This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Track gauge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps, showing the major railways of the world colored by gauge. See https://www.openrailwaymap.org the railroads all have a "gauge" field https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gauge though some data is missing. It would be more accurate and be a good supplement for map already on the page, be included in this article to improve its quality. |
Track gauge#Advantages and disadvantages of different track gauges
For example, the
BART choose
5 ft 6 in (1,676 mm) because the wider gauge would give greater
stability in case of high
cross winds.
eBART uses
standard gauge.
Peter Horn
User talk 18:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
The gauges of railways often have their origins in decisions made in the era of railway development – the second half of the 19th century and early years of the 20th. The choice for any given railway was usually founded not only on the terrain but also on the economic and political history of the area in which it was built. Often, a narrow gauge was chosen to keep within a very small budget when a line was initiated to develop economically promising resources, whether agricultural or mineralogical. Narrower gauge railways cost less to build, for several reasons. First, the dimensions of locomotives and rolling stock were smaller in order to limit train weight on track and bridges and to limit the amount of rock to be removed in tunnels. Second, to maximise the tonnage that could be hauled by low-powered steam locomotives of the time, track had to be built as level as possible. That necessitated trains going around contour lines if earthworks were to be kept to a minimum, which was necessary when horse-drawn implements, humans with hand tools, and occasional explosives were the only available resources. Third, because narrow-gauge steam locomotives were smaller than those of the larger gauges, their wheelbase – the distance between the centres of the front and rear wheels – was shorter, allowing them to negotiate tighter curves. Eventually, development of articulated designs such as the Garratt allowed powerful locomotives to operate on such track.
The place of political history in the choice of gauge was, in newly developing countries or colonies, related to the gauges already established in the territories of the particular colonial power.
Narrow gauge is thus often used in mountainous terrain, where the savings in civil engineering work can be substantial. It is also used in sparsely populated areas, with low potential demand, and for temporary lines that will be removed after short-term use, such as for construction, the logging industry, the mining industry, or large-scale construction projects.
Broader gauges (especially standard gauge) are generally more expensive to build because characterisitcally larger rolling stock and locomotives mandate a larger loading gauge and heavier engineering. The trade-off is usually their higher speed and tonnage capacity. However, some modern narrow-gauge lines approximate the capacities of broader gauge equivalents. Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 ( talk) 12:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Previously today I read in a Wikipedia article that the ideas that governments selected track gauge with military defense in mind and that narrower gauges allow for tighter turning radiuses are misconceptions. This paragraph states both. What is the real story? Fearga ( talk) 21:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)John Shanahan
Fearga, Real story seems to be mostly "individual choice". Also see my reply above. Vatsmaxed ( talk) 17:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
As I interpret the section on minimum-gauge, it is defined as "smaller than 2 ft, which equals 610 mm". I would rather say "smaller than 2 ft or 600 mm". In Sweden and, I think, other European countries, there were numerous 600 mm railways built. They had a small gauge, but were not regarded "minimum". Some were by the Decauville design, with light and pre-fabricated pieces, while others were regularly built railways. Fomalhaut76 ( talk) 17:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Finnish gauge is 1524 mm [1] [2]page 10 [3]. It has never been 1520 mm. The change from 1524mm to 1520mm was done in the Soviet Union, and Finland has never been a part of the Soviet Union. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenfox ( talk • contribs) 09:03, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
References
What about changing the map for a map displaying the Iberian gauge in the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal), instead of this incorrect map that shows standard gauge? 37.170.58.217 ( talk) 11:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Why not include 950mm in the list of gauges?-- Oldboltonian ( talk) 14:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Move the sentence about the Battle of the Gauges to be clearer that the following sentence about mountain railways refers to the modern usage of narrow as less than standard, rather than to the Stephenson gauge? Tom Permutt ( talk) 04:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
See Openrailwap permalink 1 in Lille where one metro one line seems to be dual track (1435 mm / 1620 mm) while the other line is only 1620 mm. These are Rubber-tyred metro's where tyres run on metal bands wich are 1620 mm apart. Line two has been build without the normal gauge guiding rails. Example: File:Lille Metro Quatre Cantons - Grand Stade empty train 2.jpg
The other 1620 mm railway line is Orly Val: Openrailwap permalink 2. Should we treat this as a 1620 mm track gauge or explain the situation with Rubber-tyred metro's. Luckely there are no other gauges with Rubber-tyred metro's. Smiley.toerist ( talk) 12:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Track gauge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps, showing the major railways of the world colored by gauge. See https://www.openrailwaymap.org the railroads all have a "gauge" field https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gauge though some data is missing. It would be more accurate and be a good supplement for map already on the page, be included in this article to improve its quality. |
Track gauge#Advantages and disadvantages of different track gauges
For example, the
BART choose
5 ft 6 in (1,676 mm) because the wider gauge would give greater
stability in case of high
cross winds.
eBART uses
standard gauge.
