If BR had been built to Continental gauge?

[Merle Haggard]

Freightliner would benefit - you could have two 40ft containers 9ft 6 inches high on the same wagon.

For electrified lines that would need very tall pantographs ...

 

[RT4038]

For electrified lines that would need very tall pantographs ...

Although the locomotives could be much taller as well...

 

[Dhansak]

If the bridges weren't tall enough for catenary then it may still have been installed in South London. Equally we came very close to Overhead electrification in the south anyway with the LBSCR.

For me the biggest difference would probably have been on the freight side - more generous gauge would have meant less work needed to clear for containers and bigger wagons making services potentially more profitable. Also there's a version of this future where the Channel Tunnel gets built earlier and we have commuter services from northern France to London when Britain was more friendly to ideas of European integration.

Indeed, and it was the combination of cost and the fact 3rd rail was the preferred approach of the LSWR, whose top brass made in the bulk of early SR management, which did for the overhead. Short-term expediency was still a thing 100+ years ago too!

An interesting thought experiment. If the UK and mainland Europe had the same loading gauge, would there have been better through connections, especially post tunnel? Freight and passenger. Better connections, better relationships? If so, would the outcome of June 2016 could have been different?

 

[MarkyT]

For electrified lines that would need very tall pantographs ...

India has been double stacking for a while on certain lines with electric haulage and very tall pantographs:

 

[martin2345uk]

What benefits do 374s have over 373s related to the former's larger size? The former takes advantage of HS1 being of continental loading gauge with a larger body size than 373s, which started life navigating the classic network.

A roomier driving cab?

 

[furnessvale]

Freightliner would benefit - you could have two 40ft containers 9ft 6 inches high on the same wagon.

Thank God that the US loading gauge constrains double stack to 2 x 9' 6" boxes or the Yanks would have introduced 10ft boxes which would have become an international norm and really strained the UK loading gauge.

As an aside, India double stacks on standard height wagons, not wells. That is really impressive! ( As shown by Marky T)

 

[jayiscupid]

That's a good point actually, I can see BREL probably developing some kind of double-deck coaches or even bilevel Networkers, though the Sprinter family would probably still be single deck (I don't know of a double-deck DMU anywhere).

But this would probably still lead us to the same spot today where we wouldn't have trains like the Electrostar and Aventra because we would be able to buy off-shelf products with some specific engineering for the 915mm platform height.

Given in this hypothetical universe HS2 is built to the same loading gauge as the classic network, I can see Alstom's offering being derived from the TGV M much like what was offered to Eurostar. Whether that would win them the bid is another question entirely.

Double-deck DMUs do exist, but there aren't many. I know of a North American one and a German railcar, but neither was made in large quantities, which suggests there isn't much of a market.

 

[HSTEd]

There are also diesel multiple units in Japan where they have the cab elevated over the corridor connection, whilst not being truly double deck. Including this KiHa 281 series train on JR Hokkaido (link is image of the train in question) which is now apparently out of service, but others in this style exist.

 

[JamesT]

There are also diesel multiple units in Japan where they have the cab elevated over the corridor connection, whilst not being truly double deck. Including this KiHa 281 series train on JR Hokkaido (link is image of the train in question) which is now apparently out of service, but others in this style exist.

I'm looking at that, and I can't quite envisage how the driver fits in there. There's barely any gap between the bottom of the window and the top of the corridor door.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm looking at that, and I can't quite envisage how the driver fits in there. There's barely any gap between the bottom of the window and the top of the corridor door.

I think the drivers footwell is actually behind the connecting door cover, so the passengers using the gangway would through where his feet would be when the corridor connection is in use.