A week or two ago, I made a comment on a topic concerning, IIRC, minimum radii for locos. I made mention of an article in MRR dealing with a 4’ X 6’ layout that was set up for operation, and used large articulateds. Several other respondents tasked me to provide the issue date, although one or two others did admit to also remembering it. Today, I was cleaning out some old files, and found a copy of the article.
The article was “The Mostest Track in the leastest space.” It appeared in the January 1965 MRR. Article was by Eugene B. Platt, with comments by Bill Rau. Inner loop of 18" radius, outer of 22" radius, mostly Snap Switches, with a Flieschman 3-way and 2 double slip switches. 5 buildings, a whistling billboard, and a couple trees for scenery.Controls are Atlas snap switch controls and old-fashioned ceramic knife switches. Through use of his imagination, he can run trains through multiple laps, with periodic loco changes as he changes divisions. The operation includes multiple switchers from 0-4-0 up large road engines, including at the time an Akane DM&IR 2-8-8-4. The photo taken during the operating session show 18 locos, 3 passenger and 30 other cars. And, looking closely, one Snap switch macine and part of the 22" outer oval track actually stick out over the table ends.
I remember that article well! Hardly a bit of the layout was not track. It was a mouth watering collection of brass engines.
I recall that the author mentioned that the large brass steam locomotives he bought were actually running on far tighter radius curves than they were rated for or advertised to run on. That brings up the question of whether back then the minimum radius was actually tested and rated, or did someone just assume that it should not run on 18" (or 15") radius curves? I guess I’d be reluctant these days to assume that the published minimum radius for large steamers has so much wiggle room as maybe it did back then – when a very nice brass steam locomotive could be had for $50 to $100.
eh, the pictures make my mouth water. I remember when a LHS got in one of those Akane EM-1s. Only $99.95. I was just out of college, making $1.27/hr, still paying off bills and supporting a car, and getting ready to go into the AF. I think the adds mentioned and the MR review both mentioned that both yellowstones could operate down to 18"R.
But, what a concept. No scenery, curves that should only be found on a trolley layout, 60’ streamlined passenger cars, Controls, uncoupling ramps, and Snap switch switch machines in full view, nothing going for it but sheer multi-train operation with yard switching and locomotive swaps at division points, including as the builder says, the passenger train starting with a 4-6-2, changing to a 4-6-4, then when it gets to the mountain division, switching to an articulated.
How many larger, better detailed layouts can do better?