Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

N Scale Radius Question!

442 views
16 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
N Scale Radius Question!
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 1, 2019 9:27 PM

Hello to everyone, i hope you all had a great Thanksgiving! I have a question. In N scale, i want to build an around the wall shelf style layout based on my current layout "The Salt Lake Route" while also taking Tinplate Toddler's suggestion and expanding the lengths to accomodate an around the room in a 12'x20' room. My plan is to build the shelves 24" deep. Is this too wide for N scale or would you reccomend a different size? Also, what would be my optimum radius for a turnaround at each end of the layout? I will attach a rough sketch of what i am thinking as far as my benchwork.

 

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Monday, December 2, 2019 6:30 AM

No, 24 inches isn't too deep - it's a fairly comfortable width.  About the widest you might go is 30 inches but 24 should be fine.

As for turn back radius, I'd suggest as broad as you can manage.  A curve radius of 18 inches would be nice for longer rolling stock.  That would require a benchwork width of at least 38 inches or a bit more at the turnback.  I wouldn't go any tighter than 15 inch radius just to allow for a variety of rolling stock with few, if any restrictions.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • From: 53° 33′ N, 10° 0′ E
  • 1,565 posts
Posted by Tinplate Toddler on Monday, December 2, 2019 6:45 AM

The MR project layout "Salt Lake Route" was built with Kato N scale Unitrack. If you plan to do that as well, you are more or less stuck with the geometry Kato offers.This mens that the maximum radius for a double track line is 13 3/4", resp. 15". Singly track curves go up to 28 1/4" radius.

Happy times!

Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)

"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,239 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Monday, December 2, 2019 9:53 AM

As I enjoy working on my CAD I took the liberty of dropping your sketch in my CAD.  First I scaled or sized your drawing using the 24” dimension of the shelf as the reference point.  Next I resized it to your room dimensions.
 
 Your sketch is in red, the black is actuall.
 
I took your room dimensions and made a scaled drawing of what I think you are proposing.
 
 
Using your 36” x 36” corner with a 12” filler the max usable radius appears to be about 14”.
 
 
I can easily make changes in my drawing if you would like to change some of your dimensions.
 
It’s often helpful to see what the actual size is before you get going.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,239 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Monday, December 2, 2019 12:27 PM

Still playing around with a corner.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Monday, December 2, 2019 4:58 PM

RR_Mel

Still playing around with a corner.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

Thanks a ton everyone for all the insight and help....RR_Mel, that is awesome sir and much appreciated. As stated earlier, i am going to do "My Version" of "The Salt Lake Route" but i am NOT using Kato Uni Track, I have already purchased more than enough Atlas fles track, cork road bed and #6 Atlas swithes. As for the turnback radius, i have decided to expand the width of the end of the benchwork to 48". I know its a bit of a reach but i made sure to leave plenty of room at the end between the wall and the end of the benchwork that i can easily get into to work etc. My biggest question is this....I am expanding the width of the turnback to 48" but im not sure how much to really lengthen it by??? The front of the layout where the bridge over the river is is going to be changed a bit. I want to add a longer bridge there. Standing in the front of the river/bridge scene, looking to your left around the curve, i plan to elevate that and omit the double crossover as well as all of the little spurs that would normally be behind the center backdrop, instead of the center backdrop divider i will be attaching a regular backdrop to the walls.....That is about as far as i have planned yet so please, any and all recommendations and suggestions are welcome....Thanks again, i will try to get some new pictures later as i finish up on the first section of the new benchwork tonight.

 

 

 

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,239 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Monday, December 2, 2019 8:13 PM

Still screwing around on my CAD
 
 
 
That’s what I do when my arthritis pain gets to the point I can’t do physical work.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Monday, December 2, 2019 8:33 PM

RR_Mel

Still screwing around on my CAD
 
 
 
That’s what I do when my arthritis pain gets to the point I can’t do physical work.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

Thanks Mel, i really appreciate your help and i sure know what you mean by Arthritis....Here is kind of what i envisioned....Let me know your thoughts!

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Monday, December 2, 2019 8:38 PM

I'd go with 40" benchwork at the turn backs.  It would be a little easier but access from the inside may be necessary.  You could use 18" radius which is pretty generous in N and passenger cars should look decent.  Of course broader is even nicer - 22" curves should be very nice!

