I believe that is why Glasgow and Huddersfield had the strange gauge of just under 1435 mm, so that freight wagons could use the rails, but running with their flanges in the grooves.Whilst I'd guess that ultimately narrow gauge does allow tighter turns, I'd have thought that spacing between axles in the bogie and the length of cars between bogie centres is much more of an influence on minimum corner radii. And I'd suspect that more than a few tramways at one time had some limited conveyance of freight wagons from the mainline, at least at their extremities.
I believe that is why Glasgow and Huddersfield had the strange gauge of just under 1435 mm, so that freight wagons could use the rails, but running with their flanges in the grooves.
Have any trams ever been built with independent wheels each side to allow low floors more easily by removing the axles?........Although it obviously wasn't a concern when the tramways were built, a 100% low floor tram is more difficult on narrow gauge because the wheels are under the seats and the aisle needs to pass between them.
I have read that some systems ran water along the grooves of tram rails in some locations to lubricate them, presumably just 1 side, to ease the noise - & presumably wear too.... The tightest curves on any tramway are far too tight to allow rolling contact with any sensible wheel conicity, so they just have to accept that one wheel is going to be sliding on the rail and there will be heavy rail wear in this location as well as heavy wheel wear if the tramway has a lot of tight curves.
Yes, many of the early low floor tram designs had independent wheels and some still do. Even so the wheel, motor and associated suspension gubbins takes up quite a bit of room so has to be boxed in under seats. Independent wheels also lose the self-centering effect which isn't relevant to cornering on tight curves but is at higher speeds on larger radii.Have any trams ever been built with independent wheels each side to allow low floors more easily by removing the axles?
That may be so, although Volk's railway wasn't standard gauge! I would guess it's largely a question of knowing standard gauge works and is about right for the size of vehicle needed, so there's no good reason to do anything different. But in practice high-capacity tramways have been built at a range of gauges between metre and slightly wider than standard.Could it also be that the earliest tram cars were at the infancy of electric traction and it was easier to fit an axle hung motor on a standard gauge axle with the technology of the time?
...which may be why they are second in the list for extant narrow-gauge tramways in the link in post #2.Trams on the Seaton Tramway run on 2ft 9in gauge track, but I suppose that they are not really referring to what the OP was referring to as they are just a scaled down version of standard gauge.
The Isle of Man had no problems fitting motors on their narrow gauge trucksCould it also be that the earliest tram cars were at the infancy of electric traction and it was easier to fit an axle hung motor on a standard gauge axle with the technology of the time?
It shows about 20 less-than-metre gauge tramways (mostly historical,) maybe 170 metre gauge (lots abandoned or converted to standard gauge) and 170 standard gauge (also lots abandoned) and about 130 broader.I thought that post 2 inferred that the list (which I didn't look at) was a list of Metre Gauge tramways and Seaton is 838mm!
as the link in post 2 shows us..There have been and, outside of the UK, still are plenty of examples of narrow gauge tram systems with metre gauge being quite popular.
Now that isn't immediately obvious from scanning the list. Thanks. From a quick look at the network map it looks as though they join up too...The german Rhein-Neckar network racks up about a total 300 km of metre gauge spanning three cities and their surroundings.
If it did, it made it quite easy to use another gauge instead, as you just needed to say so in the enabling act:did the Railway Regulation (Gauge) Act 1846 apply to trams?
If I recall correctly the other remnants of the Vicinal are a small network in Charleroi (part of which was put underground during the pre-metro craze of the 70s) and a short route mainly for tourists. Both of these are also metre gauge.Kust Tram, Antwerp and Ghent trams are metre while Brussels are standard. The first 3 are operated by De Lijn, the Flemish public transport operator.
KustTram was once part of an extensive tramway network across Belgium run by NMVB/SCNV, all metre gauge. Think the rest of the network is now gone.
Looking in one of the published railway magazines, I do believe a former Blackpool transport Brush railcar is trialing individual wheel motor technology at I do believe the churnet valley railway. Also in terms of the guage of tramways, surely it is economies of scale. If the national network runs at 4 foot 8 and 1/2 inch. It then makes sense to make everything else at that garage to lower manufacturing costs, because, all the axles are the same width. Also there is no break of gauge like you had in days gone by with Brunel's broad gauge. Or you have in modern Australia going from one coast to the other. (Irish gauge 5'3", standard 4'8 1/2", and narrow gauge 3").