Cape gauge adoption due to space considerations?

[Sacto1985]

I'm sure this has been discussed a lot here in the past, but is the reason why Japan Government Railways (the predecessor to today's JR Group of companies) adopted the narrower Cape Gauge (1,067 mm or 3 feet 6 inches) was due to space considerations for Japan's crowded cities? That does explain why most non-Shinkansen JR Group long distance lines are still in this gauge.

 

(Interestingly, many private railways in Japan adopted standard gauge. Maybe not having to connect with the JGR/JNR lines was a consideration for adopting standard gauge.)

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Certainly the mountainous terrain had a significant effect on the gauge selected; that and the fact narrow gauge was much cheaper to engineer. The British had a major influence on early railways in Japan and 3'6'' gauge is quite widespread through their railway influence...Japan, South Africa, parts of Australia.

 

The narrow gauge has always been a bit of a bind for Japan...with a number of attempts over the last 100 years to change to 'standard' gauge.

[Fenway Park]

Richard Trevithick was the engineer involved. New Zealand uses 3ft 6in as well.

Interestingly, Indian railways used metre gauge extensively and not Cape Gauge, does anyone know the reason?

 

Malcolm

[marknewton]

Edmund Morel was appointed Chief Engineer in 1870 - given the lack of any definitive documentation I think it's reasonable to assume he was responsible for choosing to build the first railway to 3'6" gauge, as he had worked as a locating engineer building parts of the 3'6" gauge New Zealand railways prior to his arrival in Japan. His work was mainly in the South Island, which has similar terrain and weather to Japan.

 

The Trevithick brothers, Richard Francis and Francis Henry, didn't arrive in Japan until 1874 and 1877 respectively, by which time the government railway was well established. Neither would have had any part in deciding the gauge - Richard was initially a deputy loco superintendent at the Kobe works, as was Francis until he was appointed chief loco superintendent at the Shinbashi works in Tokyo.

 

The choice of metre gauge in India was made during the early 1870s by the viceroy, Lord Mayo. He calculated that 4 people sitting abreast would need a minimum carriage width of 6', or 6'6" externaly. He had been advised that it was unwise for the gauge to be less than half the body width, so he recommended 3'3". At that time there was a draft bill for the introduction of metric weights and measures before the Indian government, so to be consistent with that the recommended gauge was modifed to exactly one metre.

 

All the best,

 

Mark.

[Eisenbahn]

Akira Saito published an article on this in the Japan Railway & Transport Review 31, June 2002.

 

Saito attributes the 3ft6 decision to a discussion/agreement between Inoue and Morel. Inoue was a Japanese who had just returned from studying civil engineering and railway engineering in London and is regarded as the first Japanese Railway expert. The proposal for 3ft6 guage was approved by the then Finance Ministry of the new Meiji Government after the end of the Tokugawa Period. The decision was based largely on lower construction cost.

 

Saito's journal article makes an interesting read.

 

cheers...Eisenbahn

[Fenway Park]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the information. I had always thought it was Trevithick that introduced railways to the Meiji government but I stand corrected. I thought there was a connection between New Zealand and Japanese railways.

 

As regards India, I was unaware the decision was that early.

 

Thanks

 

Malcolm

[Sacto1985]

I still think needing a smaller right-of-way was a consideration on my Japan adopted Cape Gauge.

 

If you've seen many cab view videos of JR trains on YouTube like I have, note how buildings often crowd up literally to the edge of the tracks in urban areas. I can imagine when the original tracks were laid down in Japan late in the 19th Century they had to consider that around the Tokyo and Osaka metro areas.

[marknewton]

Akira Saito published an article on this in the Japan Railway & Transport Review 31, June 2002.

 

http://www.jrtr.net/jrtr31/f33_sai.html

 

Cheers,

 

Mark.

[marknewton]

I still think needing a smaller right-of-way was a consideration on my Japan adopted Cape Gauge. If you've seen many cab view videos of JR trains on YouTube like I have, note how buildings often crowd up literally to the edge of the tracks in urban areas. I can imagine when the original tracks were laid down in Japan late in the 19th Century they had to consider that around the Tokyo and Osaka metro areas.

 

I seriously doubt it was ever a factor, for two reasons. The difference in width between the ROW for standard gauge and 3'6" at that time was minimal, particularly in urban areas that didn't require heavy earthworks. If your reasoning was valid we'd see narrow gauge railways in all big, crowded cities...

 

The other reason is that when the first line was built to Yokohama, buildings didn't encroach on the ROW as they do today. Instead of looking at modern cab view videos, look at photos and woodcut illustrations from 1872, and you'll see that for most of the railway's length, it was in relatively open country. The railway came first, and the buildings followed.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark.

[bikkuri bahn]

Interestingly, I read that the battle between the 1067mm advocates and standard gauge proponents (mainly the military) didn't end in the early development period, but continued off and on into the beginning of the 20th century, though the 1067mm gauge obviously prevailed.  The military was even against building lines along the coast, such as the Tokaido Line, due to the ease that they could be interdicted by coastal invasion or bombardment- they instead favored interior routes, such as the Chuo Main Line.

