# How do you design layouts for long steam engines?



## SRV1 (Nov 14, 2010)

Hey everyone. Been a long time but I'm still around. I'm at the my new house now with plenty of basement. I'm not looking to take over the basement, rather am thinking about an L-shaped, movable layout with some criteria in mind. Looking at HO scale here.

The main issue is that I have a 2-10-2 I want to run and the minimum curves it can navigate are 22" Based on AnyRail mock ups I think I can pack the L-shape into approximately an 11 ft x 11 ft area or so. It seems like the bulk of the layout is curves and I want more straight away. I want an interesting layout with possibly a steel girder bridge, an old short wooden bridge, a siding, a couple industries, etc. Anybody have any good plans for something about this size to check out? 

MR does a great job with smaller track plans and I love seeing them but I need medium size track plans with more generous curves. I don't feel like I'm very gifted at coming up with track plans and I know others are. I fiddle around but seems like never thrilled with what I come up with. Though I love modern era, the era would be late 30s, early 40s.


----------



## tr1 (Mar 9, 2013)

*Running big steam posible layout suggestion?*

The granite gorge and northern is possibly what your looking for.
Check out my blog here at model train forums. Have a look aground and explore. It is a double mainline figure eight. It has larger radii turns(outer radius. It may have what your
looking for. Check out my blog:[email protected] train forums. Regards,tr1
<See the layout in my albums section>Actual photos are intended to appear sooner rather than laterer.


----------



## Laidoffsick (Sep 20, 2015)

Our layout is 3 rail O scale, but it was designed for articulated steam and long passenger cars. 26 x 17 is really very small for O Scale, especially after 089 and 080 curves go down.

I would say go big... as big as you can. Long sweeping curves look great with big engines. Even if you don't have anything bigger than a 2-10-2 now, you may one day. If you have the space go with big curves. I wish we could have went bigger.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

It sounds to me like your problem is that you want more layout than you have room for...or are willing to allocate room for. With a 22" radius curve, by definition, close to 4 feet at each end of your layout has to be curvy, with more curves in the middle. An L shape 22' long isn't going to give you vast, long straightaways, no matter what you do. You can mitigate this a little by going around the room and avoiding the large return loops at each end. Even large layouts with peninsulas and such have most of their track in curves.

I hate to say it, but if you want long straights, you're going to have to find, well, a long, straight room.


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

You could make the change to N scale. Your straight aways would automatically become twice as long and using the same 22" curves would look beautiful and allow you to run anything. Or you could cut down to 15" and still be able to run almost anything.


----------



## D&J Railroad (Oct 4, 2013)

Here's a 2-10-2 on my empire. Broad sweeping curves, long straights and long cuts of cars. minimum radius is 48".


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

Let's see...with an eleven by eleven L-shaped layout and 22 in. rad. curves,you could have two seven foot straight sections along the rear edges.But this means you need a 48 in. deep layout,pretty uncomfortable to work on scenery unless you can walk around the bench.A "topside creeper" (a mechanic's tool) could be very handy for such a case though.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

/6 matt said:


> You could make the change to N scale. Your straight aways would automatically become twice as long and using the same 22" curves would look beautiful and allow you to run anything. Or you could cut down to 15" and still be able to run almost anything.


I bet that nice HO scale 2-10-2 that the OP wants to use would work very well on an N scale layout...


----------



## SRV1 (Nov 14, 2010)

I already have the ho scale 2-10-2 and have put a decent amount of work into it, weathered, added sound etc.. all of my stuff is HO

Sent from my XT1093 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chet (Aug 15, 2014)

It seems like you have a fairly generous space for your layout, but why limit yourself to a set radius. Have you considered using flex track?? I have a decent size layout and I wanted my curves to be as broad as possible. I started hand laying track and turnouts and completed it using flex track. I managed to keep my minimum radius to 32 inches but most curves are broader than that. The largest steam locomotives the I usually run are Mikes, but I do have a brass 2-8-8-4 with a fixed rear engine that can easily negotiate the entire layout although I only run it a few times a year just to keep everything lubricated. 

I like to run a few passenger cars and they also look so much better on broader curves. Also by using flex track, you can have easements into the curves whereas using a set radius track takes away making easements.

I'm sure that Ken will probably tell you the same thing. Don't think he used any fixed radius curves on his beautiful D&J layout.


----------



## D&J Railroad (Oct 4, 2013)

That's right. No fixed radius track on the D&J Railroad. All flex track and #8 & 10 turnouts.


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

I'm aware of the equipment clause, I was just making a point that you currently have no good routes to take and you are gonna have to compromise somewhere. Or switch scales. Plus I wasn't aware if he was already invested in HO or if he was building a layout around A locomotive. If it was the latter it wouldnt be too late to make a change but either way that option's kinda out now.

Here's where your at. Given you take a maximum of 22" curves, you're gonna get roughly 7 foot straightaways and have an awkward layout that looks like a cookie cutter. Also on an L shaped layout if you want a continues run, the only options you have is to make a love on each end where the track doubles back on itself and angle that love into the room so you can access both side and then you'll still be limited to about 24" radius for reach purposes. Or you can go bigger and use a trap door/ duck under in the middle of the love but that increased radius comes at the expense of sacrificing the straightaway length. But at the same time you 2-10-2 is gonna look ridiculous on 22" curves so something closer to 35" would be the ticket.

You could also go with a square or triangular shaped layout IF that's an option. 

In the end it's all gonna come down to making compromises and they are all geometry based.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

A railroad comprises sections of curved rail connected by lengths of tangent track. On the prairies, the ratio favours the tangents, but everywhere else the curves win...hands down. If you ever hope to have some nice photos of your layout, most people report that they like to see curves.

Planning your layout doesn't just mean getting away with the minimums. Often the minimums, even carefully engineered, raise the probability, statistically, that you will have problems with running. For example, I always add a full 10% to my locomotives' minimum curve capability so that I can run them at speed, and so that I don't prematurely wear out the pins holding the rods, and so that the flanges on the outside drivers don't get scrubbed down paper thin early. So, my one loco of concern is a Sunset brass 2-10-4. Sunset says nothing less than 30", so with 10% added my mainline curves are never less than 33".

There's more. How about clearances if you have sidings or twinned mains? Larger steamers will sideswipe long cars or other long engines on curves, and it gets worse the tighter the curve. Beware!

Backing trains along tight curves is often going to result in derailments. Wider curves are easier on couplers, especially on the longer cars.


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

I guess this situation happens to many modelers...we let the heart decide wich locootives to buy way before we have even started building a functional layout.Then when time comes to cut the lumber,we find out that space is much more restrictive than we first thought.

I did it...bought myself a nice N scale roster mostly made up of articulated (8 in fact) and now that I'm building the layout,I have to go through a lot of compromise to achieve the necessary curves these beauties need in the space I have to work in.

The result is a 120" X 80" L shaped that I had to go for 40" depth to allow curves of up to 18" radiuses,wich will be somewhat uncomfortable to work on at times.A good point though is that since it's built with moving in mind,the layout is made of four 40" X 40" modules that can be separated quick and easy if I should need to.


----------

