Why does BART use Indian Broad Gauge?

Many railfans might be knowing this, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is the only commuter rail system in United States that does not use the standard gauge tracks. Instead it uses 5 feet 6 inch gauge, also known as Indian Broad Gauge. Anyone knows the history behind this? What made them choose this unique gauge for the trains, and why they did not want to go ahead with uniform gauge that everyone else uses?

Because they wanted to be different and make sure that they did not get absorbed into any of the existing Joint Powers Authorities?

That BART track gauge equals Indian Broad Gauge is probably entirely accidental.

I have heard 2 or 3 versions. In general people involved act surprised when told that BART's track gauge is the same as Indian Broad Gauge.

One version is that it was determined by analyzing the effects of various earthquake intensities on a running train.

Another version is that in the original planning there was intended to ultimately be a line across the Golden Gate Bridge (within the truss, that is below the road deck) and stability under high wind conditions was a factor.

Still another was that it permitted use of larger cars which was considered not only a plus from a capacity viewpoint, but also a larger interior made for an airier feel.

Recall that at the time "Subway" and "Railroad" were regarded as synonyms for obsolete, old fashioned, and any other word of similar meaning that anyone could dream up. That is why most of the lessons leared in transit over the previous 60 plus years were ignored if their existance was even known. The idea was that the place to learn anything was from the aerospace industry. Ignore common railroad and transit industry practices. There was nothing to be learned there. This method was particularly applied to the vehicles.

Use of such words as "tested, tried and proven" was considered a form of profanity. Unwillingness to look into common signal and train control practices and problems is why the initial train control system would allow trains to dissapear.

Complete automation was considered the wave of the future. Even having on-board operators and station attendants was considered as primaily a comfort factor for those people that were refusing to allow themselved to be dragged into the 20th century.

Texan Eagle said:

Many railfans might be knowing this, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is the only commuter rail system in United States that does not use the standard gauge tracks.

Click to expand...

That is not entirely true. There is quite a bit of milage in rail transit in Pennsylvania that is set at what is commonly called the Pennsylvania Broad Gauge or the Pennsylvania Trolley Gauge. Much of it is at 5 feet, 2 1/4 inches, such as the Frankford Elevated, and a few other lines both existed and gone in Pennsylvania. Soem are also at 5 feet 2 1/2 inches, such as the Pittsburg trolley lines. (The New Orleans street cars also run on 5'-2 1/4" track. There may be others. I do not claim omnicience.) There are two mutually exclusive reasons given for this.

1. It appears that as the specter of the rise of Interurban Railroads rose into the view of the management of the Pennsylvania Railroad they called in their considerable contingent of puppets in the Pennsylvania State Legislature and got a law passed that required all interurban and suburban transit lines to be built at a track gauge that differed from standard by at least 6 inches. The objective being to make it impossible for these lines to take a slice of the freight business because they would be unable to move standard railroad freight cars.

2. The Interurbans chose to use a wider track gauge to make their systems less desirable takeover targets to the railroad companies.

I tend to lean toward reason 1 as the real one. If the Pennsy had decided in say 1920 to buy up the entire urban/suburban/interurban netword in Pennsylvania they would porbably not even needed to check the balance in their checking account.

I don't know if this had anything to do with it, but the ride in the broad gauge BART cars is definitely more comfortable when traveling at fairly high speeds (ca. 50+ mph) than in light-rail vehicles, such as the SF Muni Metro.

However, I don't know how the Muni Metro would ride if it used heavy-rail equipment instead.

George Harris said:

Texan Eagle said:

Many railfans might be knowing this, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is the only commuter rail system in United States that does not use the standard gauge tracks.

Click to expand...

That is not entirely true. There is quite a bit of milage in rail transit in Pennsylvania that is set at what is commonly called the Pennsylvania Broad Gauge or the Pennsylvania Trolley Gauge. Much of it is at 5 feet, 2 1/4 inches, such as the Frankford Elevated, and a few other lines both existed and gone in Pennsylvania. Soem are also at 5 feet 2 1/2 inches, such as the Pittsburg trolley lines. (The New Orleans street cars also run on 5'-2 1/4" track. There may be others. I do not claim omnicience.) There are two mutually exclusive reasons given for this.

1. It appears that as the specter of the rise of Interurban Railroads rose into the view of the management of the Pennsylvania Railroad they called in their considerable contingent of puppets in the Pennsylvania State Legislature and got a law passed that required all interurban and suburban transit lines to be built at a track gauge that differed from standard by at least 6 inches. The objective being to make it impossible for these lines to take a slice of the freight business because they would be unable to move standard railroad freight cars.

2. The Interurbans chose to use a wider track gauge to make their systems less desirable takeover targets to the railroad companies.

I tend to lean toward reason 1 as the real one. If the Pennsy had decided in say 1920 to buy up the entire urban/suburban/interurban netword in Pennsylvania they would porbably not even needed to check the balance in their checking account.

Click to expand...

And of course, on re-reading this thread, I'm surprised that the they wouldn't have just dual-gauged the tracks they wanted to use (and, if necessary, plan on a "broader broad gauge" than the law required).

George Harris said:

Another version is that in the original planning there was intended to ultimately be a line across the Golden Gate Bridge (within the truss, that is below the road deck) and stability under high wind conditions was a factor.

Click to expand...

Wow, that would have been a super-cool ride!