Railway Gauges

So, in certain discussions the subject of railway gauge comes up and people talk about the pros and cons of particular gauges and their relative value versus other gauges. However, I don't know enough about railroads to understand why one gauge would be better or worse than another. The benefits of having a standard gauge are pretty obvious, but what would be the advantages and disadvantages of a wide gauge compared to a narrow one? Why would someone choose one over another for their railroad?

Thanks,
Jack
 
So, in certain discussions the subject of railway gauge comes up and people talk about the pros and cons of particular gauges and their relative value versus other gauges. However, I don't know enough about railroads to understand why one gauge would be better or worse than another. The benefits of having a standard gauge are pretty obvious, but what would be the advantages and disadvantages of a wide gauge compared to a narrow one? Why would someone choose one over another for their railroad?

Thanks,
Jack

Its a decision of cost vs. carrying capacity. The broader the gauge, the faster more volume of goods and people can be transported but the construction is more expensive as well.
 
the wider the gauge, the wider the trains can be, the more they can transport. BUT, the wider the gauge, the more expensive it is to lay, due to them being more expensive in and of themselves, and demands more real estate, specially relevant in the case of building in urban areas
 
I don't think there is much difference between the size of the load that can be carried on a 4'85" gauge compared to 5'6", it's more about the clearance through tunnels and the like. I think the big difference is between these and the narrow 3'6" gauge.
 
But when you think of the double decked Breitsurbhan planned by the nazis it sorta makes all other guages a bit pathetic, it had a guage of 9 feet!
 

Insider

Banned
I don't think there is much difference between the size of the load that can be carried on a 4'85" gauge compared to 5'6", it's more about the clearance through tunnels and the like. I think the big difference is between these and the narrow 3'6" gauge.

Some cargoes are more bulky than they're heavy, and indeed you could build 4'85'' gauge with wider clearence and still could transport most of the cargo. The weight carrying capacity is more the question of the embankments, brigdes construction standard's.
 
Wider gauges can be more comfortable and stable especially in the earlier times when gauges became standardized. Narrower gauges on the other hand are cheaper in general and easier to build in mountainous areas.
 
Last edited:
There is also outside factors to consider. What kinds of gauges are your neighboring countries using, what track has already been laid in your country? The Russians, for example, went for a different gauge than that used in Europe, and trains used on one type of track could not be used on the other (as the Nazis learned so painfully in 1941).
 
Size of load

Carrying capacity is determined by weight of track, the capacity of the rolling stock and bridges, and the like. One thing a broader gauge gives you is the ability to transport a wider load at speed, and still maintain stability. The Maine 2-footers maxed out at about 8' wide, and were usually narrower. Anything wider would require moving very slowly and carefully, lest the train tip over. A 6' gauge train, on good tack, could transport wider cargo than a comparable 4' 8 1/2" gauge train, all things being equal.

Broader gauges tend to need broader curves, also--and that allows longer pieces of cargo. Curves, of course, can be made wide in any event.

But, broad gauge is much more expensive to build, though not much more costly to run.

Break of gauge is often a problem, changing cargo from one train to another. Sometimes narrow gauge to standard is less of a problem. The East Broad Top, for example, was a coal mining narrow gauge railroad. Coal was loaded into its cars, and had to be unloaded at the crushing/processing plant. It was then reloaded into standard gauge for distribution.
 
Cost is certainly a big issue - that is principally why NZ's colonial adopted the Cape gauge - it had to borrow the money from London and needed to save where it could, no matter that a broader gauge might have been better in the long term. Even to the extent of relaying the short amounts of broad gauge rail lines laid
 
planning for the future

When laying a narrow gauge line, if possible, you can plan for the future by having a loading gauge (the maximum dimensions of railroad equipment that will fit) be larger than needed for narrow gauge lines, facilitating a later upgrade. Britain has standard gauge trains, but the loading gauge is small compared to elsewhere, so the carrying capacity on many lines is limitedm by the dimensions of the equipment.
 
other thread related to thsi: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=272424

uk gauge:
ukavgauge.jpg


iuc gauge:

536px-Railway_Loading_gauge_UIC_and_containers_profile_-ISO.png
 
Top