Widest possible trains in Great Britain?

[showchaser]

Hello all. Please may I ask what the widest possible train which could run in normal passenger service on the “classic” network would be? I understand the general limit is a width of approximately 2.8m, however I am unsure why the Class 503 EMUs were able to run in an earlier era with a 3.04m width including sideboards.

What would the maximum width of a British train be on the classic network, assuming that the length of the car body could be shortened as necessary to as little as 13m like a Talgo car? Are there limitations on train width for train separation and because of platform distances?

Thank you for any responses.

 

[Ploughman]

I think that the widest stock in use historically, was the Liverpool Overhead Railway with carriage widths over 9ft.
However it has been demolished since 1956.

 

[LordFlashheart]

Metropolitan A60 Stock was 9' 8" (2.9m) wide.

 

[AM9]

Hello all. Please may I ask what the widest possible train which could run in normal passenger service on the “classic” network would be? I understand the general limit is a width of approximately 2.8m, however I am unsure why the Class 503 EMUs were able to run in an earlier era with a 3.04m width including sideboards.

What would the maximum width of a British train be on the classic network, assuming that the length of the car body could be shortened as necessary to as little as 13m like a Talgo car? Are there limitations on train width for train separation and because of platform distances?

Thank you for any responses.

If the general limit seems to be about 2.8m, then that should give the maximum route availability as a fair compromise. For years, the majority of BR passenger stock was 64ft 6in long and then 20m (65ft 7in) which gave as near universal access as was practicable. When 23m stock became common (MK111 IC), the narrower body (2.7m) became a standard, until the class 323, which had shorter bogie centers. This meant that the inswing at the centre was the same as shorter cars and the outswing at the ends was greater but the ends of the coaches were tapered inwards towards the gangways, giving greater clearance. The 26m class 80x stock is another case of proportionally smaller wheelbase, (I can't find a definition of the length, but the overhang outside the bogies and the limited space inside being used as storage suggests that the wheelbase is similar to the MK111s allowing the maximum width to be kept at 2.78m

Metropolitan A60 Stock was 9' 8" (2.9m) wide.

The A60s (and C69s) are much shorter than BR stock at 16.2m which allows use on the Met and Circle/Hammersmith routes. The District D78 cars were over 18m long and thir widtgh was 50mm leass at 2.85m. The 'S' stock is even wider at 2.92m with a 16.23 & 18.15 car length.

 

[swt_passenger]

The 26m class 80x stock is another case of proportionally smaller wheelbase, (I can't find a definition of the length, but the overhang outside the bogies and the limited space inside being used as storage suggests that the wheelbase is similar to the MK111s allowing the maximum width to be kept at 2.78m

The 26m IET bogie centres are 17m apart, as you say the extra end length is almost all beyond the bogies. I think the Mk 3 is 16m.

If the Mk 3 dimensions had simply been scaled up pro-rata I think the IET bogies would have to be over 18m apart?

 

[30907]

The GWR Ocean Liner or Super Saloons were 9ft 7 which is over 2.9m, but only 60ft/19m long - and restricted even on the GW network. They built other stock almost as wide.

 

[Merle Haggard]

If the general limit seems to be about 2.8m, then that should give the maximum route availability as a fair compromise. For years, the majority of BR passenger stock was 64ft 6in long and then 20m (65ft 7in) which gave as near universal access as was practicable. When 23m stock became common (MK111 IC), the narrower body (2.7m) became a standard, until the class 323, which had shorter bogie centers. This meant that the inswing at the centre was the same as shorter cars and the outswing at the ends was greater but the ends of the coaches were tapered inwards towards the gangways, giving greater clearance. The 26m class 80x stock is another case of proportionally smaller wheelbase, (I can't find a definition of the length, but the overhang outside the bogies and the limited space inside being used as storage suggests that the wheelbase is similar to the MK111s allowing the maximum width to be kept at 2.78m


The A60s (and C69s) are much shorter than BR stock at 16.2m which allows use on the Met and Circle/Hammersmith routes. The District D78 cars were over 18m long and thir widtgh was 50mm leass at 2.85m. The 'S' stock is even wider at 2.92m with a 16.23 & 18.15 car length.

When I worked at 222 I went Euston Sq. to Baker Street and walked. On one occasion I caught a 'Met Main' and the automatic signalling at Baker Street went wrong, and it was signalled straight on into the Circle/Hammersmith platform. A great deal of delay and discussion standing before the junction, but it eventually did run cautiously into the Circle platform without any scraping. Rather surprising - they certainly looked wide.

 

[AM9]

When I worked at 222 I went Euston Sq. to Baker Street and walked. On one occasion I caught a 'Met Main' and the automatic signalling at Baker Street went wrong, and it was signalled straight on into the Circle/Hammersmith platform. A great deal of delay and discussion standing before the junction, but it eventually did run cautiously into the Circle platform without any scraping. Rather surprising - they certainly looked wide.

I think the profile of LU trains plays well into their apparent size. Famously, the shape of the O, P and R stock lower edge flare was designed to make the trains appear wider at platform level, thereby encouraging waiting passengers to step back a little from the platform edge. The A60s filled the space above the flare to increase width at shoulder height to enable 3+2 transverse seating. The S7s and S8s have a tuck in at platform level making them look slightly slimmer.
The OP mentioned the 'classic' network so I will stop my OT posts here.

 

[showchaser]

Thanks to everyone: this is extremely interesting. I suppose if there were operational restrictions on 2.9m wide stock when in service then it would be impossible to countenance 3m wide across the network. I appreciate the insights!