Talk:Key:loading gauge
Norwegian loading gauge
The Norwegian loading gauge is documented on BaneNor's dokuwiki https://networkstatement.banenor.no/ at https://networkstatement.banenor.no/doku.php?id=vedlegg:jbv_no1_-_pren_15273_dynamisk_profil (for 2023).
There are to lauding gauges:
- NO1 on all lines within the national railway network.
- NO2 on some lines (not specified)
NO1 is similar to Sweden's SE-B and NO2 might be similar SE-A
Usage of UIC_C and TSI_GB
This page states that TSI_GB is deprecated and UIC_C must be used instead. Is there any reasoning behind this? Wikipedia page for loading gauges says the opposite, that TSI GB has superseded UIC C in Europe. Looking at the tags of TSI_GB versus UIC_C you will see UIC_C only used in half of Denmark (as I was told to use that one). Shouldn’t we change this wiki page to reflect this?
—- 1993matias 10th of September 2025
Hi, there actually is a reason. It was decided (I don't remember where and when) that when there is further denomination of a type a lauding_gauge, we chose the most global rule. So between a national rule and European rule, we prefer the european one.
Here, we have the choice between a European denomination and an international denomination. So the UIC system is preferred.
--La Voie de la Raison (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
I see. But for now the prevalent use in Europe is TSI GB, and loading gauges are not really tagged outside of Europe. It may sound rude, but I don't see why I should change the tags I use when nobody else does, especially since the decision is not widely known.
--1993matias (talk) 07:54, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
Well, actually your last point isn't a real problem as it just need to precise it on the page. On the other point, you're writing that nobody change the tags following the wiki ? I may don't understand well, but here I understand that for you if the tags aren't harmonized by a global rule it doesn't matter ?? All the interest of OSM is the global importance of datas. If all these datas aren't harmonized under the same rull, why making a world data-base and don't keep all these small nationals data base ? I hope I've misunderstood. I'm waiting for your answer to continue to improve the debat. --La Voie de la Raison (talk) 07:24, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
I understand that the change needs to start somewhere, but I don't understand where it started? When was the decision made and by who? What was the reasoning? And why has nobody else taken note of the change? I would be more than happy to conform to the guidelines if the process behind them was available somewhere. I mean, I could just change the wiki now since there is no discussion or source on the current decision (but I won't, of course). Data standard rules are good, until they are not followed. National railway infrastructure companies use the European loading gauge standards - or even national ones. I understand that UIC C and TSI GB are theoretically interchangeable, but what sense does it make to use a standard (UIC C) that is deprecated and that nobody uses in the real world? I am sure there are answers wherever the decision was made, but there is simply no reference to it. About me following rules; I follow every other rule on railway tagging - even these - since I use the data provided by the infrastructure manager which specifies the TSI GB loading gauge. TSI GB is listed in the table with no comment (while TSI G2 is apparently UIC C) --1993matias (talk) 08:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)