whoops, edited to more accuratly fit the truth.
Lost in the snow
BeringI did a bit of math and 18" radius would put me darn close to the proto radius of the eastern most tunnel.
18" radius in N scale should look great, but that's equivalent to about a 24-degree curve -- much tighter than the prototype. Or any mainline curve on the Southern Pacific.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I did a bit of math and 18" radius would put me darn close to the proto radius of the eastern most tunnel. So thats pretty cool.
I am smrt. No idea how I got that number, some times my own stupidity amazes me. For reference the correct radius would be about 41" in N.
I think the OP has a great looking layout because that is what he wants, and if he can deal with the S curves and scenic it in winter I would love too see the final product.
Bering, I will defer to others, but 18" in N scale will be sweeping.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
graymatterThere is a MR track plan called The Salt Lake Route N scale 4'x9'
That layout is a different direction from what the Original Poster was describing, since half of the layout consists of turnouts, industries, etc.
Here is something a little different.
http://s350.photobucket.com/user/thomasweekley63/media/N%20scale%204%20x%2010_zpsbfsa0bex.png.html?sort=3&o=0
There is a MR track plan called
The Salt Lake Route
N scale 4'x9'
BeringI am not worried about the radius, i just want to get nice sweeping curves.
Great, and in N scale, your overall of 4' will give you that.
Stretch out the radius at the ends, as much as you can, use the length of your layout to bring the track back in a little, to add interest, and then curve it back out to do the radius on the other end. That way you avoid the parallel track to the edge of the layout, and avoid any drastic "S" curves.
I love the idea of a layout built just for train watching, and fantastic scenery.
Mike.
My You Tube
I am not worried about the radius, i just want to get nice sweeping curves.
If you are modeling N-scale then it seems to me that all you have to do is deal with those two S curves. 18 inch in N scale is very broad.
yes sir bearman
I guess i will buy the mag, i never even thought that there might be a trackplan in a mag.
Does anyone know what happened to Nscaleaddict? He hasn't posted on his blog in over a year.
Bering, you are doing this in N scale...right?
Why not buy the original track plan in the old magazines that featured it. I believe it will be a little easier on your part than guessing.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
cuyamaUntil any plan is drawn to scale, it’s impossible to know what all of the issues might be. But yes, S-curves can be a problem, especially with longer modern equipment or full-length passenger cars in any era. Note that the Marias Pass layout seems to have at least a longest-car-length section of straight track between curves. There also seem to be spiral easements leading into the curves, a good idea for performance and appearance. With so much of the Original Poster’s plan in tunnels and snowsheds, moving equipment onto- and off the tracks may be a little tedious. And some might grow tired of watching trains orbit – but that’s a personal preference, to be sure. Good luck with your layout. Byron
I plan on running mostly maxi-i s and enclosed racks behind tunnel motors, but that mostly depends on what i can afford. Do you have any idea what would be a good minimum radius for this type of layout? I threw out the 18" number but would like to shrink that down a bit. I am in a bit of a bind for width. The layout is going to be built in the detached garage. It is either going in the corner infront of a car, or in the attic of said garage. both have their sortcomings.
Until any plan is drawn to scale, it’s impossible to know what all of the issues might be. But yes, S-curves can be a problem, especially with longer modern equipment or full-length passenger cars in any era. Note that the Marias Pass layout seems to have at least a longest-car-length section of straight track between curves. There also seem to be spiral easements leading into the curves, a good idea for performance and appearance.
With so much of the Original Poster’s plan in tunnels and snowsheds, moving equipment onto- and off the tracks may be a little tedious. And some might grow tired of watching trains orbit – but that’s a personal preference, to be sure.
Good luck with your layout.
Byron
Hopefully Cuyama will weigh in on your question. I and a lot of others would defer to his opinion and judgement. He does layout design for a living.
the s curve question was one of my big questions, that whole aera needs a rework. i was wondering how problematic that would be. I am trying to make some easements and atleast a a bit of straight between the curves. Any ideas for that aera?
I third the WOW! Making that scenery in the winter time with snow. And then putting up a video, man oh man. One question for Cuyama, will those S curves be a problem? I assume that the trains will be running slow enough so that they may not be.
I second that WOW! Yea, I love it. Just watching trains run. I know a lot of modelers snicker at the "roundy-round", but I think it's great.
cuyama The Original Poster is referencing a layout based on Marias Pass (Great Northern, now BNSF). A web search for N Scale Addict + Marias Pass will turn up many references and photos. Including this one. Note how the Marias Pass layout curves the edges of the benchwork, which adds to the visual appeal. Byron
The Original Poster is referencing a layout based on Marias Pass (Great Northern, now BNSF). A web search for N Scale Addict + Marias Pass will turn up many references and photos. Including this one.
Note how the Marias Pass layout curves the edges of the benchwork, which adds to the visual appeal.
Alton Junction
i would suggest a crossover and a switch lead that can lead to a future staging yard. Or at least place a piece of track that can be replaced by a switch.
You will eventually want to run a different train and taking trains on and off the track manually is a pain and parts get broken.
I like the idea of just scenery and have seen many good examples of these designs.
Steve
BigDaddy Bering it has no switching or even a turnout to keep cost down. All i want is to have long trains snaking through the mountain scenery. If that's what YOU want, it looks like you have plenty of areas for scenicking. We don't see many proposed layout plans with no turnouts. However for less than the price of a DC engine, you can buy a couple of turnouts and have a single crossover or a siding or a spur to a mine. A mine, even if you don't actively switch it, presents all kinds of visual and creative opportunities.
Bering it has no switching or even a turnout to keep cost down. All i want is to have long trains snaking through the mountain scenery.
If that's what YOU want, it looks like you have plenty of areas for scenicking. We don't see many proposed layout plans with no turnouts.
However for less than the price of a DC engine, you can buy a couple of turnouts and have a single crossover or a siding or a spur to a mine. A mine, even if you don't actively switch it, presents all kinds of visual and creative opportunities.
You edited his quote to correct the typo !
That's no fun.
Surnout sounded so much better.
Rich
bearmanThis is true, but if there is no crossover between the two mains then each track can be wired to a separate DC transformer, put the trains on the tracks, and let 'er rip. In fact, and I am not sure that you would need more than one set of feeders connected to each transformer. Even I could wire that layout blindfolded.
That's the way I run my Christmas layout, only I use 3 sets of feeders to each loop, because it's all Bachmann EZ Track sections.
Not that it has anything to do with this layout, except a way to power it.
I model HO, but just for giggles and laughs I would love to see the original track plan.
This track plan is N Scale. It had a few publications in N Scale Railroading magazine.
Beringit has no switching or even a turnout to keep cost down. All i want is to have long trains snaking through the mountain scenery.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
That's exactly what I meant Randy about symmetry. And I assume it is N scale. Maybe just run one side straight across.
Did he say N scale? He's copying (sort of) an N scale plan, but when I hear 4x something and 18" radius curves I think HO. If it's N scale, should be fine. HO, 18" radius is going to be too limiting with 80-90's era equipment.
By "too symmetrical" I think what that person meant is that both sides are pretty much identical curves. Ends, not too much you cna do about that, but to both sides need to have the exact same gentle S curve? Perhaps make one different, or have the whole line run further inboard on the table on one side compared to the other.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.