# Advice / comments on my (VERY) ambitious layout



## soswald (Feb 28, 2017)

Hello, all.

I am in the planning phase of a very ambitious layout. I have a somewhat oddly-shaped room that I have permission from the boss to use as a layout room.

Please take a look at the images (SCARM layout images) and make any comments that come to mind, or ask questions. 

I know there's no sense of scale, but the layout is in HO. 
The aisles are between 24 and 30 inches (this is one of my concerns - too narrow).
My minimum radius is 14 inches (I know - too tight).

I have also attached a SCARM layout of the room with walls and open benchwork.

Any help, questions or suggestions would be very much appreciated!!!

Steve


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

Hi,

For an aisle 24" is a bit tight but not terrible for one person.

IMO, a radius of 14" is way too limiting except for certain kinds of layouts like a logging railroad or a city trolley car line.

Why are you thinking of using 14?

Frederick


----------



## FTWingRiders (Jan 13, 2017)

I could live with the 24" aisles, but I'd really want larger radius if possible..


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

I agree with Fcwilt, 14 is out of the question, period!


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

Could you show the room measurements?It would help a lot.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

I represent the minority here when it comes to minimum radiuses.

I think 14" is not a problem.

You will have to be selective about the equipment that you run, but for example a 2-8-0 locomotive will handle it just fine.

I am partial to tight radius curves because I have always had to deal with space limitations. To me, 18" is a luxury. So I have gotten good managing the situation.

One suggestion would be to join the vertical spurs in the lower left peninsula so that you have a nice wye for reversing engines.


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

I would say to loose the peninsula and increase the radius of your loops to 18 minimum. Your outside corner should be fine with 18 to 24 inch bench work. As Brakeman Jake stated, give us some room dimensions.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

I have different questions.
Are you sure you want this much layout? I mean, I tried it but got so bogged down after 4 years I tore it down. Something this elaborate is going to require a commitment , and some extra help.

Build it with the largest radius curves you can, you will not be sorry. I can build a 4x8 with 22" curves, and I have 18" and 15" now. the 15" curves I have are by necessity, but not everything will handle them.

I'm not trying to be negative, I fully support your endeavor and wish you success. Just please keep us posted so we all can enjoy the progress!


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

fcwilt said:


> Hi,
> 
> For an aisle 24" is a bit tight but not terrible for one person.
> 
> Frederick


Just stay off the burgers!

I agree with time warp, this is quite a project and although you've resisted the temptation to cover it with track its still going to be quite a marathon. Builders fatigue is likely to set in.


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

I also agree 24" is too tight, I don't care how skinny you are. You need arm swing room still and when you're working on the layout and need to have tools and other crap with you for construction you're going to be hindered by the narrow space to work.

I'm not in HO scale myself, but from what I've read it sounds like you want to be in the 18" to 22" range for curve radius if you plan on pulling long cars (like passenger cars and autoracks)...

Also, are those windows on the left back wall where the layout butts up against? Where the tracks cross the river? If yes, something to keep in mind is direct sunlight affecting discoloration of your scenery. Especially risky is having your river right next to the window - because when you use gloss mediums / epoxy to create your river water, direct sunlight will yellow your gloss medium over time.


----------



## soswald (Feb 28, 2017)

Thank you for all the comments and suggestions. Here is an updated image with the wall lengths.

I will see what I can do with the space and 18 to 24-inch minimum radii.

I haven't started any benchwork yet (no, I'm not going to start that discussion), so now is the time for me to work out as many issues as I can.

Thanks again!

Steve


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

It appears that the grids are 5". Have you thought about N scale or do you already have a lot of HO?


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Have to agree with the guys. 14" curves are not going
to give you satisfactory operations. Most of us struggle
to get more than 18" curves. 

You have to keep in mind that the ends of locos and
cars protrude outward on a curve, and overhang the
inner part of the curve. You may have to use truck
mounted couplers to avoid the cars pulling each other
off the track. We strongly urge you to revise your
plans to ensure that you have more than 18" curves.
Enlarge the 'bulge' where your curves are to
make it work.

My layout has a peninsula similar to yours. The aisle
on one side is my work area and operations center.
The opposite side is an aisle less than 2 feet. I have
to decided which way to face when I move into it
sideways. Even with that my shirt will often brush
against scenery dislodging it. 

You have an interesting continuous running layout with
a small yard. While it is enjoyable to sit back and
watch the trains go by, after a while you want to
say, 'is that all there is?' See where you can add more
spurs for industries and car storage. The more you
have the more you'll enjoy your layout.

Don


----------



## soswald (Feb 28, 2017)

Bwells,

I hadn't really considered N-Scale, but not because I have a lot of HO. I really at this point only have a desire to build a layout.

My real concern is the physical size of the materials. I'm not a small guy. I'm 6'4", and the concept of modeling in N-Scale worries me just a bit.

Steve


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Nikola said:


> I represent the minority here when it comes to minimum radiuses.
> 
> I think 14" is not a problem.
> 
> ...


That's not being in the minority, that's just an outright statement of what everyone else is implying.

What we're saying is that we find 14" curves to be far too limiting in what you can run and how you can operate, not that it won't physically work in many cases.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

How many previous layouts have you built and how much free time do you have to devote to it?

Do you have any unifying theme or region in mind for this layout? Understanding this can help us tweak the layout design to get where you want to be.


----------



## soswald (Feb 28, 2017)

Well, there's a couple of great questions. I'll answer them in order, I guess..



CTValleyRR said:


> How many previous layouts have you built.


As an adult, I had one layout that was operational, but never completed. Before that, it was simple model trains. The previous layout was around 17 years ago now.



CTValleyRR said:


> how much free time do you have to devote to it?


