Metro Red Line I think you misunderstood him [IRONROOSTER]. I took his post to say that if you got an HO layout plan and used N-scale track on it, you'd get *roughly* twice the space, and not that he suggested you reduce an HO layout by half.
I think you misunderstood him [IRONROOSTER]. I took his post to say that if you got an HO layout plan and used N-scale track on it, you'd get *roughly* twice the space, and not that he suggested you reduce an HO layout by half.
I didn't misunderstand him. My statement was in support of his comment that an N-scale layout benefits by using the HO-sized space. I also wanted to point out that N isn't half the size of HO, so reducing an HO plan to N by using a factor of 50% is off the mark. My opinion is contrary to the MR magazine world, but it is correct. Half of 1/87.1 is NOT 1/160.
Mark
markpierceIRONROOSTER Any of the smaller plans (halve the dimensions for N scale) will benefit by being stretched to a larger size. Actually, the reduction multiplier is more like 55% (not 50%). (An HO 4-by-8 layout would be reduced to 2.2-by-4.4 in N.) However, merely reducing an HO plan to N results in a more toy-like setting because of the compression of the scene. Like others, I'd think it would often be better to just use an HO plan and modifiy it for N-scale components. For instance, the scale size of the structures can be increased (something like 6 times in volume) if the same footprint is used, making industries nearer the size needed to justify being served by a railroad. Mark
IRONROOSTER Any of the smaller plans (halve the dimensions for N scale) will benefit by being stretched to a larger size.
Any of the smaller plans (halve the dimensions for N scale) will benefit by being stretched to a larger size.
Actually, the reduction multiplier is more like 55% (not 50%). (An HO 4-by-8 layout would be reduced to 2.2-by-4.4 in N.) However, merely reducing an HO plan to N results in a more toy-like setting because of the compression of the scene. Like others, I'd think it would often be better to just use an HO plan and modifiy it for N-scale components. For instance, the scale size of the structures can be increased (something like 6 times in volume) if the same footprint is used, making industries nearer the size needed to justify being served by a railroad.
I think you misunderstood him. I took his post to say that if you got an HO layout plan and used N-scale track on it, you'd get *roughly* twice the space, and not that he suggested you reduce an HO layout by half.
Steve75I live in Wisconsin so I would like to do some thing local. about the era I was thinking about doing 1930's to 1960's. I would like to hear any ideas any one has one.
I also stuck on where I can find the correct information I looked at the local libary but the dont have any thing on the rr near me as I live in Chilton WI, which is a very small city.
Basically this town is on the main north-south main line of the Chicago Milwaukee St. Paul and Pacific railroad often shortened to just Milwaukee. The town had a brewery that had some interesting railroad tracks to it. A way cool interesting sweeping curve just to the north of the town. It appears this is still active CP trackage.
IRONROOSTER 101 Track Plans has some good ideas and will get you started looking at types of track plans available for table top type layouts. It has more basic plan ideas for small layouts - twice around, loop to loop, out and back, etc. - than other plan books Any of the smaller plans (halve the dimensions for N scale) will benefit by being stretched to a larger size. Track Planning for Realistic Operation is another book I would recommend, it explains what real railroads do and how to adapt it to a layout. The two together will enable you to plan a layout.EnjoyPaul
101 Track Plans has some good ideas and will get you started looking at types of track plans available for table top type layouts. It has more basic plan ideas for small layouts - twice around, loop to loop, out and back, etc. - than other plan books Any of the smaller plans (halve the dimensions for N scale) will benefit by being stretched to a larger size. Track Planning for Realistic Operation is another book I would recommend, it explains what real railroads do and how to adapt it to a layout. The two together will enable you to plan a layout.
Enjoy
Paul
I agree, pick a 4x8 HO layout plan and use it as the basis for an N scale layout. You'll find more space for industries, towns, mountains/hillsides, etc. - not to mention broader sweeping curves of 15-18" radius, which are too tight and toylike for HO but are much nicer looking in N.
steinjr The 101 track plans book is probably not an optimal choice if you want to learn about some newer ideas about track planning/layout design, as it is a fairly old book.
The 101 track plans book is probably not an optimal choice if you want to learn about some newer ideas about track planning/layout design, as it is a fairly old book.
I agree if "fairly old" means something like 50 years. I don't know a book on model railroading with such a long publication, and there are some "jewels" in the book, but I would not put it on my priority list of track planning books, especially for N scale since it never existed when the layout plans were developed. I'm no N-scaler, but I suspect there are publications containing track plans more suitable for that scale although they may be more geared to door-sized layouts. Perhaps magazines geared solely toward N-scale modelers would be a good source. ... Seems like N-scalers could have been more helpful.
