Designing my first layout and although I would love it to have everything in the initial 4x8 space I know that isn't reasonable. My priority is a relatively realistic layout that doesn't look too crowded to get as much in as possible. What do you recommend for min radius on mainline and turnouts to keep relative realism and scale? Thanks Russ
Most of today's releases, three axle diesels may require 22" . The budd passenger cars require 24". Manufacturers claim even the bigger steamer will run on 18" but I would expect some operating difficulities so squeeze 22" in.
Whether it be 18" or 22" radius, you'll be confined to four-axle diesels and no bigger than 50-foot cars- anything bigger looks ridiculous on such small radii. You might want to check out the Turtle Creek layout series in Model Railroader- it's a 4x8 layout plan.
I'd recommend going to a point to point shelf-railroad. By doing so, you eliminate the need for extensive curves, which eat up a lot of space where scenery or other operations could take place. Think about it. I believe you will agree.
If you are definitely going to a 'table' or 'island' type layout, see if there's any way you can go to 4 1/2 or 5 ft. wide instead of 4 ft. Then you can use 22", 24", or even 26" radii. If you can stay away from the TOTALLY overrated and eventually frustrating 18" radius completely, you will NEVER regret it. regards / Mike
Mike is correct. I "can" make my 4-8-8-4 Big Boy go around an 18" radius, as well as my 2-10-4 which is not articulated, but they must be going very slowly. The over-hang is rediculous, so this layout is 30" radius where there is a true radius. You "can" have a nice layout with the 18" radius using small engines, but remember the radius is to the center of the track, not the over all clearence. Center to center on a 180 degree loop will be three feet and you will have to be able to clear 4" more on the outside and 2" inside.
So I go back to my original quandry when I started this, should I go N scale vice HO. I certainly can't get the level of detail in N that I would like to have (especially with my eyes) but it seems in the small space I have HO will be a challenge as well. The point about point to point is a good one but can I do that in only 8 feet long?
Don't be too afraid of the 18" radius. You would just have to plan ahead better than someone who has more area to use. As someone already mentioned, 4 axle diesels and 40' rolling stock etc. I know what you're saying about eyes and Nscale. If you want to look forward to hours of frustration, or having to depend on someone else for even the simple tasks, rather than enjoying the building and operating of your layout, then go Nscale. There is a very good book that has been around for many years called "101 Track Plans" by Kalmbach. If you could get a hold of a copy, you'd be surprised at what you can do in HO in smaller areas including 4'x8' etc. Why not buy some HO track and make a circle with 18" radius track, and try a few different locomotives etc. That would give you an excellent idea of the possibilities. Good luck....and be sure and let us know what you decide.
In my opinion, lots of the challenge with small layouts is picking your compromises, you know you will be making compromises with any model railroad, let alone a small one, the trick to getting a layout you can live with is choosing the compromises you can live with and avoiding the ones you can't. For example: What sort of trains are you planning to model? If you're happy working with a switcher or geep and some 40' & 50' cars, then a 4x8 could work quite well for you. There are some nice 4x8 plans out there. If you feel the need for multiple modern diesels with autoracks or superliners for example, then to me that wouldn't work (in other words that compromise isn't one I could live with), and as a dyed-in-the-wool HO person I would suggest looking seriously at N if you have that fixed space and want that sort of railroading. Yep, you may lose the chance for some fine detail (although some of these N modellers are producing things that amaze me with their detail & quality) but the overall effect would likely be better in N. A layout in 2'x8' or similar is also feasible, but it would be better to think on that maybe as an industrial district to switch rather than a point-to-point. That sort of layout is pretty common this side of the pond, due to space issues. There's been lots of good advice in this thread, but it's always going to come down to your choices in the end!
Hi Russ, a 4x8 in HO gives u 22" and 18" r. This is still okay for realism. Stay away from the SD90MACs and and those longer diesels. U cannot go over 70' (scale) for cars or locos. 60' and under is best. i started some pics for a 4x8 HO layout u can view it here http://railery.tripod.com/railsite/id7.html i will be adding many more pics of this layout, showing the engines, consists and scenery. The tricks in making the layout look larger are separations. Using ridges, tunnels, rivers, buildings, roads and fences. U can have alot of stuff in a small area and not have it look cluttered. Even in the small layout u can distract people to look at smaller areas of it. Mountain climbers, fisherman, a fire scene, animals etc.. U create a bunch of little scenes. Going to be interesting in which way u go [ 25. January 2003, 02:50: Message edited by: railery ]
Addendum: Nothing wrong with 18" as long as you confine yourself to the operating parameters of motive power/rolling stock. The N gauge business is growing and with Athearn entering this gauge N scalers will have a much greater selection . N is getting better all the time and I'm a HO guy. [ 25. January 2003, 11:19: Message edited by: locomotive2 ]
Maybe I was too strong in my negative comments on 18" radius, but my real point was, if you can stay away from it completely, you will never regret it...I stand by that. I had it myself in the late 50's, once and never again, except in the odd industrial spur. Yes, 18"R works with most short equipment. Yes, use it if you must, but ONLY if you must, as you will invariably want to acquire something that either won't run on it, or looks bad on it. [If my advice was on Lionel, I'd say stay away from any diameter under 54" unless you are FORCED to do otherwise]. The whole premise of the magical H0 "4 x 8" was that since plywood came in that size, that was a standard table layout size, which subtly assumed no carpentry tools or skills were readily accessible. It had little or nothing to do with the room available in most homes, which was invariably smaller or larger. 22" Radius was INVENTED based on the maximum for a 4 x 8 sheet, since the proper 'next size' to 18" would have been 21"R. 18" radius spawned some of the most compromised models ever developed, such as the Rivarossi engines with enormous side play in wheels, rodding, and valve gear, engines with blind drivers, 60 foot passenger cars, etc...all so they could be advertised as "will run on 18" radius". Too bad. In reality, unless you go to a narrow gauge, only a Dockside or 4 wheel industrial switcher even LOOKS ok, with a maximum 36' or 40' car, on an 18"R siding.[ ..this is IMHO only] . At one time, in the early 60's, Atlas and others had added 15" radius to their 'snap-track' product lines, with the idea that 18" radius could be the outer oval, and 15" the inner oval. Quite a bit of the short equipment ran on that, too...and looked bad, kind of toylike...and often resulted in equipment being sideswiped off the track immediately. 15" didn't last, and I think it was mainly that the manufacturers couldn't make enough equipment run on it, which is a good thing. Anyway, have fun. regards / Mike
Russ .. you did not state specifically that you were thinking of using "Snap Track," or any other 'pre-formed' track. Have you considered laying flex track?
