Model Railway Forum banner

Pretty specific question on track separation along a curve

391 Views 12 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  34C
Hello!

TL;DR:
Planning layout. Era 5 British outline. Peco code 55. 180 degree curved parallel track. Outer radius 40cm. Inner radius 37.35cm. Fixed 2.65 track separation throughout that curve. Mocked it up. Mark 1 coaches clear each other by approx 2-3mm.

Q1: Is that 2-3mm separation sufficient for reliable operation going forward, or is it asking for trouble?

Q2: For era 5, is there anything more "overhangy" than a Mark 1 and would it mean trouble on that setup?

- - - -

Rejoining the hobby after the odd decade away, and I’ve read several encyclopedias worth of posts on the “safe” minimum distance to have between curved parallel tracks, and while the consensus seems to be that separation should increase slightly on curves to allow for stock overhang, I’ve also read that if you mock it up and it works, you should be good to go, and that the potential problems are less likely on larger radii, and that it all depends on the stock you’ll run, as well as on the type of track.

All of this leaves me guessing a little too much… So I think I’m really after input from those who may have a similar set up to me or have been through this already:

I’m designing my first layout in n with Peco code 55 track. I’ve mocked up the parallel curves I want with flex track on a radius of 40cm or 15.74in (outer) and 37.35cm or 14.7in (inner), maintaining the distance of Peco’s 6 foot way gauge throughout, so (feeling brave) I’ve not increased the separation at all. It’s a single 180 degree double track curve. I’m modelling Era 5 (only British outline), so I think my longest stock will be Mark 1 coaches. (Some Mark 2s maybe?)

With the setup I’ve just described, those Mark 1 coaches just about clear each other by around 2 or 3 mm.

I’m very tempted to go with that margin and start laying track, but I don’t know if in operation it will be reliable or whether that is just too close.

Also, being quite new to modelling Era 5, I’m not entirely sure if stock longer or wider than the Mark 1 coaches exists, because if it does, I don’t want to preclude myself from being able to use it on my layout in the future. (I don’t own any Mark 2s - would they cause a problem with that 2.65 separation?)

So, to summarise, is that distance on those curves safe enough to proceed with? Or should I add a few extra mm? I just don’t have the experience actually running layouts to be able to answer that question, nor do I know if Era 5 stock exists that will overhang even further.

Lastly, might be worth adding that having it “prototypical” is secondary to the space I have available. I like the way the current separation looks, and it would make much better use of the space I have available.

Thank you!
See less See more
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Caveat - I model in 4mm OO gauge ..

2 - 3 mm is a lot in N. I would start with that and see how it goes. Once you have both circuits complete to the point where you can run two trains in the opposite direction, run them at max speed. You should know with about 10 to 15 minutes whether there is enough fluctuation for the trains to touch each other.

David
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Caveat - I model in 4mm OO gauge ..

2 - 3 mm is a lot in N. I would start with that and see how it goes. Once you have both circuits complete to the point where you can run two trains in the opposite direction, run them at max speed. You should know with about 10 to 15 minutes whether there is enough fluctuation for the trains to touch each other.

David
Thank you, David! Just knowing that "2 - 3 mm is a lot in N" gives me a lot of confidence. I'll wait a bit to see if there are more replies, but if not, I think I'll just go with the current spacing and test as you suggest. Thanks again!
I have about the same, or even less clearance on my HO railroad. I did not take into consideration of car overhang when I laid my curves in some spots, and depending upon the trains running, I can hear the occasional scrape as wagons pass one another. Especially on the full size 303mm coaches.

It's not serious enough to cause a derailment, and hasn't in over five years, but it's a little unsettling to hear. It only occurs on one curve and I've been meaning to fix this for years, but it's just not important enough, and, it's in an unseen area of the layout.

If I had it to do over again, I would make certain my spacing is a few millimeters wider on the curves than on the straights.
A 'known problem' vehicle in N is the Dapol 9F, which is significantly overscale for width at the cylinders. One of these on the inside curve passing the 'longest between bogie pivots' era 5 model available on the outside curve (probably the Farish Deltic) will be the acid test.

There are longer era 5 wagons than the longest traction or coaches, but nothing of this sort is available in UK RTR models TTBOMK.
I have about the same, or even less clearance on my HO railroad. I did not take into consideration of car overhang when I laid my curves in some spots, and depending upon the trains running, I can hear the occasional scrape as wagons pass one another. Especially on the full size 303mm coaches.

