# Question Regarding Space Between Tracks in Yard



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Hello,
As mentioned before, I have plans to expand my current HO layout to one with inclines, reversing loops, sidings, and a yard. I've figured out how to run trains in and out of my yard (pictured below) by using an operations simulator, but was informed by one of my fellow model railroad club members that I might not have enough space between the tail track (at bottom right) and the siding just above it. I've measured just over 2.5 centimeters of space between those two tracks, and will also likely put my yard tracks together to see how much space I actually have (and whether such an arrangement is feasible), but wanted to know your thoughts. Thank you very much.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

How is that 25mm measured? Track center to center, tie edge to tie edge, or rail to rail?


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

My apologies for not being more specific. As the track I'll be using is already molded to the roadbed, I believe the 25 mm was measured from tie edge to tie edge.



MichaelE said:


> How is that 25mm measured? Track center to center, tie edge to tie edge, or rail to rail?


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

The answer is simple..
Curves anywhere must be far enough from any other track as to be sure your longest car and loco will not strike any other car or loco's corner or side while under way...Parallel (yard) tracks must be far enough apart as to be able to get your fingers between parked cars without them striking equipment you are not dealing with...If this causes you to amend your track spacing, so be it. There's no getting around (pun intended) car clearances..It's a physical constant we all must comply with...
In the hobby sometimes 1:1 scale practices can not be adhered to in the miniature depiction of them.. 🛤🌵


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

The only problem I see is backing in a passenger coach while there are cars on the lower yard track. The overhang will likely catch the cars on the lower track. But, since that track is so short you probably won't be backing in 85' passenger wagons.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Thank you for letting me know . I believe I'll have enough space for my fingers between tracks, as well as for the switcher and freight cars I'll likely have in the right side of the yard, but I'll do a real-life experiment nonetheless to see if that's true.



telltale said:


> The answer is simple..
> Curves anywhere must be far enough from any other track as to be sure your longest car and loco will not strike any other car or loco's corner or side while under way...Parallel (yard) tracks must be far enough apart as to be able to get your fingers between parked cars without them striking equipment you are not dealing with...If this causes you to amend your track spacing, so be it. There's no getting around (pun intended) car clearances..It's a physical constant we all must comply with...
> In the hobby sometimes 1:1 scale practices can not be adhered to in the miniature depiction of them.. 🛤🌵


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Thank you for your reply . Yes, I plan on only putting freight cars on the short tracks in my yard, as I figured (and measured) that my passenger coaches would fit better in the left-hand portion of the yard.



MichaelE said:


> The only problem I see is backing in a passenger coach while there are cars on the lower yard track. The overhang will likely catch the cars on the lower track. But, since that track is so short you probably won't be backing in 85' passenger wagons.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

If you were referring to the bottom right caboose track, what's the prob with just angling it, bending it away from neighboring track above it, starting just past the switch (at word "track") ?


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

The only issue with that scenario is that the track I'll be using (and have purchased) is sectional, with the pieces precut and molded to the roadbed, meaning that I wouldn't be able to bend the track. I could, though, put in a curved piece of track so the tail track moves away from the other tracks.



telltale said:


> If you were referring to the bottom right caboose track, what's the prob with just angling it, bending it away from neighboring track above it, starting just past the switch (at word "track") ?


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

It's a 3MPH yard track..Coming from said switch, just add a short RH curve then a short LH curve forming an 'S'...Then continue on out, w/existing straights..You could formulate the 2 pieces by sawing through an extra curve section..
Or, obtain one piece of 3' flex track (ebay), make 'S' with that and continue on out, it stacked up on any number of materials which lift it to the height of neighboring track..Use your noodle..


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*PS*
I Just now noticed what you said in post #9..Yes, do that !..Simply angle it away using one curve only...1:1 would likely do the same thing...I think that would look cool, too !


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

JStussy said:


> My apologies for not being more specific. As the track I'll be using is already molded to the roadbed, I believe the 25 mm was measured from tie edge to tie edge.


That should be enough...

For HO scale, center-line to center-line track spacing for parallel straight tracks is typically 2" (~5 cm).

Design measurements/standards aren't usually based on "edge of the ties" measurements but centre-line spacing...


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

My (HO) yard tracks are 1 1/8" between rails. There is no room for fingers in there.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Murv2 said:


> My (HO) yard tracks are 1 1/8" between rails. There is no room for fingers in there.