[Sacto1985]

The military was even against building lines along the coast, such as the Tokaido Line, due to the ease that they could be interdicted by coastal invasion or bombardment- they instead favored interior routes, such as the Chuo Main Line.

 

Well, the Tokaido Main Line was built because by following fairly closely the old Edo-era Tokaido Road, that right there meant there was going to be a lot a freight and passenger traffic on the line anyway. By the time the current routing was completed in the middle 1930's (with the opening of the Tanna Tunnel west of Itami), the Tokaido Main Line was easily the busiest in all of Japan.

[KenS]

Interestingly, I read that the battle between the 1067mm advocates and standard gauge proponents (mainly the military) didn't end in the early development period...

 

Odd.  I'd read somewhere that one of the reasons the periodic attempts to convert the narrow gauge to standard gauge (which continued up to the 1920s) were blocked was opposition by the military.  The reason wasn't clear, but my impression was that it was due to a concern that an attacker could more easily use the lines if they were standard gauge.  I don't remember where I read that though.

[marknewton]

Thanks for the information. I had always thought it was Trevithick that introduced railways to the Meiji government but I stand corrected. I thought there was a connection between New Zealand and Japanese railways. As regards India, I was unaware the decision was that early.

 

My pleasure, Malcolm, but I can't claim any special expertise. The subject came up at a recent club meeting, and I did a bit of reading just to clarify the facts in my own mind before answering any tricky questions!  

 

I too was suprised that India adopted metre gauge so early, particularly as the rest of the country still hasn't gone over to the metric system.

 

All the best,

 

Mark.

[marknewton]

Interestingly, I read that the battle between the 1067mm advocates and standard gauge proponents (mainly the military) didn't end in the early development period, but continued off and on into the beginning of the 20th century...

 

I'd read somewhere that one of the reasons the periodic attempts to convert the narrow gauge to standard gauge (which continued up to the 1920s) were blocked was opposition by the military.

 

Proposals for gauge conversion from 1067mm to standard are discussed in some detail in "A History Of Japanese Railways 1872-1999" and "Early Japanese Railways 1853-1914". To summarise, from 1887 the military advocated converting the system to standard gauge, and a committee was established to investigate the proposal. But in 1898, the miliatry changed their position, and demanded nationalisation instead. That meant standardising on the existing narrow gauge system.

 

After nationalisation, Goto Shimpei proposed conversion to standard gauge, and the 1911 budget included funding for the project, but it was opposed by the Seiyukai opposition party. They instead favoured expanding the existing network. 

 

During 1916 experiments aimed at regauging were carried out with dual-gauge track near Yokohama. But when Seiyukai were elected to government in 1919 the new PM Hara Takashi cancelled the conversion plan permanently.

 

But the work on gauge conversion wasn't entirely wasted - the technical standards for the 1067mm gauge railway were upgraded as much as possible by adopting 1435mm gauge standards for things like the loading gauge, construction gauge, track centres and bridge specifications.

 

All the best,

 

Mark.

[westfalen]

Projects being shelved when a new government gets elected. Why does that sound familiar?

 

Just as interesting as India's metre gauge I think is former Dutch colony Indonesia's 3'6" amongst all its metre gauge neighbours.

 

Of course being a Queenslander I can't help making the observation that cape gauge should really be called Cap Gauge after Carl Abraham Pihl who pioneered its use on a light railway in Norway in 1862 before its first adoption for a mainline railway in Queensland in 1865, it was not until 1873 that it came into use in South Africa. Japan even beat South Africa to it.

[minijapan]

Can anyone do a table on gauges in their respective lenghts?

i.e

 

km or miles of standard gauge in world

km or miles of cape gauge in world

km or miles of broad gauge in world

 

With the trans siberian line and most of India and South America broad gauge must be considerable?

[westfalen]

Wikipedia has a table of the different gauges though I have noted an error or two and there is no mention of the 4,000 or so kilometres of 2 foot gauge in the Queensland canefields.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_gauge

[marknewton]

Quoted from a paper written by Dr. Eiichi Aoki, titled "Technological Innovation and the Development of Transportation in Japan", published in 1993. Dr. Aoki is one of the authors of "A History of Japanese Railways 1872 - 1999".

 

"The proposal to reconstruct tracks to "wide" (i.e. standard) gauge was started in 1909 by Goto Shimpei, director-general of the Railway Agency under the Katsura cabinet, in an order to the Railway Investigating Committee to make an economic comparison for a railroad between Tokyo and Shimonoseki that would have both international standard gauge and narrow gauge tracks and be built to meet the estimated increases in future transport demand. The report of July 1909 on the survey gave an estimated cost for building a railroad with international standard gauge rails in a separate location of Y202.8 million, while upgrading transport capability by improving existing narrow-gauge tracks would cost only Y137.0 million. This report insisted that keeping narrow gauge and making improvements in it was the better policy.

