From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net

"Glen Labah"  wrote in message
news:gl4317-C66B8C.22523113052014@mx05.eternal-september.org...
> In article , John Levine 
> wrote:
>
>> I would think so.  The right of way is already there.  In some places
>> they'd have to widen it, but for the most part, they'd just lay new
>> track.
>
>
> Just widening it may not be necessary.  This isn't a typical USA style
> narrow gauge line but was built as a national main line.  There are
> meter gauge lines out there (South America) operating ex-Conrail and BN
> locomotives that essentially just had meter gauge trucks put under them.
>
> The Kenya & Uganda Railways had a few 4-8-4+4-8-4 Beyer-Garratt
> locomotives.  They were not huge by standard gauge standards, but at 186
> tons they were larger than a fair number of standard gauge locomotives
> in the UK.
>
> If you look at the photos of the locomotives they had on the East
> African Railways;
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:5907-Mount-Kinangop.jpg
> (this is a 4-8-2+2-8-4)
> they appear to be wide enough to be nearly a standard gauge locomotive.
>
> --
> Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam due to e-mail address
> harvesters on Usenet. Response time to e-mail sent here is slow.

Thanks for answering my question.  The group I am a member of for narrow
gauge RR shows one tunnel where the first part was cut for standard gauge
and not finished when the RR was converted to narrow gauge.  The tunnel
suddenly, right in the middle, narrows sharply because of the need was not
there.  So, I was thinking of things like that.  Also, fills, bridges, and
stations.

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)