So based in that, because 25mm is almost exactly one inch, the width of the ties in either side probably won't give you enough clearance to swap out cars in the yard. You'll have to do that elsewhere. You also will probably want to do what real railroads do and mark the "fouling points" on each track. This is the spot at which, if the equipment sits any closer to the points, it is likely to be bumped by equipment moving through the turnout.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

My opinion only.

Your yard tracks aren't long enough.
Your runaround track isn't long enough.

I think that yard needs a complete re-design.
You need to get rid of that "stuff in the middle".
The "26.04" track in particular seems to serve no purpose.

Since you're using sectional track (nothing wrong with that, I did too), be prepared to make one or more "reconfigurations" of the yard AFTER you get it into service.

You'll see "what works", and what _doesn't work _with use.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

I have some HO yard tracks spacing at 1.75" center-to-center for 40' cars. There's no way I'll get my fingers between the cars, but I have no intention of picking them up from there anyway. I did what I could with a tight space, and I think it looks pretty cool having a bunch of cars lined up so close together. Use what works best for you, and as long as the cars aren't hitting each other nobody can tell you it's wrong.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Thank you all for your replies . I have imported my complete track plan (including yard) into the TrainPlayer model railroad simulator, and have figured out a way to get cars/coaches in and out of my yard. I've also found no issues with putting cars in the two bottom sidings (though it is a bit tight), and as I'll be using the "put-and-take" operations system for freight (pick up and drop off cars in one trip), it's not likely the sidings on the right-hand side will be completely filled at any time. Furthermore, I'll be using a bamboo skewer to uncouple cars, and will likely take cars off the layout (car ferry) from the yard's lead track, which will be closest to me as I operate the trains.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

I would explore possibilities of having the entire yard angled, keeping storage tracks center to utilize maximum length, and a compound ladder. Make the arrival/departure tracks the center longest one or two. The run around can be integrated into the drill track (track leading into the yard) if desired, which would save space. An angled yard would automatically remove 45 degrees of curvature in there. Probably increase storage space by 110% or so.

NO MATTER WHAT… use double sided tape or loops of tape to temporarily hold track in place, and give whatever design you use a good long test, several ops sessions. Test it for a week. Look for problems or areas that could be combined, etc. Sectional track is marvelous for that sort of tinker testing.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

That could work, though I'm somewhat limited in terms of space. The room in which I'll be putting my layout has doors that open outward on three sides, and I want to make sure there's enough space for technicians to service and/or remove the heaters/water heaters in the adjoining rooms.



OilValleyRy said:


> I would explore possibilities of having the entire yard angled, keeping storage tracks center to utilize maximum length, and a compound ladder. Make the arrival/departure tracks the center longest one or two. The run around can be integrated into the drill track (track leading into the yard) if desired, which would save space. An angled yard would automatically remove 45 degrees of curvature in there. Probably increase storage space by 110% or so.
> 
> NO MATTER WHAT… use double sided tape or loops of tape to temporarily hold track in place, and give whatever design you use a good long test, several ops sessions. Test it for a week. Look for problems or areas that could be combined, etc. Sectional track is marvelous for that sort of tinker testing.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

JStussy said:


> That could work, though I'm somewhat limited in terms of space. The room in which I'll be putting my layout has doors that open outward on three sides, and I want to make sure there's enough space for technicians to service and/or remove the heaters/water heaters in the adjoining rooms.


I meant just having the yard tracks angled on the “as planned” benchwork. Upper left to lower right, instead of upper left to right side. Less curves, more length. Triangular space on each side for whatever else you want.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Ah, OK, thank you for clarifying . If my understanding is correct, then (and please correct me if it isn't), this would entail either having multiple yard tracks at the same angle, or combining the seven smaller sidings I have at present into four much longer ones.



OilValleyRy said:


> I meant just having the yard tracks angled on the “as planned” benchwork. Upper left to lower right, instead of upper left to right side. Less curves, more length. Triangular space on each side for whatever else you want.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

JStussy said:


> Ah, OK, thank you for clarifying . If my understanding is correct, then (and please correct me if it isn't), this would entail either having multiple yard tracks at the same angle, or combining the seven smaller sidings I have at present into four much longer ones.


