Trains.com

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!

radius in N scale

10334 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
radius in N scale
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 23, 2005 11:24 AM
what should be the minimum radius in N scale, to allow for a decent look? thank you for your feed back [8D]
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: California - moved to North Carolina 2018
  • 4,422 posts
Posted by DSchmitt on Monday, May 23, 2005 11:43 AM
18" main line
as little as 10" on industrial track where only short cars and small locos will operate

I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.

I don't have a leg to stand on.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 23, 2005 11:47 AM
thank you, I was hoping for something smaller but you are probably right.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 23, 2005 12:26 PM
From my readin 18 is pretty generous. I think that I remember 16 being classified as broad. (I think from Track Planning for Realistic Operation, I could be mistaken.) So depending on your goals, you might be able to work down a bit.

Here is a link to the NMRA "Recommended Practice"

http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-11.html
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 23, 2005 12:46 PM
From my readin 18 is pretty generous. I think that I remember 16 being classified as broad. (I think from Track Planning for Realistic Operation, I could be mistaken.) So depending on your goals, you might be able to work down a bit.

Here is a link to the NMRA "Recommended Practice"

http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-11.html
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Monday, May 23, 2005 1:01 PM
There is a question behind your question. The question is, "what should be the minimum radius in N scale, to allow for a decent look with the equipment I am running?"

You see, a Big Boy will look OK on aa 18 inch curve, but to really make it look good you are going to need a larger radius.

One of the big benefits of N scale is that it has a higher scenery to track ratio in a given space then most other scales. Why not, if we have the available room, take advantage of that?

One of the ways to do that is to use very broad curves.

This makes our scenery look more realistic. It also makes our equipment look more realistic.

Now to answer your question more directly, I would base my curve radius on several things; the era of the railroad, size of the equipment to be operated, and available real estate.

Lets assume you are using Big Boys and 85 foot passenger cars.

In a room where you want it to look good but not engulf the entire room: something in the neigborhood of 24 or 26 inches would look very nice. Larger would only enhance the visual appeal.

Ok, now what about something smaller, say 40 or 50 foot cars and 2-8-0's and first generation diesels and such?

18 to 20 inches or so would look good.

How about small equipment, say turn of the century and stuff.

Maybe 15 or 16 inches minimum to look decent.

Logging and trolly?

Now you are getting down there. Maybe 10 or 12 inches.

Now keep in mind that all or this is subjective, so...
Philip
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Santa Fe, NM
  • 1,169 posts
Posted by Adelie on Monday, May 23, 2005 1:34 PM
As a general answer when planning, the largest you can get away with. Also, use easements for performance and, on extremely broad curves, appearance.

- Mark

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 23, 2005 1:34 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by pcarrell

There is a question behind your question. The question is, "what should be the minimum radius in N scale, to allow for a decent look with the equipment I am running?"

You see, a Big Boy will look OK on aa 18 inch curve, but to really make it look good you are going to need a larger radius.

One of the big benefits of N scale is that it has a higher scenery to track ratio in a given space then most other scales. Why not, if we have the available room, take advantage of that?

One of the ways to do that is to use very broad curves.

This makes our scenery look more realistic. It also makes our equipment look more realistic.

Now to answer your question more directly, I would base my curve radius on several things; the era of the railroad, size of the equipment to be operated, and available real estate.

Lets assume you are using Big Boys and 85 foot passenger cars.

In a room where you want it to look good but not engulf the entire room: something in the neigborhood of 24 or 26 inches would look very nice. Larger would only enhance the visual appeal.

Ok, now what about something smaller, say 40 or 50 foot cars and 2-8-0's and first generation diesels and such?

18 to 20 inches or so would look good.

How about small equipment, say turn of the century and stuff.

Maybe 15 or 16 inches minimum to look decent.

Logging and trolly?

Now you are getting down there. Maybe 10 or 12 inches.

Now keep in mind that all or this is subjective, so...
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • From: Southwest US
  • 438 posts
Posted by Bikerdad on Monday, May 23, 2005 8:28 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by pizzo

what should be the minimum radius in N scale, to allow for a decent look? thank you for your feed back [8D]


As noted, "it depends." One element has already been addressed, namely, it depends on what you're running. GPs pushing a bunch of 55t ore cars around have a lot more leeway on "lookin good" than the D&RGW PA/PB/PA consist pulling the California Zephyr.

There's an even bigger, more significant consideration though: what looks good to you. [8D]

Nobody else can answer that. I personally have no problem with the Zephyr running on 9.75" radius curves. Yes, I would prefer to run it on bigger curves, but preferences are malleable beasties that often buckle under the relentless force of geometry. Bigger is preferred, but only you can determine what the minimum you will accept will be. I'd suggest that you get some flex or sectional, put it down on the kitchen floor (sweep first), and run trains to get a sense of your radius demands.
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Santa Fe, NM
  • 1,169 posts
Posted by Adelie on Monday, May 23, 2005 8:45 PM
That's what I have always liked about the "squares" method of developing a track plan. Once you know your absolute operational minimum radius, balancing the size of the squares (and minimum radius) vs. the available space makes it pretty easy to reach a compromise between larger radius, space and desired layout shape.

- Mark

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 6:52 AM
thank you to all, excellent advice. big boy on kitchen floor sounds good for a trial and error excercice. then back to negociation table to get the right amount of space.

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

There are no community member 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!