It would be evenings and weekends, but I certainly see this as a long-term (more than a year) process before it would be close to completion.



CTValleyRR said:


> Do you have any unifying theme or region in mind for this layout?


That's the most interesting question. I hadn't really considered modeling a specific period or region. That would make it easier to decide on things like terrain, scenery and industries. 

I started playing with layout ideas as a hobbyist, but I see how answering these would definitely affect the layout design.

Steve


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

Great suggestions from all - I just want to chime in on the curve radius issue. The tight curves on your plan open up a ton of possibilities, but severely limits what you can run. A tight little logging pike would work, but doesn't seem suited to all the space you have. 
As TW suggested, I would plan the largest radius curves possible. 

Good luck with it and keep us posted! :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

Hi,

Given the short lengths of wall you have to work with I think you should give serious thought to N scale.

Large radius turns take space away from the straights.

For example on my HO layout the minimum radius is 30". So two corners right off the bat use up 60" or 5'. 

On your 8' foot you would be left with just 3' of straight track.

On the other hand a 30" radius in HO works out to (if my math is right) to 16" which is just a little more than your original 14".

So with N you would have the benefit of nice broad curves and still have nice lengths of straight.

If you ever desire to run full length passenger cars or big steam you will be much happier having broad curves from both an appearance and operations point of view.

My layout was a series of compromises but I stuck with the 30" despite what I had to give up and I am very glad I did.

I love passenger trains and they look just grand on 30" curves.

In the past, not knowing any better, I stuck with 18" and 22" and I was never happy.

Frederick


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

soswald said:


> Well, there's a couple of great questions. I'll answer them in order, I guess..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, obviously, the concern is that if this is your first go at it, you'd be well advised to scale back. That doesn't seem to be a concern.

I admire your ambition in getting it done nights and weekends. Unless you don't intend much scenery or details, I suspect your completion timeframe will be closer to "decade" than "year".

The layout as it exists right now is a railfan layout. That is, it doesn't do much more than let you watch trains run around, and the purpose for putting track down is simply because you can. Which is fine, and maybe that's all you want to do with the layout (also fine).

If you would like something closer to prototypical operations, though, you need to consider a lot more storage for trains -- a couple of small yards or some staging, which in turn will take real estate away from the running tracks.

You might also want to consider eliminating that long peninsula at the bottom of the drawing, because the only thing it's really buying you is a longer mainline run and two symmetrical sidings. If you eliminate the peninsula, though, that might give you room for wider turns while preserving the width of your aisle.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

I'll put one more suggestion into the mix. How about considering redesigning it on a point to point basis, that would eliminate many of those tight curves. And maybe get rid of that lightbulb shaped peninsula, I can't really see it's purpose and it would give you more space to move about. Nowhere does it say you need to have a loop at either end.


----------



## AmFlyer (Mar 16, 2012)

I recommend you eliminate the two return loops at the entry and replace them with tracks across the opening. Below are pictures of the swing gate used for entry and exit. 
There are no reverse loops, I think you will regret that long term. There is only one track with passing sidings, I recommend you consider at least two loops for continuous running. Unknown what era is modeled, is a turntable and roundhouse appropriate?
I model S, not HO but it is 2 rail. My minimum radius is 30" with #5,6&8 turnouts. 30" in S is 22" in HO. You will not regret building this right for reliable operation. You should not use less than 30" for isle width. 
This is the swing gate closed. 









This is the gate open.


----------



## FTWingRiders (Jan 13, 2017)

^^^ I like this idea!


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

AmFlyer, I can't even fathom the amount of planning and development time it would take me to execute a swing gate so comprehensive like you've achieved. Amazing work.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## AmFlyer (Mar 16, 2012)

Thanks, I had professional help with it. What resulted is way over done but stable. All that is really needed is a sold core half door, HD hinges and the plastic tongue and receiving groove to position the end of the door when closed. The black plastic tongue is visible in the open picture.
I find this to be a preferable entry mechanisim compared to a lift out or lift up section. I had minimal space to work with and the layout sections at each side were angled.
Even if the layout owner wants return loops as originally shown the layout would work better in the space if the track spanned the entry door and the return loops stacked on top of one another. That would use half the space as the current design.


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

Wow, that's a swinging door! Is there some mechanism that helps align each track? Or is it just over spected to eliminate any changes in the material?


----------



## AmFlyer (Mar 16, 2012)

I would say it is a very robust design. The gate hinges are adjustable for overall fit but each individual track is not. The gate assembly along with the two support towers were assembled then the track was installed. There would be no reason only one of the 5 tracks on the swing gate would get out of alignment. 
The two support towers and the wood base visible under the gate are attached to the house. All the rest of the layout is free to move on large teflon discs under each leg. This does two things, first it means the layout imposes minimal load on the gate structure and two, the layout can move relative to the house structure during any earthquake. There is a 3" gap between the layout and the walls. That gap has (firm seat cushion) foam in it to absorb any earthquake impact loads from the house. The joys of living in Southern California.
Back to the gate, after 6 months and a full cycle of summer to winter weather there is no need for any adjustments. The biggest effect is from humidity changes, a low of about 10% during a Santa Ana to 90% in a warm rain. The layout and backdrop panels shrink a bit in extended low humidity, very small gaps can be seen between the backdrop panels. Also at low humidity the swing gate closes with no resistance, high humidity there is some minor resistance due to the wood swelling. For these reasons I decided to wait a year before applying the wood finish laminate to the exposed layout structure. 

Here is a picture of the plastic receiver piece on the support that matches up with the plastic tongue on the gate. Also visible is the switch that opens to kill the track power in the blocks on and approaching the gate to preclude driving trains into the chasm.


----------

