question about designing layouts in HO

[BigDaddy]

More advice, run your ideas by the layout experts here in the forum (that would not be me)

John Armstrong's book  Track Planning for Realistic Operation is a must.  There is someone who pm'd me, and I need to research your question about the book.

 

[BigDaddy]

SeeYou190

Why is there an echo in this thread?

Stuff happens in a 15 year old thread.  Another reason to avoid them.

Loutheshoe to the forum.  There is no charge to start your own thread. 

Some advice:

The Atlas track planning book is trying to sell your track and has way too much in too little space.

4x8' layouts are a very popular topic for MR type magazines.  It's dirt easy to buy a sheet of plywood and put it on legs.  They are not very popular among professional layout designers, of which, we have a some in this forum.

I am not a 30" snob, meaning if your radius isn't 30" you are less than a man, send it to the dumpster, do not pass go, do not text girlfriends pictures of your layout or anything else.  Mine are not 30", but if you can, aim for bigger than 18".

Anonymouse

[bearman]

My HO layout has mostly 18" curves, a concession to space.  I am modelling the transition era, 1950/early 1960's, and run 4 axle diesels and 40' rolling stock, all freight no passenger trains.  6 axle diesels may be a problem and I have read that 18" curves will take 50' rolling stock with no real issues.  But, I am more than happy wth my layout insofar as the trains I run.

[SeeYou190]

Why is there an echo in this thread? All the early posts are duplicated.

.

-Kevin

.

[mbinsewi]

OK, well, welcome Louthe Shoe.

The radius is measured down the center line of the track, If I remember correctly, so you would have to add what the distance is to the outside of the track from the center,  so roughly, the circle would be about 38" diameter.

Mike.

[LoutheShoe]

What is the outside dimension of a complete circle of 18" radius Bachmann EZ Track?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by unionpacific4018

Greetings

I just started back into the hobby and I am modelling HO Scale Union Pacific so that means big radius turns my minimum radius is 36" my biggest is leading into a spur is 60"

Sean

Sean, I am planning a elevated layout around a bedroom. I have a Alleghany 2-6-6-6 also a UP 2-8-8-4. I was planning on using my minimum radius at 32". Will your UP make a 32' or should revaluate my radius to 36".

Thanks Dougster

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by unionpacific4018

Greetings

I just started back into the hobby and I am modelling HO Scale Union Pacific so that means big radius turns my minimum radius is 36" my biggest is leading into a spur is 60"

Sean

Sean, I am planning a elevated layout around a bedroom. I have a Alleghany 2-6-6-6 also a UP 2-8-8-4. I was planning on using my minimum radius at 32". Will your UP make a 32' or should revaluate my radius to 36".

Thanks Dougster

[Anonymous]

I use both 18" and 22" radius track. The 6 axle locomotives some will work on 18" radius curves some will not. My Kato SD 45 locomotive runs well. I have used up to 72' lumber cars on the 18" curves without problems but again the appearance is the issue.

[Anonymous]

I use both 18" and 22" radius track. The 6 axle locomotives some will work on 18" radius curves some will not. My Kato SD 45 locomotive runs well. I have used up to 72' lumber cars on the 18" curves without problems but again the appearance is the issue.

[dano99a]

Mark-

My 2 cents and I'll keep it short:
18" curves are fine just know that the roverossi (can't spell it) passsnger cars will not go around them nor will anything that length (auto carrier cars, high cube boxcars)

Athern "ready to roll" pullman cars work fine on 18's. I have 6 of them and they work fine.

Large steam engines will not run on them either (big boy, etc. etc.).

If you can live with the way everything looks on an 18", curve then get going and start having fun with the space you have.

I use mostly 18's but most people don't notice or care because they're too busy looking at the scenery. Not the curves.

hope this helps

[dano99a]

Mark-

My 2 cents and I'll keep it short:
18" curves are fine just know that the roverossi (can't spell it) passsnger cars will not go around them nor will anything that length (auto carrier cars, high cube boxcars)

Athern "ready to roll" pullman cars work fine on 18's. I have 6 of them and they work fine.

Large steam engines will not run on them either (big boy, etc. etc.).

If you can live with the way everything looks on an 18", curve then get going and start having fun with the space you have.

I use mostly 18's but most people don't notice or care because they're too busy looking at the scenery. Not the curves.

hope this helps

[Anonymous]

There seems to be alot of disappointment with the HO 18 inch radius curves. I find them useful to get little engines and cars to the industry customers in a tight space.

