Streetcar track gauge - broad, standard, or narrow?

[Myrtone]

What will be the gague of the New system, the previous system in Cicintatti was built to the Pennsyilvania trolley gauge, and neither Pittsburgh, Phillidelphia nor New Orleans have not shown any intenion of converting to standard gauge. Wolud it thus be feasible to build the new system to that gauge?

[electricron]

What will be the gague of the New system, the previous system in Cicintatti was built to the Pennsyilvania trolley gauge, and neither Pittsburgh, Phillidelphia nor New Orleans have not shown any intenion of converting to standard gauge. Wolud it thus be feasible to build the new system to that gauge?

Any gauge is possible, so yes it could happen. By why use a different gauge than standard when starting from scratch again?

[Myrtone]

Because they had it before, also with low floor trams it enables a wider ailse. Would the old system have been converted to standard gauge if it had surivied? If you are retruing streetcars to a city that had them before, I would not call that starting from scratch.

My question is, why not use a different gauge from standard if this system is physically separate from existing standard guage lines? If they were to choose the Pennsylvania trolley gauge, they would be bulit to the same gauge as both the prevouis system in Cincinatti and suriving networks in Pittsburgh and Phillidelpiha, with added benefits in case of low floor trams.
I realise that Cincinatti has chosen CAF's urbos, this is 100% low floor, but it is a fixed bogie design, and we've been at length on this before, fixed bogie trams are no good on tight curves, they may not have clearence problems, but having entire carbody sections tracking curves greatly increases impact on tight curves.
Skoda's 15t would have been a better choice, it has 100% low floor and pivoting bogies. With a wider track gauge, there will be more space between the wheels relative to the aisle, reducing constraints on bogie movement. Also if made for a North American system, the North American versions would be wider than those in Prague and Riga, allowing for 2+2 seating, and longer entrance ramps so the entrance height can be lower, combine that with height adjustable suspension, and such a tram could provide easy access from classic style tram stops, making it very suitable for the street enviroment.

[justalurker66]

If you are retruing streetcars to a city that had them before, I would not call that starting from scratch.

Not one inch of old rail will be reused ... that is what we call starting from scratch.

My question is, why not use a different gauge from standard if this system is physically separate from existing standard guage lines? If they were to choose the Pennsylvania trolley gauge, they would be bulit to the same gauge as both the prevouis system in Cincinatti and suriving networks in Pittsburgh and Phillidelpiha, with added benefits in case of low floor trams.

Find standard equipment and don't pay extra for some oddball gauge. If they can get another gauge for the same cost as a standard, and be reasonably sure that they can get more cars as the system expands then fine ... but don't make limiting decisions.

[Myrtone]

How "oddball" is that gauge, it is the same gauge as the current Phillidelphia trolley and so it would allow Cicinatti and Phillidelphia to share joint venture orders, and would allow rolling stock to be transferred between systems. And how much extra are you paying if you choose non-standard gauge rolling stock? Rail equipment design is the same apart form the bogies. Bogie design is the same apart from the wheel track. In case of 100% low floor trams, wider gauge means more space between the wheels
So what you are saying is that the new system will likely be standard gauge even though the old system would have remained broad gauge if it had survived. In other words we end up in a situation where Pittisburgh and Phillidelphia keep their gauge because they kept their original systems, while Cincinatti is standard gauge beacuse they tore up their old broad gauge system and put in a new one. But if all three systems had survived, none would have converted to standard gauge.

[mtuandrew]

My opinion is that Pennsylvania gauge limits Cincinnati to buying what and when Pennsylvania cities buy, or spending a premium to get its preferred gauge. Standard gauge allows Cincinnati to buy everything *but* what Pennsylvania cities have - a lot more equipment.

[Myrtone]

Pennsylvainan cities could gain the same advantage as Cincinatti by converting to standard gauge, but they have shown no intention of doing so. And since the new trams will neccesarily be low floor, track gauge affects the spacing available in the gap between the wheel wells that protrude into the car interior.

Standard gauge allows Cincinnati to buy everything *but* what Pennsylvania cities have - a lot more equipment.

More off-the-shef equipment maybe, but if you ask me, I'm not such a great fan of off-the-shelf tram designs. The only off-the-shelf tram designs we have here in Melbourne are the Citadis and the Combino, both are low floor, all our older high floor trams are of custom designs. When trams ran in other Australian cities, we either ordered our own customised designs or built and designed trams in our own workshops.
Besides, Phillidelphia will surely be in the market for new trollies some time soon, so would a joint venture order be feasible?
And how much of a premium do you need to pay to get your preffered gauge? The extra cost would surely only be marginal.

