hi,
ask Lee about the scale he is modelling and a precise plan.
Paul
hi,
ask Lee about the scale he is modelling and a precise plan.
Paul
It looks to me to be N scale, and why would I want to copy his layout. My bench work is all ready framed out and will grow. I liked the plan you sent on my earlier post but then I made some changes to the bench work, have to keep the Wife happy. I also dont need all that staging just yet and that as you know eats up scenery. I wish I had more time on one of those cad programs but what ever or how ever I draw it up will likely change as the track gets laid. You know that goes.
Again Thank you for the input
Ron
hi,
What you do not need yet, you will need tomorrow…and since the staging was under the visible part of the layout it would not cost you scenery-wise.
It is time to start being un-lazy …and start making drawings with scale switches and radii.
I doubt very much if the chosen construction method with foam is the most easy when it comes to a sectional plan with so many grades. The old-fashioned “cookie-cutter” all plywood construction is pretty straight forward. And stay away from short pieces of plywood, when longer pieces are bend and properly supported its strength will amaze you.
As said before, the passing siding is way to short, nor do i see any of your museum buildings. Smaller radii will give you the length to develop a station; though your wish to run long equipment might lead to a choice for N-scale.
Smile
Paul
Did I miss something? Is the OP using “N” scale? [:O]
I’m using “HO”. A 5’ X 10’ table would have bigger curves and be a better design. that’s why additions to my lay out are 5’ wide. On 4’ table, track has to come to the edge. I use a 1 1/2" plastic shield to avoid off the table excursions. Elevation is carried through the curves and from one end to the other on a 10’ length. Now I remember, The cross under curve is just under 20" on my 4’ section. The reverse loop in the middle of the lay out is 18" radius, but would not be used if larger radius is required. My 2-6-6-2 and 6 axle PA1s will travel smoothly any where on my lay out.
Of course I will defer to older modelers. Just my suggestions. [swg]
OH, if I were to start over from scratch, I would probably do around the wall instead.
Good luck.
Lee
Morning Everyone,
Paul; Your right I do need to take the time and either learn to use the Atlas free program or find one that is easier to use.I am also probably getting ahead of myself on some of the other details too, like building placement and such. You are also right about using wood framework and plywood sub-roadbed, I have been thinking this and will only be using the foam to fill in for the scenery. The last real layout I worked on was in the late seventies no computor design then we just drew up a rough sketch and then made changes as we laid the track to make it fit. It was also just a huge table of four sheets of plywood with access holes that you had to crawl to get to. the layout was a scaled down copy of Riverside International Raceway and train ops around Perris Ca. and March Air force base.
Thank you for the drawing out the plans like that, today I am going to set up a tripod and use a yard stick to draw out some differant curve radiuses on my bench work, just to get an idea of what they will look like. It has been a long time and now that the Wife is giving me full support in this I am probably trying to move a little to fast on this, but that is why I have been posting all the rather dumb questions. The hobby has realy gone a long way since my active days and I have a lot of Catching up to do.
Lee; I am sorry, When I looked at the photo of your layout and because of the lens you used I was trying to judge the scale by the length of the trains in the far end of the photo, and I just assumed that you were modeling in N scale. Yesterday I had taken an 8’ length of 1" X 3" and layed it on my bench work put out a couple of pieces of flex track, a terminal track and found an old transformer. Then I pulled out an old engine and some rolling stock out of a box thatI have been toting around the country for over twenty years. after putting together my little train I was a little surprised at how long it looked on that 8’ board. I even thought ab
What you mean looks bad! Looks about the same as the 4% grade from the mainline interchange to the colliery at the high end of the valley on the Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo - except that mine is shaped more like a garden hose that’s been tossed carelessly on the ground in loops and wiggles.
OTOH, I’m not trying to run 50 car trains of auto racks. A typical train has a couple of 4-wheel goods wagons and a short coach, usually with an 0-6-0 teakettle on each end.
If you combine that g-nasty grade with short cars and small locomotives, preferably in a ‘themed’ way, it can be made to look good and operate well. If you want it to look like the (fill in Class 1 of choice) main line…
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Hi Chuck,
Now you have peaked my interest, can you post a pic ?
My inability to post pictures, or even get my wife to point HER digital camera at the layout, is a standing joke around the forums.[:$]
Actually, a photo wouldn’t show much - just a bunch of tracks wandering around inside a steel framework, rather like the Himalayas ride at Disney World before they put the skin on…
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)