Engines and long cars like 24" or bigger. Some ready to run product in the stores will have a small warning on box stating minimum radius. Certianly one can always squeeze it down smaller curves. Or try to one time.

Let us think of the 18 inch radius not as a block to large equiptment, but rather as a area where Big Engines and Big Cars cannot go. This should more than justify your switchers and small cars etc.

My future main will have several large curves where normally straight track would be and I think other scenic areas such as a stream, river or buildings (backyard gardens etc) that the train needs to work around creates an impression of a long train out of a 14 car unit. (14 cars and a caboose is long enough for me)

Images of multiunit lashups and 75 car double stack trains need about 50-60 feet to fit. I find it amusing that we are worried about finding 18 inches of room when we dream of that long train we like to run.

Good Luck!

Lee

[Anonymous]

There seems to be alot of disappointment with the HO 18 inch radius curves. I find them useful to get little engines and cars to the industry customers in a tight space.

Engines and long cars like 24" or bigger. Some ready to run product in the stores will have a small warning on box stating minimum radius. Certianly one can always squeeze it down smaller curves. Or try to one time.

Let us think of the 18 inch radius not as a block to large equiptment, but rather as a area where Big Engines and Big Cars cannot go. This should more than justify your switchers and small cars etc.

My future main will have several large curves where normally straight track would be and I think other scenic areas such as a stream, river or buildings (backyard gardens etc) that the train needs to work around creates an impression of a long train out of a 14 car unit. (14 cars and a caboose is long enough for me)

Images of multiunit lashups and 75 car double stack trains need about 50-60 feet to fit. I find it amusing that we are worried about finding 18 inches of room when we dream of that long train we like to run.

Good Luck!

Lee

[mrgstrain]

Hi Mark I just started put my new layout up. My space restrictions will not let me use 22in radius, I am useing 18in, you have to go with what room will allow. Iam useing Atlas sectional & flex track. So you my be restricted on what you can roll on down the road, I am so you build your railroad with in those restrictions. 22 does look nice but takes more room. By the way all my rail is BRASS. Good luck.

MRGSTRAIN

[mrgstrain]

Hi Mark I just started put my new layout up. My space restrictions will not let me use 22in radius, I am useing 18in, you have to go with what room will allow. Iam useing Atlas sectional & flex track. So you my be restricted on what you can roll on down the road, I am so you build your railroad with in those restrictions. 22 does look nice but takes more room. By the way all my rail is BRASS. Good luck.

MRGSTRAIN

[Anonymous]

Hi Mark
[2c]
Let me throw my two cents in and try not to confuse you more. [%-)]

First, I understand you have an Atlas track plan you like to build. Atlas test all their track plans and they do work. They have the layout on a grid to show you what size it is.

Second, look at the top or side of the page the track plan is on. See that little train? It might be pulled by a steam locomotive on one side and a diesel on another side. Atlas suggest this is the size and type of equipment that will run on that particular layout.

The size of the minimum radius will dictate what type of equipment you can run on it. Any other radius on the layout can be larger but none can be smaller than the minimum.

If you want to use flex track instead of sectional track, the simplest way (but more expensive) is to layout the track plan with sectional track and replace it with flex track after you laydown the roadbed.
However, when you use flex track for a curve you will have to cut off the excess rail at some point. You can use an Atlas snap saw or a flush cutting Rail Nipper cutting tool (click on highlited words). I also recommend this BOOK.
ALWAYS WEAR SAFTY GLASSES WHEN USING CUTTING OR POWER TOOLS
You can find used sectional track cheap at model railroad shows or on eBay.

In the Atlas book it shows to use upholstery tacks to secure the cork roadbed and track nails to secure the track. That is the old way and it makes for very bumpy roadbed and you can bend or break rail ties if you pu***oo hard on the track nails. Many modelers are now recommending latex cualking to glue track and roadbed.

The questions I have for you is, how much room do you have? Are you building on a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood or foam? Do you already own HO scale rolling stock? If so, what is it?

F.Y.I.
I made my own radius templates out of poster board. I made a compas from a wooden yard stick by drilling holes in it to hold a nail at the pivot and a pencil at different radi. They are 2 1/2" wide (that is my track center spacing for curves) so each edge will help me mark my center line. But now I'm getting off the subject here.

You can e-mail me if you have any other questions.

[Anonymous]

Hi Mark
[2c]
Let me throw my two cents in and try not to confuse you more. [%-)]

First, I understand you have an Atlas track plan you like to build. Atlas test all their track plans and they do work. They have the layout on a grid to show you what size it is.

