Large Scale Central

Turnout construct standard vs wye vs 3 way

Track and Trestles
#21

I just measured the specs for the “bigger” mogul Kevin and I will be making. This will likely be the largest locomotive will run. It is right at 5" wide. I measured the mogul I just got done building (well the drawing I measured off of that David Fletcher drew) and it is 4" wide. These are both 1:20.3 locos. I also believe that my NG freight cars are 4.5" wide I thought they were four but I know they are wider than the locomotive by a little bit.

So worst case scenario for the equipment I plan to run is that they will be 5" wide which at 6" C to C will give me an inch. And this will only be in the yard.

#22

Devon I think you are (finally) on the right track. I planed on my minimum right of way being 6 inches wide, and so far that has worked out ok for me. Even with some 1:20.5 stuff I run. Since I planed on a 6 inch wide right of way, I made my narrowest bridge 7 inches wide, inside of the girders. I do admit that the right of way looks extra wide for some of my equipment, but I would rather have too much space, then too little.

One of the standards I had read, said that clearance should be 2 inches from the outside of the rail-head to any structure. Since the track gauge is about 1.75 inches (I said about), and the rail heads are 1/8 inch or so, then that would be 2 inches on the near side, around 2 inches for the track width (outside rail-head to outside rail-head) and 2 inches for the far side, or 6 inches for the right of way. Moved over, center-line to center-line, 6 inches center-line to center-line would give the proper clearance per those specs. Now I don’t remember if they were NMRA specs, or G1M specs or whatever.

#23

Can you get your fingers into that 1 inch space to rerail something?

What sounds good on paper sometimes doesn’t work out so well.

#24

Steve, with good track-work, and good railroading practices they shouldn’t derail. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)

I have cut my clearances down to the minimum in my storage areas, but I wouldn’t dream of actually trying to run a yard this tight.

#25

Steve Featherkile said:

Can you get your fingers into that 1 inch space to rerail something?

What sounds good on paper sometimes doesn’t work out so well.

The only place that 1" will be an issue is in the yard and sidings and only with the very widest stock sitting next to one another. Even at the sidings I can widen it. I doubt I will have a rigid constraint there. The real issue is the yard, to get further spacing means dropping a track or widening the yard. Its already 60" wide. So that’s already too wide, 30" reach to the center track. Doable but certainly not ideal.

Maybe the answer is to eliminate a track. It wouldn’t be the end of the world.

#26

Well further taking the excellent advice of others I have revised this yard plan further. For one it was unanimous that 6" was ok but more was better. I decided to see about dropping a track and get more spacing. I ended up with 8 tacks not 9 and I took the track out of the shed. I went for 7" C to C. By doing this I also reduced the over all width of the yard which reduces the reach. Now the way I have the bottom most track in the shed Is a long reach like 31.5 inches. But I think that is a compromise I can live with, I have measured a desk 29" tall and then put a car 36" away from the edge and while not comfortable it can be done. The top track in the shed will be the loco track and it is an 18.5" reach The shed is 96" long giving me effectively 7’ of usable enclosed track on three rails. That will hold two locos and two made string of cars 4-5 cars each. externally I could get 20-25 cars in the yard packed. I doubt I would ever put that many cars out there at one time but even 15 cars in the yard would be great since I won’t pull that many at one time anyways. That’s the spacing issue.

For track configuration I went with a representation (as best I could with what I had to work with) of a 5 way stub for the entrance and set that up basically using a #6 switch for spacing and divergence angles. Then on the center leg I went straight into a #4 wye and the outer legs were split using #4 turnouts. Like Greg mentioned this eliminates the wicked S curves and also gave me some length. All curved track is a minimum of and 8’ diameter.

Now the track I have going into the stub I randomly chose a length of 24". What would be a good length of track here that would give me a gentle curve and allow for easy flexing of the track. I would prefer to “bend the iron” as opposed to a hinge but I am not against a hinge either. Also that switch will be manual. what would be a good method for making positive stops in each position?

OK guys let me have it. While I know its all different out in the yard I really do need a workable design on paper so I can pour the slab and build the cabinet and bench.

#27

this new plan looks doable to me.

#28

Devon

Are you building these switches?

If you have someone near by with Train-li’s rail bender, you better make him your best friend!

I do think you will do better with flex track to build this.

Why are you only covering three tracks, It looks like you should do four!

Looks great!

#29

A point I’d like to make if your into Operations is with a 1" spacing it’s difficult reading the numbers on the cars sides. Bob ran into this when he built the yard in Franklin Falls. The yard tracks were to close together and we couldn’t read the car numbers, which resulted in us picking the cars up or moving stuff in adjacent tracks so we could find the cars we needed.

The yard tracks in my shed are just far enough apart to read them. Just a minor point.

