I am asking in your opinion, how would you do this?
I will be building a shelf layout for N scale. The era is 1970 to 1985ish. The entire max. will be 27’ long. At one end I can have a max. of 8’ x 8’ for a balloon/reverse loop and at the other a max of 5’ x 5’. The balloon/reverse loops will look something like a tear drop or pear shape.
In between each end section will be the industry specific elements. Passenger depot, brewery, power plant, fuel/oil storage, some kind of manufacturing, etc. These will be accessed by turnouts and spurs to each part. Except the passenger depot will need its own siding.
I already know I will need to use a minimum of 36" radius for the loops because of the longer stock I will be using. SD50’s and newer with Gunderson box cars and 30,000 gallon tankers, etc. Knowing that, each end of the layout will need to be at least 4’ x 4’. That should give me a really great yard in the middle of each loop.
My question is, if you were building this within these parameters would you max out the ends of the layout at 8’ x 8’ at one end and 5’ x 5’ at the other and make a really killer layout? Or would you stick with the 4’ x 4’ at each end?
Keep in mind with each end section being larger it shortens the distance in between the consits can run on and will reduce the amount of industry specific elements that can be added to it.
You may need to re-think your plan, as a 4’x4’ area will allow at most only a 22" or 23" radius, and even the 5’x5’ one of no more than 28" or 29". Since you’re working in N scale, these may be sufficient. Alternatively, you may want to consider a point-to-point layout - this wouldn’t allow continuous running, but it would give you more room for industries and you could still have a yard at either end.
I’m gonna guess the OP was referring to a 36" diameter turnback loop. I’m not in N, but I’m pretty sure the rolling stock he cited can make it around an 18" radius curve, even the six-axle SD50s. If so, then plenty of room for the loops at each end.
Yes, I do mean 36" diameter, or 3’ diameter, which is an 18" radius. Sorry for the confusion.
So I’ll ask again, what would you do? Would you max out the available space for a large yard at one end, the 8’ x 8’ space and a smaller yard at the other, the 5’ x 5’ space? Or would you use only what you need?
Personally, I’m all about access to build, maintain, and operate. Even a 4x4 blob is going to have to be arranged to have access on 2 full sides and at least partial on the 3rd. Especially in N scale, when someday you will have to rerail equipment on the track furthest from the access point.
How far can you reach in to rerail? Layout height will have some impact, as will the level of detail on the structures, equipment, scenery, etc., in front of the rearmost track. I like mocking up things like this using cardboard boxes. Set up some boxes to the approximate height and depth you are contemplating for the layout. Put a couple of pieces of track in the back. Put something in front to represent your structures or scenery or even front tracks - can be just as simple as more track with trains on them. Now reach over and rerail some equipment in the back without knocking anything over in the front. Voila, you have just determined the accessibility limits for your situation.
Of course, back in the bad old days of layouts with large expanses depth-wise, folks used pop-out or drop-down hatches. I can remember climbing up and sitting on my dad’s layout to take care of things in the back - or using his 14" x18" access hatches. Even as a young teenager, I swore I would never do that to myself on my own layout.
Unless you’re going to have good access space on both sides of your 5-foot-wide loop, you’re going to need to leave an access opening in the middle of the loop, at least 2 feet square, to be able to get at the back of the track for construction, scenicking, maintenance, rerailing toppled rolling stock, etc. So filling in the entire loop with track isn’t practical, at least not on that end. You can fill in the entire area with lift-out scenery, such as a city or mountain, but you won’t be able to put track on it. So that kind of limits you on the narrow end to the 2 feet or so along the aisle side of the loop, as you won’t want to duck under to that access hatch on a regular basis.
As for the 8-foot-wide end, I wouldn’t fill it either. I would bend the track along the wall on a 1’ wide shelf, then put a 4-to-5-foot turnback loop near the entry of the 8-foot area, so there’s access to that peninsula on both sides. The resulting layout configuration will look something like the letter J (only imagine a turnback loop on both ends of the J). If you can place this second loop where you have access on both sides, you can go ahead and fill it with track. But depending on the walls surrounding the 8x8 area, you may need an access hatch in the middle of this loop also. (If your library has a copy of John Armstrong’s Track Planning for Realistic Operation, take a look at the chart “An alphabet of walk-in pike shapes” on page 90. The “J” in that chart is exactly what I’m envisioning, though in your case it would be taller.)
Based on the book “101 Track plans” for N scale curves,12 in. rad. curves are considered as “conventional” while 15 in. rad. curves are called “broad”.Now,all your six axle locos and even your longer cars will handle the 12 in. curves though not necessarily looking their best at it.On the other hand,15 in. curves will be just fine for your engines and cars but still be minimal if you ever want to run big steamers.However,your choice of 18 in. is what I’d call generous curves for anything you’d wish to operate,but then,the larger is always the better when one’s space can afford it.
As others have already wisely stated,you’ll need working room for both building and operating and 30 inches is about the deepest one can reach without having to climb on the layout.Trains will be happy with wide areas but will you?
NO. That thread was about required radius. This thread is about asking peoples opinions on what they would choose to do based on these parameters that I have to work with.
I appreciate the info. I did not think of work around/working space. I need to take that into consideration and rethink the spacing needed for the end sections of my layout.
I guess the question is whether the OP would be happy with that latest layout drawing where there is no continuous loop for uninterrupted running of trains.
And, there is only that one yard on the right side, not two yards like he seems to want.
I suspect that the drawing will not meet with his approval.
You’re right. I would not be happy with it. I’ve decided one yard will be engine maintenance and the other car maintenance. Each will have a yard office and maintenance buildings plus enough track to stage consists ready to run on the mainline’s to the industries on the layout.
I have also said, more than once, a walk in layout will NOT work. This layout has to be against the wall only with me standing on the outside to operate it. I need space in the rest of the room for secondary use. I feel like that design is being pushed onto me by Paul.
first of all it is a loop to loop design with a branch. You should look better.
The OP never told any one a walk-in design was not wanted.
I only illustrated what Steve Otte was thinking, You did not mention in this thread how you wanted to fill the loops. You could have come up with something yourself.
Paul, no, that’s not what I was thinking. I knew SUX wanted his layout against the wall. I was talking about a simple dogbone, except that the 8-foot-wide end was bent back along one side to form a J shape.
so just keep the centre open and make a reversing loop at the left end. Would let the width of the centre part open to Sux. An access hole might be needed on the 5x5 part if the radius is larger then 18` .
I went around the corner for two reasons. He has stated his centre part was 14 x 4 and for the price of narrow shelves he could have a much longer main.
If this is what he means, i finally understand SUX. The loop at the right could also be build as a peninsula, fitting within your 8x8 bounderies. When the width of the peninsala is 3,5 feet and the aisle 2,5 feet you could still have a 2 feet wide shelf along that part of the wall.
This is not meant to push you into something, but as I said, i find it hard to talk about plans without a drawing. The tearing down fun or finding alternatives can start now, on both loops a 18 inch radius is possible.
That really seems like a lot of wasted (i.e., unused) space.
There must be some variations where a long industrial siding, or an engine servicing facility, or something, could extend off of that left side loop to form a peninsula.
That’s a lot closer to my idea, Paul. The only differences would be that I’d make the loop on the left 1 foot bigger and add an access space behind the yard; and I’d curve the track on the right farther along the wall so that the loop you have against the right wall sticks out as a peninsula, parallel to the long wall. Depending on whether access is available at the bottom of the drawing, this loop may need to be made bigger to accommodate an access opening, as well.
