Hi, I am looking for a plan for a L shaped layout consisting of a 4x8 main section and a 2x6 extension much like the Turtle Creek Central featured in Model Railroader's 102 Realistic Track Plans #5 February 2010. I know that curves radius is an issue. Passenger trains require a minimum 30" radius I believe. I would like to run both freight and passenger train.
Ok, so it is this https://www.trains.com/mrr/how-to/track-plan-database/turtle-creek-central/
with the extension:
https://www.trains.com/mrr/how-to/track-plan-database/turtle-creek-branch/
(kudos to MRR for making these available)
First off, what period do want to model? Anything past the 30's-40's will involve longer passenger cars (80') - someone correct me if i'm mistaken here. In HO, there is a big difference between, say, 60' and 80' cars. With 60' cars, which is steam era, you can get way with 18'' radius track. 80' cars will require at least 24'' radius, and will look better with 30'' radius track. IMHO, if you want to go with longer cars, I would look for another plan instead of trying to adapt the Turtle Creek. But if you like steam, the Turtle Creek could work fine - just add a passenger station somewhere (e.g., where the coal dealer is) and you are good to go.
Simon
Adding a foot, if possible, to the width gives you a lot more options
In my experience, the length of the car may not be as important as how the couplers are installed. A 60' HO passenger car with body mounted couplers might have a hard time with a 22" or 24" radius curves, while an 80' car with truck mounted couplers might go around an 18"R curve with no trouble.
Note that HO products now often have a recommended minimum radius of 22" rather than the 18" that was once common. You might find too that a large engine like an SD70 might go around an 18"R curve by itself, but not be able to pull a train around the curve without causing the lead car to derail.
In the long run, a simpler 4' x 8' layout with 22"R curves and No.5 turnouts might work out better than a more complicated layout with 18"R and No.4 turnouts.
wjstix In my experience, the length of the car may not be as important as how the couplers are installed. A 60' HO passenger car with body mounted couplers might have a hard time with a 22" or 24" radius curves, while an 80' car with truck mounted couplers might go around an 18"R curve with no trouble. Note that HO products now often have a recommended minimum radius of 22" rather than the 18" that was once common. You might find too that a large engine like an SD70 might go around an 18"R curve by itself, but not be able to pull a train around the curve without causing the lead car to derail. In the long run, a simpler 4' x 8' layout with 22"R curves and No.5 turnouts might work out better than a more complicated layout with 18"R and No.4 turnouts.
Thank you all for your pertinent comments. I might try, as proposed, to add a station to the Turtle Creek or find another L-shaped plan with similar dimensions. Any plan suggestion would be greafly appreciated.
Cheers!
I am not sure about the exact period/era. Here's a picture of the engine.It's Canadian National C-liner in the 1950's. F9 and 9600 appear on the cab's shell.
Passenger cars vary a lot on radii.
Athearn, rivarossi, ihc and any other older plastic cars clear 18" fine. If you wanted to run heavyweights I would pick from these companies.
walthers says 24" but I think 28" is better because it lets you get body mounted couplers. Branchline/Atlas is about the same maybe a tad wider.
BLI makes SP daylight articulated cars that can do 22" curves pretty well and they look good doing it. Very niche but just throwing it out there.
I have Branchline (original and post-Atlas-purchase) and Spectrum heavyweight passenger cars that navigate my 24" radius curves without problems. I think they are about 11.25 inches long including couplers. Sure they would look better on 40" radius curves but I don't have 40" radius curves. I have 24" radius curves. They don't derail so I'm happy.
-Matt
Returning to model railroading after 40 years and taking unconscionable liberties with the SP&S, Northern Pacific and Great Northern roads in the '40s and '50s.