←back to thread

Finland announces migration of its rail network to international gauge

(yle.fi)
461 points axelfontaine | 1 comments | 20 May 25 07:40 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
cake-rusk ◴[20 May 25 08:35 UTC] No.44039197[source]▶
The rest of europe should move to the broader guage. It is more stable.
replies(1): >>44039299 #
jabl ◴[20 May 25 08:49 UTC] No.44039299[source]▶
The difference is so marginal it doesn't matter, and is certainly not worth the cost.

Both the heaviest cargo trains and the fastest passenger trains (ignoring monorails, maglevs etc., just normal style trains running on two steel rails) on the planet run on standard gauge.

replies(2): >>44039345 #>>44042074 #
consp ◴[20 May 25 08:55 UTC] No.44039345[source]▶
It would also make switches and curves larger so it would not be possible in constrained (city) environments already present.
replies(1): >>44042166 #
1. iggldiggl ◴[20 May 25 14:39 UTC] No.44042166[source]▶
While narrower gauges are somewhat more favourable to tighter curve radii, ultimately the difference is negligible enough that it can be ignored. At the extreme end of the range, curve radii for standard gauge trams can go down into the 10 – 15 m range just the same as metre gauge networks, and for mainline railways curve radii instead are usually limited by vehicle geometry and mostly line speeds (centrifugal forces), which (especially the latter) aren't related to the track gauge.

You're right about switches though – if you keep the rest of the switch geometry (angle, radius) the same (and to some extent you have to if you want to keep existing speeds across switches), the large track gauge alone will make the switch somewhat longer, which at least in complex stations with huge clusters of switches (like e.g. https://www.google.com/maps/@50.1039604,8.6563677,197m/data=...) could potentially cause some headaches.