it weighs out. Given the number of fairly high cube HGVs about there certainly appears to be plenty about.