Peter Horn
User talk 18:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
The gauges of railways often have their origins in decisions made in the era of railway development – the second half of the 19th century and early years of the 20th. The choice for any given railway was usually founded not only on the terrain but also on the economic and political history of the area in which it was built. Often, a narrow gauge was chosen to keep within a very small budget when a line was initiated to develop economically promising resources, whether agricultural or mineralogical. Narrower gauge railways cost less to build, for several reasons. First, the dimensions of locomotives and rolling stock were smaller in order to limit train weight on track and bridges and to limit the amount of rock to be removed in tunnels. Second, to maximise the tonnage that could be hauled by low-powered steam locomotives of the time, track had to be built as level as possible. That necessitated trains going around contour lines if earthworks were to be kept to a minimum, which was necessary when horse-drawn implements, humans with hand tools, and occasional explosives were the only available resources. Third, because narrow-gauge steam locomotives were smaller than those of the larger gauges, their wheelbase – the distance between the centres of the front and rear wheels – was shorter, allowing them to negotiate tighter curves. Eventually, development of articulated designs such as the Garratt allowed powerful locomotives to operate on such track.
The place of political history in the choice of gauge was, in newly developing countries or colonies, related to the gauges already established in the territories of the particular colonial power.
Narrow gauge is thus often used in mountainous terrain, where the savings in civil engineering work can be substantial. It is also used in sparsely populated areas, with low potential demand, and for temporary lines that will be removed after short-term use, such as for construction, the logging industry, the mining industry, or large-scale construction projects.
Broader gauges (especially standard gauge) are generally more expensive to build because characterisitcally larger rolling stock and locomotives mandate a larger loading gauge and heavier engineering. The trade-off is usually their higher speed and tonnage capacity. However, some modern narrow-gauge lines approximate the capacities of broader gauge equivalents. Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 ( talk) 12:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Previously today I read in a Wikipedia article that the ideas that governments selected track gauge with military defense in mind and that narrower gauges allow for tighter turning radiuses are misconceptions. This paragraph states both. What is the real story? Fearga ( talk) 21:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)John Shanahan
Fearga, Real story seems to be mostly "individual choice". Also see my reply above. Vatsmaxed ( talk) 17:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
As I interpret the section on minimum-gauge, it is defined as "smaller than 2 ft, which equals 610 mm". I would rather say "smaller than 2 ft or 600 mm". In Sweden and, I think, other European countries, there were numerous 600 mm railways built. They had a small gauge, but were not regarded "minimum". Some were by the Decauville design, with light and pre-fabricated pieces, while others were regularly built railways. Fomalhaut76 ( talk) 17:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Finnish gauge is 1524 mm [1] [2]page 10 [3]. It has never been 1520 mm. The change from 1524mm to 1520mm was done in the Soviet Union, and Finland has never been a part of the Soviet Union. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenfox ( talk • contribs) 09:03, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
References
What about changing the map for a map displaying the Iberian gauge in the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal), instead of this incorrect map that shows standard gauge? 37.170.58.217 ( talk) 11:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Why not include 950mm in the list of gauges?-- Oldboltonian ( talk) 14:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Move the sentence about the Battle of the Gauges to be clearer that the following sentence about mountain railways refers to the modern usage of narrow as less than standard, rather than to the Stephenson gauge? Tom Permutt ( talk) 04:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
See Openrailwap permalink 1 in Lille where one metro one line seems to be dual track (1435 mm / 1620 mm) while the other line is only 1620 mm. These are Rubber-tyred metro's where tyres run on metal bands wich are 1620 mm apart. Line two has been build without the normal gauge guiding rails. Example: File:Lille Metro Quatre Cantons - Grand Stade empty train 2.jpg
The other 1620 mm railway line is Orly Val: Openrailwap permalink 2. Should we treat this as a 1620 mm track gauge or explain the situation with Rubber-tyred metro's. Luckely there are no other gauges with Rubber-tyred metro's. Smiley.toerist ( talk) 12:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)