I am sure that this question has been asked a million times but here goes. What is a typical center to center spacing for yard tracks in HO scale?
The center to center spacing of the yard tracks is really no different than that of the mainline. You want the tracks far enough apart that you can get your fingers in if needed without knocking stock off adjacent tracks and you don't want them too close together. The S-8 Track Centers Table of the NMRA should be of help to you. There's a wealth of information on the site that you can take advantage of.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
On the (prototype) New York Central in 1954, yard tracks were laid on 14 foot centers - which is 49mm in HO. (2 inches, the usual practice, is 50.8mm.) The same was true of mainlines in the crowded Northeast.
For finger and 'eyeball' clearance (to be able to see reporting marks over intervening cars) some modelers recomment 2.5 inches.
Recent multiple-track alignments in the 'wide open spaces' have 21 feet (or more) between parallel tracks on the main stem. Yard tracks are laid somewhere between 15 and 18 feet apart (for easier and safer access.)
In the opposite direction, the parallel tracks at the CNJ Bronx freight house were only 10.5 feet center to center. A gnat standing on the outer side of a ladder rung was in serious jeopardy if either his car or the one on the adjacent track was moved.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with yard tracks on 50mm centers)
Because I "fiddle" my yards, I tend to use 2 1/4" to 2 1/2" spacing.
Nick
Take a Ride on the Reading with the: Reading Company Technical & Historical Society http://www.readingrailroad.org/
I space my yard tracks at 2" centers because my yard is L shaped and I have a 90 degree curve and I wants enough clearance between moving trains but I now realize I could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance. I picked up a track laying set of tools from Micromark a while back and they provide you with a spacer block that will give you both 2" and 1-1/2" spacing. You just slip the grove over the two rails closest to each other and it assures your spacing is consistent.Just a little faster then drawing out lines with a straightedge
Allegheny2-6-6-6 but I now realize I could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance.
but I now realize I could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance.
Assuming you mean "ample", that's not correct, at least not for HO standard gauge center-to-center. The tightest spacing in most real life railroad yards was more like 13 foot centers back in the steam days (more today). What you are proposing is less than 11 scale feet in HO.
If you have even a few cars that are slightly oversize or are "listing" slightly on their trucks, 1.5" track to track spacing could be asking for trouble.
The NMRA specs cited earlier are a good guideline to begin.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I've for my class tracks 46 mm spacing, this is about 13'. You see them at the right.
Wolfgang
Pueblo & Salt Lake RR
Come to us http://www.westportterminal.de my videos my blog
cuyama Allegheny2-6-6-6 but I now realize I could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance. Assuming you mean "ample", that's not correct, at least not for HO standard gauge center-to-center. The tightest spacing in most real life railroad yards was more like 13 foot centers back in the steam days (more today). What you are proposing is less than 11 scale feet in HO. If you have even a few cars that are slightly oversize or are "listing" slightly on their trucks, 1.5" track to track spacing could be asking for trouble. The NMRA specs cited earlier are a good guideline to begin. Byron
Note my comment about the CNJ Bronx Terminal above. In HO,1.5 inches is just about the same as that prototype's 10.5 feet. The tracks were paired, and anything that even resembled a wide load embargoed the second track of the pair.
Just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD be done. After all, I could have a 600mm wide front walkway between two rows of Cholla cactus... (Anyone who has lived in Arizona can tell you why that's a not-so-good idea.)
I chose to go with 50mm track centers so that I could run the occasional wide load and not have to worry about snagging cars on the adjacent tracks. I still have to route them clear of the high platforms, which is why my stations have bypass tracks.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
The CNJ Bronx terminal was an exceptional case built in the steam era. And team tracks or freight house tracks, as in the case mentioned, are very different from yard tracks.
I don't think it's wise to use Bronx Terminal team track or freight house track specifications as a basis for a general yard track spacing recommendation to a newcomer whose modeling era, locale, and prototype are unknown.
tomikawaTT Just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD be done.
Just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD be done.
My point exactly. And I'm not even sure 1.5" center-to-center spacing can be done with reliability -- for yard tracks (which was the original question). This thread is about advice to a newcomer, I should think, not a recitation of exceptional cases that don't apply.
Embargoing the two adjacent yard tracks for one oversized load, for example, would be a ridiculous accommodation. Which is why the prototype didn't generally (or maybe, ever) build yard tracks on 11 foot or less centers -- at least not in the twentieth century and beyond.
Again, the NMRA track-to-track spacing guidelines are a good general recommendation.
cuyamaAllegheny2-6-6-6 but I now realize" I" could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance. Assuming you mean "ample", that's not correct, at least not for HO standard gauge center-to-center. The tightest spacing in most real life railroad yards was more like 13 foot centers back in the steam days (more today). What you are proposing is less than 11 scale feet in HO. If you have even a few cars that are slightly oversize or are "listing" slightly on their trucks, 1.5" track to track spacing could be asking for trouble. The NMRA specs cited earlier are a good guideline to begin. Byron
Allegheny2-6-6-6 but I now realize" I" could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance.
but I now realize" I" could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on the straight sections of the yard and still have amble clearance.
Excuse the typo, of course I meant ample and in the case of a yard I really don't give a hoot what the NMRA standard is as if there is ever a spot on a model railroad the requires selective compression it's a rail yard. My only reason for going with 2" centers If I were to build an uncompressed model of a typical prototype yard I would not only need my entire basement but most likely would need part of my neighbors too. In my yard on my railroad the sole purpose is to be able to fit as much rolling stock and still leave ample room to make car movements. If you hadn't notice what I had written I highlighted it in red for you. I said "i" meaning myself could go down to 1-1/2" spacing on straight sections This is what works for me I was not telling or implying that the O/P had to follow what works for me just siting facts
Oh an BTW my cars don't list every piece of rolling stock that makes it to the layout is perfect in and meets all standards especially my own or it doesn't leave the work shop.
I once asked Joe Fugate why/how he selected the wide track separation distances in his yards (which seem to be about 2.5 inches.) He said it was to provide easy access for operators.
Mark