The reason that the UK has no double decker trains, is a real simple one.
There is a actually a lack of forward thinking the reason for this.
The tunnels are not high enough and the wrong shape.
If I want to move a container from Teesport by rail to Mossend,I have to send in via the midlands, as the tunnels on the east coast line a to shallow.
Many of times banged me head against the wall for this as containers get stuck in Coventry, Birmingham and Rugby terminals when coming from the North.
yourhavingalarf:
I have a habit of looking for trains regardless of what the lights are doing as I approach level crossings. (possibly early onset paranoia)
I do it when driving around steelworks, docks, large scrap yards etc, basically anywhere off the main road as the ones on the main road put the barriers down what feels like 5mins before you see a train. I have less faith in ones where im guessing they are controlled by the driver.
^^ As Above^^
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilevel_rail_car
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge
And Winseer, using “forward thinking” by “government” is really something!
If countries use lots of double deckers then they will be more likely to be in accidents. We could always look at the enviable statistic that the UK has not had a single accident with double deck trains in over 50 years!
Winseer:
I thought there was a flurry of close-together “fatal accidents” involving double decker trains in places like Switzerland, Austria, India, Australia etc. Different cultures, different places - but places nonetheless where the use of such rolling stock is an everyday thing. Meanwhile, in the UK - we don’t use Double Decker train carriages at all, and I’m wondering if some forward thinking government department has “ruled them out for safety reasons”.
Whatever the reasoning originally happened to be, it seems appropriate to consult such paperwork before we consider the notion that “I can’t find anything negative in case studies on the internet - so they must be 100% safe, so why are we not using them ourselves in the UK?”Meanwhile, trying to steer this back into a TRUCK conversation - “have there been any studies done as to the safety factors involved in driving double decker trailers, especially those over 15’9”
Serious question though, as surely we’re all aware that they cannot possibly be as safe as a lower-topped (say, 13’9") trailer which we take as “more the standard”…
Still, that doesn’t stop the odd pillock trying to squeeze one under a bridge that even a 13’9" wont fit under.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFLoXR2xJMEI wonder if “Transport” is going to be a campaign issue in the forthcoming Stoke-on-Trent By-election?
The dough must have risen after he set off…
Winseer:
I thought there was a flurry of close-together “fatal accidents” involving double decker trains in places like Switzerland, Austria, India, Australia etc. Different cultures, different places - but places nonetheless where the use of such rolling stock is an everyday thing. Meanwhile, in the UK - we don’t use Double Decker train carriages at all, and I’m wondering if some forward thinking government department has “ruled them out for safety reasons”.
Whatever the reasoning originally happened to be, it seems appropriate to consult such paperwork before we consider the notion that “I can’t find anything negative in case studies on the internet - so they must be 100% safe, so why are we not using them ourselves in the UK?”Meanwhile, trying to steer this back into a TRUCK conversation - “have there been any studies done as to the safety factors involved in driving double decker trailers, especially those over 15’9”
Still, that doesn’t stop the odd pillock trying to squeeze one under a bridge that even a 13’9" wont fit under.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFLoXR2xJMEI wonder if “Transport” is going to be a campaign issue in the forthcoming Stoke-on-Trent By-election?
Mr Kipling-Makes Exceedingly Good Bridge Bashes.
He had his cake & tried to Beat it, under the Bridge.
How do you make a Swiss Roll ?
Push him down a hill.
Sorry, gone off track there, so did he, by the looks of it. ■■■■■ !