I guess I’m on my own then? Thanks for those of you who contributed layout ideas and suggestions. I wanted that, not critiques.
Or you might choose a published layout that’s closer to your actual space – that will put you in the right ballpark from the beginning.
Would you rather have been told, “Yes, go ahead with that much-larger layout published in MR (even though it won’t fit).”
Or encouraged to go ahead with your sketches even though they won’t work for your concept, scale, and space?
I tried to help you with the suggestion of a donut-style layout which would fit well in your space, allow a broader radius for your modern equipment, etc. But as is so often the case, people seem to take any alternative suggestions as criticism.
Best of luck, perhaps others will provide information in a manner that you find more palatable.
Well, I guess maybe your are alone. Any of your 3 sketches CAN be made to work, if you want point to point, and NO continuous running, and NO helix, and on 1 level, not 2 or 3.
Cuyama is trying to be realistic with you, and trying to make you aware of what space you have. It’s been pointed out to you how much space a helix takes up, and for continuous running, looking at your sketch #3, each section on the left and right needs to be a minimum of 4’ wide, just to have a 22" radius for the return loop.
And the plan you linked to in MRR, it’s 16’6" x 16’6". You have 6’3" x 11’. You have to come down to earth with the space you have, or leave the car parked outside.
If it was mine, I’d go with the donut shape that Byron (Cuyama) shows, or maybe something in the shape of my first suggestion, leave enough space to walk all the way around the layout, divide whats left with a backdrop divider, and have a continuous loop.
BUT, Cuyama is a professional track plan designer, I’m nothing close to that.
Do a scaled drawing of your space, with a proposed track plan, but be real, and use a compass to draw loops and curves on the track plan, with an actual scaled radius, and see for yourself what will fit. The absolute bare minimum you want for a return loop, in HO, is 22", most modern equipment will work, but 24" is better, and recommended for modern equipment, and 30" is best.
Mike.
Please guys!! I know my space is too small! That is why is said I would have to do some “reworking on the other stuff mentioned in the article to make it fit my CRITERIA and SPACE”. Obviously raidus and layout size would be smaller. I just liked the scenery, the helix IDEA, not saying I will definitely do it, and the triple shelf concept the transitions from mountians to the sea. Thats all.
- Quick Reply
- Reply
- Edit
Helix Size,…larger than you first think
Helix Rings,…steel or alum
They will intersect with some 68” steel circles I am having bent up from 1.5” angle iron. Those two steel circles (one top, one bottom) will be joined by 12 vertical post made up from 1” square alum sections I salvaged elsewhere. It should be strong, and rigid.
Regretably I was not able to find a fabricator to make these steel rings of angle iron and/or at a reasonable price. So I had to settle to some rings bent of 2"x1/4" thick aluminum strips. They arrived a couple of days ago, and I’ll start some drilling work on them tomorrow.
Sure look bigg
Why a helix? An elevator takes up much less space and can stop on many levels with out the needed approach design considerations. No curvature and berticle space issues either
Hmmm… Maybe. Although I would need it lo lift whole trians, which still takes up a lot of space. Also, the payload has to exit in the same direction it entered, unless you add the additional complication of turning 180 degrees. I will have to see.
Basically all you are saying is you like the overall concept.
A turnback loop in HO will need to be at the absolute minimum 48" across (for the benchwork) with the equipment you want to run, and will likely need to be larger.
A helix with a tighter radius is highly inadvisable for a couple of reasons. Top of the list is that as the radius gets tighter, both the actual grade and effective grade due to curvature goes up. Trains want to run in a straight line. Turning adds friction. More friction = more drag. More drag equals fewer cars that can be pulled. Somewhere I have a helix calculator that someone ginned up awhile back, but if memory serves, a 22" radius helix puts you in the 5-6% grade+ range.
Intermodal is not probably workable in your space. 89’ flat cars and 53’ well cars like big curves, not little ones. You might beable to modeler’s license a bit a get away with smaller intermodal cars, Front Runners might be workable, but I would guess that your track work will need to be bulletproof (the prototype had trouble with the things derailing).
I would suggest either getting a compass and several sheets of graph paper or using a CAD (CTSS notwithstanding) program to draw your space to scale, then put scale minimum radius circles into your space and drag them around a bit. Af
Since youve stated you want continous run, locating where the turnbacks will exist is probably going to be the most limiting thing.
