THE NARROW GUAGE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 17, 20 May 1871, Page 1

THE NARROW GUAGE.

In a postscript to the “ San Francisco News Letter,” of 25th March, a letter appears which has been written by E. N. Robinson, and addressed <£ to a prominent man in Salt Lake.” It is not occupied with the question of polygamy, as might be at first inferred,, but with what concerns us more nearly—the questiou of the narrow guage.- This letter is full of calculations of a most interesting character, all tending to show the advantage of a guage of three feet. We shall endeavor to lay before our readers the information we have gleaned from it. It is supposed by some that the narrow guage is only adapted to light traffic railways, whereas it is now recommended by the best authorities, for any line of railroad having an estimated future traffic equal to the heaviest known in the world: that of the London and North Western Railway of England. As Mr Robinson remarks :

There are very few of the many people who advocate “ narrow gauge” lines for this country, that have any knowledge of the advantages arising from the"same, or correct ideas as to what the gauge of the future system will be, if adopted in this country, and few there are indeed who seem to comprehend the relative cost and capacity of same as compared with the standard lines of 4 feet 8 1-2 inch gauge.

The business over the L. and N. W. R. R. amounts in a single year to about 15,000,000 tons, 5,000,000 of which consists of mineral—and 10,000,000 of general freight. With such a large movement of paying freight, let us seo wbat the movement is of dead weight necessary on a 4 feet 8 1-2 inch gauge to handle the same. As it has been, and as it can be demonstrated at any time, satisfactorily to any one, that the proportion of non-paying to paying weight transported over a wide gauge is at least as stol on English cars. The amount of dead or non-paying weight hauled over the L. & N, W. R. R. to transport the 10,000,000 tons of paying freight would amount to 50,000,000 tons, at an average speed of 25 miles an hour.

The entire length of the road named is 1,450 miles. The average gross weight of each train hauled is about 250 tons, which would require 240,000 trains or in 313 working days in the year, 767 trains per day over all. The Company’s books show that the average distance travelled by each ton of freight is forty miles, and consequently each train only averages forty miles in distance per day travelled. The road being 1,450 miles long, it follows that there must be an average of 36 trains distributed over the total length constantly; this number divided into the total number of trains per day shows an average of about 21 trains per day passing over each mile of road, or one every 70 minutes. Thus it will be seen, that notwithstanding the movement is so enormous, if the trains sustain an average speed of 25 miles an hour, one train in following another is in time 70 minutes behind the preceding one, and is distant about 27 miles. We thus see what a large surplus capacity this road has for doing business. Let us now see what could be done with this amount of traffic, if the gauge were 3 feet in place of 4 feet 8£ inches. In the first place a speed of 30 miles an hour can be maintained on a narrow gauge, yet we will accept the same speed as the wide— i.e., 25 miles per hour. The narrow gauge freight car weighs 1£ tons, and will carry say 4 tons paying freight ; 10,000,000 tons paying freight therefore would require 3,750,000 tons of dead car weight to be moved, or a total of 13,750,000 tons gross weight moved oh narrow gauge as against 60,000,000 on wide gauge. We will assume that the narrow gauge trains each weigh 150 tons, it would require then 91,660 trains each year to handle the amount of freight named, or in 313

days, 284 trains per day,” each train averaging 40 miles per day, and the road being 1,450 miles long, there would be an average of 36 trains distributed over the road daily ; this number divided into the total number of trains per day, and we have an average of eight trains every 24 hours passing over each mile of road, or one every three hours. If the train sustain an average speed of 25 miles an hour, one train following another is in time 3 hours, and in distance 75 miles behind the preceding one. Note the following comparison:— 4ffc B£in gauge. 3ffc gauge. Paying freight, tons 10,000,000 10,000,000 Non-paying freight... 50,000,000 3,750,000 Total 60,000,000 13,750,000 Speed, miles ... 25 25 Total weight of each train, tons ... 250 150 No. trains per day ... 767 284 Length of road, miles 1,450 1,450 Trains passing over each mile of road per day 21 8 One train every ... 70minutes. 3 hours. Distance trains are apart 70 minutes. 3 hours. Distance trains are apart ... ... 27 miles. 75 miles. The above proves that the capacity of the narrow gauge road is as superior to the wide gauge for freight transported as 180 is to 20—and that in transporting the same amount of dead weight as the wide gauge, namely 50,000,000 tons, the narrow gauge would move 136,000,000 tons paying freight as against 10,000,000 tons paying freight moved by the wide gauge. These results are astonishing, but they are nevertheless correct.