Second, look at the top or side of the page the track plan is on. See that little train? It might be pulled by a steam locomotive on one side and a diesel on another side. Atlas suggest this is the size and type of equipment that will run on that particular layout.

The size of the minimum radius will dictate what type of equipment you can run on it. Any other radius on the layout can be larger but none can be smaller than the minimum.

If you want to use flex track instead of sectional track, the simplest way (but more expensive) is to layout the track plan with sectional track and replace it with flex track after you laydown the roadbed.
However, when you use flex track for a curve you will have to cut off the excess rail at some point. You can use an Atlas snap saw or a flush cutting Rail Nipper cutting tool (click on highlited words). I also recommend this BOOK.
ALWAYS WEAR SAFTY GLASSES WHEN USING CUTTING OR POWER TOOLS
You can find used sectional track cheap at model railroad shows or on eBay.

In the Atlas book it shows to use upholstery tacks to secure the cork roadbed and track nails to secure the track. That is the old way and it makes for very bumpy roadbed and you can bend or break rail ties if you pu***oo hard on the track nails. Many modelers are now recommending latex cualking to glue track and roadbed.

The questions I have for you is, how much room do you have? Are you building on a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood or foam? Do you already own HO scale rolling stock? If so, what is it?

F.Y.I.
I made my own radius templates out of poster board. I made a compas from a wooden yard stick by drilling holes in it to hold a nail at the pivot and a pencil at different radi. They are 2 1/2" wide (that is my track center spacing for curves) so each edge will help me mark my center line. But now I'm getting off the subject here.

You can e-mail me if you have any other questions.

[Jetrock]

A lot depends on rolling stock. If you model articulated engines and 80-foot passenger cars, you want curves that are as broad as possible. If you model lightweight steam or four-axle diesels pulling 40-50 foot cars, you want some breadth but will do fine with 18-24" curves. If you model 0-4-0's and two-truck Shays pulling logging disconnects, you can go for ridiculously short curves and if you model traction, the curves can often be not much longer in radius than the length of the car.

Setting is also a factor--if you model the Great Plains, 15" curves are going to be hard to justify, while someone modeling snaky mountain roads or urban environments has an excuse for flange-scraping sharp curves.

Focus of scale is also important. N scale's forte is being able to model loooong trains in a small space, so that 18"+ curve looks nice--but HOn30 engines (mostly converted 0-4-0's) running on the same width of track but in a different scale, look fine on flextrack bent down to 6" radius. They also look fine on 18" curves.

The pre-made curves are typically used by novice modelers rather than by the more experienced--and novice modelers tend to prefer the sharp curves because they're making a 4x8 or something equally small. Flex track, which can be curved to the user's choice of sharpness, is preferred among those who have some skill but aren't yet willing to lay track by hand.

[Jetrock]

A lot depends on rolling stock. If you model articulated engines and 80-foot passenger cars, you want curves that are as broad as possible. If you model lightweight steam or four-axle diesels pulling 40-50 foot cars, you want some breadth but will do fine with 18-24" curves. If you model 0-4-0's and two-truck Shays pulling logging disconnects, you can go for ridiculously short curves and if you model traction, the curves can often be not much longer in radius than the length of the car.

Setting is also a factor--if you model the Great Plains, 15" curves are going to be hard to justify, while someone modeling snaky mountain roads or urban environments has an excuse for flange-scraping sharp curves.

Focus of scale is also important. N scale's forte is being able to model loooong trains in a small space, so that 18"+ curve looks nice--but HOn30 engines (mostly converted 0-4-0's) running on the same width of track but in a different scale, look fine on flextrack bent down to 6" radius. They also look fine on 18" curves.

The pre-made curves are typically used by novice modelers rather than by the more experienced--and novice modelers tend to prefer the sharp curves because they're making a 4x8 or something equally small. Flex track, which can be curved to the user's choice of sharpness, is preferred among those who have some skill but aren't yet willing to lay track by hand.

[Anonymous]

It's also helpful when actually making the curve to use a trammel - a sort of compass. If you have ever seen the devices that cut large circular holes, they consist of a pivot point, a connecting piece, such as a piece of 1 X 1 stock, and a marker or cutter.

A yardstick works just fine, clamp a nail or a screw to the yardstick, then put your marker at the desired radius (distance from the pivot). You will come up with wonderfully smooth curves that will mark the center of your track. This is the technique I used on my very first HO layout and I've never regretted it. The curves were much more forgiving than using sectional track and while not all of my locomotives would run on the 4 X 8, the majority did.

