Hello,
What is the best way to scale track planes that are found in MR magazine? I would like to say scale HO to N scale. The planes that are in MR magazine will say they are X" to a foot, but in the magazine the a lot smaller. so how is the best way?
Thanks,
Ed Lewis
Lancaster, CA
The best way is to get a multi-scale steel ruler from your hobby shop. It's one of those basic tools everyone should have, along with an NMRA track and clearance gauge and a KaDee Height gauge.The ruler will have HO scale measurements on one edge and N, O and S scales on the other edges. There are also individual scale clear plastic rulers. If your hobby shop doesn't carry them, check www.walthers.com and/or www.micromark.com (better prices, ships fast).
btw, it's plans not planes.
Jay
C-415 Build: https://imageshack.com/a/tShC/1
Other builds: https://imageshack.com/my/albums
If you are talking about converting a plan for an HO scale layout to N scale, the rule of thumb is to divide the dimensions for the HO layout in half. (N scale is actually 54% the size of HO.) If the plan has grid lines representing one foot, think of the grid lines as representing 6".
However, if the plan you are adapting has access hatches and aisles, these cannot be halved, because 12" to the foot operators are still going to need the 24"-36" aisles. (And some of us will probably feel a lot more comfortable with 48" aisles.)
Another pitfall is that with sectional track, the track geometry may be different between the two scales. For example, the basic Atlas curve section is 18". The equivalent section in their N scale line is 9 3/4". So a piece by piece copy of an HO scale layout to an N scale layout is not possible.
Hope this helps.
Dan
I'm sorry I was thinking building, car and locomotive plans, not track plans as the OP stated, duh. Yeah, what Dan said is right.
Ed Lewis What is the best way to scale track planes that are found in MR magazine? I would like to say scale HO to N scale. The planes that are in MR magazine will say they are X" to a foot, but in the magazine the a lot smaller. so how is the best way?
One answer is "divide all lengths and distances by 1.84" - N scale is 1:160, H0 scale is 1:87.1 - the conversion divider ends up being is 160/87.1, or about 1.84.
Btw - dividing distances by 1.84 is the same as multiplying the distance by 0.54 (1 / 1.84). 0.54 is the same as 54/100 - i.e. 54%. So saying "divide by 1.84", "multiply by 0.54" or "make it 54% of the size" are all different ways of saying exactly the same.
Doing it that way, you learn e.g that an 18" radius curve in H0 scale is the equivalent of a 9.75" radius curve (not a 9" radius curve) in N scale.
You can get a very rough idea about how much smaller a distance would be in N scale than in H0 scale by thinking "N is just a little bigger than half the size of H0 - so if I think of those 12" squares in the H0 scale plan as 6" squares in an N scale plan, I get a rough idea about layout size in N scale".
But there is several things to keep in mind when attempting to convert a track plan to a different scale:
1) The human operator stays the same size no matter how big the models are - any aisles still need to be the same size (or bigger, if they are skimpy in the published track plan).
That's a thing to keep in mind when looking at the type of layout you want to rescale.
If the track plan you are looking at is a walk-around design (like a rectangular table), rescaling from H0 to N works fine - N needs a smaller table. That makes walk around aisles wider and reaches shorter - no worries. You can say do a 5 x 12 foot H0 scale table layout in 3 x 7 feet in N scale.
But if the track plan is a walk-in design (with aisles inside the outline of the layout), the width of the aisles still need to be big enough for humans after the scale change - so it is not at all a given that the outline of a walk-in design can be shrunk to fit into a much smaller room by switching to N scale.
2) Most published track plans use flex track (ie track you can bend to the curve you want and cut to the length you want), rather than sectional track (where you buy straight and curved pieces).
If you want to use sectional track (where you buy straights and curves, with only a few standard lengths and standard curve radii available) to re-create a track plan made with flex track, it may not fit together at all exactly like in the plan you are looking for.
3) Turnouts from different companies may have different geometries - a #4 turnout from Atlas may be different from a #4 from Kato.
This does not matter a lot for a sparse track plan - ie one without a lot of track close together - there it doesn't matter if you need to put switches a little further from each other to make the geometry work.
It may make quite a bit of difference if you are trying to convert a plan with dense tracks - lots of tracks and switches close together.
Again - for dense track plans, allow more space - e.g. divide H0 scale distances by 1.6 instead of 1.84.
In general, the best idea may be to not try to make an exact copy of a published track plan, but to take inspiration from ideas you find in that track plan, and then use those ideas in your own track plan.
To think e.g: "hmm - letting the yard branch off like that looks like a good idea", or "that was a smart way of handling a switchback lead" or whatever you see in the track plan that interests you.
Smile,Stein
steinjr One answer is "divide all lengths and distances by 1.84" - N scale is 1:160, H0 scale is 1:87.1 - the conversion divider ends up being is 160/87.1, or about 1.84. Btw - dividing distances by 1.84 is the same as multiplying the distance by 0.54 (1 / 1.84). 0.54 is the same as 54/100 - i.e. 54%. So saying "divide by 1.84", "multiply by 0.54" or "make it 54% of the size" are all different ways of saying exactly the same. Doing it that way, you learn e.g that an 18" radius curve in H0 scale is the equivalent of a 9.75" radius curve (not a 9" radius curve) in N scale.
I've often wondered why Atlas did that. It makes perfect sense now.
It sounds like you're trying to figure how much area the layouts take when you say you want to "scale track plans". If that's the case, most plans are presented like a floor plan, say 3/8" inch(on paper) equal to a foot in real life. You can get an architectural scale at a stationary store that will have the most common scales on one of six faces of their triangular sides. Once you get the room they take figured out, the same scale can be used to translate the curve radii and so on. By the way, I'm a long lost son of the Antelope Valley myself (Littlerock). Say Hi to my desert for me.
Lou
The ratio of (H)ORRIBLY (O)VERSIZED-Scale to (N)OBILITY- Scale is pretty close to 11:6. If, for example, you want to scale 48" in HO-Scale to N-Scale you need to divide 48" by 11 and multiply by 6 . . . . . . . . . . this will render you an answer of about 27 3/16". What does an HO-Scale 18" radius curve equate to in N-Scale? Eighteen divided by 11 and multiplied by 6 renders an answer of approximately 9 13/16". A 100' (HO-Scale) turntable requires about 13.75"; the N-Scale requirement is 7.5".
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
I say if you have the space, keep the layout dimensions the same, and just put N scale track down. The 18" curve that looks silly in HO will look fantastic in N, the tiny HO industries will suddenly look huge, and you'll have 46% more space for scenery.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
You still need the space to store stuff, for legs to support the layout, for room to stand and operate it, and room to build it all in the first place. So, if you have a defined area, or space if you prefer, consider how you will erect whatever it is you want as a final product, and have it in place where you want it to rest.
It isn't clear to me why you want to scale a track plan. Is it because you intend to acquire scaled down items to run, because you are losing or adjusting space allocations, because you want to adapt a plan or part of a plan? But as Lee has aptly pointed out, don't give up the ship so that you can float in a warm current for the day. Hang on to space you 'own', and use it as generously as possible for both your own corpus and for the wee moving parts.
Crandell