[CComMack]

Soooo... you'd like to saddle other people with the bill for custom-made streetcars... because you have aesthetic objections to the stock models? On a project already on a shoestring budget? From the perspective of a Philadelphian who would see per-unit order costs drop if Cincinnati attached their orders to ours, I'm horrified that anybody else would consider adopting our wacky gauge. Stick to standard, please.

[Myrtone]

Soooo... you'd like to saddle other people with the bill for custom-made streetcars... because you have aesthetic objections to the stock models? On a project already on a shoestring budget? From the perspective of a Philadelphian who would see per-unit order costs drop if Cincinnati attached their orders to ours, I'm horrified that anybody else would consider adopting our wacky gauge. Stick to standard, please.

But the previous Cincinatti system was built to your gauge, and if that system had surivied, that wolud almost certainly have not converted to standard gauge, so why not build the new system to that gauge? By buliding the new system to that same gauge as the old, you are sticking to the same gauge. And in case of low floor, gauge affects the space available between the wheel wells. If you say stick to standard, why don't you convert to standard gauge to get an off-the-shelf design. It seems to me that off-the-shelf is the antithisis of what tramway traditionally is.

[Patrick Boylan]

I agree that off the shelf is the antithesis of what tramway traditionally is, but I also see that as a disadvantage of traditional streetcars. Virtually all of the literature I've ever read has said having unique equipment has acted against rail transit.

Not much of the car's floor is space between the wheel wells. And low floor is also not what comes to my mind when I think of traditional streetcars.

By the way, Baltimore streetcars were also 5ft 2 and 1/4in, yet they made their light rail 4ft 8 1/2

[Myrtone]

Light rail is quite different from traditional tramway specifications, the standard LRT minimum is 25 metres and the maximum gatiend is only 5%, classic style tramway has steeper gradients and especially tighter curves. Is there any reason why Baltimore couldn't reintroduce their old gauge if they return street running trams?

I agree that off the shelf is the antithesis of what tramway traditionally is, but I also see that as a disadvantage of traditional streetcars. Virtually all of the literature I've ever read has said having unique equipment has acted against rail transit.

1. It is not and never has been either the antithisis of what either heavy rail or standard LRT is.
2. May be true of heavy rail, but it is unique equipment is okay with traditional style tramways. In that case why don't either Pittsburgh or Phillidelphia covert to standard gauge, in Phillidelphia's case their trolleys are custom built and will most likely continue to be if when they order their next trollies.

And low floor is also not what comes to my mind when I think of traditional streetcars.

Again, it wouldn't come to mind when you think of traditional buses, would it? A tram is effectively a bus on rails.

[electricron]

2. May be true of heavy rail, but it is unique equipment is okay with traditional style tramways. In that case why don't either Pittsburgh or Phillidelphia covert to standard gauge, in Phillidelphia's case their trolleys are custom built and will most likely continue to be if when they order their next trollies.

Both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh still have non-standard gauge tracks in the ground and in use. It would cost more to re-gauge "all" the tracks than buy non-standard streetcars. All American cities reintroducing streetcars, or contemplating to do so, are laying "all" new tracks and buying "all" new streetcars. There's no money being saved using old tracks, which may or may not be in the streets anymore, nor refurbishing older streetcars they don't own anymore. Even if the old tracks are still in the streets, they're most likely in center lanes one or two lanes away from today's curbs - not in the side lanes where most planners want to run them.

Dallas MATA (historic trolleys) uses some old tracks running in the center lanes, but have laid all their new tracks in side lanes next to curbs which they prefer. If they had the money available, they would abandoned the center lane tracks and lay new curb lane tracks - just for safety reasons alone. Luckily the once abandoned tracks in Dallas are standard gauge, so making a decision to go to non-standard gauge wasn't necessary. MATA has even bought ex-Toronto PCC streetcars with non-standard gauge, but swapping their wheel sets to standard gauge is far cheaper than re-gauging all the tracks, and by the way, is not that expensive to do.

And that' is a major reason why other cities building "all" new are choosing "standard" gauge. There's no reason not to when standard gauge provides more vendor choices and therefore is cheaper.

[Myrtone]

Both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh still have non-standard gauge tracks in the ground and in use. It would cost more to re-gauge "all" the tracks than buy non-standard streetcars. All American cities reintroducing streetcars, or contemplating to do so, are laying "all" new tracks and buying "all" new streetcars. There's no money being saved using old tracks, which may or may not be in the streets anymore, nor refurbishing older streetcars they don't own anymore. Even if the old tracks are still in the streets, they're most likely in center lanes one or two lanes away from today's curbs - not in the side lanes where most planners want to run them.

