I started work on my ladder. It looked good on paper with #4 Atlas turnouts, but it looks like it will be too wide in reality. My thinking is if I go to #6's my ladder will be longer, but more narrow. Correct?? Maybe even squeeze in one more track width wise? I have plenty of length, but my table width is limited.
I could probably even shorten the mainline on the #6's. (cut an inch or so off the ends of the main line)Any pros or cons to this?
You can trim nearly any commercial turnout, no matter what number, to get different track spacings in a yard. I would think you could trim the #4s as easily as the #6s.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
loathar I started work on my ladder. It looked good on paper with #4 Atlas turnouts, but it looks like it will be too wide in reality. My thinking is if I go to #6's my ladder will be longer, but more narrow. Correct?? Maybe even squeeze in one more track width wise? I have plenty of length, but my table width is limited.
No. The width is determined by how many tracks.you want across it. You can trim the switches to fit whatever track spacing you want. If you want 4 tracks on 2" spacing you can use any number switch you want if you are willing to trim the switch a little.
Buy a Xuron rail cutter or go to Radio Shack and buy "flush cutting pliers", both are essentially the same thing. They make it quick and easy to cut rail.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
loathar I started work on my ladder. It looked good on paper with #4 Atlas turnouts, but it looks like it will be too wide in reality. My thinking is if I go to #6's my ladder will be longer, but more narrow. Correct?? Maybe even squeeze in one more track width wise? I have plenty of length, but my table width is limited. I could probably even shorten the mainline on the #6's. (cut an inch or so off the ends of the main line)Any pros or cons to this?
Are you using Atlas Customline components? I have an Atlas Customline Layouts book and it has various configurations of track arrangements including #4 and #6 ladders. For both configurations, it shows that the centerline dimension from track to track is 2 inches.
There is a note on each diagram stating how much length is required for each additional yard track. For the number 4 ladder each additional track adds 8-3/4 inch to the ladder length; for the number 6 ladder you eat up an additional 11-3/4 inch.
Note that this book was copyright in 1957, and I'm assuming for code 100. I don't think that Atlas has changed the physical dimensions of the track components, but I can not be certain of that. In any case, I think that Atlas has designed their components to result in 2 inch track centers regardless of what code the track pieces are.
I would avoid #4's. If you run any longer equipment, it will tend to want to bind up on the "S" transition from the main to the yard bowl tracks.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
Dear Loathar,
The number indicates also the length of your turnout. As a rule of thumb: spacing x number = length So a #8 switch is about 2 x 8 = 16" long. Depending on lots of things your spacing can be less then 2". Your shelfs are narrow, so you can do some experimenting in this field; but always there is cutting to perform, it's part of the fun.
The length of the trains, of the individual cars, of the speed will decide the number you need. A yard for slow switching with a short cut of 40-feeters or a yard for a long train of modern autoracks is quite a different piece of cake. As stated many times before, only when you are giving more precise information you will get the right answers.
You seem to have the length, why spend it on a ladder?, unless it fits in your scheme.
Have fun
Paul
Paulus Jas Dear Loathar, The number indicates also the length of your turnout. As a rule of thumb: spacing x number = length So a #8 switch is about 2 x 8 = 16" long. Depending on lots of things your spacing can be less then 2".
The number indicates also the length of your turnout. As a rule of thumb: spacing x number = length So a #8 switch is about 2 x 8 = 16" long. Depending on lots of things your spacing can be less then 2".
I've never seen that rule of thumb and it's not really accurate for a number of pre-fab commercial turnouts. Genrally speaking, larger numbered turnouts are longer, but the length of a turnout is determined by many factors, not only frog number.
Both Atlas #4 (actually #4.5) and #6 turnouts, automatically give you a track spacing of 2 inches. Changing one for the other won't change the number of tracks you can fit in.
To narrow the track spacing you'll have to trim the turnout's straight leg. Either the frog end or point end will work.
Nick
Take a Ride on the Reading with the: Reading Company Technical & Historical Society http://www.readingrailroad.org/
Cayuma is partly right of course. But the rule kept me from overly optimistic "planning". Before you start your ''final" design it's nice to have at least an idea how much length your ladder needs and how much length remains for the trains. And there is some math behind the rule.
The number does indicate the ratio between the spacing and the length it takes to overcome that distance. For every extra track in a ladder you need spacing x number extra length. For a #8 ladder and 2" spacing it means each additional track is making your ladder 8 x 2" = 16" longer. As an other member stated some brands are making their turnouts so that they come exactly 2" apart without cutting; their length has to be approximately 16". (i used approx. because there is more behind it; Cuyama really knows what he is talking about.)
When using a specific brand of track or making the switches yourself you'll need the more precise dimensions in your final design. For some quick calculation however the rule of thumb is working fine.
Lee-Good point on the S transition. Hadn't thought about THAT!
It just looks like with the #4's less gradual diverging route, the ladder would be wider to achieve a 2" track spacing. (if that makes any sense?)I'll boot up Anyrail later and make up a couple ladders and compare them. Glad I haven't bought all my turnouts yet!