We are not knocking your space, don’t take it personally. Everyone (and I mean everyone) has to make some sort of concession to their available space when compared to what they want to model. What we a
I decided to provide you with a quick assessement of each of your drawings.
A quick key to what radius you will need:
2x physical length is the absolute minimum for a piece of equipment to operate (in most cases), and 2.5x will likely provide trouble free operation.
What does this mean?
An 89’ intermodal flatcar will need at absolute minimum of 24-25" and would be happier at 30"
A 40’ box car will work on 15" but will be happier on 18"
Given the following facts provided by you:
The space is 6.5’ wide.
Plan 1
Plan 1 as drawn is a U shape plan. With the long legs of the U being on the long sides of the space.
In order to have a turn back loop, each leg would need to be a minimum of 48" at the end (22" radius loop). This leaves 2.5 feet for aisle space and the other leg of the U at the widest point of the return loop.
Each balloon will occupy a 4x4 space, and will need to be offset from each other. Given 11’ of length, your long ballon will end about the 7’ mark and the short balloon will likewise start around 6’ to allow you to walk between them. I would have to draw this out to scale to see if would even be workable.
Plan 2
The two end boxes sticking down would need to be at a minimum of 4x4 to accoplish turn back loops, and you will need to add some triangles in the inside corners to support the track to curve back to parallel with the back wall.
This eats up 8 feet of your length. Providing you with only 3 feet for the center peninsula and two aisles.
Plan 3
Plan 3 is basically the same as plan two with out the peninsula (which Im guessing that you may have guessed wouldnt fit)
Plan 3 again would require two 4x4 shaped boxes at a minimum to accomplish the turnbacks for continuous run (with the affo
I will try to do all of this, although, as is probably evident, it will take time. As for your question, I just might be able to have it hang slightly over the car, don’t know how tall it is. The rest of the garage space along the walls is chock full of suitcases, rubbermaids, gardens tools, etc. The car takes up the middle, so I really don’t have more space to work with than the possible overhang above the car. Thanks for all the suggestions though! Much appreciated.
They key idea there is switching to Nscale. I am almost certain that is why that layout was suggested.
Good news! Believe it or not, I can get everything I mentioned and want in ho scale, and I have started doing it! Want proof? I can post my layout plan and pictures of my progress if you don’t believe me!
Hey BNSF, what did you decide to do with your layout? I’d love to see what you’ve done! Can you post pictures and/or layout drawing? Thanks!
I can do both!!!
1:18 scale plan:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1M3w8HTRBrrnqNaaZUHWp1BbM9xV9YrWI
1:12 scale plan:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XRTenHGxjLsKcuqchq1yztmY8DNu8_Xh
Current layout progress:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GTyHW52O3x3FCW29-PJef8qPxyzD4Ddr
To answer a few likely questions…
I model in HO. I am still open to track plan ideas. I only have a few things established. I know I would like a big yard, one that can accomodate trains longer than seven actual feet, and boy am I willing to sacrifice space for it. There will be a double track mainline, as you might be able to tell already from the two trains I have up. The PROBABLE location of the yard would be mostly in the left 3ft by 6 3/4ft section of the layout, but would start off the mainline farther up. I want it to have the full shebang: rip tracks, engine service tracks, main tracks, A/D tracks, etc. And caboose tracks if I can fit them… and I want all of it to be VERY realistic (notice I didn’t say prototypical) and VERY operational.
There might be a helix (for future staging and second level), and the layout was designed to accomodate one…
I want industries popping off of the mainline at various places for even MORE operation. If I can do that prototypically. At least a stock yard/and or meat industry (if I have space) and a boxcar loading dock (wooden platform). Also, a decent sized tank car unloading platform/s to accomodate my tanktrain and other car
Thanks for the reply BNSF! I’m not a layout designer so I’m not the best to comment. I will say that I am concerned about reach with your current setup. It appears that all of your layout buildings will be between the operator and the main lines. Thus you will need to reach over the buildings to clean track, realign cars, disconnect cars, etc. I personally prefer track on the front side with a short reach. Someone earlier mentioned Pelle’s Daneville layout as an example (12 ft by 22 ft). It is a gorgeous layout where you want to step into the scene! It is a very realistic design and clearly shows how much space is required for a large yard and for switching industries with long rail cars. Based on your interests, you will need to downsize your expectations as you do not sufficient room to do them all. I like 1:1 designing by using HO track, really helps to see what can and cannot fit in a given space. Good luck with your layout!