Gauge Clarification

[Legolash2o]

Can a route be W10 and W12 but not W9?

I ask because I checked the gauge clearance on NESA for Scunthorpe area and that's how it's listed. It seems incorrect.

 

[800002]

I don't believe so. *Sorry, miss remembered. See extract at the bottom, sorry for misleading.

I believe W10 and W12 gauges are based upon W9 but with differing 'additions' to cater for different sized traffic.

I did have a handy guide to Gauge profiles, I'll try and relocate it.

If I am incorrect, no doubt someone is able to correct my error.

EDIT:-
Gauge nesting - W6a sits within W7, and W7 sits within W8. That's where it stops – part of W8 protrudes outside of W9. Nesting refers to a numerically larger gauge being progressively larger than the one with the previous number in the series. However, the concept of nesting falls down when the network cannot accommodate ever increasing size, or different rules are applied. W10 gauge is taller than W9 gauge, but W9 is wider, for example.

So in theory, a route can be tall enough to accommodate W10 traffic, but not wide enough to accommodate W9.

 

[hwl]

W10 and W12 are for standard width deep sea containers i.e. 8'0" wide but W9 /11 are for European type intermodal containers* that can take 2 pallets side by side internally and are wider at 8'4". The US have similar domestic intermodal containers that are 8'6" wide.

*marked on the ends with small yellow arrows and warning triangle.

Hence W12 includes 10 and 8 but not necessarily 11 and 9 as they are wider.

 

[Legolash2o]

Thanks for the guide.

I remember about W9 being wider and W10 being taller. But I though something that is W10 and W12, it should be W9 as well.

This is the only location on the network that I've seen that and think it's a mistake.

 

[800002]

Thanks for the guide.

I remember about W9 being wider and W10 being taller. But I though something that is W10 and W12, it should be W9 as well.

This is the only location on the network that I've seen that and think it's a mistake.

You're welcome.
It depends on the network infrastructure, as to what gauge is permitted.

Can you give the sectional appendix page reference, where you've seen this? Please.

It could be as simple as a set of 'protruding' platform cope stones *apologies for any potential mis-spelling or a narrow to gauge tunnel.

 

[800002]

This is the only location on the network that I've seen that and think it's a mistake.

Although mistakes in NESA are present!

 

[Legolash2o]

It's LN752 (Immingham to Doncaster via Scunthorpe) from the online (non-PDF) version of NESA.

 

[800002]

It's LN752 (Immingham to Doncaster via Scunthorpe) from the online (non-PDF) version of NESA.

Which is amended from the current pdf version - with W10 and W12 both listed as 'N'.

Can you see when the online (non-pdf) page was updated? - the pdf was last updated on 31/12/2017.

 

[Legolash2o]

The PDF version is created from the web version.

It has the same date but I know it was updated sometime this week, as I checked last week (old values) and then Tuesday no gauges at all, and then the new ones today.

 

[800002]

The PDF version is created from the web version.

It has the same date but I know it was updated sometime this week, as I checked last week (old values) and then Tuesday no gauges at all, and then the new ones today.

Yes.
The version i have at the moment incorporates changes dated prior to 2nd March 2019 . The latest version online is from 01 June 2019. Both say the same, as I said earlier.
If Table 5DA, the Route clearance of freight vehicles, has been updated, it should say at the top of the table. I'm pretty sure of that (but I am open to being wrong).

I am at a loss as to say what could be happening.
I would raise an email with planning publications. They'll be able to tell you when and why it was updated.

 

[Legolash2o]

I've got the feeling they've forgotten to update the date for table as well .

I've sent them an email anyway. I'm sure it's a mistake as I haven't seen W10 & W12 but not W9 anywhere else on the network.

Thanks again everyone.

 

[800002]

I've got the feeling they've forgotten to update the date for table as well .

I've sent them an email anyway. I'm sure it's a mistake as I haven't seen W10 & W12 but not W9 anywhere else on the network.

Thanks again everyone.

Hopefully you can update us with any response you get.
Taking a look at the route and it's divervancies / convergancies, in the latest upload of the pdf (anyway), nothing joining that route is cleared W9 / W10 / W12 anyway...
Make of that what you will...

*i checked the following:-
All LN 736 (except Nunnery Main Line Jn – Nunnery Jn) / 754 / 758 (except Brancliffe East Jn – St Catherine's Jn) / 766 / 888 (except Shaftholme Jn – Knottingley West Jn) / 912. Of which none of the exceptions provide access to LN 752.

 

[Legolash2o]

There's been quite a few gauge clearance work completed in that area recently. Pretty much every line in the area around Doncaster, apart from Doncaster to Peterborough and Donnington to Brancliffe East Jn, is now W12 cleared.

A train from Immingham can now reach the W12 near Sheffield, go through Doncaster to the W12 route via Lincoln, Doncaster iPort and even up to Leeds Engine Shed Jn. Once it's published in NESA anyway.