This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
The article talks about the disadvantage of the Jacobs bogie, but not the advantage(s). There must be at least one advantage, no? Greg Salter (talk) 07:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One of the primary advantages is in tare weight reduction. With fewer bogies, the train is significantly lighter. Now that I think about it, I remember reading something about this issue with regards to intermodal freight transportation too (the 3- and 5-unit container cars come to mind). Slambo(Speak) 12:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that with passenger trains, passing from one car to the next while the train is moving probably becomes somewhat easier. JNW2 (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should this article be moved to Jakobs bogie? The inventor's name was Jakobs.
Pål Jensen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pål Jensen (talk • contribs) 08:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was, but I've moved it back, because all the usage, on this page and in the article, spells it the English way, pace the inventor. Rothorpe (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jacobs bogies and shared bogies for articulation[edit]
A closeup of a shared regular bogie on the preserved Nebraska Zephyr I wonder if this is not a Jacobs bogie afterallSchema of a Jacobs bogie
The article is unclear as to what distinguishes a Jacobs bogie from other bogies. Is any bogie shared between adjacent coaches of an articulated set a "Jacobs bogie" (e.g. Nigel Gresley's LNER Silver Jubilee sets of the 1930s) ? Or is the Jacobs bogie a particular arrangement of pivots or suspension? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above are valid questions. In case of the Nebraska Zephyr a conventional truck is shared by the passenger cars by means of an articulated connector such as is shown on page 552 of the 1970 edition of the CAR and LOCOMOTIVE CYCLOPEDIA, a Simmons-Boardman publication. The same articulated connector is used in North America between well cars etc.. Peter HornUser talk 18:31, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What, so as the Electroliner diagram on this page shows it (zoom in, it's big enough) the "shared" bogie is still using just a single central pivot? I agree that that wouldn't be a Jacobs bogie, but it seems a strange way (three pivots and an extra frame) to build anything, especially when it's supposed to be "lightweight". Andy Dingley (talk) 18:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, one pivot or one pin. The articulated connector, which sits on the center plate of a regular truck, takes care of everything. And each end of it is welded to the respective center beam of the adjacent coaches. That is what shown on page 552 of the 1970 edition of the CAR and LOCOMOTIVE CYCLOPEDIA and that is also what is used on North American well cars. Peter HornUser talk 14:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not possible that a centre plate spanning between coaches is welded to the frames of those coaches. That would make the entire rake rigid! Andy Dingley (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is an articulated connector that sits on the centerplate and that is welded at each end. The connector allows for some 15 degrees, or so, left or right for a total of some 30 degrees horizontally and some vertical articulation. My email address is peter.j.c.horn@gmail.com. Send me your email address and I'll send you a scan of page 552 of the 1970 edition of the CAR and LOCOMOTIVE CYCLOPEDIA. Peter HornUser talk 15:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that makes more sense. It would be interesting to see how the plate is articulated. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:34, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A regular bogie, NOT a jacobs bogie on a double-stackwell car I have removed this file from the article because the well cars do not sit on Jacobs bogies. Here again, it is the articulated connector device that sits on the centerplate of a standard North American Truck as previously described above. Peter HornUser talk 21:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Closeup of a regular truck with specially adapted side bearings not a Jacobs bogie, between two sections of an articulated well car
Thank you, Pete, but I long ago acknowledged that I screwed up on that account (did somebody put the picture back?). The picture is still there, though, should anybody like to use it for that kind of bogie — whatever kind that might be. Kelisi (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kelisi: Nobody put it back in this article, but click on it, you'll see that it is still used in other articles. We need to find an illustration of a real jacobs bogie on the internet. Peter HornUser talk 20:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Safety, because the trains are less prone to collapse like an accordion after derailing (which contributed to the Eschede disaster)".
No source for the statement supplied, and if one refers to a type of jackknifing effect (the zigzag pile-up of the carriages), that was unavoidable once the bridge came down, the carriages basically slammed into a concrete wall at a speed 200 km/h. Maybe with Jacobs bogies the 3rd car wouldn't have hit the bridge support, I don't know, but that would require a reliable source. Prevalence 22:35, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Until now, each generation of the ICE, also the one of the Eschede disaster has no Jacobs bogies. The only property in common of the ICE is to separate the railcars of the train without tools of a maintaining workshop. In regular operation, the train is not separated. Each railcar of the ICE has two regular bogies, optimized for speed, only. The Eschede disaster was caused by failing proper service procedure of material condition ultrasound tests. Passengers failed to engage the emergency brakes due being afraid for getting sued for abusive using the emergency brake after parts of the failed wheel shoot through the floor of the railcar. Aprox 6 mins later, the railcar was guided of of its rail and crashed the nearby bridge. --Hans Haase (有问题吗) 18:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"As cars are only supported at their ends, the middle of each carriage will describe a wider path on curves than independently-supported cars, thus requiring a wider loading gauge." I have removed this sentence because it is pure nonsense. On a regular UICpassenger coach the pivot distance is 19,000 or 19,500 mm (62 ft 4 in or 63 ft 11+3⁄4 in). When one uses a Jacobs bogie one simply assures, by design, that the pivots are NO further apart. Hence the coaches are simply shorter and neither the loading gauge nor the structure gauge are affected. Peter HornUser talk 21:39, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Right, in is not the rail gauge, but is translating accident pointed to the overhang between bogie tap and end of the railcar. See outer curb radius, which is reduced when using jacobs bogies. --Hans Haase (有问题吗) 08:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hans Haase: Still not quite correct. Only the first and last car of the train with Jacobs bogies have one end overhang that may, or may not, be affected by the combination of the loading gauge and the structure gauge on the center line of the track on a curve. The term "outer curb radius" does not exist and makes no sense whatsoever. Peter HornUser talk 14:38, 27 September 2019 (UTC) Peter HornUser talk 14:40, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
