Non-standard gauges

[george matthews]

There have been in the past many non-standard gauge railways and tramways. There are two categories. Larger than standard gauge are mainly the Russian systems, also found in former Soviet states and dependencies, such as Finland and Mongolia. But there are also the Irish gauge, only found elsewhere in South Australia and Victoria. There is also the very large Indian gauge systems, also found in Pakistan and some South American countries. The Spanish gauge was also adopted in Portugal and some of the South American countries.

Far more numerous are the smaller gauges, used for tramways and colonial rail systems. These include the metre gauge systems found in former French and German colonies in Africa, and in minor European systems, and in India and East Africa. The former British colonial systems often adopted the slightly larger Cape gauge of 3ft 6in. As I have frequently travelled on many of these colonial systems I am aware of their deficiencies as practical transport and see no reason to praise them. There is a tendency at last to replace some of them with Standard Gauge. I welcome that development. However, the cost of replacement means that several of the former narrow gauge systems in Africa are being abandoned without being replaced. That is a loss for practical transport. We may note Sierra Leone where a penny pinching British government adopted a very restricted narrow gauge - less even than metre gauge - and the lines have now been abandoned, even before the civil wars, as being too slow to compete with road transport. (And of course the difficulty of supplying modern traction in a gauge that is not manufactured anywhere.) How far did that inadequate transport system lead to the numerous civil wars that have destroyed the country? Not only the restricted speed within the country was a drawback but also there was no possibility to connect up with neighbouring territories. At the very least the adoption of metre gauge might have led to the possibility of connection with the neighbours, when more trade might have benefitted the people. Even the single Cape gauge mining railway was an improvement.

What was so bad about these smaller gauges? They were SLOW. Taking the train from Nairobi to Mombasa was quite pleasant - at least if the passenger was in the comfortable first or second class. But the journey took 12 hours. The experience of the replacement Standard Gauge train which takes much less time is a very welcome development. Most passengers do not enjoy trundling along so slowly. And the faster train does not need to provide expensive sleeping cars.

One might also wonder whether the larger Russian gauge has affected world politics. How much has the difficulty of providing inter-connection with the Standard gauge neighbours affected Russian exclusiveness and threatened wars?

South America, along with Africa, suffers from different gauges. The countries have been unable to connect with each other which may well have caused the lack of economic development so common there.

[ExCon90]

In the 19th century the Austrians favored 760 mm (2'-6", near enough) for narrow-gauge lines throughout the country, and in those portions of the Balkans which came under Austrian control as the Turks were driven out. I don't think I've heard of that gauge anywhere else, except for the Maine two-footers in the U. S.; does anybody know why the Austrians chose that gauge -- not 700 mm, not 750 mm, not 800 mm). Quite a lot of it in Austria itself has been closed, and I think that all the lines in former Yugoslavia have been either closed or converted to standard gauge.

[george matthews]

In the 19th century the Austrians favored 760 mm (2'-6", near enough) for narrow-gauge lines throughout the country, and in those portions of the Balkans which came under Austrian control as the Turks were driven out. I don't think I've heard of that gauge anywhere else, except for the Maine two-footers in the U. S.; does anybody know why the Austrians chose that gauge -- not 700 mm, not 750 mm, not 800 mm). Quite a lot of it in Austria itself has been closed, and I think that all the lines in former Yugoslavia have been either closed or converted to standard gauge.

The Sierra Leone railway was 2ft 6in. Definitely unsuitable for a national railway system. Such a narrow gauge should only have been used, if at all, for short feeder lines from a mine to a full sized railway. In that case it would be interesting to know why the mining company insisted on a Cape gauge line to connect their mine. I can well imagine the engineer in charge feeling contempt for the government decision to build a too small gauge national line. Anyway both lines are now defunct. (But I have ridden in a former Sierra Leone train, that runs on a tourist line in Wales.)

I was hoping to balance the frequent praise here of non-standard railways we so often see. Short tourist lines are perhaps to be tolerated. But attempts at building serious transport on narrow gauges have increasingly shown their deficiencies. Perhaps only Japan has coped with its Cape gauge system - and even there has built Standard gauge lines. Australia realised the mistake about allowing a variety of gauges and has spent decades building Standard Gauge lines to replace at least some of the other gauges.

[ExCon90]

I think what has mostly spelled the end of narrow-gauge lines is that compared with standard gauge they have lower first costs once, resulting in higher operating costs in perpetuity because of lower-capacity cars/wagons. At one time in the U. S. there was an informal combination of various narrow-gauge lines seeking to form a national network in competition with standard gauge but were done in by their higher cost structure.

[george matthews]

I think what has mostly spelled the end of narrow-gauge lines is that compared with standard gauge they have lower first costs once, resulting in higher operating costs in perpetuity because of lower-capacity cars/wagons. At one time in the U. S. there was an informal combination of various narrow-gauge lines seeking to form a national network in competition with standard gauge but were done in by their higher cost structure.

