I'm contemplating my second layout (N scale). I generally have something in mind the size of a door; 36" x 84" or so. I found a couple in the 101 More Track Plans that I like.
I'm curious about the conversion of HO track plan measurements to N scale?? Does cutting HO measurements really work in reality? I'd like to hear of real world experiences. Is a 2/3 adjustment more realistic than a 1/2?
Yes, reducing an HO plan 2/3 rather than 1/2 works better for N.So most HO 4'x8' plans can fit alright as an N scale hollow core door (HCD) layout.And the HCD works better because it can be up against a wall and you can still reach!
N scale track, equipment and design have come a long way since 101 Track Plans, and so I'd recommend checking out some of David K. Smith's HCD designs.Byron Henderson has a groovy industrial HCD based in Oakland.And Dave Vollmer has the amazing Juniata Div. layout.
Some forums, like Trainboard, have specific HCD groups you can join.
Hope this helps.
M.C. Fujiwara
My YouTube Channel (How-to's, Layout progress videos)
Silicon Valley Free-moN
Don't go below 55% (1:160 / 1:87.1) reduction. Halving is pushing it too much, unless you start with a track plan that is pretty generous in curve radii etc. Less reduction is better - giving you gentler curves or less track density relative to scenery.
Your HCD (Hollow Core Door) used N scale is about the equivalent of a 5 1/2 foot x 12 3/4 foot table in H0 scale. Plenty of room to take a 4x8, 4x10, 4x12, 5x9 or 5x11 foot H0 scale plan and make it fit without pushing below 55% compression.
Smile, Stein
An additional planning resource is the recent 102 Realistic Track Plans at Kalmbach's Special Issues. While you're there, review some of the other special issues that may have specific application to your requirements.
102 Realistic Track Plans also has a number of planning articles such as converting a track plan to other scales. Also, a caution if considering walk-in aisles => The width of your hips are "Uni-Scale" => Meaning to be sure the aisles are wide enough to maneuver regardless of the scale modeled.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
Nice website recommendations,, very helpful..thanks
The absolute minimum `N scale from an HO track plan' reduction is HO/N = 18/9.75. By no coincidence whatsoever, Atlas 9.75 inch radius N scale track is equivalent to Atlas 18 inch radius HO track.
EDIT. Corrected per Cuyama's note.
Putting a 4 x 8 HO track plan on a 2'6" x 6'8" hollow core door gives a little wiggle room for longer tangents and slightly wider curves - always better than designing to the absolute minimum.
An island/rectangular layout can be reduced directly - but a layout with pop-ups, operating pits or aisleways can't. Models scale, but people are always 12 inches to the foot.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
tomikawaTTThe absolute minimum `N scale from an HO track plan' reduction is HO/N = 18/9.5. By no coincidence whatsoever, Atlas 9.5 inch radius N scale track is equivalent to Atlas 18 inch radius HO track.
Typical minimum N scale sectional track curves (from Atlas and others) are 9.75", not 9.5". The N scale mathematical equivalent of 18" HO radius is actually 9.80", so 9.75" is pretty close.
But broader radii than that minimum will be much more satisfying and there is usually room with N scale in most spaces.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group