60 feet = 1 mile in HO.
30 feet = 1/2 mile
15 feet = 1/4 Mile
Prototype yards I’ve seen are 1 to 5 miles long.
HO Yard Length = Unrealistic …(Unless you have a big room)
What Say You ?
True. That’s why we have to live with selective compression.
Have fun,
Richard
First I don’t worry about “scale miles” and here’s why. Eyeball a 20 car cut at eye level and see how long it looks from the engine to the last car and eyeball a passing train at eye level runing at scale speeds and look how long it looks as it passes by.The normal helicopter view we use makes everything look small…
Even looking down my 10’ board looks like a long distance for a HO man to walk…
No one has the room to scale the prototype down exactly, so those comparisons don’t rule out having a yard. I’m not sure that I understand your point. Thousands of successful layouts have been built with yards that work well – and almost without exception, none are nearly as long as real-life yards.
Just like yards, most real-life rail-served industries are huge, but compressed versions can work well on our layouts. Most of us cannot model full-length trains either (depending on the prototype), but our compressed versions can still be operated in a realistic fashion.
Bruce Petty’s Trona Railway layout I posted in one of your other threads is one example among many. The industry at Searles is massively compressed, as is the SP (now UP) interchange yard. But because they are sized to each other and to the target train length, the layout can work well.
This modern-era N scale layout is another example. The yard and major industries are compressed from the real thing, along with train lengths. But one can still replicate many of the prototype’s activities.
Model railroad yards should be sized by the kind of work they do, the typical length of the trains planned for the layout, and other factors (including human factors). Just because they aren’t the same to-scale length as their prototype inspirations doesn’t mean that they can’t provide realistic and satisfying operation, if that is what you are suggesting.
Just make your yard 300 feet long!
Then it will be realistic…and prototypical.
Rich
Yes…Everything on that N Scale layout seems to flow together and that is what IMHO makes a great layout.
Nothing choppy about that layout.
It’s not just yard length.
There’s also passing siding length.
No reason to have a 300 foot long yard if your passing sidings are 20’.
There will have to be some internal negotiations. What scale are you in? How big a space do you have? What kind of a railroad are you modeling (hey, interurbans don’t generally need big yards)? How many passing sidings do you need/want? And more…
Myself, I’ve arbitrarily decided that a standard passing siding should be about 20’ in HO. That’s ‘cause that’ll take a typical full length passenger train. That would then imply a yard based on that 20’ distance. That could mean something like an overall 35’ yard length, what with ladders and run-arounds and such.
Ed
Based on what OP is contending, wouldn’t a 20’ passing siding be unrealistic? [swg]
Rich
What I say is “Welcome to modelling!”
Dave
I’m just throwing it out there, and no doubt any master model railroaders here already are content with the compromises.
The “Selective Compression” idea measured against reality, and what a modeler can live with, is open to interpretation I think. But like the one poster here (richhotrain) said, “Make a 300 foot yard”…LOL…that’s a good one.
This conundrum became apparent to me as I did a mockup of my future 12 foot yard, which just does not have the “Zip” of any real yard, and I was attempting to get other points of view on the scenario to see if there was any technique for a good compromise.
Despite the fact that we in the Great White North have “gone metric”, a yard is still 36", and in HO, that’s a little less than one-twentieth of a mile. [swg]
It depends on to whom you’re talking if any particular compromise is a good one.
My compromise was to have staging yards, but no yards on the sceniced portion of the layout. Because my trains are usually fairly short - less than 20 cars, or less than 12 cars if I need to use the passing sidings - the staging tracks are only about 12’ long. They’re also stacked one above the other (the layout is partially double-decked, with staging on four levels) so the space occupied by them is minimal. For switching activity, most trains are required to switch the industries in each town through which they pass, which can be just as time-consuming as making-up or breaking-down trains, and is generally done in much more interesting areas, with scenery and structures. Too many layouts with large yards end up with the yard simply becoming a storage area, with little yard-related activity - much like a staging yard. To me, it seemed a waste to model a yard when what my operations
Hi all
Well concidering the largest home layout I have seen the main line loop was one scale mile.
No chance of building a scale length yard of any real size not many can even build scale length station yards,
in the space they have avalable.
The only thing you can do is make sure your maximum length train fits in to the yard.
Unrealistic NO!! realisam / authenticaty can not be measured in feet and inches it is an asthetic thing so if it looks right and real it is.
regards John
Oh, yeah.
But I was simply pointing out that he should also be aware of the concurrent problem of proper length sidings. Because what use are full length yards without full length sidings?
But, Rich, are we really sure what OP is contending?
Ed
Accurate, but irrelevant.
LOL
Glad you enjoyed it. [(-D]
Rich
Good Morning Ed,
No, I am not sure we know what the OP is contending, if he is, in fact, contending anything at all.
I just think that this thread is more whimsical than serious.
Rich
Right.Reality such a useless word the we use in our hobby.
We see highly detailed trains running at Mach 5 around loops with way to tight curves,up/down grades at breakneck speeds and so forth as “reality” while we get bent out of shape over our too small yard,too short passing sidings for our way too short freight trains…
Ever notice how silly a “Big Boy” looks pulling a 12-15 car train or two or three modern SD80Macs pulling 12-15 cars?
“Reality” ends as soon as we turn on the lights in the layout room.
Larry
I could’t agree more on that!
I have to laugh at some modelers arguing about details or the engine is 3 SCALE inches too narrow/wide etc.
And these arguments on this and other Forums about such trivial stuff!
I was giving a clinic one time and an argument broke out about Operations and how one type was closer to the real thing vs another method.
I have had to bring order back to the group by stating “Boys we are PLAYING with TOY TRAINS”
Everything got real quiet! 
BOB H - Clarion, PA
Bob, I have to agree with you and Larry.
We talk about “model” railroading, and some of us approach the level of rivet counters, but when all is said and done, we are grown men playing with toy trains. No other way to cut it.
Rich
Compromise of LION:
NYCT runs 10 car (600 foot trains) {on the IND/BMT : On the IRT that would be a 500 foot train}
LION buys subway cars in sets of four, but these look too short and were never run that way on LINE of LION.
LION runs 6 car trains (IRT cars = 300’) and can stop at platforms 4’ long (In people feet). This is about right, I can put stations far enough apart to look good (only the longest stretch has two stations on it)
Ten cars would just lookj too long on my layout and would require 8’ long stations, which is a little overpowering.
LION thinks him has got it just right.
When I had a freight system, my max was about 12 40’ coal cars. Even then I would have to double the train into the coal yard. (Let the yard engine spend the day futzing with those cars WITHOUT access to the main line.)
Now ewe go forth and make yours just right.
ROAR