Yes, combining the shorter tracks into fewer longer tracks. Make the longest track or two longest the arrival/departure tracks. The longest storage track could connect to the arrival track at both ends if desired. It would be what is called a split yard, with storage tracks on both sides of the arrival departure track(s) in the center. A Compound Ladder versus Simple Ladder will save a bit of space too. It’ll be easier to google & see the difference between Simple & Compound ladders than me trying to explain it. Split yards with compound ladders are more common in real life, as they are more efficient both in operation & use of real estate.


----------



## scenicsRme (Aug 19, 2020)

JStussy said:


> That could work, though I'm somewhat limited in terms of space. The room in which I'll be putting my layout has doors that open outward on three sides, and I want to make sure there's enough space for technicians to service and/or remove the heaters/water heaters in the adjoining rooms.


 Easy way to get more space between caboose track and next with sectional track would be to swap the RH turnout leading into the caboose track with a left hand one, then a curve or partial curve, depending if you want it parallel or off at an angle, track to bring it back.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

I will certainly try that, though I believe if I switch the right-hand turnout for a left-hand one, I won't be able to connect track for a runaround loop. I've also taken a screenshot of my layout in the TrainPlayer model railroad simulator (seen above), and found that I will likely have a bit of space between the bottom siding and tail track.



scenicsRme said:


> Easy way to get more space between caboose track and next with sectional track would be to swap the RH turnout leading into the caboose track with a left hand one, then a curve or partial curve, depending if you want it parallel or off at an angle, track to bring it back.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

At the end of the day the Golden Rule applies: Your Layout, Your Rules. If you're happy with the yard and how it performs, then build it that way and be done with it.

Several people have made suggestions for how you can improve both the flow and capacity. Yes, you can detach cars and stow them here and there, but the yard you have designed will not allow you to perform the true function of a yard, which is the classification and sorting of cars into large blocks which become future trains. If you're OK with that lack of functionality, that's fine. A real railroad would go out of business from the time wasted from trying to use the yard you designed, but if you're happy making all the extra switching moves and having to foul your main building a train with the road loco, then so be it. Build away.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Indeed. I do have a switcher locomotive that will be parked in the yard, and have purchased a turntable and additional track to house my road engines on the far left side of the yard. I think for now I'll be fine with using the "put and take" system (meaning none of my freight trains will be more than four cars long), but I may consider increasing the size of the yard as I add to my fleet in future.



CTValleyRR said:


> At the end of the day the Golden Rule applies: Your Layout, Your Rules. If you're happy with the yard and how it performs, then build it that way and be done with it.
> 
> Several people have made suggestions for how you can improve both the flow and capacity. Yes, you can detach cars and stow them here and there, but the yard you have designed will not allow you to perform the true function of a yard, which is the classification and sorting of cars into large blocks which become future trains. If you're OK with that lack of functionality, that's fine. A real railroad would go out of business from the time wasted from trying to use the yard you designed, but if you're happy making all the extra switching moves and having to foul your main building a train with the road loco, then so be it. Build away.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

I believe for now, I'll leave my yard as more of a staging area than a true classification yard, as my budget is somewhat constrained at present. As I gain more cars in my fleet and operations become more complex, though, I envision my yard looking something like this:








This modification would turn my seven sidings into four, and would likely allow for the classification and creation of longer trains. I am, however, limited in the amount of space to expand my yard horizontally and vertically, and am unable to make a runaround loop for the top two sidings with the track I have.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

*OP:*

The yard shown in post 27 above is getting to be more practical.
But it's not there yet.

That crossover on the bottom two tracks?
Locate it more "to the right". You want "the tail" to be just long enough to accommodate your largest engine.

Now, the track_ just above the bottom track_ becomes the arrival track.
The engine uses the crossover to "escape", then backs through the bottom track on its way to the engine terminal.

That stub end track we see on the lower left could be connected to the bottom track to give engines an easy path into your enginehouse territory.

I'd try to work in at least one more yard track on the top of the existing ones.


----------



## JStussy (Dec 31, 2020)

Thank you again for your reply . Though it's not indicated in my pictures, I'll have a turntable on the left-hand side of my yard with tracks to accommodate my largest engines, a PRR K4 (for passenger service) and a PRR Consolidation for freight; I also have an 0-6-0 engine as a switcher. I'll try moving the runaround loop closer to the right and adding another yard track, though as mentioned before, I'm somewhat limited in the amount of space I can expand horizontally and vertically.



J.Albert1949 said:


> *OP:*
> 
> The yard shown in post 27 above is getting to be more practical.
> But it's not there yet.
> ...


----------

