Double decking is a popular way to increase capacity. I now see that some places in Europe they have widened to loadings so that passenger cars are as wide as 11.5 feet on standard gare, compared to the normal 10 wide railroad stock. Also the Chunnel trains are wide exept the locos wich are very narrow. It seems there is plenty of trains around that are wider but still run on standard gage at hi speeds.
Next step wide double deckes!
The Long Island Railroad runs double decker coaches on its diesle lines.
All the Amtrak superliners are double decked as are most of the commuter lines Metra runs in Chicago but I wouldn’t want to be upstairs on any of the commuter cars for very long particularly the old IC cars that are about 4" from the catenary at times.
AND…when the LIRR runs single-deck trains, they are quite wide. I’ve seen seating that was 3+2 as opposed to the normal American coach assumption, two plus two.
…With 11.5’ width on the above mentioned coaches…and similiar trains with these coaches meet on double track…I wonder if the clearance is down to a minimum…and in some instances, too close.
I was wondering that since railroads have pretty much reched the limit of rolling stock, do you think that broad gauge will become popular?
Matthew
When money falls from the sky
The clearance diagrams in Europe and the UK are appreciably smaller than in the United States. Compare EMD’s JT26CW-SS with an SD40-2 and you can see the difference.
Not all European trains are so small, the old Briti***rains are. The piggyback trains going through the “Chunnel” are 13 feet wide. In places like Sweden they run with 11.5 foot wide roaling stock, all on standard gage at 125mph.
My point is that this is evidance that widening roling stock without widening the rail gage is not nessarily unstable like I hve heard some people say. I know that many places the clearances are tight but would it still not be so inconcivable to widen clearances on such open lines as the Sant Fe?
Trouble is… with changing clearances… that one spot which just passes a given clearance diagram determines what you can run on the whole route. For instance – suppose you had special wider cars (with what money?!) for the Southwest Chief. Fine… but my recollection is that there are several places on the route which are just barely wide enough for a standard width car as it is. And it only takes one.
Another, not wholly irrelevant, factor is that most folks don’t mind 2+2 seating. There are very very few folks, at least that I’ve met, who have much kind to say about 3 abreast, though. The passengers might tolerate such a thing on commuter cars, though they surely wouldn’t like it, but I doubt that it would be real popular on any longer distance train. So it seems to me that there isn’t a whole lot to be gained to going to a wider car for passenger service. And has been pointed out, Superliners and a lot of commuters are already double deck, and are used where clearances will allow it.
The clearance problem is even worse with freight, of course.
Broad gauge doesn’t help much; in freight service, if the car is that unbalanced that broad gauge would help a lot, it shouldn’t be accepted to run, and in passenger service the load isn’t big enough to generate that much imbalance.