Always thinking about the next layout, where I want to run Autoracks and Intermodal. It’s going to be freestanding in a basement, around a 10’x12’ footprint. Possibly think Wildcat Central, but it just seems a HO scale layout in 120 sq feet is dominated by curves. Don’t really want to go to N scale…
Seems like most published plans are 1950 era. Why no modern era love?
Beats me. I’m a modern age modeler too. I think designing a layout plan for modern era is probably less complicated? Back in the day, the goal was to get as much mainline run as possible, so packing a space full of track took some innovation. Shorter cars and locomotives made that easier too since you could work with sharper curves.
When faced with 70 foot and longer cars pulled by modern locos, its tougher to come up with a lot of different ways to fill a 10x12 space, IMO.
Its probably going to result in something like the Heart of Georgia basic plan simply altered a bit to fit the room.
Model Railroad Planning 2000 had an interesting bedroom sized plan, the Y2K railroad, but I don’t have a link or ability to show the plan electronically.
If you meant free-standing like in the middle of the 10 x 12 room, the footprint of that layout would be quite small.
Having said that, you could adapt many plans to the modern era by changing the structures and rolling stock. The Virginian project layout comes to mind. Its defined by sharp curves, but changing the theme to aggregate, cement, or even corn syrup would allow it to be dominated by shorter cars.
My current layout is a Heart of Georgia. I’m thinking my next one will be the Wildcat Central. Lack of staging on the HoG gets pretty tough after a while. I also want to run Intermodal and Autoracks but the room just isn’t there with the HoG.
That’s the dilemma if you want any kind of continuous running in a fairly small room. Curves. Especially if you need decent curve radii for modern longer rolling stock.
My last layout was in a slightly larger 10x18’ room and I did an around the walls large oval format to get 32" minimum radius.
It doesn’t hurt to look at a lot of track plans to get idea’s and design your own.
Ultimately 10x12 isn’t really big enough to run auto racks and intermodal. Space is often a real limiting factor - sucks.
Broader HO radii in that space will be a challenge. You’ve had a few different layout concepts posted on this and other forums, so I’m not sure where you are now focused.
Because of the (generally) larger rolling stock, modern-era modeling is more challenging in mid-sized and smaller spaces.
Thomas Klimoski’s Georga Northeastern in Great Model Railroads 2020 is modern-era HO in a 9’ 2" x 10’ 6" space (plus a small staging shelf in an adjacent room), but is limited to a 24" minimum radius. He’s chosen industries that mostly call for shorter rolling stock. MR magazine subscribers may view the trackplan here:
http://mrr.trains.com/how-to/track-plan-database/2019/10/ho-scale-georgia-northeastern
The Y2K railroad from MRP 2000 referenced earlier in the thread was a fairly tight terminal-switching shelf layout drawn with 24” radius curves and #4 turnouts, so it might not be a great fit to your needs.
There have been a number of plans published in MRP for more-modern era layouts, but unfortunately the MRP layouts are generally not in the on-line database. (I don’t know why that is.) Often these are for larger spaces than you have available. For example, my own plan for an HO modern-era layout with an intermodal yard in MRP 2015 was for a roughly 14’X23’ space.
You may have posted a dimensioned sketch of your space here earlier, I don’t recall. Posting that again in this thread along with your current concept might invite folks to suggest ideas.
As I have probably mentioned in your earlier threads, overlapping elements such as staging, main lines, and industry tracks makes the most of any space. And using the inside, outside, and back side (against the walls) for a donut-style layout often works well.
Good luck with your lay
Tom Klimoski’s Georgia Northeastern layout is excellent. I continually forget to mention it.
He also is a MR contributor and has a website and Youtube videos. Google search his name and it pops up quickly.
Again, sharp curves and short-ish cars, generally, but modern era.
My layout area is approx 14 feet x 20 feet in my basement, with access on the 14 feet side. My basement is unfinished, so I haven’t been looking at double deck layouts (too much).
modern era, Chicago railroading with a Class 1. I’ve kicked around commuter plans or a freight route, single town or multi town. Just struggling to decide what I like the most.
currently I have a Heart if Georgia with a add-on single sided entry staging yard, with three tracks.
Have to agree, 10x12 just won’t cut it. If you use 30" radius curves, you end up with less than 5 feet of straight track on the 10’ side, and less than 7 feet on the 12’ side. If you add turnouts and make say a 3 track intermodal yard on the 12’ side, your short track probbaly won’t even hold a single 3 unit well or spine car.
14x20, getting better, but still those curves needed for modern autoracks and intermodal, plus the 6 axle power to pull it, is going to eat up the length. Can probbaly get away with #6 turnouts, but they too will eat space like crazy.
–Randy
Why would you not simply go around the walls of the 14 x 20 space?
That would be a 70’ mainline that would easily allow 36" radius curves?
Or, if you can stand a few tight aisles, you could add a peninsula and add about 30’ more. 30" radius might make that idea more comfortable.
And, you can make it a twice around, hide the second lap, and add thru staging to that.
Yes, it would need a duck under/lift out…
Model only one town, with a yard and industial area, there you have it.
I model 1954 and will not settle for less than 36" radius, but admittedly, I have 1600 sq ft. The last layout was in 1000’ sq ft.
But even in 1600 sq ft, I am only modeling one town, in a scheme similar to what I described above, with three peninsula’s out into the room.
Sheldon
One more thought.
14 x 20 is not big enough for a double deck layout. A helix will use too much room and the around the room run would be hard pressed to provide enough separation.
I built a double deck layout, hated it before it was complete.
I did have one other double deck scheme I never built. Instead of the usual two narrow shelves, I had this idea to build a traditional layout similar to what I described in my first post, but build the benchwork fairly high, about 54", and 30" or 36" deep. And also have a peninsula.
