Working on building a small yard in N Scale in limited space. I want to get as many classification tracks in as possible but don’t want to overdo it. What’s the closest you’d lay track in a classification yard? Would you ever lay the track so closely that the roadbed for each classification track touches the roadbed of the adjacent tracks?
I would lay the track far enough apart that I could reach between the cars with my thumb and forefinger and pick up a car that needed to be re-railed.
Curves will also need a bit more between-space than side-by-side straight sections due to car-overhang – Test each yard track with two of your longest cars to be on the safe side.
Leaving finger room doesn’t look bad in HO. That’s gonna be a little different in N, I suspect.
It’s not the roadbed touching that’s important, but whether or not the cars touch!
I started off leaving more space, but have since started shoehorning in tracks where I need more because that extra space was available to work with.
From Railway Track and Maintenance by E.E. Russell Tratmam published in 1926.
“Yard tracks are usually 13 or 14 ft. c. to c.: sometimes alternately 13 and 15 ft. The first yard track should be 15 to 20 ft. from the main track, and ladder trackd should be 15 to 20ft from parallel tracks, in order to give ample room for switchmen.”
Today yards may have wider spacing.
In N scale 1 in = 13-1/3 ft. So 1in spacing would look prototypical. However it is often convenient to be able get ones fingers between cars on adjacent tracks so 1-1/2 in. (20 scale ft.) spacing is more commonly used.
This spacing is for straight track, curves may require wide spacing.
Based on my experience I wouldn’t use anything less then 1 /1/2" in N Scale. 1 1/2" still looks “right” for older yards.
Modern yards would look good at 1 3/4" remembering that usually for arrival and departure yards not the classification tracks…
I agree. Different modelers may have different widths to their roadbed, so have roadbeds touch for adjacent yard tracks is not a reliable approach. Trial and error with your widest and longest cars is the proper answer.
Rich
Never mind…The coffee has kicked in yet…[(-D]
I like the scale look of cars setting in the yard the distance apart that you would see in a real yard. I guess I haven’t found getting a car re-railed at that distance to be to much of a problem, if you pull it out so you can get at it, in HO scale.
I find that finger-width in N scale looks too wide for me. And if laid with moderate care, yard trackage should be reliable enough that you should almost never need to reach in while there are cars on the tracks.
A good place to start is the spacing suggested by the NMRA’s S-8 track-to-track spacing standard. For straight tracks side-by-side, this is 1 1/32" minimum. You may need to trim some off-the shelf turnouts slightly to get this spacing (depends on the brand). To my eye, 1 1/16" still looks good for transition-era yards.
This is measured track-center-to-track center. At these distances, it might be closer together than you would achieve by butting track roadbed side-by-side.
In curves, track-to-track spacing must be broader.
If you have never laid out a yard before, you may be dismayed by the length it takes for the turnouts (track switches) to branch out to many yard tracks (especially in limited overall space). A to-scale drawing early-on will tell you a lot about the largest number of tracks possible.
Best of luck.
Byron