Just to fill in a blank or two on the original discussion on this thread, Atlas 15" radius sectional track was surprisingly common particularly back when HO was still valued for being so small. But there was smaller radius track at the time – I think Fleischmann had 14" sectional track (more likely it was some metric dimension) for regular DC two rail, and I think Maerklin had something that tight or even tighter. And Tru Scale offered wood roadbed components in 14" and 16" radius sizes, in addition to larger radius increments up to 36". It was marketed to those who wanted to lay fiber tie flex track). But they offered the same sizes in their “self gauging” roadbed which had ties milled into the roadbed with milled out areas for the track to be spiked in place – a sort of hybrid form of hand laid track.
Moore by the way had another little layout that was featured in Railroad Model Craftsman but not as I recall in MR: it was N gauge and featured a mix of N scale and HOn 2 1/2. E L Moore deserves to be remembered and because he made rather than bought so many elements of of his structure projects, the articles he wrote for MR and RMC are just as useful today as when written. One oddity of our hobby is that for some reason there tends to be a backlash against prolific writers. Some of this was discussed recently in the threads about Malcolm Furlow’s death, and both RMC and MR would get complaints about “too much John Allen” when the only recent John Allen was in the OTHER magazine! Well E L Moore had his inevitable backlash too, and I remember a letter to the editor proposing to establish a “Help Stamp Out E L Moore Society.” The person who proposed this wrote a followup letter many months later rather sheepishly reporting that only one person had written him to join the Help Stamp Out E L Moore Society — and that person was E L Moore! Now that’s a character ya gotta lo
