Coincidence? I think not.

[Emperor Jake]

These two completelly unrelated commuter trains have very similar livery styles and colour schemes, despite one being from the US and one from Germany. Which one got its "inspiration" from which?

[Hyronymus]

Probably the same guy with bad taste . I do see some differences in the shapes of the bows though.

[Illegal_Alien]

The german one is more streamlined, and not a box on wheels.

[Geo Ghost]

German looks much more impressive and sleek in shape whilst the American one just looks ugly. Then again, I think that about pretty much all American trains.

How comes we don't have double-decker trains in the UK?

[JamieLei]

The loading gauge is too small - which is the clearance around the trains. The tunnels, bridges, stations, etc, simply aren't built wide or high enough to allow it. There were attempts to try and make a double decker to fit the British Loading Gauge - do a search for 4DD, although it was a complete disaster.

Even when the DfT did a pretty serious investigation to introducing double-decker trains on the busiest lines, they didn't contemplate using the Continental loading gauge - it would require too much effort to expand the clearance.

HS1 was built to the Continental Loading gauge - and unless someone really is stupid, HS2 will as well, meaning that there's the possibility for Double Deckers on the high speed lines.

[Geo Ghost]

Though that might be the case. Shame there's not a way round it with modern-day designs.

Be good to see such running on HS1 and hopefully 2. I imagine that would reduce any possible over-crowding on commuter lines considerably.

[John]

Even when the DfT did a pretty serious investigation to introducing double-decker trains on the busiest lines, they didn't contemplate using the Continental loading gauge - it would require too much effort to expand the clearance.

Did they release any papers on the matter?

I mean it needs doing - you will only be able to extend train lengths so much...

For example with the electrification of the GWML would it cost that much more to electrify it to continental gauge - given the amount that needs to be done just to fit the wires in?

[61653]

I'd have thought that less work will be needed to fit the catenary in on the GWML than for example the MML or Chat Moss routes, as the GW was originally built to Broad gauge (mostly)... I'd imagine nearly as much work will be needed to make other routes suitable for the displaced 165/166s that'll be released by the GW electrification... (Of course, I may be talking rubbish though).

[Illegal_Alien]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_4DD
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=47988 (Video, most weirdest layout i have ever seen, and not realy a "standard" doubledecker thing.)

Doesnt seem to be comfortable though:P

[SquireJames]

I still haven't worked out how the 'upper' compartments were accessed, since their seem to be no doors to them and the cross sectional diagrams i've seen don't have space for any connection to the 'lower' level.

A weird design to be sure, especially since the problem they were designed to solve was eventually solved simply by lengthening trains to 10 carriages from 8. Seems a lot of effort and weirdness when the answer was not exactly ground breaking...ah well, that's Bulleid for you! A bit nuts, a genius to be sure, but a bit nuts.

[Gord]

Found this on Youtube just the other day actually. Shows how you get to the upper compartments on the 4DD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22FWR3MmBIg

[John]

(Video, most weirdest layout i have ever seen, and not realy a "standard" doubledecker thing.)

Doesnt seem to be comfortable though:P

Well no, but the UK Gauge doesn't allow 'standard' double-decker. Even if you put the floor of the downstairs on the rails, each level would just have 1.65 metres of height (going by the most widespread gauge) or just under 2m if you follow the new larger gauge. That doesn't account for any structure mind you.

[SquireJames]

Found this on Youtube just the other day actually. Shows how you get to the upper compartments on the 4DD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22FWR3MmBIg

Ah so there was an internal step? Nice. I have to agree with the latest comment on the video. Seems like it would all fold up like balsa wood in the event of an accident.

[Ameecher]

Even when the DfT did a pretty serious investigation to introducing double-decker trains on the busiest lines, they didn't contemplate using the Continental loading gauge - it would require too much effort to expand the clearance.

Did they release any papers on the matter?