Some European tramway networks have been regauged, for exmaple Stuttgart formerly had a metre gauge tramway network, but it has now been converted into a standard gauge stadtbahn. Trams in Chemitz, East Germany, used to run 925 mm but changed to standard gauge. In Stuttgart, they didn't regauge the whole network at once, the did so line by line. This happened in Chemitz too, but most lines were replaced by buses.

Dallas MATA (historic trolleys) uses some old tracks running in the center lanes, but have laid all their new tracks in side lanes next to curbs which they prefer. If they had the money available, they would abandoned the center lane tracks and lay new curb lane tracks - just for safety reasons alone. Luckily the once abandoned tracks in Dallas are standard gauge, so making a decision to go to non-standard gauge wasn't necessary. MATA has even bought ex-Toronto PCC streetcars with non-standard gauge, but swapping their wheel sets to standard gauge is far cheaper than re-gauging all the tracks, and by the way, is not that expensive to do.

But wasn't most of your rolling stock already standard gauge? Also the TTC gauge differs from standard by less than the width of the rail, so dual gauge track is not possible, unless you interlace the two tracks of different gauges.

And that' is a major reason why other cities building "all" new are choosing "standard" gauge. There's no reason not to when standard gauge provides more vendor choices and therefore is cheaper.

I wonder how many of those cities had their previous systems built to standard gauge. Was the previous Portland system standard gauge? Note that Bilbao, in the Spanish Basque country, recently built all new and yet they chose metre gauge, presumably because their previous system was also metre gauge, also it matches the gauge of their metro. And as I said before, with low floor rolling stock wider gauge provides more room between the wheels for an aisle. Also, in Cincinatti's case, choosing the same gauge as the previous system keeps you in line with Pittsburgh and Phillidelpiha just like the previous Cincintatti system.

[CComMack]

But the previous Cincinatti system was built to your gauge, and if that system had surivied, that wolud almost certainly have not converted to standard gauge

And if I had some bacon, I could have bacon and eggs, if I had some eggs.

Your counterfactual is meaningless; we live in a world where, in terms of the environment they are building in, there is no difference whether Cincinnati had previously had a PA trolley gauge system, a standard gauge system, or no previous system whatsoever; there is no usable remnant of any of Cincinnati's trolleys, and they must build from scratch on "greenfield" alignments. Therefore, Cincinnati's engineers have a fiduciary duty to the city to not add unnecessary expense to the streetcar system, and should therefore build to standard gauge. Cincinnati has no responsibility to Pittsburgh or Philadelphia, nor should it.

I'm baffled why an Australian, who has to personally deal with the crippling of that nation's rail industry due to breaks-of-gauge, would wish that on anyone else. Also, you are aware that Cincinnati and Philadelphia are as far apart geographically as Melbourne and Sydney, right?

[electricron]

Some European tramway networks have been regauged, for exmaple Stuttgart formerly had a metre gauge tramway network, but it has now been converted into a standard gauge stadtbahn. Trams in Chemitz, East Germany, used to run 925 mm but changed to standard gauge. In Stuttgart, they didn't regauge the whole network at once, the did so line by line. This happened in Chemitz too, but most lines were replaced by buses.
Note that Bilbao, in the Spanish Basque country, recently built all new and yet they chose metre gauge, presumably because their previous system was also metre gauge, also it matches the gauge of their metro. And as I said before, with low floor rolling stock wider gauge provides more room between the wheels for an aisle. Also, in Cincinatti's case, choosing the same gauge as the previous system keeps you in line with Pittsburgh and Phillidelpiha just like the previous Cincintatti system.

In Bilbao, they're matching the gauge that they are already using. There's no rail on the curb side lanes in Cincinnati streets today. If there were old rail under the asphalt, it'll be under the center lanes. That's not where they want the streetcar tracks today. Cincinnati has already selected it's new streetcars. It's not the same streetcar used in Philadelphia or Pittsburg. The new streetcars use standard gauge wheels. Therefore they need to lay standard gauge tracks. It doesn't matter what Philadelphia and Pittsburg use.

As for the low floor argument, there's no requirement for for wheelchair access throughout the streetcar. Just a requirement for a wheelchair position(s) near the double wide doors. Whether the gauge is narrow, standard, or wide there will be plenty of room between the wheels to walk if its a 100% low floor, or a step or two for the floor to be over the wheels because there's no requirement for streetcars to be 100% low floor. Most modern streetcars in the USA aren't 100% low floor anyways, although I'll admit I don't precisely know what Cincinnati is buying.