Russ, look at your layout as a fine horse. What do you really want that horse to do, just look good? Would you really enjoy seeing it perform some tricks? Would you want to spend hours getting that one horse in perfect condition? Would you want to add other horses to train together? Would you enjoy building a fine barn with several stalls for several fine horses? Now, with that in mind, you could spend hours super detailing just one engine. You could run it around and around a circle pulling some cars, then go watch TV. You could switch some cars into which one goes where and for what reason. You could have a yard at each end, make up a smll train, change engines, put that "train" down to the other end, change engines, and switch the cars around, pick up a car, drop off another, change engines, and pull the "new train" back to the original yard, and have had a pretty good time enjoying a small layout while off duty. It would even be easy to packup and take to another assignment. In the maen while, you will be planning for later when retiremenbt gets here, and you will have accumulated a pretty healthy stable of rolling stock along the way in life. Then you can built the larger layout where you can now run all the rolling stock you have saved up all these years for. That is where I am now. I am building that last big-enough layout that will provide me all the features I really truly care to enjoy, no more, no less. Just think it out, but enjoy "something" along the way. Details will work out as you go.
Once again, I'm thrilled with the quantity and quality of great advice and conversation I find here. After much consideration about what we want to do with this (wife and I) we are going to go with N scale on this initial small layout for several reasons. It will initially allow us, without cramming, to get more railroad in less space. The size is a compromise, but hey, that's what they make reading glasses for It will also allow us to build smaller modules that will be more easily transportable. Long term, when we settle in wherever we are going to stay, we will build our final layout in HO (or larger ) using the lessons we learn here. Thanks again for all the great ideas and suggestions. Now it's just a "simple" matter of finalizing the layout plan Russ
Green shirt, Sounds like you are already thinking in this direction, but build four, 2 by 4 modules; as you have figured out, these can be re-used in a future layout. I think once you get used to N (and I don't like the looks of it on bare plywood) you will enjoy it: I'm willing to bet you don't go back to HO. With a four by eight layout, you can run all the long stuff in N. My favourite engine is the SD90's. In fact, if you run large contemporary engines and cars, the scale begins to approach TT in appearance.
Thanks Rick, that's pretty much what I have in mind. I'll keep everyone posted on my progress. First is finish organizing the garage to make space which has actually turned into a fun project in itself.
Sounds like you made the right choice (yeah, I'm doing HO, but trains is trains, and ya gotta go with what works). Might I recommend building an N scale layout on a hollow-core door? The doors are cheap, and can be bought at any builders supply store (Home Depot, Lowes). The one I built in Colorado was built on a hollow-core door- I glued some 2-inch blue foam to the door surface, and laid my track & roadbed on that. Atlas has a couple of layout plans for N scale on their website (www.atlasrr.com).
I run 22 and 24 inch radius on the club layout that I designed. And my home layout had 18 and 22 inch radius but I've since changed that with my articulated obbsession so. I'm now running 26 and 28 inch radius! And my EM-1 (2-8-8-4) runs great on all!! From 22 to 28 inch radius. However it sure did look rediculous on 18 inch radius! Think about what you plan to run! all 4 axled diesels will run on 18 inch and some 6 axled diesels as well.... Even tho most companies recommend 22 inch radius so..... the bigger the better.. in any scale!!!! Got the room, use what you can......
You probably would benefit from Yahoo's "smalllayoutdesign" group that has several of the heavy hitters from "Expometrique" and U.K., German, North and South American and Japanese modelers known for their extensive publication in model railroad periodicals. Most are devoted to n.g and industrial lines, as well as demo type diorama lines, and modules. Your proposed railroad falls into this category. The large 'Nn3' group also will have much usable layout design material , despite their specialization in other types of trains and eras than you seem to favor. In any event, Good-Luck, PJB