Referring to the Portmadoc and Festiniog railway, Mr Robinson remarks that many persons, influenced by the wonderful results of this line, have been converted from an advocacy of the widest guage to the narrowest one possible, consistent with speed and safety. He adds, however, that although that little road (with its extreme narrow gauge, small and light rolling stock, sharp curves, and a continuous rising gradient one way for its entire length) is claimed to have proved beyond all doubt, that the entire business of the “ London and North Western” Railway could be managed over a similar guage for fifty per cent less cost in running expenses, and 60 per cent less wear and tear ; it does not follow that such a gauge is the most economical of all others, and that it can be proved that a little wider gauge would be more profitable in many ways and admit of an increased rate of speed, without adding to the first cost of the same materially. With regard to the relative expenditure in the construction of railways on the broad and narrow guages, there is a paragraph in the letter so extraordinary that we quote it at length :

As regards the question that frequently arises as to the economy in first cost of narrow gauge in comparison with the existing broad gauge system, I offer you the following extraordinary statement as made by one of the most practical men connected with the department of Public Works in India. He says : “ If the difference in cost between 10,000 miles of narrow, as compared with the existing broad gauge, were capitalised at twenty years purchase, the effect of capitalising, and the saving in maintenance and making would have the singular result of bringing out the cost of the narrow gauge at $90,000,000 less than nothing.”- For a result so startling as this the author was probably not himself at first prepared, but subsequent reflection and careful revision of his data justify him in saying : “ I shall not object to a temporary laugh at my expense, or being twitted with having at last discovered the philosopher’s stone, if the apparent paradox should arouse our officials, financiers, and engineers to a sense of the gravity of the Public Works’ problem they are now called upon to solve. My calculations and figures have been given step by step, and though nob in such strict scientific form as I should have preferred, they will bear scrutiny.” Here is the actual comparison of all the aggregate for 10,000 miles of railway:— Cost of 10,000 miles sft 6in standard lines, 47,625 dols. per mi1e—476,250,000 dols. ; cost of 10,000 miles sft 6in light railway, 31,000 dols. per mile—3lo,ooo,ooo dols. ; cost of 10,000 miles 3ft 6in gauge, 10,500 dols. per mile—los,ooo,ooo dols. The cost of one mile of railway on the Indian guage of 5 feet 6 inches, is 47,625

dole, while the cost of one mile of a 3 feet 6 inch gauge would be 10,500 dols.—or a saving of 37,125 dols. per mile. These figures only apply to the cost of construction of the narrow as compared with the existing broad gauge of India, but it represents a sum of 371,250,000 dols. on 10,000 miles of road. The saving in maintenance, renewals and working of these 10,000 miles of railroad would amount on the narrow gauge to 1,C90 dols. per mile, as follows : Maintenance, 150 dols. ; renewals, 480 dols.; working expenses, 440 dols.; total, 1,070 dols., which at twenty years’ purchase would amount to 21,400 dols. per mile, to which add total saving in first cost of 37,125 dols , and we have 58,525 dols. saved per mile, and as this wide gauge costs 47,625. dols. per mile, we have a result that in the building of the narrow gauge in place of the wide, would show its cost of 10,000 miles to be about 90,000,000 dols. less than nothing. It is almost impossible to offer an exact comparison of cost between two railways of different gauges and constructed over different country, on account of the cost of work varying with the nature of the ground; the only way an exact comparison could be instituted must be by a careful location and estimation over the same country. . The following detail matter may serve to give you some idea as to the difference in cost between a 4 feet 8 1-2 inch and a 3 feet gauge, the figures beiug taken from two roads actually built over a similar country, one road representing the wide and the other the narrow gauge:

4 feet 8| inch. 3 feet. Right of way ... §1,145 00 $450 00 Fencing 425 00 425 00 Grading 9,710 00 4,550 00 Bridges .. ... 1,605 00 ■ 515 00 Rails, ballast, &o. 7,840 00 4,665 00 Buildings • ... 2,090 00 2,090 00 Rolling stock ... 3,745 00 2,135 00 Engineering, etc. 2,000 00 945 00

Total cost per mile 28,560 00 15,775 00 A saving of 13,000 dols. per mile first cost. It is not necessary for me to suggest to you that the first cost of a narrow gauge is greatly beneath that of a wide gauge. This will be apparent to any clear thinking mind; for a single track the saving is about 50 per- cent, over an ordinary flat country, but in mountainous or raining districts the proportion increases to 70 per cent, or more. There are many things to be considered iu connection v ith the rolling stock of a narrow guage, which, when carefully studied and worked out, controls and in a great degree establishes the exact width that the gauge should be, the principal ones being speed, safety, and comfort to passengers, and a proper arrangement or distribution oi platforms area on freight cars, combined with strength to work the traffic of road economically.

These figures are very suggestive. They show the immense strides in railway construction, now making in all parts of the world. Jt is some satisfaction to us that we can now benefit by this experience, and that the saving thus effected, not only in the original cost of construction, but the future maintenance of our projected railways, will make our loan go very much further in this direction than a few years ago would have been thought possible. We have, by no means, exhausted this letter, and we will trke an early opportunity of returning to the subject.