And, the NMRA standards are obviously smart guidelines from which to alter, if you want, based upon how you are going to run your layout. If you are going to run it generically, that’s fine, then calculating precision beyond the guidelines seems like a waste of time.
However, if you ask questions like…do I need to run 85 foot long cars an every yard track, or a big boy on every track? If not, you can then cut down the spacing between tracks to something like my pics posted above…since it appears that CSX/NS will not be running 89 foot flat cars along side the coal hoppers.
Does spacing need to be the same for every track? Obviously, the radius will be descending as you move inwards along a curved yard.
Well, here is my reply to the OP, verbatim, and it was the first reply to this thread.
It was a serious reply based upon my own experience.
After I posted that reply to the OP, my subsequent replies were in support of Crandell’s and Ed’s similar responses - - - test the trackwork to see if it creates clearance problems or not.
Rich
richhotrain
I don’t have an absolute answer for you, but I can make some suggestions.
A minimum radius of 36" is great, especially on mainlines, but not really necessary for yards. What is more important on curves is the spacing between tracks, and 2" on center on curves is tight even though you are limiting your rolling stock to 40’ and 50’ freight cars. Spacing of 2 1/2" on center on curves is far better, at least in my experience.
Years ago, I got some good advice from my LHS guys about spacing of tracks on curves. They recommended that I buy a pair of 85’ boxcars and test them on actual track to be sure. I wouldn’t blindly rely on the advice of others unless they can say with certainty that 2" on center spacing for 36" radius tracks will work based upon their actual experience.
If this were my layout, I would use 2 1/2" spacing on curves and, since it is the yard, I would step down the radius on curved tracks to something like 32" radius. In fact, that is exactly what I did on my old layout where I installed a yard on a curve on my layout.
Hope this helps.
Rich
Gentleman,
As I’ve been following this thread, I realized that my track plan was not only i
Sheldon, what spacing would you recommend for two parallel tracks (HO) with a minimum radius of 24 inches? While I like your standard of 36" or greater curves, l just can’t fit them into my switching shelf layout… 4 axle diesels, 60 foot cars, 18" shelves
As I’ve been following this thread, I realized that my track plan was not only inaccurate, but that I jumped the gun in posting it, my bad. I apologize not only for not participating in this thread (don’t have the knowledge) and by for not mentationing that I intend to run large articulated locomotives.
I did some trial and error as suggested with the equipment I have and incorporated a lot of the suggestions that were made. With that being said, I made the following adjustments:
· Main line radius minimum 42”
· Yard radius minimum 36” except for car shop where I’m using 28” - 32” curved turnouts
Mike, as you are learning in this hobby, manufacturers make products that are incomplete. The product can do some things, but fails at other things. When judged with the standard that each product should do what the other guy’s does, they all fall short of being competent because they were designed to only do limited applications.
The Atlas sectional track was designed, mainly, to provide train set type of 4 x 8 layouts way back in the day. Their trackplan book has many plans with 22 inch radius curves inside a 24. But those train set plans would not work if the buyer was running 85 foot passenger cars (which Atlas doesn’t make BTW, AFAIK). Atlas doesn’t disclose that
I understand and agree, but I like the double swivel articulated locos, as I said earlier, they make our large (but still compressed) curves look larger. 8 of my 11 articulated locos are x-6-6-x designs anyway.
And, I don’t see a long list of additional articulated locos in my future, brass or plastic.
I actually limit the rigid wheelbase of steam that I purchase to 21 scal
I don’t disagree with using the best tool for the job.
I’m asking what are the jobs in model railroading where you need that level of precision?
Boring out a cylinder, I get. Laying track, or placing a trackside building, I’m lost.
That’s not a challenge to your methods, its just that the discussions on the forums seemingly involve an ever more level of precision that I’ve never considered. and I’m wondering what I’ve been missing or doing wrong all of these years.
At which, we all close our eyes, smile, and emit a resounding, “AAAaaaahhh…!”, like Bill Shatner as the MC in the talent show in that movie when the main character looks wide-eyed and then hastily adds, “…and world peace.”
You are likely not doing anything wrong, but you may not be involved in some aspects of the hobby that others are. I use my micrometer a fair amount.
But I kit bash locomotives, measure axle lengths for proper replacement fit, build the occasional custom turnout, etc.
But I’m the same guy that layed my straight track with a 36" steel rule, then checked it with a lazer… we use them to install kitchen cabinets, why not use them to lay track?
If you get satisfactory results with your methods, you are not doing anything wrong.
If you see discussions that involve more precision than you care about, so what? That’s what THEY want to discuss. I don’t see why it would bother you if they do. Just move on to a different topic.
I no longer build models, which is where precision that’s measured in fractions of inches comes mainly into play. The guys who ran the CAD program at Athearn t
I certainly wasn’t going after precision. Oddly, mathematical tools work on both precise and imprecise dimensions.
I know the typical width of a freight car is 1 1/2" (about) in HO. So I simply scaled the width of the car and the width of the open space between the cars, set up a proportion, and solved for x (x being the HO distance between the cars). Adding 1 1/2 and 1/4, I got my answer.
As I said, I wasn’t guessing. And neither did you, if you built a sufficiently accurate model to measure.
Other people’s interest in precision seems to be really bothering you. Again, if a topic is becoming of no interest to you, why not just drop it, and leave it for the people who DO have an interest?