It's not serious enough to cause a derailment, and hasn't in over five years, but it's a little unsettling to hear. It only occurs on one curve and I've been meaning to fix this for years, but it's just not important enough, and, it's in an unseen area of the layout.

If I had it to do over again, I would make certain my spacing is a few millimeters wider on the curves than on the straights.
Hi Michael!

Do you mean that you have 2-3 mm clearance on your HO layout? Or 2-3mm scaled up to HO, which I guess is double that? (I’m modelling in N.)

Thanks!
A 'known problem' vehicle in N is the Dapol 9F, which is significantly overscale for width at the cylinders. One of these on the inside curve passing the 'longest between bogie pivots' era 5 model available on the outside curve (probably the Farish Deltic) will be the acid test.

There are longer era 5 wagons than the longest traction or coaches, but nothing of this sort is available in UK RTR models TTBOMK.
Fantastic catch! I just so happen to have one of those 9Fs (which incidentally runs like a pig from new) and I hadn’t paid attention to the cylinders:

Ruler Office ruler Camera accessory Measuring instrument Font


That’s with a Mk 1 (the longest thing I have), and it still looks like a couple of mm, though perspective makes it difficult to be precise.

I wonder how much closer a Deltic would get, because one of those is definitely on my To Buy list when they next become available.
See less See more
...I wonder how much closer a Deltic would get, because one of those is definitely on my To Buy list when they next become available.
Not significantly closer as the bogie pivots are slghtly closer than on a mk1 coach. However this isn't the whole story, with two further factors to take into account:
'Static' is one thing, but when moving, locos, and steam locos in particular, can 'weave' along the track. Worth testing with the loco powered.

Scale width is the other factor. It's not unknown for models to be slightly wider than scale.
But unless the Deltic is well overwidth, I think you will have clearance.
  • Helpful
Reactions: 1
If you are using the Peco red way guage then it has two widths. The narrower side, which it says is suitable for all Streamline track, is fine for straight or near to straight track sections. For curves I find it best to widen out slightly to use the wider gap side of the way guage. I too use Code 55 track and following this rule has worked out well for me.
  • Like
  • Helpful
Reactions: 2
Hi Michael!

Do you mean that you have 2-3 mm clearance on your HO layout? Or 2-3mm scaled up to HO, which I guess is double that? (I’m modelling in N.)

Thanks!
2-3mm actual clearance in most spots between 303mm coaches.
  • Helpful
Reactions: 1
Well I lay the thing out and with the two most overhung coaches run them back and forth by hand, so now sometimes I have added a short piece of track to the outer curve where the curve commences, then match the same where it finishes, in OO an inch does it so as you are in N then half this if it can be managed would do you hardly notice the extra and the rolling stock will give up on hitting each other whilst the radii stay the same.

All this for an extra half an inch - see do it the easy-peasy way and you are good to run!
half an inch is about 12.7mm

You see this in a photo where the two curved points are parallel but the outer curve gets a bit more
All this for an extra half an inch - see do it the easy-peasy way and you are good to run!
half an inch is about 12.7mm
Thank you! Good suggestion. In my design, I did play quite a bit including with adding extra lengths like you say, as well as with easements. Not at all easy as in the pursuit of getting the largest radius possible, I’d already pushed those curves out as close to the edges of the board as I dared.

I’m feeling brave, so I think I’ll go with my risqué 2-3mm margin for error, which has passed all my side by side coach and loco wiggling tests, and then test actual running as much as possible before building out the rest of the layout. That’s assuming I don’t get a barrage of people saying this is madness between now and actual track laying. Have some piano wire and Cobalt tests to do first, and that’s likely to keep me occupied for a bit, with said wire arriving on Monday.

Great pic btw!
See less See more
...feeling brave, so I think I’ll go with my risky 2-3mm margin for error, which has passed all my side by side coach and loco wiggling tests, and then test actual running as much as possible before building out the rest of the layout.
The testing matters, because what any layout requires to be fun to operate is reliability, beginning with the models staying on the rails in normal operation. Have you got any locos or stock that have proved 'track sensitive'; these are the ones you want for test running...
  • Helpful
Reactions: 1
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top