dugfromthearth Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Were European railroads built on elevated railgrades or were they the height of the surrounding terrain? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco QNS Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Almost all railroads I´ve seen are built on a bed of crushed rocks, about twenty centimeters of high and around double that under the soil level. It depends heavily on the terrain, drainage and annual-rain-index. Main problems are karstic soils and others with little consistency. Heavy rains dissolve them, when drainage fails to prevent eroding. Do a search on Google Images, using "ferrovia" -and ignore the brazilian pictures-. Here is a modern pic Ferrovia Lugano-Ponte Tresa, cerca de Orcesco Please reformulate, if you question remains unanswered. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Apart from anything else, railways need to be flat, or very close to flat, and the European landscape isn't at all flat so you'll see cuttings and embankments all over the place determining the level much more than anything else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 well my question isn't what is best. It is what was done. For instance the roads in France weren't usually paved in 1944, but they are now. So in practice were Italian railways elevated to any significant amount (ie at least 2.5m) in 1943-45? Was the terrain heavily modified for the trains, or did the tracks wind around to best suit the existing terrain? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Being as the railway engineers of the early 20th century weren't a bunch of dummies, they would do what is best. More to the point, the lines laid then are still in use now. The way I do it is to pick a railway level for the map, and then make cuttings and embankments to maintain this level. The majority of flat ground in Europe (at least, the bits I've seen) is by rivers (on the flood plain) Obviously, if you don't want to lose your tracks, you raise them up and have frequent cluverts and bridges to let water underneath. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Originally posted by dugfromthearth: So in practice were Italian railways elevated to any significant amount (ie at least 2.5m) in 1943-45? Was the terrain heavily modified for the trains, or did the tracks wind around to best suit the existing terrain? Even modern trains cannot climb anything higher than a 2% - 3.5% grade as that is maximum climb rate they can handle. I'm not sure what that translates to in meters though. [ December 28, 2003, 12:54 PM: Message edited by: Panzerman ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 About 1.25m up in 33-34m along for absolute maximum. 1:100 would be closer to the mark for regular slopes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.