Steve75 I have cosen to go with N scale, and I have just orderd 101 Track Plans for model railroaders from my local hobby shop.
I have cosen to go with N scale, and I have just orderd 101 Track Plans for model railroaders from my local hobby shop.
Choosing N scale is a good choice for maximizing run length and minimizing curve radius limitations on a small island style layout.
The newer book "102 Realistic Track Plans" or quite a few other newer track planning books might have served you better, if what you are looking for is examples of how others have planned their layouts.
Or maybe one of the standard books on layout planning - it all depends on what you are trying to get from a book - whether you are just trying to find a simple track plan you can copy, or whether you are trying to learn about how to do track planning in some way.
In another post in this thread you write:
Steve75 I live in Wisconsin so I would like to do some thing local. about the era I was thinking about doing 1930's to 1960's. I would like to hear any ideas any one has one. I also stuck on where I can find the correct information I looked at the local libary but the dont have any thing on the rr near me as I live in Chilton WI, which is a very small city
I live in Wisconsin so I would like to do some thing local. about the era I was thinking about doing 1930's to 1960's. I would like to hear any ideas any one has one. I also stuck on where I can find the correct information I looked at the local libary but the dont have any thing on the rr near me as I live in Chilton WI, which is a very small city
I guess one thing you should start thinking hard about is to decide what is most important to you - to get a ready made plan from a book or to try to represent your home town in e.g. the 1950s in some way.
Looking at what tracks are in Chilton, WI these days (from http://www.bing.com/maps), there seems like there is a RR running North to SE through the eastern part of Chilton, with one rail served industry just north of East Breed Street, crossing a small bridge or something just north of East Grand Street, crossing under (possibly - could be crossing at grade) East Main Street, with a runaround on the east side, a couple of tracks parallel to Clay Street, a rail served industry on the east side of these tracks, and a spur leading westwards from Clay street, parallel to Webster Street, crossing Adams. Douglass, Pennsylvania and Columbia, before ending up in some kind of rail served industry in a triangular shaped area between East Main, Commerce and Columbia.
According to http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/localgov/docs/railmap.pdf, Chilton is also just a little to the SE of Green Bay & Western route between Kewaunee, Wisconsin and Winona, Minnesota. There is a lot of interesting modeling information on the Green Bay route here: http://www.greenbayroute.com/index.html
Further google searches on Chilton WI and railroad yields the information that a depot built there by the Milwaukee Road still stands.
Googling (http://www.google.com) for "Milwaukee Road" and Chilton WI, I also found a snippet on a web page for the Milwaukee Road historical association () that mentions a former employee that worked at Chilton, WI after WW2: http://www.mrha.com/employees.cfm (search for Chilton on page) - it is written by someone who was a boy in Chilton, WI in the late 1940s/early 1950s, and mentions his dad Edward Krans, who was the station agent in Chilton at the time. The son also mentions getting doodlebug rides from the section foreman at Chilton, something which might be fascinating to model.
Further googling mentions that there was an industry in Chilton called "Briess Malting & Ingredients Company", in Chilton since 1876 - might be a lead to follow up for further googling, which among other things yield this site: http://www.brewingwithbriess.com/About/Facilities_Malthouse.htm
Here is a list I found by googling for industries in Chilton now (or at least recently) - some of these (or their predecessors) may have been around for quite a while:
http://www.chilton.govoffice.com/index.asp?Type=B_LIST&SEC=%7B086828AF-51E4-433F-B0A7-9225013EF32D%7D
One thing you can do is to look up the adresses of these industries on www.bing.com/maps and compare that with the RR lines, to see which of these are rail served.
Also, a quick search shows this contact information (which may be outdated) for the Calumet County Historical Society : http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/localhistory/directory/viewsociety.asp?id=42
Should be very possible for you to take a camera and go take some pictures of what is still there, to get some ideas about whether you would want to model this town set back in an earlier age (1930s to 1950s), and if so - what aspects of the town you would want to model.
Then again - judged from your posts so far - trying to do a model of a prototype location might be quite a bit too advanced for you at the stage you are at now.
It is often smart to learn to walk before taking off at a run.
Maybe you ought to start by just doing a small "chainsaw" model railroad - a simple test model, not intended to be the ultimate layout, but just a way to get a railroad up and running fast, where you can learn some skills, run some trains, have some fun, while you learn more about what you like or don't like about model railroading.
Just use latex caulk to fasten down your tracks, and then you should be able to take them up again and reuse them on a later, maybe more advanced layout.
In any case, I wish you the best of luck with your model railroading. Have fun!
