Or an old definition. Armstrong called that schematic “The Riata” in Track Planning for Realistic Operation. With optional return loops at the end, it looks a bit more like the bola (or boleadora) of the vaqueros than a Riata, but JA may not have been that expert on cowboy tools.
You’ve probably already looked at this, but if the room can be rearranged to allow a slightly longer space, even somewhat narrower, a number of interesting folded loops will fit. The two “arms” of the “U” need not be of equal length. This 8X12 HO example with 22" radii crosses over, but with some rearranging, you could add reversing connections instead.
At this point in your deliberations, stay fluid where it matters most, and keep rigid where it matters most…to you!
By that I mean you might want to be quite flexible in the use of your space, including the design of your track system and what it will do for you, but if your strong druthers are to run longish (70’-plus) passenger cars, you must not compromise on your minimum curve radius. This becomes an iterative process necessarily where you keep half an eye on the rolling stock available to you either in kit form or “RTR” (ready-to-run, purchased assembled), the locomtives available that you desire most strongly (for the wow or fun factor that brings you to the hobby), your space, and how wide the tightest curve is going to be. It all has to fit: what you like to run, how you like to run it, and the pragmatic realistic problems such as access, ease of maintenance, easy of assembly so that your trains run smoothly and reliably on well-laid track with virtually no compromises. IOW, keep your eyes on about three or four balls at this point, and also later during construction.
Crandell
Cuyama
This 8’ x 10’ layout has me thinking of more options in my space.
Thanks,
Nelson
I feel like my desire to have the ability to operate late generation steam engines and passenger cars will dictate that I revaluate my entire design approach. Which is a little disappointing, because I originally thought I could get those types of roiling stock to traverses around on my design. However, I now think the curves will be to sharp a radius. This will cause a step back at the basic shape to be used in this 100 sq. ft. area for these types of operations.
I’m a little stuck on my theme. I grew up in the Roanoke area, and this gives me many memories of rail yards for maintenance, of old 611 with passenger cars, and her contemporary large steamers hauling coal. While many of the early generation diesel of this era would work in a tighter space, the steam engines and passenger cars of the period wouldn’t, not to mention modern diesels (I think).
Nelson
If you go around the room (which necessitates the need for a movable section or a duck-under), it will be easy to broaden the radius in that space, as in this 8X12 HO layout built with 24" radius. You only lose the reversing element. Or as noted earlier, re-examine the overall larger room to see if a more amenable space may be arranged/negotiated.
On a dogbone, the return loops can be the min radius that your equipment will do or a combo. Example, in HO scale and engine may run on an 18" radius (HO scale but looks toylike on anything less than 24". This can be done by hiding or disguising the loop, now if part of the loop is to be see you can do this part in a larger radius and lead down into a smaller. personally find that things look better seen on the outside of a small radius than if seen on the inside.
The Original Poster has said that he wants to run large late-generation steam engines and full-size passenger cars. These may not operate reliably around 18" radius in HO without some significant modifications, if at all.
The information on perspective from inside compared to outside is good to know, thank you.
I think I have to settle on what will be the minimum curve radii used in the dog-bone/turn around sections, and that will dictate what the layout design is in my space. Then everything else can be added on later.
The suggestion of a continuous loop is an option, i.e. a loop around the 9.5’ x 9.5’ circumference . But, that prevents the ability to switch between east bound and west bound operations.
This not to every ones taste. The gap between cars on a straight is already way larger then on the prototype. At the outside of a curve the gap is larger then at the inside, so a lot of folks prefer a view from the inside.
The U-type design I have drawn was a dogbone. When applying large 30" radii, space for blobs might be hard to find; besides those large radii are leading to reach-in issues. A doughnut (donut) type layout often is the better option when larger radii are needed in a smaller space.
The best way to start is with a drawing of the whole room, with doors and other obstacles included.
Wish you luck
Paul
Paul
Paul
I’m trying to reimagine this layout, dogbone, with 24” radius end loops. I wouldn’t mind doing doughnut design, if I could incorporate a direction changing route in to it. Perhaps if I got inventive with some bridges or over passes that allowed this reversal in each end as a dogbone would.
Nelson