 

It can be imagined that Goto, who had conceived the standard-gauge policy, was dismayed by this report. Consequently, he instructed an engineer, Ishikawa Ishiyo, to make a study of the 1909 report. Ishikawa's report, submitted in July 1910, stated that reconstructing the existing narrow-gauge tracks to the international standard could be done for Y152 million. That meant only a 15-million-yen difference between the cost of a change-over to standard gauge and the Railway Investigating Committee's estimate for keeping and improving the narrow-gauge tracks. This led to the conclusion that a switch-over to standard gauge would be beneficial in the light of future increases in transport demand.

 

Based on this report, the Railway Agency firmed its resolve to rebuild to standard gauge, and the government included reconstruction costs in its 1911 fiscal budget proposal to the Imperial Diet. But with the opposition from Seiyukai Diet members, costs for standard-gauge reconstruction were removed from the budget. However, the government, after consulting with government and private experts, set up in April 1911 a Preparatory Committee for the Rebuilding of Railways to Standard Gauge.

Then, in August 1911 the entire Katsura cabinet resigned, to be followed by two Seiyukai cabinets, first the Saionji and then the Yamamoto, which cancelled the plan to reconstruct to standard gauge based on their forecast that no source for funds could be found. The Preparatory Committee was disbanded and the preliminary arrangements made in preparation for a shift over to standard gauge and that had advanced with the construction and improvements in trunk railroads were abandoned.

 

But standard gauge reconstruction proposals again surfaced in the subsequent Okuma and Terauchi cabinets. In deciding on a seven-year plan for the construction and improvement of the National Railways in 1914, Sengoku Mitsugu, director-general of the Railway Agency, considered arguments for standard gauge and in July of that year appointed an Investigative Committee for the Reconstruction of Railways to Standard Gauge. The committee devised four rankings according to the amount of reconstruction required: existing narrow gauge, strengthened narrow gauge, ordinary standard gauge, and strengthened standard gauge. A comparison survey was conducted and a report given on the use of strengthened standard gauge in the following year. The report estimated that if construction started in 1916, it would take 12 years to widen the gauge on the route between Tokyo and Shimonoseki and 25 years to rebuild all tracks in Honshu. In response to this report, the government set up a Gauge Survey Committee in April 1916 that was directly under the control of the prime minister and charged with carrying out specific surveys.

 

In October 1916, the Terauchi cabinet provided Goto with his third appointment as director-general of the Railway Agency, and Goto moved rapidly to firm up proposals for standard-gauge reconstruction. He first proposed, in December of that year, that the cancelled Preparatory Plan for Reconstruction of Existing Trunk Railways to Standard Gauge be resurrected. It took one year to convince the cabinet, and not until December 1917 did the cabinet decide to submit the proposal to council. During this period, Shima Yasujiro (who was appointed chief engineer for the railroads in April 1919) of the Railway Agency's Mechanical Engineering Bureau led the rapid preparations for a concrete proposal and experiments conducted for the reconstruction. One of the experiments was a test construction of standard-gauge tracks between Haramachida and Hashimoto on the Yokohama Line and operation on these tracks of locomotives and passenger and freight cars rebuilt to run on standard gauge. At the Oi Factory, engineers test-built equipment for replacing axles on freight cars and devised methods by which axles could be easily changed to either standard or narrow gauge at points connecting the narrow and standard gauge tracks.

 

The proposal to change the gauge of the National Railways, made at this time, stated that it would be simple to widen the gauge and leave existing facilities and rolling-stock width as is, a concept referred to by "light railroad, standard gauge." Some of the steps that it called for were the simple trimming back of station platforms, widening the space between the centre line of double tracks, operating locomotives of the same weight as those operated on European railroads, and leaving major bridges as they are or moderately reinforcing them. The proposal basically stated that the reconstruction could be completed by just widening the ties and the wheel axles of rolling-stock. The construction was to start in fiscal 1918 and would consist of one or two additional rails laid on the outside of existing tracks. The first railroad to be reconstructed was the Bantan Line (between Himeji and Wadayama), with completion slated for April 1918.

 

In the first stage, reconstruction was to proceed in western Japan, with construction scheduled to move eastward, and all railroads in Honshu were to be standard gauge by March 1923. To meet with the new requirements, all newly manufactured rolling-stock and locomotives were to have their axles widened and lengthened so that they could handle standard gauge. The proposal did not get to the stage where the cabinet would have to make a decision on it, but it brought the plans for standard gauge that much closer to actually starting.

 

However, the reins of government again reverted back to the Seiyukai in September 1918 and Tokonami Takejiro became director-general of the Railway Agency under the Hara cabinet. In February 1919, Tokonami made a statement before the Imperial Diet rescinding plans to go to the standard gauge. Then, with the onslaught of the post-World War I recession in 1920, the fiscal situation was such that it would have been unable to handle standard-gauge reconstruction. The debate over standard gauge continued after that, but realization of such a plan was very remote. The National Railways continued its efforts and was somewhat effective in improving the transport capabilities and speeds of trains on the existing narrow gauge."