Smile, Stein
I too recently switched to N scale due to space limitations and constant moving since I am Active Duty Navy. Another option that is very popular in N scale is building on a layout on a hollow core door. http://www.thevollmerfamily.com/Pennsy/index.html here is a link to Dave Vollmer's N scale Pennsy layout on a door.
Jason
Modeling the Fort Worth & Denver of the early 1970's in N scale
I live in Wisconsin so I would like to do some thing local. about the era I was thinking about doing 1930's to 1960's. I would like to hear any ideas any one has one. I also stuck on where I can find the correct information I looked at the local libary but the dont have any thing on the rr near me as I live in Chilton WI, which is a very small city.
hope any one can help
Steve
Steve75I have cosen to go with N scale, and I have just orderd 101 Track Plans for model railroaders from my local hobby shop. So I hope that will help, thank you all for your advice and help it means a lot to me that you all are willing to help someone that doesn't know what they are doing. I only wish that their was a local club near me which I could join. any way thank you again. Steve
I have cosen to go with N scale, and I have just orderd 101 Track Plans for model railroaders from my local hobby shop. So I hope that will help, thank you all for your advice and help it means a lot to me that you all are willing to help someone that doesn't know what they are doing. I only wish that their was a local club near me which I could join. any way thank you again.
Woo-hoo!
Congrats, Steve! Welcome to N-scale! It's actually the fastest-growing scale these days.
I converted from HO to N back in 2006, so I'm relatively new to N myself, but there's a lot from my HO scale days that carries over. I also have a 4x8 N scale layout with a fairly long run (a folded dogbone configuration). What era do you plan to model? What railroad? What part of the country?I'd be glad to help you get started.
I don't mean to pick on you, Wolfgang (of course), but this is always the challenge with HO on a 4X8. Reasonable end curves (of even fairly tight 18" radius) must take up most of the width.
Byron, in fairness to Wolfgang, that plan doesn't use Atlas track, but more like track from ROCO. ROCO's R2 curves are about 14" in radius and they have an curved switch that goes from R2 (14.1" radius) to R3 (16.5") radius. I believe Fleischmann's track has a similar geometry at the smaller end.
Andre
cuyamaWolfgang, an appealing track plan drawing, but again very demanding in terms of radius for a complete beginner. If scaled to the 4X8 table the Orignal Poster has already built, 15 1/2" radius curves are needed, and even then the towns will need to be shortened because some of the turnouts are drawn slightly too optimistically for off-the-shelf components. ...
Wolfgang, an appealing track plan drawing, but again very demanding in terms of radius for a complete beginner. If scaled to the 4X8 table the Orignal Poster has already built, 15 1/2" radius curves are needed, and even then the towns will need to be shortened because some of the turnouts are drawn slightly too optimistically for off-the-shelf components. ...
No problem. I wanted only to give ideas. I have not built such a layout, if I don't count my childhood layout. But I like those ideas. Nowadays I would go with a H0n3 layout. I'm just in narrow gauge.
Wolfgang
Pueblo & Salt Lake RR
Come to us http://www.westportterminal.de my videos my blog
Steve75I am trying to choose between N gauge or HO. the problem is money and space. The space I have got is 8' X 4' maximum and I would like to have a medium to long run.
Any advice would be welcome
There are probably at least 10 others if you go back through the year and also check the "layouts and layout building discussion" forum too.
wedudler Here's a better plan, for snap track. Text in German
Here's a better plan, for snap track. Text in German
Wolfgang, an appealing track plan drawing, but again very demanding in terms of radius for a complete beginner. If scaled to the 4X8 table the Orignal Poster has already built, 15 1/2" radius curves are needed, and even then the towns will need to be shortened because some of the turnouts are drawn slightly too optimistically for off-the-shelf components.
Steve75 This was the plan I found but if any one knows of a better one I would like to see it as I am not very good at track plans because I am not very good at the wireing aspect and can't get them to work.
This was the plan I found but if any one knows of a better one I would like to see it as I am not very good at track plans because I am not very good at the wireing aspect and can't get them to work.
It's certainly not your fault that Atlas foists these plans on unsuspecting newcomers, sorry if I implied that. Wiring can seem more intimidating if you've only seen the Atlas books because of their insistence on using their clumsy products in the wiring schemes.
The Atlas plan books are designed to sell Atlas products, not necessarily to be the easiest entry point for a newcomer.
Wiring for two-cab DC control is much easier with DPDT toggle switches, in my opinion. But of course, DCC would eliminate much of the electrical switching complexity altogether.
