I'm currently brainstorming a variety of different layout designs that would allow me to include a turntable and a roundhouse, while keeping to a minimum radius of 26" for the turns - this is owing to the min recommended radius of my Daylight passenger cars and my steam locomotives from BLI, which is 22".I came up with a layout that ended up being close to 6x12, which is simply too large. I want it to be a closed-circuit layout, so I can run the trains continuously without having to reverse direction. The layout design right now is extremely similar to what I had as a kid in a 4x6.
The layout design right now:
The width is 5.8 feet, and length is 12 feet. Simply too large. Any ideas or suggestions? I'm considering sticking with a module-ish layout design and doing breakout sections of E-Z Trax to create the circuit.
Edit: An alternative is to cut this layout in half into 6x6 sections that would require some doing to re-establish track links after a move.
One strategy is to eliminate the triple track. I can't tell if you are doing the inside radius as 26" min R, but if so another strategy if to consider having just the outside route as 26" min R.. This is somewhat restrictive, but sometimes compromise is needed to achieve the overall goal.
I would give you a caution here about relying on on stated min R from mfg's. That usually means you're right at the edge of the envelope of the train NOT working. You're far better off to adding a couple of more inches to a min R if you want consistently good performance. Not having experience with the models you've cited, hard to say if this applies here, but it's something to consider.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehman One strategy is to eliminate the triple track. I can't tell if you are doing the inside radius as 26" min R, but if so another strategy if to consider having just the outside route as 26" min R.. This is somewhat restrictive, but sometimes compromise is needed to achieve the overall goal. I would give you a caution here about relying on on stated min R from mfg's. That usually means you're right at the edge of the envelope of the train NOT working. You're far better off to adding a couple of more inches to a min R if you want consistently good performance. Not having experience with the models you've cited, hard to say if this applies here, but it's something to consider.
That's why I'm doing 26" minimum radius (with the occasional 24"), basing it off of the Bachmann HO EZ Trax sections that are available in that radius.
I just had a brainwave, gonna see how I can get a new idea to work...hmm.
NKatoThe width is 5.8 feet, and length is 12 feet. Simply too large.
instead of building an island, is it possible to build an around the wall layout? see Why waste the space on an HO 4x8'?
The British have adapted to building layout in homes with limited space by building layouts in sections that are assembled when used and packed away otherwise
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
gregc NKato The width is 5.8 feet, and length is 12 feet. Simply too large. instead of building an island, is it possible to build an around the wall layout? see Why waste the space on an HO 4x8'? The British have adapted to building layout in homes with limited space by building layouts in sections that are assembled when used and packed away otherwise
NKato The width is 5.8 feet, and length is 12 feet. Simply too large.
A promising idea, but a 24" minimum radius for the turns means you're going to get stuck with some fairly large segments. I've decided to go for a "showroom-style" island design that is only 10 feet long and 6 feet wide, in four segments. It could fit in some bedroom-sized spaces, too.
This would fit in the garage, living room, or basement of any household. It can also be easily disassembled and reassembled for a major train show or convention (provided that I have a box truck to transport it with), and has one Free-Mo compatible module that I can take with me to module shows and meets.
What do you think of this one?
Looks more practical, although I could see adding a couple of inches to your min R and having better results if you are running long passenger cars.
The yard lead that goes into the tunnel would probably be best if it were "daylighted" so it's out in the open. Put the inner line of the main that is next to it under the mountain instead. That way you can build a more natural scenic form. It will also allow you to more easily uncouple and work trains in the yard -- hard to do in a tunnel -- while trains on the inner main need no help like that usually and can pass unseen in a tunnel wit6h few issues.
mlehman Looks more practical, although I could see adding a couple of inches to your min R and having better results if you are running long passenger cars. The yard lead that goes into the tunnel would probably be best if it were "daylighted" so it's out in the open. Put the inner line of the main that is next to it under the mountain instead. That way you can build a more natural scenic form. It will also allow you to more easily uncouple and work trains in the yard -- hard to do in a tunnel -- while trains on the inner main need no help like that usually and can pass unseen in a tunnel wit6h few issues.
Good advice. I'll make those adjustments. :D
Adding more radius to it might be an issue, though, since I need to keep the layout as narrow as possible so it has some clearance in a normal bedroom-sized room.
I would probably run long passenger trains on the outer main, and freights on the inner main, so it's less problematic in that fashion.
Also regarding uncoupling, I intend to install plenty of electromagnetic decouplers on the layout - none of this "decouple by hand" crap. I've been spoiled by the magnetic decouplers they had on the Boeing Employee Model Railroad Club layout back in the nineties. Some of them were even electrically-operated!
NKatonone of this "decouple by hand" crap
I've got a couple KD magnets to install and I haven't because they are rear end ugly. I was looking at the Youtube videos on rare earth magnets. Some people use bar magnets of uncertain size and some install 1/8" rods of various size. The rationale for what length rod or what length bar is not discussed. I have ordered some from Home Depot, which with free shipping to their store, is the cheapest internet source I found. I will report back on how many 1/8 x 3/8 rods one really needs.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
NKatoAlso regarding uncoupling, I intend to install plenty of electromagnetic decouplers on the layout - none of this "decouple by hand" crap.
Yeah, but you still need to see the cars to get them spotted to uncouple even with ramps. And it would be nerve-racking to have to constantly keep track of how many carlengths are in the tunnel and thus how close to the EOT in there your loco might be.
mlehman NKato Also regarding uncoupling, I intend to install plenty of electromagnetic decouplers on the layout - none of this "decouple by hand" crap. Yeah, but you still need to see the cars to get them spotted to uncouple even with ramps. And it would be nerve-racking to have to constantly keep track of how many carlengths are in the tunnel and thus how close to the EOT in there your loco might be.
NKato Also regarding uncoupling, I intend to install plenty of electromagnetic decouplers on the layout - none of this "decouple by hand" crap.
An IR switch could easily indicate when the railcars have passed a certain threshold. When the railcars break the infrared beam, it indicates to the operator via a light board. I'm thinking maybe setting up three IR switches in there that will trip yellow, red, and blinking red lights to say "You have one foot...six inches...you are out of track."
Here's an electromagnetic uncoupler model that could work: http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Rapido-HO-320001-RailCrew-On-Off-Uncoupler-p/rpi-320001.htm