# First HO Scale Layout 6'x1.5' opinions wanted



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

Hey guys,

I have been wanting to make an HO layout for quite some time, but simply havent had the means or the space. So now that I have the means I still don't have the space which has made me want to make a small switching module (That would be the correct terminology, right?) Its small and the initial design size is 6 feet long and 1.5 feet wide. I mainly wanted to focus on switching in this layout and the main locomotives I will be (plan on) using is an SW1500 as well as an SD45 and a GP40. (Edit: Also will probably run some Steamers on this layout such as the FEF-3 and 2-8-4.)

I don't have access to a PC right now so all my sketches are hand done at the moment so the scale might be totally off and i may need to make this a little wider/longer to accommodate having the correct curve radius. Once I have more access to my PC again, I will likely make a computer generated version of the track plan. I was very much inspired by Giles Barnabe (His layout design will be included) and when I saw this layout I fell in love with its trackplan, just figured it could use a little something more.

I also plan on making the right module sooner or later, but I wanna focus on one step at a time. 

Do you guys have an comments about the track layout? Things I can Improve? Questions? I plan on making these portable so I can disassemble them and put them up rather quickly.



















Thanks!


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

A very good idea for getting started! Modules made from 1x3 lumber and extruded foam panels will be very light and manageable.

For the most part, I think you've done a good job of expanding the small switching layout used as the inspiration.

There are two things I think you should reconsider, though. The first is the loss of the cassette, which adds a lot of flexibility to operations. Since you have 4 places you could install one, that's a pretty simple fix.

The other is the reversing loop by the turntable. Even at 15" radius, a turnback like that needs more like 30" width. I seriously doubt that you will be able to achieve any kind of a loop on that small width. Certainly not one that is operationally viable for bigger locos and cars. The cassette arrangement would allow you to drive a train onto the cassette and reverse the whole cassette, thus turning the train.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

A width of 1.5 feet does not permit much of a curve
as pointed out by CTvalley.

You can get a lot of switching action in that 1.5 X 6 foot
space but it's going to be more of a linear design.

Google 'HO switching shelf layouts' and you'll find a number
of ideas you could use.

Another idea you could try: Get several lengths of
flex track and some turnouts. Lay them out in various
ways and you'll be better able to create a track
design that you like. Instead of cutting the track for
now, make templates of it and the turnouts. Use
stick pins to hold them in place.

Don


----------



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

CTValleyRR said:


> A very good idea for getting started! Modules made from 1x3 lumber and extruded foam panels will be very light and manageable.
> 
> For the most part, I think you've done a good job of expanding the small switching layout used as the inspiration.
> 
> ...


Would it be better than to have another X (crossover track) that runs into the lumber yard (bottom left) rather than have it be the reversing loop? I just am not comfortable with not having a run around in the main city part, it can complicate things a bit too much IMO especially having the main line go from a double track down to a single while in the city. The only engine that would be using the reversing loop/run around would be my sw1500, all other trains would be banned from using it as its mainly just to help the switcher out. 

As for cassettes, I either plan on using those, or I plan on making these layouts "2 story" and having a length of track (and probably a bigger generic yard) be underneath these with a Helix on either end so that the main train (GP40, SD45, F40ph etc.) can run a full circuit around the layout without ever having to come off while saving space. I would try and make the helix a module that can come on and off aswell just for ease of use and so that I can keep using them on the ends of the modules because I honestly believe thats how I will build my giant real layout when I get to it is just keep making modules. 

Thanks for the reply, I can definitely see how thise are shortcomings in the design!



DonR said:


> A width of 1.5 feet does not permit much of a curve
> as pointed out by CTvalley.
> 
> You can get a lot of switching action in that 1.5 X 6 foot
> ...


I have been googling and youtubing layouts these past 2 weeks, mainly micro and shelf switching layouts. Barnables was the one that stood out the most to me as something I can really enjoy switching time and time again. Yeah the 1.5 foot doesnt allow for much vertical track as much as it does horizontal but I wanna rectify that with, like I said above, double decker layouts that could hide all the extra track and let the trains really stretch out their legs.

Thats a very good idea! I'll have to do that once I get some of the materials I will need for this layout build! 

Thanks both of you for your insight!


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I always like to encourage the ability to turn a loco or
train around to run the opposite direction on the same
track. But with only l.5 ft width a 'reverse loop' is not
possible. You could do it with an elongated wye perhaps.
Maybe you could have a wide enough end piece to
'top' the wye. That's something you can fiddle with when you get the templates. The only other possibility is a turntable.

Don


----------



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

DonR said:


> I always like to encourage the ability to turn a loco or
> train around to run the opposite direction on the same
> track. But with only l.5 ft width a 'reverse loop' is not
> possible. You could do it with an elongated wye perhaps.
> ...