[Anonymous]

It's also helpful when actually making the curve to use a trammel - a sort of compass. If you have ever seen the devices that cut large circular holes, they consist of a pivot point, a connecting piece, such as a piece of 1 X 1 stock, and a marker or cutter.

A yardstick works just fine, clamp a nail or a screw to the yardstick, then put your marker at the desired radius (distance from the pivot). You will come up with wonderfully smooth curves that will mark the center of your track. This is the technique I used on my very first HO layout and I've never regretted it. The curves were much more forgiving than using sectional track and while not all of my locomotives would run on the 4 X 8, the majority did.

[Anonymous]

Maybe this will help you to understand what they are telling you.

As has become our tradition, I put a circle of track around the Christmas Tree, using 18" radius curves and an RSD-5 locomotive. This year I decided to institute passenger sedrvice using an 80 foot coach.

My daughter immediately ask if real coaches were that long, whem I answered yse, she informed me that it did not like like it should go around thoses curves.

Yes. it did go around the curve, but it did not look correct,

Tom Blair

[Anonymous]

Maybe this will help you to understand what they are telling you.

As has become our tradition, I put a circle of track around the Christmas Tree, using 18" radius curves and an RSD-5 locomotive. This year I decided to institute passenger sedrvice using an 80 foot coach.

My daughter immediately ask if real coaches were that long, whem I answered yse, she informed me that it did not like like it should go around thoses curves.

Yes. it did go around the curve, but it did not look correct,

Tom Blair

[Anonymous]

Mark:

Following up on the posts above, the minimum radius you want will depend largely on what era you are modeling and thus what size motive power and rollingstock you want to run.

Early in the last century most freight cars were in the 36-40 foot class, most motive power of the four or six coupled variety, thus you can use smaller radius curves. Late in the steam era motive power became much larger as did passenger car lengths, thus you will require larger curves.

Also there is the issue of "look". Most larger rollingstock will actually operate on smaller radius curves but will "look" out of scale and pinched due to overhang.

My advice to you is to follow the MNRA standards closely, you will have less operational trouble and be happier with your layout appearance.

Good Luck

Randy

[Anonymous]

Mark:

Following up on the posts above, the minimum radius you want will depend largely on what era you are modeling and thus what size motive power and rollingstock you want to run.

Early in the last century most freight cars were in the 36-40 foot class, most motive power of the four or six coupled variety, thus you can use smaller radius curves. Late in the steam era motive power became much larger as did passenger car lengths, thus you will require larger curves.

Also there is the issue of "look". Most larger rollingstock will actually operate on smaller radius curves but will "look" out of scale and pinched due to overhang.

My advice to you is to follow the MNRA standards closely, you will have less operational trouble and be happier with your layout appearance.

Good Luck

Randy

[DSchmitt]

18" is historically the "standard" minimum radius for HO because it fits nicely on a 4' wide sheet of plywood and everything will be reachable if there is access from both sides. It is adequate for 4 axel diesels, small steam locos and 50' cars. Larger equipment may work ok, but appearance will suffer.

There are fewer compromises with scale accuracy on most of the HO equipment now available than there was in the past, (for instance when I started in HO truck mounted couplers were the norm) so a larger radius is required to operate properly.

O gauge and O scale 3-rail usually has truck mounted couplers and can negotiate tight curves. O scale 2-rail with body mounted couplers requires much larger radius than HO for proper operation and appearance..

[DSchmitt]

18" is historically the "standard" minimum radius for HO because it fits nicely on a 4' wide sheet of plywood and everything will be reachable if there is access from both sides. It is adequate for 4 axel diesels, small steam locos and 50' cars. Larger equipment may work ok, but appearance will suffer.

There are fewer compromises with scale accuracy on most of the HO equipment now available than there was in the past, (for instance when I started in HO truck mounted couplers were the norm) so a larger radius is required to operate properly.

O gauge and O scale 3-rail usually has truck mounted couplers and can negotiate tight curves. O scale 2-rail with body mounted couplers requires much larger radius than HO for proper operation and appearance..

[Anonymous]

Greetings

I just started back into the hobby and I am modelling HO Scale Union Pacific so that means big radius turns my minimum radius is 36" my biggest is leading into a spur is 60" I will not be running anything as stiff legged as a 9000 eventhough I still want one. Moslty bigboys challengers and northerns.
My layout is designed around my wifes car and over hangs the windshield.
Go as big as possible it looks better prototypically and will allow you to run anything larger if you want to.

Good luck

Sean