Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Minimum turn radius for actual us track

4031 views
20 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Friday, August 21, 2020 5:22 PM

Generally #7 through #10 are used in yards, at least in the transistion era, and hand operated switches in the main were #10, with siding switches #14-#16.  Higher speed switches were #16 and above, up into #20 +.

On the UP main track in rule 251 double track territory the trailing point, hand lined crossovers were #10.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Friday, August 21, 2020 5:16 PM

I walked through a very sharp turnout in the main yard at Woss on Vancouver Island 14 years ago because an old 2-8-2 was sitting just beyond it on a stub.  As I got to the points, I shook my head, turned, and thought to myself, "There's just no way...."

I went back to the derelict steamer and took a closer look.  Now I understood how and eight-coupled steamer of any size could have negotiated what I think was a real #6.

I believe that mains turnouts on the CPR leading to sidings in the Fraser Valley are actually #10's, or thereabouts, and most certainly not less than a #9.  Higher speed turnouts, such as crossovers, are going to be in the #22+ range if I recall a conversation over on the trains.com forum many years ago...in fact, I think the number stated was a #25 or better.

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Friday, August 21, 2020 9:20 AM

Doughless
With the discussion of turnouts, I've come to realize that our #4 through #10 frog models are actually close to what the prototype uses. Maybe we typically use one frog more severe in our situations than does the prototype.

I don't think that's correct. On some prototype double track mainlines, the crossovers from one track to another use like no. 20 turnouts.

Stix
  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Heart of Georgia
  • 5,406 posts
Posted by Doughless on Thursday, August 20, 2020 8:44 AM

With the discussion of turnouts, I've come to realize that our #4 through #10 frog models are actually close to what the prototype uses.  Maybe we typically use one frog more severe in our situations than does the prototype.

This is important to me because my new more contemporary layout is being built with #8 and #6 frogs.  With my tests, I thought the longer equipment looked a bit funny hanging over the turnout when traversing a #6 frog in a yard and spur, but that overhang might actually be quite common on real yards and spurs.  I'm using #8s for the passing siding/runaround.

Of course, the actual mainline turning radius we use is much more compressed for our layouts compared to the prototype.

- Douglas

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 6:18 PM

At Tower 55 in Ft Worth 30 years ago, a local car manufacturer was doing some  compression testing on some new cars on one of the wye legs that was particularly sharp.  They had a cut of cars with an engine on each end.  Lets just say the test wasn't as successful as they had hoped.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,767 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 4:54 PM

An anecdote I picked up in my younger days was that a specific curve in Butler, PA was Pullman-Standard's de facto minimum curve. All outbound shipments moved from the Bessemer & Lake Erie to the PRR/PC/Conrail, which crossed perpendicularly. If something couldn't navigate the curve between the two, that represented a severe problem for Pullman. It wasn't considered a major problem until the initial R&D for the first 89 foot flats. Engineering calculation indicated that it was too tight for them, which proved true in initial tests. The underframe was reworked until the flats could make it in practice not just on paper.

It was about 340 feet or so. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 3:08 PM

The 1922 P&R MofW rule book had plans for split point switches down to a #3.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,367 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 2:37 PM

Doughless
Interesting table.  As an aside, any ideas as to what "Stub Switch Length" means?  I'm assuming its one of the three legs of the switch.

I believe it would refer to the "movable" portion of the rails at the stub end:

 Stub_switch_crop by Edmund, on Flickr

So the "Stub Switch Length" would be measured from the last point of the anchored tie (where spikes end) following the dashed lines to the actual toe of the switch. Note the tie rods (T) to maintain gauge.

A switch refers only to the movable portion of a turnout.

Regards, Ed

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,678 posts
Posted by gregc on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:46 PM

Doughless
any ideas as to what "Stub Switch Length" means?  I'm assuming its one of the three legs of the switch.

not sure.   click the table, it's linked to the page I got it from and has some discussion of stub switches.

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Heart of Georgia
  • 5,406 posts
Posted by Doughless on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:20 PM

gregc

looks like a #4 was prototypical

 

Interesting table.  As an aside, any ideas as to what "Stub Switch Length" means?  I'm assuming its one of the three legs of the switch.

At 11 feet as a minimum, actually building the minimum seems laughably short for anything other than a 0-4-0.  Which would relegate #4 switches to only the wharf-ish type of switch areas, if 11 feet means what I think it means.  Maybe it means somehting else.

Maybe it means the minimum length beyond the frog the track should be before another track is joined to it, if they build the switch assembly as one piece.