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 977 posts
Posted by ROBERT PETRICK on Monday, December 2, 2019 9:28 PM

Trainzman2435

...Here is kind of what i envisioned....Let me know your thoughts!

Do you want to mirror your crossovers? As shown, they both face the same way.

Robert 

LINK to SNSR Blog


  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Monday, December 2, 2019 9:39 PM

ROBERT PETRICK

 

 
Trainzman2435

...Here is kind of what i envisioned....Let me know your thoughts!

 

 

Do you want to mirror your crossovers? As shown, they both face the same way.

Robert 

 

 

Robert, i am glad you seen that lol. I have been sick for a week now and i didnt even notice that i had did that, thanks for pointing it out and no, i did not want to mirror them......

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,239 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Monday, December 2, 2019 9:39 PM

I agree with Robert only I would go with a pair of double crossovers.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 6:00 AM

Double crossovers are pricey, just sayin... 

I'd start the grade just after the creek rather than in the curve.  Remember, grades need a gradual transition too.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,239 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 8:08 AM

I agree with Riogrande5761 on a double crossover being high $$$.  I could reset my Atlas HO Mel made double crossover into N gauge if you feel like building your own.  Pretty simple just reset the track width and the CAD will make the entire drawings to N scale.
 
 
 
Piece of Cake!!!!
 
 Click on the drawing for full screen.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    April 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 680 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 10:58 AM

I have 15” radius curves and I think that my six axle Arnold U28C looks wierd on them, so if your using large six axle power (I assume Salt Lake Project=modern era) then go bigger! Say 18”!

If you have room for even more, go for even more. 22” or 24” would look really cool in N scale, so if you have space for that, take advantage of it!

For the HOers out there 15”~30”, 18”~36”, 22”~40”, 24”~48”, etc.

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 11:12 AM

SPSOT fan

I have 15” radius curves and I think that my six axle Arnold U28C looks wierd on them, so if your using large six axle power (I assume Salt Lake Project=modern era) then go bigger! Say 18”!

If you have room for even more, go for even more. 22” or 24” would look really cool in N scale, so if you have space for that, take advantage of it!

For the HOers out there 15”~30”, 18”~36”, 22”~40”, 24”~48”, etc.

It actually isn't a 1:2 equivelent but very approximate, since N scale is 160:1 and HO is 87:1.  If you double N scale size it would be bigger than HO (80:1)

A 15" radius in N would be more like 29 inches in HO or a 30 inch curve in HO would be more equivelent to a bit more than 16 inches.

From the NMRA site, a direct comparison: 40" radius in HO or a 21.5" radius in N scale

 

As a rule of thumb, you need to go a bit bigger than half the radius to get an equivelent look in N vs. HO.

So that being the case, a six axle diesel in N would make the curves look a bit sharp even on a 15" curve.  Operation may be fine but looks, not as much.

If the OP wants to run auto racks, passenger cars or TOFC flat cars, then 18 inches would be a good minimum; more even better.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: belgium
  • 868 posts
Posted by Marc_Magnus on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 1:13 PM

I'm just in the way to make a new track plan for a big extansion of my N scale layout.

Even in a switching area I can only say the broadest radius is the better.

 

 

My ever rules is to use the broadest curves I can, in the available surface.

When I make a plan I first check the width of the area and look how I can put the biggest radius in this surface.

This mean I did'nt have a standard radius anywhere on the layout but never use any radius under 18.5", this is my minimum.

Most are over 20" some are 25" radius

In fact I prefer to move a building or change scenery goals because I try to put and use the biggest curves in the area.

The scenery is adapted to the track.

The general design of the plan is walkaround along the wall with two big peninsula in the middle of the room.

No depht over 32" and no track  from more than 20" from the edge

My area is 1935 - 1943, big steam and only a very few early diesel, most of the cars are 33' or 40' boxcars and hoppers.

They look especialy great on large curves.

Turnout are #6 in siding and industrial area, the others on main are #8

This is sometimes a sacrifice of number of track or some operational possibilities but the result is a good looking N scale layout and with good trackwork a waterproof design, because broad curves help to keep train in track for sure.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!