Hi,
Lots of good answers so far, and may I add.........
You can pick up some of the older Kalmbach books on Ebay for a few bucks and the info is still valid. Mr. Armstrongs book of realistic operation is invaluable.
It's pretty easy to figure out what works for double straight (tangent) trackage, but determining what is OK for double curved track is not as easy. Obviously you need more separation depending on tighter curve or longer cars/locos - due of course to "overhang". And then there is that pull of centrifigal force which may add to the space needed.
And of course there is that "what looks best to me" factor................
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Thank you all for your comments. I knew I could count on this forum for answers. I think I now know what I will do.
One question. Do you mean double track or two separate companies.
All of the answers so far have been for double track. I won't give mine. I work in the Metric system and there are metricphobes who would take offense.
If, OTOH, you mean two independent companies, the spacing would be wide enough to allow each company to site signals, pole lines and such between the tracks without interfering with the other.
My own layout is 16' 0" by 19' 4" and fills the 'buildable' space of a double garage. It supports five different railway companies (three of them minimal static displays) but only has closely spaced parallel tracks at passing sidings and in yards. The one short stretch of visible Japan National Railways double track has been modeled as two tracks built at different times on different alignments, so the tracks are four inches or more apart. The two fully modeled railways aren't parallel anywhere.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
starmanIf I want to run two (2) rail lines side by side, both straight and curves, how much width should I dedicate for this?
Follow the NMRA standards and RPs for this. It also depends on the equipment you are running and your curve radius.
If your are running class Ia (see linked chart) locomotives on a Class I or II curve (despite the NMRA recommendations, manufacturers engineer rolling stock and locomotives so that they will traverse unprototypical curves, so it is sometimes possible), you will need to increase your track spacing appropriately for the excess overhang caused by pivoting drive gear on articulated locomotives, etc.
Approximate measuerments are given here, as previously linked.
http://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/s-8.pdf
Well I would say 2 inches for passenger trains and modern freight.
Roger Hensley= ECI Railroad - http://madisonrails.railfan.net/eci/eci_new.html == Railroads of Madison County - http://madisonrails.railfan.net/ =
Note the distance of 3" on-center for the sectional track radius of Atlas Code 83 and Atlas Code 100 for HO Scale.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
This is also discussed in John Armstrong's book Track Planning for Realistic Operation. It is money well spent, though part of it deals with what I would call humongous home layouts.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Hello all,
Check out this thread...
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/254250.aspx
You'll probably have to copy & paste into your browser or you can highlight the link, right-click and Open Link.
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."