- Douglas

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 869 posts
Posted by NHTX on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:13 PM

      Sharply curved frogs are not limited to just industrial trackage.  Boston's South Station had #8s in the throat.  One of the reasons the New Haven decided to buy their I-5 Hudsons was, the R class 4-8-2s repeatedly derailed on the throat, especially the double slips.  I would not be surprised to find that many major terminals had throats laid out with #10 or sharper frogs because of cramped locations and maximum speeds not exceeding 15MPH. 

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,678 posts
Posted by gregc on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:37 PM

looks like a #4 was prototypical

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:14 PM

Doughless

I was going to start a new thread until I saw this one, so I'll embed my question here since I think both questions can be addressed.  

What is the typical minimum turnout frog# an industrial switching area might have?

 Not speaking of railroad policy absolute minimum, or the one off example, but as a general operating observation.

Our models compress curve radius, or degrees, to where a typically broad radius on  layout would actually be a tight radius in prototype general situations.

Same holds true for turnouts.  A #10 frog is very gentle for our  models, but its my understanding its fairly severe for the prototype.

But still, industrial areas or even modern industrial parks probably have turnouts with divergent degrees more severe than a #10, I'm thinking. 

We use #4's a lot on our layouts for industrial spurs, but is that too severe for a typical prototype turnout in an industrial area?

 

I actually meaured a lot of frogs on some industrial trackage many years ago and found mostly #6 and #8's.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Heart of Georgia
  • 5,406 posts
Posted by Doughless on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:07 PM

I was going to start a new thread until I saw this one, so I'll embed my question here since I think both questions can be addressed.  

What is the typical minimum turnout frog# an industrial switching area might have?

 Not speaking of railroad policy absolute minimum, or the one off example, but as a general operating observation.

Our models compress curve radius, or degrees, to where a typically broad radius on  layout would actually be a tight radius in prototype general situations.

Same holds true for turnouts.  A #10 frog is very gentle for our  models, but its my understanding its fairly severe for the prototype.

But still, industrial areas or even modern industrial parks probably have turnouts with divergent degrees more severe than a #10, I'm thinking. 

We use #4's a lot on our layouts for industrial spurs, but is that too severe for a typical prototype turnout in an industrial area?

- Douglas

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 11:40 AM

Nominally one limit on practical curvature is imposed by using solid wheel sets on freight equipment.  Tread as well as flange wear then becomes a potential concern.

Remember that 'in practice' most model railroad curves are already wildly tighter than those AREMA would likely specify for other than sidings or industrial plant trackage.

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 10:11 AM

Remember there are some curves to sharp for anything more then a end cab switcher.

On the PRR there was a scrap yard that had a very sharp curve.

How sharp? 

We had to use idler cars to make a pickup or setout. Needless to say the flange squeal was loud.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Central Texas
  • 365 posts
Posted by MJ4562 on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 9:36 AM

Do you mean contemporary or if not, what time period?

As plant has improved and equipment gotten larger the standards have changed overtime. 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 9:32 PM

gregc

values for Reading steam locos

Those last two, of course, aren't steam locomotives, they're AGEIR 60-ton 300 hp boxcabs, delivered in 1926 and 1928.  Interestingly I believe #50 was geared for 'Road Service', about 55 nominal mph...

I believe B&O had a two-truck switcher that was specially modified to allow greater truck swivel (e.g. longer traction motor leads) for street-trackage curves in Baltimore -- those might be the 'tightest' general curves a regular engine might be expected to encounter in practice.

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,678 posts
Posted by gregc on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 4:19 PM

values for Reading steam locos

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,314 posts
Posted by BEAUSABRE on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 4:09 PM

Learn more than you ever want to know about railroad infrastructure standards and recommended practices from The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association's

Manual for Railway Engineering

 
Current Edition - 2019
Released each April - Annual Publication

The Manual for Railway Engineering (MRE) is an annual publication released every April. The Manual consists of more than 5,000 pages of railway engineering reference material, the recommended practices for the industry. It contains principles, data, specifications, plans and economics pertaining to the engineering, design and construction of the fixed plant of railways (except signals and communications), and allied services and facilities. The material is developed by AREMA technical committees and is published as a guide to railways in establishing their individual policies and practices relative to the subjects, activities and facilities covered in the Manual, with the aim of assisting them to engineer and construct a railway plant which will have inherent qualities of a safe and economical operation as well as low maintenance cost. Chapters are grouped into four general categories, each in a separate volume: Track * Structures * Infrastructure and Passenger * Systems Management.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  • Member since
    July 2020
  • 42 posts
Minimum turn radius for actual us track
Posted by Traincraft199 on Saturday, August 15, 2020 4:47 PM

What's the minimum curve radius for North American railways? Is it a solid standard? what's the typical turn radius for (edit: modern day) locomotives?

Building my first layout, 4x8 contemporary urban area in HO scale 

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!