#30

Sean,

The whole layout will be Llagas code 250 aluminum flex. As for making turnouts I will have to make the 5 way stub. For the regular turnouts and the wyes I haven’t decided yet. Llagas is pretty reasonable in my opinion on their switches. They want $100 a piece for #4s But you can go pretty broke pretty fast buying switches so the jury is out.

As for the yard that next track down is begging to be covered from a symmetrical standpoint. But reach is an issue if you access the shed from one side. To cover that track it would have to open from both sides. Also I really do like having three legs at least on the one side for operations and “switching the yard” to use two tracks on either side of the shed would require a person to walk around to both sides of the yard. If I keep three on one side then all the switching can be done on that side and staging of trains by guests can take place on the upper two. This would also keep them out of each others way. And I really don’t need a ton of covered storage. Trade offs have to be made, and more open yard for operations is more important to me than covered storage.

Ken,

That is a great point, and the focus of this layout has shifted to one of operations. I really can’t go wider than where I am now without giving up more track than I am willing in the yard. It is a space thing, for operations this will be a limited layout anyways, its small, I know that. I should now have 2" between 5" wide cars and most cars are under 5" so I hope this will allow you to see them.

#31

Devon

The grey area … I’m seeing as a warehouse with a loading dock/doors on each side … with three doors in the front! Something like this!

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/bob_mccown/_forumfiles/IMG00383-20110503-1807.jpg)(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)

#32

Devon, you DO have some rolling 1:20.3 stock right now, right? Take 3 pieces and put them side by side like they were on 3 separate tracks in your yard. space them 6" apart on center and now try to pick up the middle car…

Can you do it without knocking the other cars apart?

Greg

#33

Devon

Can you make a mock-up of the the yard, as close to size with all the switches etc. (Card board)

Set it on the ground were you think it will go … before you set it in concrete.

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/devon_sinsley/yard.jpg)

Give some room between the edge and the house … unless when it’s all built ,it can be slid back in case…

#34

Greg I already agreed that I would need to widen it. I now am 7 inches center to center. My cars are under five inches wide. I haven’t measured it but I am pretty sure when I built them I didn’t exceed that. And my 1:20 cars will be link and pin and will be my “special” cars and won’t be used in ops. But really none of that matters. I agree that it needed to be wider. So 2+ plus between cars had better be enough. It isn’t getting any wider.

#35

Sorry Devon, somehow I thought I was on the last page responding but I was on the first page and did not see how far you have come!

Greg

#36

Greg Elmassian said:

Sorry Devon, somehow I thought I was on the last page responding but I was on the first page and did not see how far you have come!

Greg

Oh lol. I was beginning to think. . .Geez. . . what does he want from me?. . . its all good.

BTW how long are the stub rails on that 5 way and what angle are the diverging tracks coming off at? I just mocked up the one in the picture using a standard #6 turn out for spacing and angle on the diverging tracks. I also just took a stab at 24" long stub rails. But what is a good length so the stub rails can be “bent” into each position and still keep a smooth gentle curve?

#37

stub rails are 30-3/4", the small pieces past the moving part are 2-7/8"

measuring the angles between the 5 tracks is too tough to get accurately, but the centerlines between adjacent pairs is 3/8"

Greg

#38

Sean McGillicuddy said:

Devon

Can you make a mock-up of the the yard, as close to size with all the switches etc. (Card board)

You read my mind. One of the reasons I am trying to get this done on paper is so I can go put it on the ground (hadn’t thought about cardboard). I want to go stake it out and visualize it before committing to cement. I certainly can do it and card board is a great idea. I will take pictures. Can’t happen for awhile until I get the locomotive finished for the RPM meet.

The nice thing about the yard is that none of it is adjacent to the house. Only the corner of the layout and the corner of the house will be in proximity to one another and I plan to leave at least a little gap to get a paint brush in or make siding repairs.

#39

Greg Elmassian said:

stub rails are 30-3/4", the small pieces past the moving part are 2-7/8"

measuring the angles between the 5 tracks is too tough to get accurately, but the centerlines between adjacent pairs is 3/8"

Greg

Just looking at it and ball parking it would you say they are relative to a #4, #6, #8 or whatever? Unless there is a better method for designing it I figured I would do it the way I did it in Anyrail and just take a standard turnout and place it first with the straight leg going strait and attaching the small fixed pieces down where they normally land. Then move the straight leg of the turnout to the diverging track and then tacking down the next fixed piece where the diverging leg now is and so forth. Does that make sense? will it work? It made for a very smooth 5 way in Anyrail and using the #6 looks good on a computer. everything went smoothly after the switch.

And 30" is easy peasy. In the current design I have over four feet that switch can occupy.

#40

All that you save in the switch length, you gain in storage capacity. That’s the main recommendation to have a multi-way switch.

The “furthest” track diverges about 4.5 " in 30.75 inches… that is a frog number of 6.8 … in other words you could run anything through it.

Worry more about your other switches :wink:

Greg