Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 11:55 29 Mar 2024
* Easter getaway begins with flood alerts in place
* Attempted murder charge after man stabbed on train
* KFC Nigeria sorry after disabled diner refused service
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
29th Mar (1913)
Foundation of National Union or Railwaymen (*)

Train RunningCancelled
09:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
11:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
12:17 Westbury to Swindon
12:22 Newbury to Bedwyn
12:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
12:52 Bedwyn to Newbury
13:15 Swindon to Westbury
13:21 Newbury to Bedwyn
13:48 Bedwyn to Newbury
14:12 Newbury to Bedwyn
14:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
14:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
15:22 Newbury to Bedwyn
15:28 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
15:50 Bedwyn to Newbury
16:15 Newbury to Bedwyn
16:23 Westbury to Swindon
16:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
16:55 Bedwyn to Newbury
17:36 Swindon to Westbury
18:37 Westbury to Swindon
20:13 Swindon to Westbury
21:16 Westbury to Swindon
22:30 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
12:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
13:42 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
13:55 Paignton to London Paddington
14:36 London Paddington to Paignton
15:42 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
16:35 London Paddington to Plymouth
16:50 Plymouth to London Paddington
17:03 London Paddington to Penzance
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth
18:03 London Paddington to Penzance
18:36 London Paddington to Plymouth
19:04 Paignton to London Paddington
20:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
21:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
Delayed
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
08:15 Penzance to London Paddington
09:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
09:10 Penzance to London Paddington
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington
11:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
12:03 London Paddington to Penzance
12:15 Penzance to London Paddington
etc
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 29, 2024, 12:03:54 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[124] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[53] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[49] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[48] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
[43] Return of the BRUTE?
[30] 2024 - Service update and amendment log, Swindon <-> Westbury...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Double decker transport - UK compared with Europe  (Read 9801 times)
NickB
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 711


View Profile
« on: November 21, 2014, 14:54:52 »

I write this from the comfort of a train speeding from Brussels to Bruges for the weekend. The train is a double decker similar to other European trains.
I was just wondering, seeing as how the network is full and the platforms too short, as to why we only have single decked carriages?
Thanks
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2014, 15:02:37 »

The British system (bridges, tunnels, etc) has a much smaller cross-section so it's quite hard to get a second storey on to a train.   It was tried (somewhat) in South East London with two 4 car units about 60 years ago, with compartments offset above each other - cross seating with (in effect) a compartment above in the luggage racks.  But there were far more seats per door, and station dwell times suffered.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/rw3-497alh/5330944631/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR_Class_4DD
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
chrisr_75
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1019


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2014, 16:40:13 »

I believe the reasons stated by Graham, essentially gauge clearance issues, are, at least in part, a relic of WW2, in that our rail system was relatively lightly damaged (and largely continued to operate "normally") in comparison to that of our continental neighbours, whose rail systems were pretty much rebuilt from scratch post-war. So, we're stuck with Victorian spec railway, whereas France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany etc all have mid 20th century specification rail systems that allowed more sustainable growth, particularly with double deck trains & electrification. I understand it is also less of an issue to carry the larger sized shipping containers on Euro rail systems as opposed to ours.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2014, 17:16:35 »

I always through the gauge difference went back to the beginning, and places that got railways even 20-30 years after Britain saw the advantage of bigger loads. According to this that's true for the German sphere of influence, but not the French (perhaps too early). However, they made the effort to upgrade main lines before the WWII (World War 2 - 1939 to 1945), so post-war reconstruction would not have had much effect  - especially given the small amount of damage in Paris and much of the rest of the country.

I've seen an analysis (no idea where) of the gains from an upstairs, given that it can only fit between bogies and you need stairs. That showed the gain is pretty small, especially for fast-loading commuter trains. That's because moving up and down stairs is slow, so you need more standing space to hold a whole station's joiners and leavers (or to try to). The gain is even smaller for 2-storey RER trains, as they have three doors per carriage, hence three stairways.
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2014, 18:10:29 »

I've seen an analysis (no idea where) of the gains from an upstairs, given that it can only fit between bogies and you need stairs...

You might be thinking of this:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100513020716/http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/strategy/whitepapers/whitepapercm7176/railwhitepapersupportingdocs/provevalddtrains

Basically it isn't just the height of vehicles, the GB (Great Britain) network usually has less space to deepen carriages between the bogies as well.

Coincidentally the possibility of using double deck trains on discrete parts of the SWML (South Western Mail Line) (e.g. Waterloo to Basingstoke) has just resurfaced in the Wessex route study draft - though NR» (Network Rail - home page) still appear lukewarm about it, with only a 50% capacity increase being assumed.

Paul
Logged
4064ReadingAbbey
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2014, 19:57:24 »


Basically it isn't just the height of vehicles, the GB (Great Britain) network usually has less space to deepen carriages between the bogies as well.

Paul

This is the critical part. British trains evolved with high platforms with the result that the width of the coach below floor level is narrower than the body. In central Europe, and much of France, low level platforms were the order of the day so the coach maintained its width down to rail level.

