Difference between "permanent way" and "track"

[Oscar]

What is the difference between "permanent way" and "track"? Wikipedia articles seem to suggest that the "permanent way" is the whole of the track infrastructure and "tracks" are the individual rails. I translate for a railway company and in the source texts sometimes a similar distinction is made.

 

[pdeaves]

What is the difference between "permanent way" and "track"? Wikipedia articles seem to suggest that the "permanent way" is the whole of the track infrastructure and "tracks" are the individual rails. I translate for a railway company and in the source texts sometimes a similar distinction is made.

The track is rails and sleepers. The permanent way is the whole 'way', the line of route, pretty much everything inside the fence.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’m not sure of a formal definition. However having worked in the field... I would say that Permanent way is everything above the formation*, ie rail, sleepers, fastenings, ballast, and any sand / geotextile membrane that separates the ballast from the formation.

Track is rail, sleepers and fastenings only.

The one part of ambiguity is track drainage. Definitely not part of the track, but could be part of the permanent way.

*formation being the subgrade, and everything beneath it, ie the basic civils. This is the responsibility of the
Civil Engineer, not the Permanent Way** Engineer.

** unhelpfully, most permanent way engineers are now known as track engineers. But they look after the whole permanent way, and their professional body is the Permanent Way Institution.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Although historically the permanent way was the rail keys chairs and sleepers, in the same way that the temporary way was also ... some of these distinctions aren't the same as NR's views of who does what, as Bald Rick says. NR has a Track Engineer that covers all things Permanent Way!

 

[civ-eng-jim]

What is the difference between "permanent way" and "track"? Wikipedia articles seem to suggest that the "permanent way" is the whole of the track infrastructure and "tracks" are the individual rails. I translate for a railway company and in the source texts sometimes a similar distinction is made.

Nothing. They're used interchangeably. If you tell 100 people in the street you're a "Permanent Way engineer" 100 of them will stare blankly back at you. Tell them you're a "Track Engineer" and you get, usually at most, an "oh, alright" sometimes followed by a comment about getting the trains to run on time.

Even the Permanent Way Institution's (PWI) own track engineering text book has a brief mention of "Permanent Way" in the opening paragraph and then it's barely mentioned thereon.

Network Rail has a "Track Design Handbook" standards, a "Professional Head of Track" and "Route Asset Manager (Track)" - Permanent way is barely mentioned.

The track is rails and sleepers. The permanent way is the whole 'way', the line of route, pretty much everything inside the fence.

While this would definitely have been the case in the early years of railways when it was just track, there's a whole load of kit out there inside the fence, a lot of it on the track, which is very much not in the realms of the modern day permanent-way engineer. However, the PWI is trying to brand itself (probably the wrong turn of phrase) as THE institution for railway infrastructure engineers so maybe one day OLE and ancillary Civils, as well as track, be considered permanent way engineers after all.

 

[Gostav]

For example if someone builds a temporary railway which just sleepers on the ground with a twisted second-hand track, you can call that is a track but not a permanent way.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

I think I'd still rather be FPWI than FTI ...

 

[Mag_seven]

What is the difference between "permanent way" and "track"? Wikipedia articles seem to suggest that the "permanent way" is the whole of the track infrastructure and "tracks" are the individual rails. I translate for a railway company and in the source texts sometimes a similar distinction is made.

According to a book I have called "The Railway Dictionary - An A-Z of Railway Terminology" the following entries appear:

Permanent Way:

Railway Track; rails, sleepers, fastenings and ballast; so called to distinguish it from the temporary way laid during railway construction.

Track:

The running lines and sidings etc. of a railway or tramway.

Hope this helps.

 

[Oscar]

Thanks for the many helpful replies.

 

[MarkyT]

I wouldn't categorise drainage as part of the 'permanent way'. A formation, whether to receive a railway or a road on top, will always need suitable drainage, although the precise form and layout might vary to an extent according to the intended use. The PW is self-draining in itself, usually through the ballast, and delivers water to the formation drainage.

 

[Tim M]

It’s simple. The term permanent way is British, other countries use the term track or track work. Both terms refer to everything from the ballast and upwards. Having worked on export signalling Contracts it is essential to understand different terminology around the world. For example: Points - British; Switch - USA, End of passing loop - British; End of siding - USA. There are many, many more different terms.

Interesting to note differences in drawings, for example Signalling circuits are very different where there is German influence compared to British influence. US circuits are similar to British standards, (sometimes called ‘written circuits’) but use a different set of symbols to Association of American Railroad standards.

Oh and by the way, Frog: component in a set of points - model railways; small four legged reptile - railway engineering!

 

[Deepgreen]

Nothing. They're used interchangeably. If you tell 100 people in the street you're a "Permanent Way engineer" 100 of them will stare blankly back at you. Tell them you're a "Track Engineer" and you get, usually at most, an "oh, alright" sometimes followed by a comment about getting the trains to run on time.

Even the Permanent Way Institution's (PWI) own track engineering text book has a brief mention of "Permanent Way" in the opening paragraph and then it's barely mentioned thereon.

Network Rail has a "Track Design Handbook" standards, a "Professional Head of Track" and "Route Asset Manager (Track)" - Permanent way is barely mentioned.



While this would definitely have been the case in the early years of railways when it was just track, there's a whole load of kit out there inside the fence, a lot of it on the track, which is very much not in the realms of the modern day permanent-way engineer. However, the PWI is trying to brand itself (probably the wrong turn of phrase) as THE institution for railway infrastructure engineers so maybe one day OLE and ancillary Civils, as well as track, be considered permanent way engineers after all.

I don't agree that there is no difference just because laymen don't see a distinction (and why would/should they?). The permanent way is everything between the fences from ballast level downwards (the 'made' route, in other words) and the track is sleepers, rails and fasteners.

 

[Deepgreen]

It’s simple. The term permanent way is British, other countries use the term track or track work. Both terms refer to everything from the ballast and upwards. Having worked on export signalling Contracts it is essential to understand different terminology around the world. For example: Points - British; Switch - USA, End of passing loop - British; End of siding - USA. There are many, many more different terms.

Interesting to note differences in drawings, for example Signalling circuits are very different where there is German influence compared to British influence. US circuits are similar to British standards, (sometimes called ‘written circuits’) but use a different set of symbols to Association of American Railroad standards.

Oh and by the way, Frog: component in a set of points - model railways; small four legged reptile - railway engineering!

Ahem - amphibian! The railway term derives from a word meaning the soft tissue within the hooves of a horse.