Ok I have several questions for the seasoned vets out there. I want to start a 4X8 layout. I have a few N- scale 6 axle diesels. It needs to be DCC as I am heading that route already. I would like a yard and the ability to switch over mains. I would like to do a reverse loop as well. The problem I seem to have is I have read several places that min radius should be in the 13-14" range. most of the plans I see out there either don't list the radius or they are too tight. I have been playing with RTS8 and just can' seem to come up with anything. I should have plenty of power with the diesel selection I would think to handle 2-3% grades with the length of train that works in this size layout. I started a layout last year that turned into a big flop. I had some pretty tight curves and my diesels derailed. not sure if it was my lack o skill on track laying or the tightness o the curves.
Often, the only thing that limits the radius of curves is the actual look of the train going over the curve. For example, a train will have absolutely no trouble making it over an 11" curve, but if you're using passenger cars, they will look horribly unrealistic. Now, if you're looking at a 4x8' track plan, I would suggest not.. especially in N Scale. Although the square footage is more than enough for a quality N-Scale track plan, 4'x8' track plans are often unappealing and not very prototypical. If you have the room, an L-shaped layout will perform just as well and it will look ten times better. You should have no trouble pulling off curves if you cut your plywood right, as well. Yes, 2-3% grades are fine, and about 14" radius is a good standard to stick to. You can go lower on smaller branch lines, but for a double mainline, 14" should be minimum. Easements can also help larger locos from derailing and make the turns look more appealing.
I could do an L shape but we are still talking 32-36 inch widths to accommodate the 14" radius right? I do agree a 4X8 is pretty boring to look at. an L would probably give me longer main lines. Just thinking out loud here so share any thoughts they are all good!
Yes, actually, if you cut a 4x8' sheet of plywood correctly, you can come up with those widths in one sheet... that is if you want to stick with that kind of square footage. I'd be happy to try and design some layouts for you to help you spark your mind. A few questions though: 1. What railroad/location do you plan on modeling? 2. What are your requirements? You've already stated you would like DCC, double-mains, and the ability to switch between the two. Are you more focused on switching or yard-to-yard. Considering you would like two mains, I'm guessing switching isn't the highest priority. Do you want a yard? Engine Facilities? Towns? Etc. 3. What footprint are you looking at? Number of switches? Complexity of track? etc. 4. What are you most interested in modeling? Many modelers prefer to model coal lines, or intermodal areas, etc. Preferences? These questions often help considering when looking at designing a model railroad.
I understand your doubts, but...from a master in N-scale, Dave Volmer, a 36" x 80" double track layout, as inspiration and demonstration of what can be done in way less than a full basement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veEvKHFGd5s . The gentleman is a craftsman of many talents, but this layout seems to provide the basis of your wants, as a proof of concept or an outline from which to work. Steam locos, 6 axle diseasels, passenger cars all shown in a few minutes - working position light signals, too ! Enjoy and see if you can pick up some ideas. All the Best. Bob C.
biggrin: I've built 4x10, 4x12, and 4x14 layouts and always used the 4' width for large radius (20"/22"), dbl-main "end" curves. Superliners, 6-axle diesels look great. In between the end curves my best looking track plan featured multi-pass dbl-mains within the main loop that necessarily had tighter radii (11"/15".) Worked OK, looked not so good. Spaced the interior dbl-mains a bit more than the peripheral dbl-mains. Interfaced staging tracks along the lower 1' of entire plan. Could do pretty much the same with 4x8 space. Used sight blocking scenery (tall woods, ridge lines) to separate long running mains from themselves and the staging area. cute: Now trying to do 2x8 layout (need the space for other things) with 11" max radii for single-main loop. Not yet proven, but seems to work.
Thanks for the video link. It is definitely something worth pursuing in my mind. I am sure my quality would never do it justice but the size and everything is great. The only thing I can think of adding would be maybe an L extension for a storage yard. I am thinking something along the lines of a drawer type that I seen in maybe MRR magazine. Something that could have a single track aligned with a storage yard by sliding the drawer out to different positions. I am not good at reverse engineering. Does anyone know if there is a track plan anywhere for this? I am in LaCrosse WI and want to model the stuf I see everyday. We have bluffs rivers and industries. I see BNSF, ICE and CP on a daily basis. The BNSF has lots of coal and intermodal. I am going to stay away from passenger trains.
Ask an you shall receive! Doing some more research I found this link to Dave's page. http://www.thevollmerfamily.com/Pennsy/about.html Maybe I don't want to do a storage drawer type thing after all. One more question. If I use code 55 will that have any effect on the radius of curves and performance of the bigger diesels? I assume the rail height is about the only thing that would possibly impact performance? As long as I don't have pizza cutter wheel flanges I would think it should be fine.
Here is the Chippewa Central layout in HO, its basically a water wings design which for me has more appeal over a rectangular 4 by 8, I was going to build this roughly in N; I haven't looked at the plans in a long time, but if I remember correctly it was a 4 by 12 layout. Maybe you'll have space to add another foot or two or four as you can see in this design. I would probably modify the track plan a bit, but even it isn't too bad. I have a layout with a double tracked line with 18 inch curves on the outer rail, fitting into a space less than 48 inches across, you will be fine with 48 inches. http://books.google.ca/books?id=cKj...QKQ38WoCA&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
cool: in re c55 vs. c80 shouldn't be a game changer... look at price and availability of material through your sources... there is a tad more challenge to doing c55 (I think) and its pricier (for Peco) my track choice. In fact, have intermixed c80 & c55 with little interface issues. arghh: When doing 4x8's or longer, issue of "boring" is there but can be overcome... biggest issue is to get the trackage away from the periphery but using the full width (if wanted) for exposed loopy-loopy returns. In fact, peripheral trackage leads to centralized scenery/structures, another problem with the 4xany format. But one can make errors in any format. eek: Good luck and let's know what happens.
I can relate to creating a flop layout. My first N scale layout suffered from poor alignment and steep grades. I created that layout freehand with a ruler and trammel point. I stuffed turnouts where they rightly could not fit. I did not incorporate power routing for the turnouts and locomotives are prone to stall more frequently than I would like. I still run this layout today, 7 years later, because it is useful as a testbed for exploring electrical issues, such as power routing, JMRI control, and signaling. Last year I started a second layout using the lessons learned from the first. I laid out the track plan with Cadrail using Peco track and turnouts. I still wanted a layout with a two track main, twice around loop, ability to reverse direction, an adequate yard with leads, and additional sidings for switching industries. There's a lot of track in a tight space and I plan to use the scenery (Eastern mountain) to mitigate the spaghetti syndrome. I wanted 12" minimum radius and less than 3% grades. I mostly achieved those design goals. The main line maximum grade is about 2.5% and the minimum radius is 12". In the yard the minimum radius is about 11.5 inches and the yard leads have about 3.5% grade, with the yard proper at level grade. I plan to operate with rolling stock less than 50' length, although I do have some that are longer. I have many 6 axle diesels and a couple of 4-8-4's. I chose the 4x8 format because I wanted the layout to be potentially portable and fit a typical room. The track physically fits in a 4x8 space except for one slight deviation. I extended the size 3" on all sides to create room for a scenic buffer and minimize the chance that a derailment would result in a tragic leap off the edge. I added two sidings off the main that allow for future expansion. The finished layout is 8.5x4.5. Now I am ready to start some basic scenery and track laying. I want to get the scenery in place along the ROW before laying track. View attachment 20120121.pdf