In HO, Atlas #4s are actually #4.5s and, while not ideal, have been used successfully in ladders so long as the cars and engines are moderate-to-short. If you have more length available, #6s are "better".
I can't see why a yard with 2" track-to-track spacing would be deeper with one size turnout vs. another for the same number of tracks, but I may be missing something.
i asume that Loathar thinks:
"the smaller the angle, the lesser the spacing".
The number of a switch indicates how much length is needed to get a certain spacing.
"the the smaller the angle, the more length it takes". John Amstrong covered this subject decades ago (TP for RO), there must be more recent covering on the market.
Hi Loathar: Here is a photo of the East end of my yard. I used all #6, code 100, CL turnouts. Counting the main line, which is in yard limits, there are 8 tracks, in a 20" wide area. Counting the main as #1 and moving to the right, #3,#4,#5, and #6 had 1 5/8" cut off the straight side. These 4 tracks are on 2" centers. The other tracks are wider to accomodate bridge columns. Maybe this is a help to visualize a ladder.DJ
Paulus Jas The number of a switch indicates how much length is needed to get a certain spacing.
That's true only at the frog. The spacing of the tracks can be affected by the way the turnout is contructed past the frog (whether curved or straight diverging path), the angle that is used for the ladder, etc.
I don't say this to make you "wrong", but to point out to readers that there is more than just frog number to take into account. For example, one can save in length of the yard ladder simply by adding a small curve to the lead track before the first turnout and again at the beginning of each body track. This doesn't increase the severity of the S-curve significantly.
Trimming turnouts and/or using turnouts constructed with shorter "leads" also makes a difference, even for the same number turnout frog. For example, here are two 4-track ladders contructed with 2" track-to-track spacing, #6 turnouts and 30" radius curves in HO. Using a more compact #6 turnout (here, the NMRA #6 which is used by the FastTracks jig) allows the use of an an angled ladder track -- which results in more than a 10% length savings over 4 tracks. Note that the Walthers #6 turnouts could likely also be trimmed to length sufficiently to allow use with a #5 ladder angle, but I don't have one handy to be sure.
Just an example of a case where generic "rules of thumb" don't necessarily apply.
ByronModel RR Blog Layout Design Gallery
But Paulus' rule is, in fact, precisely correct for each _additional_ track in a ladder, once the first turnout and the curved piece of track which makes the last yard track parallel are in place. So in Byron's examples, making the yard a 5-track yard would lengthen the #6-ladder yard by 2*6 = 12 inches, and the second, #5-ladder yard, by 10 inches.
Running this calculation backwards, the length for the turnout and curve section for the first additional (i.e., the #2) yard track with a #6 ladder is 41-5/8 - 2*12 = 17-5/8", and for the #5 ladder, 37-1/8 - 2*10 = 17-1/8", showing that you don't save anything with just one siding - think about it, the only turnout is still that first #6.
- Gerhard
Regardless of whether or not it allows you to add another track, I would go with the no.6 turnouts. I'm in a similar situation, my "layout" is currently what will be the staging yard of a new layout, but set up for now to be operated as a switching layout. It's true no. 6's take up more space and shorten each yard track, but it's really nice to be able to watch engines and cars go smoothly thru the broader switches - much more realistic to my eye, plus no "minimum radius" problems for even your biggest equipment.
Hi,
I was a bit surprised that an old time modeler like you would be asking about "yard ladders". Personally, I like to use Ys and double-slip switches besides #6 switches to make all the yard tracks accessible within the yard and to provide long drill tracks, that do not tie up the mainline. It,also, eliminates the binding S curves of the usual ladder and provides equal length tracks.Below are photos of one of my 7 track stub ended yards, In which the switcher has access to all 7 tracks, without entering the mainline.
The following photo shows the use of double-slip switches and crossovers within the yard, to allow for access and escape of the switcher from any track.
This photo of my 7 track pass-through yard shows the use of a double-slip switches within the yard, so that the switcher has access to all 7 tracks, without tying up the mainline
Bob Hahn
Bob, IMHO what you show is fairly typical of a passenger terminal, and, just possibly, maybe even a passenger yard, but does not in any way resemble a freight yard, which would most likely be just a simple or sometimes a compound arrangement (each ladder turnout feeding a turnout to two yard tracks so the ladder is at double the angle) with a drill track so as not to foul the main. Slip switches are complex and expensive to install and maintain and would not be used in the slam-bang wear and tear of daily freight yard operations. John
If you wan't to avoid S-turns it can be as simple as angling your leads:
HO....all Peco #6's.....Scale is 1' per square....2+1/4" track centers....
wjstixIt's true no. 6's take up more space and shorten each yard track, but it's really nice to be able to watch engines and cars go smoothly thru the broader switches
HHpath56 wrote- Hi,
I was a bit surprised that an old time modeler like you would be asking about "yard ladders".
Right! I've been at this a while, but this is the first layout I've built where I had the room for even a small ladder! Just 4x8's and slightly larger till now. Even we middle aged dogs need to learn new tricks from time to time! If you've noticed, I very rarely comment on track planning/critique topics. Just not very good at them.