Although higher platforms are now common in parts of central Europe they are spaced far enough from the rails that there is no interference fit between the train and the platform. Wink

It would be very expensive to enlarge the UK (United Kingdom) structure gauge on existing lines - not only the platforms would need to be moved but potentially hundreds of under bridges with longitudinal girders between the rails would have to be rebuilt.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2014, 14:00:53 »

Coincidentally the possibility of using double deck trains on discrete parts of the SWML (South Western Mail Line) (e.g. Waterloo to Basingstoke) has just resurfaced in the Wessex route study draft - though NR» (Network Rail - home page) still appear lukewarm about it, with only a 50% capacity increase being assumed.
Paul

While there is little detail in the study, it is clear that they are considering clearing a specific route (Waterloo-Basingstoke, and perhaps to Southampton) for these trains which will not (indeed cannot) run anywhere else. That suggests greater height, and/or perhaps greater below-platform width (within the restrictions of third rail stock). They would also only be used for peak service, so potentially one up and one down per day. That, plus being a small-volume custom design, is all going the weight the BCR (Benefit Cost Ratio) heavily against it.

Interestingly, the 1930s French Voitures ^tage ^tat were also used as peak-busters - though that was not the first double-decker design; that was the Bidel back in 1882 (and very quaint it looks).
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2014, 14:35:07 »

Interestingly, the 1930s French Voitures ^tage ^tat were also used as peak-busters - though that was not the first double-decker design; that was the Bidel back in 1882 (and very quaint it looks).

Fascination - From that link, which is in French, via Google Translate:

Quote
Bidel is the nickname given to commuter cars to imperial network of former French West . This nickname was given to them because their shape and the barred windows of the upper floor evoked trailers menagerie Bidel of the time. At about the same time, the double-decker open car was put into service from the Gare Saint-Lazare .

These vehicles with two axles and closed imperial included two series:

1882 type 9.5 m in length over buffers, delivered from 1883
1911 type 9.8 m length built from 1911 to 1924.
Built by workshops Romilly-sur-Seine on a lowered chassis Vidard on extremities gooseneck to support pads and hitch, they had a tare weight of 15 t. The ceiling heights were 1.617 m for the lower body (2nd class) and 1.695 m for the Imperial (3rd class).

On 1 January 1938, the park SNCF (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways) still included 710 such cars used mainly on the Vincennes line and sometimes on the line Little Belt . The latest units have disappeared from the line Vincennes in 1949; they made ​​their last trip 30 June 1954 on the line of Enghien Montmorency .
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2014, 14:51:09 »

Hmm - not one of Google Translate's best - for "network of former French West" read "the old Paris East network" - in fact from the gare de Paris-Bastille to Vincennes. Also, ^ imp^riale ("to imperial", excusably) means double-deck, as applied to buses too (and imp^riale refers to the upper deck itself).
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2014, 00:51:54 »

An excellent Pathe Newreel video via
http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2014/11/22/double-deck-trains-proposed-for-waterloo-station-lines/?

showing how the seating was going to work on the prototype
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2016, 10:34:43 »

An old video - introduction of double decker trains from Charing Cross.   I wonder how this will differ from first run of a 387 out of Paddington

https://youtu.be/22GWR3MmBIg
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
phile
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1382

Language spoken Welsh as well as English


View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2016, 20:49:12 »

Perhaps we won't have double decker trains for fears of bridge strikes where road over rail
 Wink Wink
Logged
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 589


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: September 01, 2016, 21:38:01 »

If the use of rail continues to grow, then someone will have to decide what to do with busy terminal stations, such as those in London.

A typical station with ten platforms, a train turnaround of 2ph (with unloading, cleaning and loading) and 6 primary routes has a limited capacity. With a further growth of 40%(guess) over the next 10-20 years quite likely, are we going to add extra decks of platforms, or deploy double deck trains.

The current Paddington plan of adding two new Crossrail platforms (underground), re-allocate some local platforms to intercity and longer trains makes the current situation more tolerable.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #13 on: September 02, 2016, 05:00:11 »

If the use of rail continues to grow, then someone will have to decide what to do with busy terminal stations, such as those in London.

Perhaps someone has ... with Thameslink, Elizabeth Line, Crossrail 2 so far, and HS1 (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) relieving some pressure inbound from Kent.  Could there be more in the series? 
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 02, 2016, 11:43:24 »

Perhaps we won't have double decker trains for fears of bridge strikes where road over rail
 Wink Wink

That might be more plausible than perhaps you'd think.

That 2007 Network Rail study into two-storey trains (referred to in this forum before) looked at adapting just one route into London, e.g. Southampton-Waterloo. Just raising the height to French gauge (same width as ours) was costed at the thick end of 1 G£. Doing the same for 16-car trains cost a little less, but gave more extra seats, so would always be a better bet - and you could go on to look at longer trains still.

The real killer for that extra deck is the narrow UK (United Kingdom) gauge below platform level. Continental gauges go right down at almost the same width, while our trains don't, and can't due to all the stuff down there. The NR» (Network Rail - home page) study didn't even look at clearing that - dismissed as far too expensive (especially all those bridge girders). If downstairs can only hold 2+1 seating, its benefit is pretty limited.

Raising the height is familiar from electrification, hence much easier to cost. But if you got a few taller trains, you would have to very careful where you drove them. CTRL (Channel Tunnel Rail Link) and your cleared route (and maybe a short link between) would be OK, but any routeing or signalling brain fade and that hugely embarrassing bridge strike is all too possible.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page