new to HO with some questions

[bryanfarris]

As I am new to HO scale, have a G scale outside, what spacing between to tracks (Atlas 83) is recommended?

Also, was looking at the new KATO MAC70 engines, is there a minimum radius for these engines?

last question for this post, my plan has three over under crossings, what is the suggested height difference ?

Plan is a "L" shape 15' on north side, 13' on east side, 6' on south side leg of "L" and 9' on west side leg of "L"
Hope to have a Blast furnce, rolling mill, mine, farms, town, grain elevator, and maybe a water feature.
and plenty of room for expansion, as I have a 1800 sq feet basement

[tstage]

Bryan,

Welcome! [:D] Here's the link for the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA)'s web site:

http://www.nmra.org
Some of your specific questions on track spacing and clearance can be answered in more detail there.

Real quick. Your minium track spacing depends pretty much on how long your locos and rolling stock are, as well as what your minimum radius on your curves will be. (A modern 86' box car will need a bit more clearance around curves than an older 40' reefer will.)

For your yard, it's usually good to have at least a 2-1/4" center-to-center spacing between your tracks. You can get away with 2" centers but that makes it a bit tight to get your fingers down between the cars in order to lift them out.

I'm not all that knowledgable about the newer diesels so I don't know how many axles the KATO has. If it's one of the longer ones, then you are probably looking at a minimum curve radius greater than 18". (Probably 22 or 24".) Maybe the KATO web site can help you out there.

Tom

[Anonymous]

Can't answer you're first one, but I can answer the others.....

KATO SD70MACs would probably need a 22'' curve. They could probably make an 18'' curve, but they'd look horrible doing so.

As for hieght, well, it depends on what kind of trains you'll be running. If you're going to be running double stack trains, I'd suggest to make a few centimeters higher than the car.

[easyaces]

I would recommend at least a 36in. radius for that mac70 loco. Atlas nickle-silver flex track code 83 would be fine for sidings, but I'd consider code 100 for your main lines. At least a 2 1/4 in spaces between tracks, and you would have to eyeball real close for your overpass's especially if you will be running any doublestack cars or high-cube cars. With 1800 Sq ft. of basement to work with you have some nice room for a nice layout. Good luck!!!

[Anonymous]

According to MR reviews the Kato SD 70 & 80 MACs will handle 18" radius BUT
without cars.
Now who runs locos w/o cars? They go on to say, 24" recommended.

There are a few three axle models that will handle 18" like an Athearn SD-2,
Atlas SD 24 & 35.

[mondotrains]

Hi Bryan,
I think the guys above have already got you on the right "track" for radius and track spacing. My thoughts center on that 1,800 square foot basement and your proposed L-shaped layout. I would rethink going with that design and size, especially when you have so much space. Try to find some local guys, maybe at a hobby shop, who can look over your space and come up with a long-term layout plan. You could still begin with a small section but at least you'll know where you're going. The L-shaped plan you describe sounds like something that will be difficult to expand later, especially when you mention it has 3 over-under crossings. What I'm picturing is one of those Atlas layout plans with risers and tight radii.

Trust me....you can spend a lot of time on that L-shape and find you'll have to tear it up later. I wish I had met some knowledgeable guys a lot sooner because I spent a lot of time on my first major layout, just to see it by the curb later on with the trash.

I'll mention some of the "mistakes" I made to clarify why you need help from experienced modelers.

My layout height was around 38". Talk about backaches bending over that benchwork. A better height, per some of the experts, is around 54". Sure, you need to step on a small stepstool to work on some sections, but it looks better because trains are running at eye level.

All my sidings on the layout were so short that it was difficult to spot cars and pick them up.

I used Atlas block controllers which only allowed for 2 cab operation. I have now gone to rotaries and you may want to consider DCC.

I had no way to turn engines. My new layout has a turntable.

I could list many other "mistakes" but I think you can get the idea of what I'm talking about.

Hope this helps.
Mondo

[cacole]

Welcome to HO scale -- I, too, have both HO and G.

I strongly recommend that you purchase an NMRA HO-scale gauge and scale ruler. If a local hobby shop doesn't carry these items, they can be purchased from mail order sources such as Micro Mark. The NMRA Web site also has these "Standards and Recommended Practices" listed.

The NMRA standard spacing for main line tracks is close to 2" center-to-center, widening out on curves to accommodate the overhang of long rolling stock such as passenger cars. From what I have seen along the Union Pacific's Sunset Route through Arizona, 2" spacing in HO is too close. The problem with NMRA Standards is that they are hopelessly outdated and need to be revised, because trains no longer consist of WWII 40' boxcars and single-dome tank cars. Modern rolling stock has grown taller and wider over the years. There is an old curved truss bridge over the San Pedro River at Benson, Arizona, for example, that Amtrak superliners cannot cross because it does not have sufficient clearances, so the Union Pacific dispatchers always have to cross it over to the other, newer bridge at it approaches Benson. My guess is that 2.5" center-to-center would be better for HO scale parallel mainline tracks, widening out to 3.5 around curves if you intend to run modern-day rolling stock.

Vertical clearance for tunnels and overhead crossings is not as clearly defined. In my experience, Woodland Scenics and other commercially manufactured tunnel portals are not high enough to clear double-stack and other modern rolling stock such as the Auto-Max or Super-Liner passenger cars. On the Cochise & Western Model Railroad Club's HO-scale layout, I had to go back through and grind out the tops of the tunnel portals or cast my own to clear these items. At least 4" is necesssary.

The Kato engine will look better on 24 or larger radius curves. It might be able to negotiate 18" radius, but the ends are going to hang over so bad that it will pull rolling stock off the rail sideways.

Check a Walthers Catalog about the footprint required for an HO blast furnace and all the other buildings that go along with it. We were given part of a blast furnace, but it is so big that it would not fit anywhere on our 20 x 40 foot layout, even though it is not all there. The blast furnace and outlying buildings could easily take up one side of your layout space.