Prototype Question: Why narrow gauge?

"Mikal Fisher"

Rather like most "BIG" business today then?

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

formatting link

Reply to
Roger T.
Loading thread data ...

The UK loading gauge is standard sized - the rest of the standard gauge world is oversized! ;-) Let's put it another way; in the proportion of 'loading gauge : track gauge', New Zealand's is probably greater than any standard gauge railway. Like South Africa, NZ's rolling stock is basically standard gauge on a narrow track.

Pre-dieselization, our trains ran at much higher speeds. The K series locos (4-8-4) and the railcars could and did run up to 100 mph in regular service. The J series would run to 90mph. Those were the major mainline locomotives from my childhood in the 1950s until the end of steam in the mid-1970s.

There has been almost no investment for the last 30 years.

That's not going to work, unless we provide differentials on every driven axle!

The problem with increasing the loading gauge is the number of tunnels that would require enlargement. I had fun in the 1970s sending containers on the NIMT (North Island main line, Wellington - Auckland). There was clearance on the older flat deck wagons pressed into container service to carry an 8' high ISO, but 40' x 8'6" containers were a gamble. Lowering the tunnel floors at each maintainance session and using newly built container wagons solved the problem until the 9' high containers started appearing.

Nahh, WC/Transrail sloughed off all the railfreight that wasn't bulk to avoid any further investment in rolling stock and locos. It wouldn't take much to get back as much freight again as they presently carry. I reckon a new wagon design that could carry a truck trailer overnight Auckland/Wellington and Christchurch/Dunedin/Invercargill would give them more business than they could handle. At the moment, international shipping comes to the four main ports (plus several intermediates occassionally). If the port calls could be reduced to two by way of moving containers overland by rail some huge savings would be made.

Regards, Greg.P.

Reply to
Gregory Procter

The gauge of 1067mm ( 3' 6") is not narrow gauge in Japan. It is the dominant gauge and thus qualifies as the Japanese standard gauge. The gauge of 1435mm is broad gauge in Japan.

The whole philosophical concept of "narrow gauge" is based upon the gauge being narrower than the dominant standard. Only a few lines operate on a gauge wider than

1067mm in Japan, which puts them in the minority. Apparently Japanese horses have smaller rear ends.

Captain Handbrake

Reply to
Captain Handbrake

The dominant world standard is 1435mm. In NZ we have to order "narrow gauge" (1067mm) versions of standard gauge locos. (1435mm)

Reply to
Gregory Procter

And all of that means you can go round tighter curves. Also useful in mountainous mining areas!

Reply to
David Cantrell

Mark Newton wrote: ...snip...

Oh, I see. Well, in my lexicon a cost is a cost is a cost, and there is only one wallet - mine (the consumer's, that is). I pay for the railroad one way or another, and sooner or later I get tired of subsidising a losing proposition, so the subsidies stop.

As I read it, people thought a NG line would be cheaper in every way. After all, small NG engines consume less coal, etc.... The subsidy was paid _after_ the line was finished, and it developed that operating costs were much higher than anticipated, so that there was insufficient return on investment - not even enough to amortise the loan, let alone enough to make a profit.

Actually, a standard gauge bridge line was mooted, the STB was supposed to be standard gauged at one point to shorten the N-S connection between Upper Austria and the southern provinces. The promoters of the NG line argued that there would be lower operating costs, too, which prompted the critiques that the authors of the STB history quoted. In any case, the K&K gummint subsidised every form of transportation, mostly to guarantee a return to the investors.

And if you want to argue social need, then you must also inlcude social costs (subsidies are a small part of these) in the costs of a subsidised service. But we're getting sidetracked, so to speak. :-)

And I never claimed that NG construction costs were high, etc. I'll spell out my p.o.v, which (it seems) iss very close to your own anyhow:

The cheaper construction costs of a narrow gauge line were more than offset by the higher operating costs, so that building a NG line was false economy.

There, is that clear enough?

Your comments on the poor state of NZ railways are noted with sadness.

Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir

Captain Handbrake@Atlantic Coast Line.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.west.earthlink.net:

Uhm, not really.

The shinkansen network (bullet train network) runs on Standard Gauge track (1435mm) ....

Added to that, the Japanese /chose/ the 3'6" *narrow* gauge because they reasoned it was quicker to build and better suited to the local terrain (there's an excellent article on this at

formatting link
unfortunately I lost the link)

Oh, and talking about pushing limits; there's talk that that 160kph service might go up to 180 in the near future ... of course, by that time the shinkansen line in that area is prboably finished so the whole issue becomes moot.

I wouldn't dare to call their high speed network anything but dominant; wherever one of those lines opens, the 1067mm lines all get sold off to third sector companies .. (private railways)

Reply to
JB/NL

Nice try. The various railway companies/operators in Japan all regard

3'6" as narrow gauge. If that's what they think, then I'll go along with them.

You need to read up on what gauges are used where in Japan, and then reconsider your position. There are many lines in Japan of greater gauge than 3'6"/1067mm...

Reply to
Mark Newton

I dunno, but I model it 'cos it looks great!!!

Steve

Reply to
Steve Magee

There are a few. You want to spend a couple af days arguing about what "many" and "few" mean?

Captain Handbrake

Reply to
Captain Handbrake

Captain Handbrake@Atlantic Coast Line.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.west.earthlink.net:

I wouldn't call the 3000+ (and expanding) kilometers of high speed rail few. Nor would I call the Kinki Nippon Railway network (one of the many large private railway companies operating in Japan) stretching between Kyoto, Nagoya, Osaka and the Kii peninsula small. Nor would I dare to diss or otherwise call insignificant the number of

1435mm gauged tram networks in various cities in Japan. (Hakodate, Hiroshima, Osaka, Kagoshima and Takaoka spring to mind immediately - and I'm sure I've missed a lot of them) And remember, even the *Japanese* call the 3'6" network 'narrow gauge'.

Don't make these dangerous assumptions until you know more about the prototype.

Reply to
JB/NL

Dangerous?

Captain Handbrake

Reply to
Captain Handbrake

In that case they are all narrow guage, as Brighton (England) did have an electric railway with a guauge of over 2 feet, it also ran underwater adn was equipped with a lifeboat......... and I am not joking !! Volks Railway I believe. Beowulf

Reply to
Beowulf

There's nothing to argue about - you are wrong. Simple.

If I were you I'd check my facts before rushing into threads about railroads outside the USA. You MAY be well-informed about roads your own country, but so far you've demonstrated considerable ignorance about them elsewhere. Attempting to argue semantics when you've been called on it doesn't make you appear any better informed, either.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Captain Handbrake@Atlantic Coast Line.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.west.earthlink.net:

Yes, dangerous. You were making a very poorly informed assumption based on minimal, if any knowledge of what you were talking about. I consider that to be dangerous.

Reply to
JB/NL

You want I should spend a couple of days compiling a list of all the non-3'6" gauge lines?

Reply to
Mark Newton

I doubt that you'll get a result with this bloke, JB. I notice the last time he had his false claims debunked, he went very quiet.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Mark Newton wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au:

Point well taken.

[And in case you're curious, yes, Japan is my chosen prototype for my modeling endeavours - currently building a modular layout - pictures available at
formatting link
]
Reply to
JB/NL

Like "more" and "less" but with less precision? ;^)

Reply to
Gregory Procter

However he chooses to express himself, he's still wrong.

Reply to
Mark Newton

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.