As far as the best beginner path, I'm not sure it's always jumping directly into building your own layout, especially if you've had limited exposure to the hobby. Working on an existing layout is also a good way to begin. This can be either formally, such as by joining a club, or informally, by finding a local layout where you can help out.
If you are fortunate enough to have a good local train shop, they can often be an excellent source of referrals to either of these possibilities.
If you decide to start with a layout, I think the Kalmbach how-to books are often a better choice -- although sometimes I am frustrated by the limited track plans they feature.
Marty McGuirck's new book is a step-by-step guide to building, wiring, and scenicking an N scale 4X8: N Scale Railroading: Getting Started in the Hobby, Second Edition I haven't picked up a copy yet,but the cover art depicts a nicely-detailed model railroad.
Similar HO scale oriented titles include:Basic Model Railroading: Getting Started in the HobbyHO Railroad from Start to Finish
These books, in my opinion, are probably better than trying to piece together a layout from advice gleaned from online forums. There are too many divergent opinions, only a few of which actually make sense for a beginner, so it can be difficult to winnow the wheat from the chaff.
Best of luck.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
This question or ones like it (i.e. x vs S or O or narrow gauge or ???) seem to crop up once a week or so. There is no definitive "best" or "worst" to model, for they all have their plus & minus points. I would suggest that factors like available space, money, product availability, modeling abilities, eyesight & manual dexterity, your particular interests, and a few others are prime considerations.
I started in Lionel O as a youngster, but its size became a limitation (as did the costs) later on. I then thought about S gauge, but product availability and cost stopped that early on. Ho was begun as a teen, and kept mainly due to product availability, cost, and "realism". I did a stint and layout with N in the late '80s, but soon found that it was just too small for me to work well with, and that killed my enjoyment. So I got back into HO in a big way in the early '90s, and am here with it today. Oh, almost forgot, I seriously considered going into narrow gauge a few years ago, but my love of mainline railroading won out.
I guess my point is that there is no right or wrong answer here, and if you are unsure, I would spend some time at train shows or clubs and hobby shops to get a feel for "what you really want". Take your time now to answer that question - THEN spend the bucks!
Mobilman44
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Metro Red LineN ALL THE WAY! ...Jolly Ol' St. Nick may say, "HO-HO-HO" but you caN't spell SaNta without "N"! :)
N ALL THE WAY!
Jolly Ol' St. Nick may say, "HO-HO-HO" but you caN't spell SaNta without "N"! :)
Since St. Nick and Santa start with S, you should too.
N S ALL THE WAY!
Dave-the-TrainAsk Santa, he'll give you the correct answer. ()
Ask Santa, he'll give you the correct answer. ()
Santa can certainly fit more N-scale trains than HO-scale trains in his sled! :)
And when he slides down the chimney, he can just fit that Kato SD70ACe in his pocket!
4x8' can get you a nice layout with great scenery and the run that you need in N scale. For HO scale, 4x8 is only good for kids' train sets with its unrealistic, toylike 18" radius curves. If you're into modern-era trains and only have space for a 4x8, forget HO.
As for price, there really isn't much of a difference these days. They're generally about the same price. Actually, some N scale trains and accessories are actually cheaper than the HO equivalent! That wasn't the case 15-20 years ago! There's also a great selection of N nowadays, and with technological advances such as laser-cutting and high-resolution printing, the level of detail in N is light years ahead of what it was 20 years ago.
I would only recommend HO if you have an entire basement/garage to devote to a layout. Then it's nice and fun. Notice that the real cool looking HO layouts you see in Model Railroader are huge basement/garage layouts or club layouts. Otherwise, for small layouts (unless you're doing a small short line or traction thing, where tight curves are not a detriment), it's really useless.
hi Steve
Steve75I am not very good at track plans because I am not very good at the wireing aspect
Wiring your layout has nothing to do with drawing a trackplan. You seem to have to learn a lot on both issues.
Steve75I am not very good at the wireing aspect and can't get them to work.
Steve75I tryed to usr the free download track plan from Atlas but with no sucess.
This is crying out loud, tell where you were lost and ask how to go on.
I know, Byron Henderson and all other designers are warning against inproper use and to early use of CAD-software. It can still be a nice way to get at least a drawing of your "room" on this forum.
In the mean time you could visit as much layouts as possible and start study the sites and books mentioned. Till now you've heard a lot of NO, NO's; IMHO the Atlas trackplan you have chosen is not a bad start. Don't get me wrong: not a bad start for a discussion; I agree with Byron a bad start for just building. But you have to think about the footprint of your layout first. And you have a lot of thinking to do about the kind of railroad you want before drawing trackplans. After doodling a lot on paper it is time for a drawing with CAD. Doodling on paper is leading to many overly optimistic idea's. (Wolfgang's first plan showed that clearly; despite of all his experience. And for the second time he is coming up with a couple of not really good plans, before debating the footprint or your wishes. As a old teacher he should have known better) Andy Sperandeo is giving in the 102 Trackplans book a nice introduction to designing with square's; in John Armstrong's book this issue is covered in depth.
