New here, so apologies if this isn’t allowed or if this is in the wrong sub-forum.
I’m heading off to college this next fall and have always loved trains. I modeled 1920s New York Central in HO when I was younger (my parents used to model as well - 50s N Scale C&O), but stopped because of a lack of space (the 4x8 sheet of plywood was absolutely killer to try to shoehorn into various rooms) and time. The school I’m going to (University of Michigan - Go Blue!) is close enough to home that I’ll be home at times and I’ll have time this summer as well that I can finally restart my layout.
I want to model late 1930s / early 1940s New York Central freight and some passenger as it existed here in Michigan (namely, the old Wolverine that went through Ann Arbor & my hometown) in HO. I definitely want to fit passenger operations on here somehow because my town sits smack-dab on the old NYC mainline through Michigan. I would also like freight / some switching or a yard of sorts on the layout if possible (looking at Hughart Yard in Grand Rapids as a prototype to follow, but definitely much smaller in size for the scale, because it would allow me to run a PRR Mikado that I picked up when younger, too).
My main problem here is the odd room size constraints that I’ve been given.
I need to somehow fit a layout on the 76" wall and the 160" wall. I’m thinking of some sort of ‘L-Shape’ or a long layout with bubbles on the end for turning around / continuous running. I haven’t found one on here or on the internet that I like, though, and was wondering if any of you had suggestions on what could reasonably fit in this space that would also give turning radii that would be acceptable for passenger cars.
It sounds like you’re describing a dog-bone layout: skinny in the middle with turning loops at the end. For 30" radius turning loops (a good choice for passenger cars), you’ll be taking up VERY approximately 5’ x 7 1/2’ on each end. Should you shrink it down to 24" radius, it’s now 4’ x 6’.
Can you do that? And leave enough in between for a satisfying layout?
I could probably do that. I’d like to keep 30" turning loops if possible - if it’s 5’ 7 1/2 I can do that because the short wall is 76" and I’ve been given essentially the rectangle formed by that wall and the 160" wall.
I was thinking something like this layout, but it looks like the short side is 8’, which is too long for my short wall.
Welcome to the forum! Your post pretty much fits all four main food groups here on the MR forum. However, I think the General Discussion forum will work the best for this thread and allow the most crossover discussion.
Being an OSU fan I can’t say I necessarily look highly on your choice of schools but I will say you have great taste in RRs and era. [:D] I also model the NYC - mainly freight with a little passenger - in the early to mid-40s.
That’s an unusual-sized room you’ve been given. I would go with an around-the-wall layout (vs. a dogbone) so that you can mazimize on the radius for your passenger cars. I wouldn’t go <R24" and would go as large as you can for better looking and operating cars. I think a dogbone will eat up too much valuable space. If you go with an around-the-wall you’ll need a duck-under or liftout at the door. Does the door swing out or swing in?
Both Digitrax and NCE are great choices for DCC systems. I personally like and prefer NCE for it’s intuitive throttles and programming but Digitrax makes a very good product that offers some nice features not found on other DCC systems.
One of the “Big Four” killers of train layouts is “access or reach.” (The others are “simple track plans”, “poor electrical connectivity”, and “poor planning.”)
If you end up with any type of layout, any configuration, that has a lot of its one side against a wall, or worse, an L-shaped one with its outer corner edge tight into a corner, reach will be a big problem if you have to get up with one knee on it or drag a two-stepper to get to a problem buried more than about 32" deep. Unfortunately, it’s one of the detracting factors of a 4X8 perimeter, the old Plywood Pacific, because most of us think we’ll solve the problem of a small room by shoving it into a corner…we can always walk around it.
I don’t want to throw cold water on your enthusiasm and excitement. Just please think carefully about either having to jerk the thing out of a corner, and not have things fall askew as you do this (or having to remove anything that can tumble beforehand), or letting it sit essentially permanently in one spot and having to get to trouble spots. Every layout requires maintenance or problem resolution. Access is a potential lunchbox letdown.
I agree with Ed…passenger service is a must-have for me, so I found space and a track plan that afforded me very generous curve radii. In my case, the only option (because my layout was shoved hard into a corner of the basement…permanently), was to have a central operating pit that I had to duck down to get to. But, around me as I spun with the controller in hand, my trains were able to use broad curves that allowed me heavyweight passenger cars from the late steam era. If you would like the longer Pullman types, you’ll have to consider curves near the 27/28" range for very reliable trailing and shoving.