The US at least has a continental network in Standard gauge, but because it has not installed any High Speed lines has failed to take advantage of the possibilities of Standard gauge. Just as the Metre and Cape gauge lines in Africa are too slow, so are the undeveloped Standard gauge lines in the US. When I travel by train in the US I am always conscious of how much slower the trains are by comparison with Britain, and I assume that they are less attractive to passengers, which is why the US has a far too exiguous network.

[kato]

does anybody know why the Austrians chose that gauge -- not 700 mm, not 750 mm, not 800 mm

There are some claims that major Austrian railway construction companies in the 1860s and 1870s used leftover rolling stock in Cape Gauge from the construction of the Suez canal for construction purposes, later adding on new material specifically in that gauge and transferring that onto regular lines in the mid-1870s.

[David Benton]

Cape gauge is 3ft6" , or 1064 mm. I think the question is why did Austria use 760 mm or 2ft6".

[David Benton]

Actually when you think about it "Standard gauge" is the oddball size. Most other gauges are to the foot or 1/2 foot , or to a metric round figure, i.e metre gauge.Standard gauge is 4 ft 81/2 inches or 1485 mm , neither been a "round" figure. Must be the Roman chariot wheel base width is a true story.

[kato]

Cape gauge is 3ft6" , or 1064 mm. I think the question is why did Austria use 760 mm or 2ft6".

Err, i meant 30" gauge (2'6"/762mm), not Cape Gauge.

[george matthews]

Cape gauge is 3ft6" , or 1064 mm. I think the question is why did Austria use 760 mm or 2ft6".

Err, i meant 30" gauge (2'6"/762mm), not Cape Gauge.

In modern times these narrow non-standard gauges are, frankly, an embarrasment and not to be encouraged, even in the Third World. I can't think of any situation where such a small size would be the best choice for a new project, and certainly not for a 'national' network as in Sierra Leone. I am not sure what is the maximum speed that would be allowable on such a track but I suspect it is quite low - maybe in the range of 20 mph or below. For passengers that is painfully slow. For freight it may be acceptable, but of course that is not the only consideration. Freight loading gauges are likely to be rather restricted, so that although one could carry agricultural produce there is great difficulty in carrying large objects such as machinery.

BTW the Sierra Leone situation is summarised here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Le ... nt_Railway

[george matthews]

Actually when you think about it "Standard gauge" is the oddball size. Most other gauges are to the foot or 1/2 foot , or to a metric round figure, i.e metre gauge.Standard gauge is 4 ft 81/2 inches or 1485 mm , neither being a "round" figure. Must be the Roman chariot wheel base width is a true story.

It's quite adequate for general use. By being a worldwide standard it means there is a huge number of competent suppliers of equipment. As far as speed is concerned there would be no advantage for anything larger. Even the fantasies of much larger gauges would have too little advantage to be worth the enormous cost of building them. In most countries there is not sufficient advantage for replacing broader gauges - though Australia is probably an exception where they would gain advantage by regauging their Irish gauge pocket, and almost certainly they ought to convert as many of their narrow gauge systems as possible. And South America would gain a great deal by standardising, probably on Standard Gauge, especially for inter-territorial lines, which they probably need more of.

If South Africa continues to be an industrialised country they would be wise to build a Standard Gauge network with its faster speed and greater capacity. And then the wider gauge should be extended north. I have travelled on most of the main lines there and observed that while the trains were as fast as the Cape gauge can be expected to run the overall length of journeys was too long, needing too many sleeping cars.

[kato]

I am not sure what is the maximum speed that would be allowable on such a track but I suspect it is quite low - maybe in the range of 20 mph or below.

Railways in the 750-762mm gauge range can reach speeds of around 50 mph mostly depending on how well the track is built.

Freight loading gauges are likely to be rather restricted, so that although one could carry agricultural produce there is great difficulty in carrying large objects such as machinery.

Some such railways in Austria have loading gauges for 20' TEU containers. Weight doesn't seem to be a problem either as many such railways in Austria apparently were originally industrial cargo routes that connected mines to the general network.

[george matthews]

Railways in the 750-762mm gauge range can reach speeds of around 50 mph mostly depending on how well the track is built..

Not enough. And I wonder whether in actual practice they run as fas as that.

[Motorman]

Actually when you think about it "Standard gauge" is the oddball size. Most other gauges are to the foot or 1/2 foot , or to a metric round figure, i.e metre gauge.Standard gauge is 4 ft 81/2 inches or 1485 mm , neither been a "round" figure. Must be the Roman chariot wheel base width is a true story.

No- 4 ft 8 1/2 inches is 1435mm. The gauge is -mostly- measured between the vertical flanges of the rails, 8mm below the running surface.
But this can vary, as far as i know there are some slight differences, as the gauges of the Rostock and Turin Trams are nominally 1440mm, but it makes no difference.
This goes as far as the gauge of the Dresden Tramways is 1450mm, but 1435mm vehicles have occasionally ran there, it depends on the width of the wheel rim. In fact, it's only a mere difference of 7.5mm on each side, so with considerable tolerance, running is possible.

[David Benton]

Oops, must have been Friday.I think they widen the gauge on sharp curves too