I mean it needs doing - you will only be able to extend train lengths so much...

For example with the electrification of the GWML would it cost that much more to electrify it to continental gauge - given the amount that needs to be done just to fit the wires in?

Most of it is possible by lowering the trackbed by around a foot which can be done with tamping or relaying the track foundations in most places. Anything more than that requires bridge rebuilds. Also, European trains are wider, not just taller so to get the continental gauge you'd have to move the tracks further apart, not so much a proper on the GWML because Mr Brunel wanted to be bigger anyway but yeah, some subsequent infrastructure might not be suitable, like signals...

[audigex]

I can't help wondering if we'd be able to pull it off now, with modern equipment taking up less space, I think a central upper seating area in each car could be feasible, at least on electric powered lines. Raise the single-deck above the bogies to store equipment, lower the centre of the lower deck and put an upper deck in above it, possibly like this which is, I believe, a Japanese take on it. It preserves space for standing and walking along the bottom deck to check tickets, while adding extra seating space.



1.6m of clearance isn't a lot (3.2) but 2m is more than enough. Double decker buses have less than 2m of clearance on the upper deck. They very cleverly use the excess height above the corridor to replace the luggage racks on the upper deck, and you don't need 2m of clearance just to get to your seat. It even preserves standing room below. I reckon it can be done with the taller gauges, and potentially even with the smaller ones with a bit of ingenuity. There's nothing to say the entire train has to be double decked, either - half or possibly even a third could be conventional and contain the bulk of the equipment.

Of course, I've not done any real work into this: I'm just basing it on the fact that electronics etc are much more compact than in 1949.

[Dave]

Pretty sure there's only one line built to continental loading gauge in the UK, other than HS1. And it's currently a series of roads, bike paths and countryside walks. Cookie for anyone who can tell me what it is.

[LaSeandre]

The Great Central.

[Ameecher]

There's also issues to do with dwell times at stations and people like to get up and go to the toilet and what not. The UK's highest loading gauge (W10 or W12) is only 2.6m high though, even if you put titchy Voyager wheels on the thing you're going to have a very crapped set up. Your proposed 2m high clearance internally leaves barely room for a room and running gear let alone a second deck and the extra luggage space required for the extra passengers you fit in the extra deck.

The proposal to have the double deck area between the bogies pretty much negates the double decking. Our coaches are shorter than mainland coaches (20m or 23m - everything on the SR region has to be 20m or it can't go to Charing Cross or Cannon Street and let's face it, SR probably needs it most) so the associated stairs and would take up a higher proportion of space on our coaches so you'd probably do as well to fill the whole lot with seats and forget about a top deck.
A final point is that the likes of Switzerland can get away with double deck because their platforms are lower too, then you don't have to have such a large step up for the doors.

[John]

Also, European trains are wider, not just taller so to get the continental gauge you'd have to move the tracks further apart, not so much a proper on the GWML because Mr Brunel wanted to be bigger anyway but yeah, some subsequent infrastructure might not be suitable, like signals...

Except the GWML is due to be resignalled from 2017 onwards anyway. I'm not suggesting it is all done at once, but if every upgrade and new build from now on is done to conform to the continental gauge then in 15-20 years you'll find you can change the gauge of whole mainlines for very little effort indeed.

This is of course all just speculation, as I doubt anyone has conducted studies on changing the gauge of a mainline over the period of 20 odd years. The return on investment might also be less then pleasing.


That Japanese setup is interesting - something like that might be possible on UK rails, but it would be full of compromises, and probably offer less then 20% increase in capacity. Whether the public would accept it or not would be a whole nother issue...

[Geo Ghost]

What is the Japanese setup?
I'm not very knowledgeable with their trains other than they (the bullet trains) look quite... abstract shall we say.
I often use to think that the TGV Duplex might fit in the UK loading gauge or something of that sort. Doesn't actually look that tall/wide compared to most double-deckers I have seen before.