So some hard questions:
Do you own the books mentioned?
Did you study the sites mentioned?
Do you want to learn how to get a drawing (with pen or with CAD) posted?
Do you want to learn about the relation between era, cars, the kind of railroad and radii?
And try to ask clear questions; I really did not understand what you were saying in your last posting.
BTW can you describe why you like the plan you have chosen? Do you have a dream about a layout? Like a BN branch in the Midwest in the 80's? Or about coalmines in Virginia in the 50's or about or a modern UP-main near Cheyenne? And your role in it: in an armchair watching your trains or are you the engineer switching an industrial zone or running a wayfreight? Or do you envision yourself running the Pocahontas Arrow in the 60's over the 750 odd miles between Norfolk and Cincinnati in just 15 hours?
But the pictures will tell.
I think a 4x8 layout is what we all started out with in HO, run some old Athearn f3's on some sharp curves and you'll be fine, its a nice size.
As others have said though, if you want town to town operations go with N. There's al ot of nice stuff in that scale now, I really like that Broadway Limited car set by Kato.
This was the plan I found but if any one knows of a better one I would like to see it as I am not very good at track plans because I am not very good at the wireing aspect and can't get them to work. I tryed to usr the free download track plan from Atlas but with no sucess.
Steve75 I am very new to the hobby this will be the first layout I have done, so I dont know anything like what does DCC stand for ? and anything about it. I also have 2 children oldest is 11 youngest is 3, plus I don't know all the termanology that goes with the hobby. Thank you in advance for the advice Steve
I am very new to the hobby this will be the first layout I have done, so I dont know anything like what does DCC stand for ? and anything about it. I also have 2 children oldest is 11 youngest is 3, plus I don't know all the termanology that goes with the hobby.
Thank you in advance for the advice
DCC stands for Digital Command Control. Each locomotive has a micro-processor called a decoder and a unique address. Track is constantly powered with AC current but the loco will only respond when a throttle sends a command to its address. In addition to direction, starting, stopping, acceleration, deceleration, other locomotive functions can be controlled from the throttle, such as headlights and sound effects if the locomotive is equipped with a speaker wired to the decoder.
cuyama Mark, this is for a beginner, right? And you're recommending a plan that requires 15 inch curves, custom handlaid-to-fit turnouts, steep grades, and finicky, expensive HO geared locomotives?
Mark, this is for a beginner, right? And you're recommending a plan that requires 15 inch curves, custom handlaid-to-fit turnouts, steep grades, and finicky, expensive HO geared locomotives?
Wasn't John Allen a beginner some sixty years ago when he built his first layout? Isn't everyone a beginner until they've built their third or fourth turnout? I had handlaid track, "finicky and expensive" geared locomotive (they're relatively cheaper and more reliable now), steep/sharp grades/curves rising via a nolix to a second deck, all the while in my mid-teens 45 years ago (with a $3 per week allowance and rare temporary jobs at $2 an hour) and have never considered my skills greater than mediocre. Regardless, I had a ball!
Equipment availability in HO is superb. In N, there are a lot fewer choices, although my Atlas N Shays both run smooth as a top.
But the OP stated that space was his primary concern, so N would be the obvious choice.
I chose N scale for my current layout, but wish I had the space to build it in HO for the added details and better selection. Life is full of compromises, yes?
markpierce The plan reminds me of John Allen's original Gorre & Daphetid layout which was smaller than four-by-eight. The plan should work in HO with some track realignments with 15-16" radius curves and custom/hand-laid turnouts with no. 4 frogs, probably necessitating the hidden track moved so it is under the upper town. Perfect geared-locomotive territory with the sharp curves and inevitable steep grades.
The plan reminds me of John Allen's original Gorre & Daphetid layout which was smaller than four-by-eight. The plan should work in HO with some track realignments with 15-16" radius curves and custom/hand-laid turnouts with no. 4 frogs, probably necessitating the hidden track moved so it is under the upper town. Perfect geared-locomotive territory with the sharp curves and inevitable steep grades.
I honestly don't see that as a path to success and fun for a complete beginner.
cuyama Sorry Wolfgang, but to that layout, I must say No No No.
Sorry Wolfgang, but to that layout, I must say No No No.