I must confess that I feel the same way about your choice of schools[;)]
So the room itself is a glorified hallway at best, and my mother might kill me if I expand out into the area between the door on the left wall and the one on the right (the two main entrances to the room - the others that are on the same wall go to the bathroom and the attic, respectively).
I’ve been suggested by a Reddit user to do benchwork like this to fit a mainline, but I’m not sure how I should go about fitting some sort of switching i
Your space in feet is 6’4" x 13’4". This is not a lot of space if you’re running passenger trains. About the only thing that will fit is a oval. Using bubbles at the ends won’t work because the bubbles will take up all the space and the front will be all curves, plus you have to keep the radius down to avoid overlap.
While you could do a donut, I would recommend a tabletop on wheels that can be kept in the corner and rolled out when needed. You will need to make it at least 4’6" to have an outer curve of 24", I would suggest 5’4" so you can use curves of 32" and 29.5" (30" might cause problems with your passenger cars, although you could mock it up and see). Then you could double track your mainline to run 2 trains at once. You can hide the backside of the oval for better scenic appearance. If your passenger cars will work on 24" radius, you can use that and have layover (staging) tracks on the back side of the oval.
I have built 2 that were 5’4" x 12’. This uses exactly 2 sheets of plywood - have the lumberyard cut each of them at 5’4". This will give you 4 pieces that can be arranged in 5’4" x 12’. Build an grid table this size. Put the 4 legs in a couple of feet from the ends. Brace the legs. I use 4" ball bearing casters on the bottom of the legs. My tables are on a concrete floor and use black wheels. Since you’re on carpet get the ones that are for carpet - these aren’t as easy to find, but do exist. I haven’t tried carpet, but as long as your carpet nap is short, you should be okay. Don’t skimp on the size wheels. The wheel packages will tell you the smaller ones will carry the weight, but you need the bigger size to make it easy to roll.
Here is a dogbone with cross overs that will fit, but like Paul says, it’s all curves. As drawn the loops are 30" radii but a couple of the connecting curves are only 24". Not great for passenger trains, but you can play with the curves. Obviously you could also add in other spurs.
Atlas makes a FREE track planning software package that you can download from their site and it’s fairly simple to learn and work with. While it is somewhat limited, it might help you “see” what would best work in that space.
If you’re primary commitment is to HO scale, you’re going to have a hard time squeezing in a realistic passenger oriented layout in that space. If your primary desire is to model NYC passenger operations, N or even Z would be a much better choice.
In HO, you’d be better off with some type of NYC switching layout. With careful designing, you could come up with something which could later be fit into a larger future layout.
Welcome back to the hobby and to the forum. In that space and with passenger traffic as a key focus, a dogbone-style layout (as the one from my site that you referenced) is going to have a lot of curvature, as Dave’s sketch shows. Dropping down to a 26” radius for the end loops would help a bit.
Likely a better approach to allow relatively broad curves and decent access would be some sort of “donut”-style layout. Since you are presumably young and reasonably agile, ducking underneath to access the “inner” part of the donut might not be an issue.
If you do choose this style of layout, I’d encourage you to use all three “sides”: inside, outside, and backside. This not-to-scale sketch shows the idea, with tracks along the wall (the backside) used for staging. In this way, one could have a scene on the outside of the donut and more on the inside.
A solid rectangular table the size of your space would be impossible to reach across; and the force needed to overcome inertia to start it rolling on carpet might derail HO trains.
Have you considered sectional building method. That way when you have to leave for the summer or move out you can take it with you and it can be built in such a manner that it can be configured to connect together in various ways to fit different locations ? I think the Model railroad forum has some articles on this ?
Unless things have changed on the market, N- or Z-scale in steam is going to be very limited in product selection - i.e. unless you want to kitbash or scratchbuild. And it’s not going to be much better for early diesel, either. I did see an N-scale 20th Century Limited passenger car set available but it was in brass and - as you might expect - NOT inexpensive.
And that’s the key, for me. I am 100% committed to steam, so I’m committed to HO because the choices for NYC Steam in N are… lacking, to say the least.
They aren’t HO. One is O gauge 3 rail and the other is S gauge. Both use very sharp curves. So not much fits. The O gauge is just a double track oval with a couple of sidings. The S gauge is an oval with passing siding on each side and 4 spurs on the front side for a small town switching area. With HO you can get more in.
