Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1877-04-03

advantage, the cost OF operating being about
twenty per cent. under that of standard gauge
| road. The Utah Northern Railway reports ex-
penses as 562 per cent. of the gross earnings the
Toledo and Maumee, as 30 per cent. the Toronto
and Nississng, Gl.2j per cent; the Mineral Range,
6356 per cent For the comparison OF a narrow
gauge railway with one of standard width. we can
take the Cairo aud st. Louis and the st.
Louis and the Southeastern which run
parallel for some distance. Owing to the
competition Of the narrow gauge the St. Louis
and Southeastern was obliged during 1870, to
pass its interest. Comment Is unnecessary.
la comparing the wear and tear of the two
gauges, the advantage is immensely in favor of
the narrow gauge with its light machinery and
rolling stock. The ordinary standard gauge pas
scnger car, weighing $1,000 pounds empty, ham
mers the rail joints with 1,31j pounds on each
wheel, whenl loaded and haued over the rail at
twenty-five or thirty miles per hour; the weight
of the blow is enormous, and terribly destruct We
to the supcIstruClufc.
a first class narrow gauge passenger car weighs
lo,OOO pounds, empty, and consequently only ham
mers the rail with 1870 pounds per wheel.
The same truth applies to locomotives. 4 thir-
~ ton locomotive and its loaded tender weighing
about seventeen tons, total of forty.seven
tons, will exert pressure of Eearly six tons on
each driving wheel. When driven at high speed
the strain upon the track is terribly destructive.
The narrow gauge railway uses locomotives
weighing from eight tons upwards. The weight
Dclnp over tue uflElnp WnceIS, thereby
gaining the necessary adhesion and requ iste pow
Ell greater pay ing load can be hauled either on
u level or up grade, than on the broad gauge.
To .cxempliiy this, Mr.. Richard Il. Osborne, a
civil engineer, has prepared the following table,
assuming the very largest class Of locomotives put
on the tree feet gauge with cylinders of fteeu by
eighteen, thirty.siS inch drivers and thirty tons
weight, AMI with tractye power, level,
equal to 400 tons, as to compare it directly
with an engine Of equal power on the standard
road.
On a lere'-ggoss ,ceigAt Of train 1859 tons.
Zow.
The feet engine with 800 tons of cars
will haul of coal, 1864
The feet . inch engine with jG6
tons Of cars will haul of coal, 900
m a marimun crate Of 20 40 f,et, gross ,ceight
bei@g 81 tons
Tons.
The feet engine with I'D tons Of cars
will haul of coal 427
The feet s IL inch engine with 226
tons OF cars will haul of coal, 36l
Oh a mara,ra g'ade Of 10 feet, gyo,s W:igdi be-
ing 4ii toms:
Tons.
The feet engine with III tons of cars
will haul OF COAL 1923
The feet IL inch engine with III
tons of cars will haul Of coal, 272
These trains it will be seen, c1rrespOad in gross
Ceght the three feet gauge by its less weight of
cars transporting about seventeen per ceLt. more
productive load than the standard gauge.
On gradieat Of so feet per mite, gross reight 2j2
tons:
Tons
The 3 feet engine with 20 tons of cars,
will haul Of COAL lS2
The feet 10 inch engine with 81
tons of cars, will haul OF coal, ljj
From the foregoing we learn:
First That an engine of feet gauge can take
a greater numJer Of tons Of freigh, in its cars
against the sane grade; and
second. That it will haul the same number Of
tons OF load in lis cars up sleeper grades than the
engines OF the feet s IL inch gauge, with its
loaded cars, can at all accomplish.
We have shown before taat the load of freight
on the feet s | inch against a &c 1 10 grade is
36l tons, and that this freight load can be in
creased on the 3 feet gauge to i27 tons AGAINST a
like grade SO also can it be stated that the freight
load Of 36l tons not being increased on the feet
road it could be taken by the narrow gauge en-.
CINE over 80 feet grades instead Of 26 i2O feet. A
gain IN gradient obtained o, % per cent. by the
adoption of the feet gauge.
SO likewi.e the freight load of the feet s IL
inch engine on a gradient of so feet being los
tons; that OF three feet would be ls2 tons. But
giving the feet engine the load only of its rival
the LOO tons it will transport it over grades of
% feet, or about 20 per cent greater.
II seems then clear that while the steam poorer
OF the 3 feet gauge engine Is no greater than the
other, and keeping the same pdyiHg iodis as the
wider gauge, the smaller road can overcome gra-
dents from 20 10 % per cent. greater.
SereHh. Safety. Daring the carly discussion OF
the relative merits Of the standard and narrow
gauge railway, the question to safety on the
narrow gauge was propounded, and it was boldly
asserted at the time that 1t would be extremely
hazardous TO tide ia cars the wheels of which
were only three feet apart and that if they we've
hauled at velocity equal to the the ordi-
nary gauge, 1t would be counting certain danger.
1t was the old argument, in another foim az ainst
the first introduction of steam locomotion. That
the hypothesis was faaclous IS evidenced in the |
TACT that since the Rrst maroon gauge train COM
meaced running in Amtried, there has been no Sc
rioHs accident eatatng great toss Of life reporfef
We leave 1t to our readers to compare this state
ment with the standard gauge railrt ads.
The first object for consideration in examining
project for railway Is the nature aud extent of
the traffic to be provided for. If this is large and
of character to demand high speed the work !
must be adapted 10 bear the contemplated serv ice.
II a light trgHc, and especially rtM a lo,cer rate !
Of speed, is anticipated much MAJ be SaUed in the
operating the ra'icay by adapting The ic0tks TO tie
serUice 10 be perfotBied." Such are the op ming
words of a book on railway property published /
sixteen years ago, before narrower gauge than |
ted, and the words we have itacsed arc pecu liar
ly applicable TO the narrow gauge system. In |
fact, they are the text which its eyponents have
always quoted.
a narrow gauge railway shouli not be built |
where heavy traffic is expected or high rate of
speed demanded, under those circumstances the |
standard gauge should be laid down, but where
country has to be developed by railway trans
porting its products 10 market, and where the
development will take lime, and the community
are unable to raise the capital for and support a
standard gauge, then the narrow gauge railway is |
the one to adopt. Ii these principles not adj |
hered to at the outset, complications will arise |
which could have been avoided at the first, and we
may safely assert that if many of the the railways
now in default had been constructed of the mar
row gauge, the country would not be suffering
from the depression which commenced after the
panic of 1873
Ties 5 il ches by inches, by feet long, and
placed two feet apalt from centre TO centre, give
sufficient bearing surface.
The weight Of iron is governed by the heaviest
weight on any single wheel this is invariably on
driving wheels of engines, and by the amount of
traffic. Some marrow gauge railways have found
a % pound iron rail sufficient, while others use
Sc pound rail, or lay down 40 pound steel rail at
first. The majority use 80 and 81 pound iron rail.
Fire and Marine Insurance In Maine.