Under the end of the peninsula, a helix goes down to a lower level, which is just a 12" deep “shadow box” layout below the main layout at about 32" off the floor.
No operation down there, just a long mainline run.
Decided against this idea for my new layout for several reasons.
Sheldon
14x20 is just enough space to do a nolix double deck with 18" or so between decks and not have a crazy grade (under 2.5%). Of course that would leave very little flat space, although a tiwce around on each deck approach with the one lap that’s on the grade being hidden or semi-hidden behind the other one for most of the run would do it. Or a combination of lesser deck separation and/or steeper grades.
–Randy
Yes, agreed, just barely.
Sheldon
Duplicate post due to forum lag.
I did a nolix in a 10x18’ room with 32" minimum curves but the separation for decks (right side) was 8.5 inches, 7.5 above the rails on the bottom level. This was tight but servicable but not great but kept my grade to 2.9% climbing from staging to the top level. I think if I could add 4 inches to provide a foot of clearance, that would be decent for a staging yard. A scenic’d lower deck would benefit from more clearance.
In a 14x20’ room, an around the walls design with a center lob would give the longest possible run.
At the cross section where the center turn-back lobe is, you could have 2’ wide benchwork on the outsides, 2 26" inch aisle at the pinch points on either side of the lobe, and the lobe itself being 68 inches to comfortably allow 32" minimum curves.
You could even put a helix where the lobe is to double deck. The only difficulty would be where the lift out is you would have at top and bottom lift out if there are two decks.
Ultimately a 14x20’ space would allow a pretty decent layout in HO and you could run long cars as well.
I’m confused. Is the layout going to be a 10x12 footprint in a 14x20 room?
Why do you need to have an “island” layout?
[quote user=“riogrande5761”]
rrinker
14x20 is just enough space to do a nolix double deck with 18" or so between decks and not have a crazy grade (under 2.5%). Of course that would leave very little flat space, although a tiwce around on each deck approach with the one lap that’s on the grade being hidden or semi-hidden behind the other one for most of the run would do it. Or a combination of lesser deck separation and/or steeper grades.
–Randy
I did a nolix in a 10x18’ room with 32" minimum curves but the separation for decks (right side) was 8.5 inches, 7.5 above the rails on the bottom level. This was tight but servicable but not great but kept my grade to 2.9% climbing from staging to the top level. I think if I could add 4 inches to provide a foot of clearance, that would be decent for a staging yard. A scenic’d lower deck would benefit from more clearance.
In a 14x20’ room, an around the walls design with a center lob would give the longest possible run.
At the cross section where the center turn-back lobe is, you could have 2’ wide benchwork on the outsides, 2 26" inch aisle at the pinch points on either side of the lobe, and the lobe itself being 68 inches to comfortably allow 32" minimum curves.
You could even put a helix where the lobe is to double deck. The only difficulty would be where the lift out is you would have at top and bottom lift out if there are two decks.
Ultimately a 14x20’ space would allow a pretty decent layout in HO and
Partly because of the problem you’re asking about - space. A c.1950 layout with four-axle diesels and small to medium steam engines moving around 40’ and 50’ freight cars can take sharper curves and so fit into a smaller space than a layout designed to run 89’ autoracks and SD-90 diesels.
One thing you may want to consider is that if you do an around-the-walls layout, you’ll be inside of the curves. That means the curves will seem more broad than they would on a free-standing layout where you’re looking at the other side of the curve. You may find in that situation that a layout with say 24-26" R curves might work well and still look good. You may need to do some testing, trial-and-error, with actual track and cars to see what looks acceptable to you.
When considering curve radii, the MRH article in Jan 2009 offers some helpful info. It discusses the effects of curve radii vs. length of rolling stock. For example, an 80’ passenger car at 2.0x radius would be 23" radius in HO, which could have issues tracking even with no underbody details in the way. It appears Walthers passenger cars were used in the examples. 2.5x radius for the same length car would be 29" radius, which cars of that length can be coupled and track reasonably well, but look unrealistic. 3.0x for the 80’ passenger cars would be 35" radius - cars roll freely, no tracking probems but still excessive overhang.
The “take away” from the article seems to be two major points. 1) Shoot for a bare minimum of 2.5x radius for your longest rolling stock and, 2) Use the largest curve radius you can manage with your “givens and druthers”.
I am going with a minimum of 32" with my layout design (givens and druthers) so I’ll be just between 2.5x radius and 3.0x radius with 89’ flat cars. Using the principle of squeezing out the largest radius possible I have managed to design in some larger curves for much of the mainline at 33, 34, 36 and 42 inches.
With curves and limited space, unfortunately we are faced with compromises on fitting a fairly long run as much as possible and operable curves.
My basement walls are unfinishe, so you still see the concrete and insulatio. I’ve thought about finishing it but not looking to open that can of worms (Live in Illinois, property taxes,etc…)
the max room space is 14’x20’. my current and previous layouts have been smaller, 8’x8’ L shape waterwings now 8’x9’ donut.
im considering the Wildcat Central from Jan 2001 Morel Railroader. but when I look at it I don’t see much in terms of operation. I’m also looking at the Koester NKP Wingate, IN track plan as a U shape with staging yards and modules. i operate by myself and seems a session lasts around 30 minutes/hr.
You can go around the walls and make it freestanding - with the layout supporting a backdrop to hide the unfinished walls.
If you go all the way around the perimeter, if you didn’t need to do continuous run, you actually have enough room for a spiral - down one 20’ wall, across the 14’. back up the other 20’ side, then a peninsula most of the way down the middle. You can easily have 4’ wide aisles throughout this spiral. A lift out or drop down would allow for a continuous loop around the outer perimeter plus the peninsula.
–Randy