Perilous Platforms

[Dextraneous]

Whilst not being able to drive, I have naturally had to rely on public transport. Buses quite often use their pneumatic suspension to lower down to assist people to get on and off. Trams have had their station platforms designed so that their is no height difference and barely more than a couple of inches gap so wheelchair users can rollon and off with complete ease.

As for mainline trains, it is a complete mystery as to why station platforms and rolling stock never line up. Is it really necessary for there to be such large step up onto or down from a carriage? Although carriage design evolves, surely this height difference could be made to remain minimal. What made it particularly poignant was watching passengers getting their heavy luggage down to the platform from a train at manchester airport.This station is relatively new (probably less than 20 years old)- why oh why wasn't it designed to be at the same height as the carriages, or the track lowered accordingly. Madness!

 

[Nozzle]

Some platforms high, some low. The same carriage, which has to have steps the same height both sides of it has to meet the requirements of all the platforms it stops at. With curved platforms the track is often banked and this makes the problem of different height much worse. Buses, with all their daft ride height adjustment don't weigh 40-45 tonnes and do 140mph+

Nozzle

 

[big-all]

yes cant on the track[tilt] and curves along with track renewal that happen every 8-30 years which can raise the track a few inches every time all add to the hotch potch off gaps
remember you have a 76 foot long vehicle with virtually strait sides on bogies means you will have a largish gap in the center on a tight curve
fast trains need more cant[lean] to stop centrifugal force making the ride uncomfortable need a bit more clearance
its all a compromise unlike busses and trams that are shorter and don't need extra clearance for high speed passing

 

[Dextraneous]

I hear what you're saying. However, many platforms are on straight runs and in the case of manchester airport- this is a terminus so the points you refer to don't apply.

 

[big-all]

I hear what you're saying. However, many platforms are on straight runs and in the case of manchester airport- this is a terminus so the points you refer to don't apply.

i suppose on top off that is the train designs from 30 years ago including the pacer based on bus components and 2 axle chassies
i dont know if these cause the problem with narrower bodies
do you notice the problem when on a specific sort off train ??

edit just had a look and the pacer is slightly wider than a modern train
but dont know if thats body width including steps or not??

 

[JBR]

Dex, you make a very good point. It's not something I have particularly thought about as I very rarely use public transport.

I can see absolutely no reason why trains and their station platforms should not match up, but this would require a great deal of re-building: straight lines and platforms at every station and a standardised height above track level of all platforms and passenger carriages.

Bearing in mind all the renewal work, new station building and carriage manufacture that has gone on ever since our standard gauge tracks were standardised (at 4' 8 1/2", I think, for some strange reason!) I find it very strange that this hasn't been considered before.

 

[Spark123]

4' 8½" gauge had something to do with horses walking down them in the olden days iirc.
I'm wondering if the height has something to do with clearance for freight trains.

 

[joe-90]

Nothing to do with horses.

 

[big-all]

4' 8½" gauge had something to do with horses walking down them in the olden days iirc.
I'm wondering if the height has something to do with clearance for freight trains.

it was the wagon wheels

the height is historical
with the most recent raising was for routs to be cleared for the full standard height containers on the then freightliner wagons
of course further raising happens when overhead electrification happens but only for electrical insulation purposes

 

[JBR]

Well whether it was horses or wagon wheels, it stretches the imagination to believe that all horses and all wagon wheel axles were 4' 8 1/2" wide!

 

[joe-90]

I seem to recall it was worked out mathematically by Stephenson for optimum performance. Wide gauge was better - but used loads more trackbed.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If true

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/rail.htm

 

[joe-90]

It's not though. What about Brunel's broad gauge?

 

[big-all]

the very first railways where "plateways "and horse powered and where little more than "L" shaped rails to guide the wagon wheels and give them a smooth surface to run on
because the where smoother and easier to pull they would pull several waggons with the same horse

it was later on in development when rails as we know them where used as the weight became more and steel rather than the brittle iron was used

 

[joe-90]

Huntingdon Beaumont was the first. Not far from me.