I can agree that the 1.5ft wouldn't be large enough to allow for a reverse loop (especially checking more track plans.) So its a good thing I have that turntable in the middle of the city hahah. Here is a rework of just the loco shed/lumberyard that i think would work better as a run around since the reverse loop wont.










And when you say Wye, you mean like on the ends where i have double track, it would go off the layout and basically loop the two ends together to create a reverse loop, is that correct?


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

No. A wye actually has the shape of Y with a track
across the top of the Y. A loco goes, for example, up
the left arm onto the cross track. Then backs past the 
turnout from the right arm of the wye. It finishes it's
turnout around by going down the right arm and onto
the main going in the opposite direction.

You wouldn't have room for this in the 1.5 width, but I
mused that you could make it an addition at the left
end of the layout.

I see all sorts of curves in your latest drawing. I really
don't think any of those can actually exist. When you
get to fiddling with the templates you'll see what we
mean.

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I'm not following what you mean by making another crossobpver and runaround. Can you sketch it?

Since you seem to be having trouble with curve radii, may i suggest that you get some graph paper to use. That will help you keep scale more accurately. 15" is extraordinarily sharp. Even an SW1500 might have trouble with that. Maybe a GE 44 Tonner would be better.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

From the UK to California, that's quite a jump! You've done a great job so far but there's one thing you might have overlooked, the Barnabe plan is for narrow gauge not HO. That's why you might have come a bit unstuck on the turntable as locos would be very much smaller in narrow gauge and of course tight radius curves and small points won't be available. The smallest would be Peco's Setrack.
I think its always difficult to plan on paper, and it's a small layout, so I suggest you download the turnout templates from Peco's site http://www.peco-uk.com/page.asp?id=pointplans and lay them out on a full size drawing on the floor. You'll then be able to see how things pan out in reality and give you a very much better idea of what is possible.
I'm a big fan of this type of layout and all of mine are like this so more power to you! One thing I've learned is to keep things simple, it will work very much better. I don't think you'll be able to use anything as big as a SD45 here, small switcher types and 40' cars would be required. SW1500 should be fine.. Did you get this plan from Carl Arendt's site? If not I suggest you check it out as there's a wealth of space saving plans.
It may be an idea to put a fiddle yard down the RH leg of your L , this will give you a staging where you can make up your trains.

Good luck and let us know how you get on.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

I am the heretic here when it comes to narrow layouts and tight curves.

I once had a layout the same dimensions as OP; maybe a foot longer.

I had three ovals inside. The center one was a figure eight.

Very tight curves using flex track! I used commercial Atlas switches to get from the outside oval to the middle oval, and built my own stub switches to get from the middle oval to the center oval.

I ran 0-4-0 switchers (steam or diesel) to pull trains of four or five cars around the outer two ovals, and streetcars in the center oval.

I put a lot of time into realistic scenery. I was happy with it - it was all the space I had, atop a credenza. I was happy to have what I could have as opposed to waiting for some elusive 'some day' when I would have a huge space as that might never come.

My buddy had a similar space constraint. He went for a switching layout, as OP has in mind. I personally hate switching railroads, so I found a way to achieve continuous operation.

Moral of the story: OP, you can do whatever you want. There are constraints in terms of what you run. But it can be done, including that reversing loop if you really want it badly enough.


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

You might want to consider going to N scale if your eyesight and dexterity can handle the smaller size. You could get a lot into the space you have available.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> I'm not following what you mean by making another crossobpver and runaround. Can you sketch it?
> 
> Since you seem to be having trouble with curve radii, may i suggest that you get some graph paper to use. That will help you keep scale more accurately. 15" is extraordinarily sharp. Even an SW1500 might have trouble with that. Maybe a GE 44 Tonner would be better.


On my previous layout I built a "high line" using Atlas Snap track with 15" radius curves in several places. My SW1500 did fine as well as GP7s, GP9s and short steamers such as 0-6-0s. Shorter rolling stock worked best. 40 ft. Boxcars were no problem.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

prrfan said:


> On my previous layout I built a "high line" using Atlas Snap track with 15" radius curves in several places. My SW1500 did fine as well as GP7s, GP9s and short steamers such as 0-6-0s. Shorter rolling stock worked best. 40 ft. Boxcars were no problem.


Sorry. That was my bad for unclear communication. I did not mean that the 15" radius would be a problem for the shorter equipment, but the approximately 4" radius that the OP had sketched.

Thanks for keeping me straight.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

Understood, CTValley. Yes, 4" would be a bit tight. I remember someone posting photos on here a while back of a small HO layout that had flex track curves bent down to 8 or 10 inches. (I'm pretty sure it was one of the regular contributors). 
He ran a loop type track plan on switching size benchwork. 
I'm not suggesting that the OP should change his track plan but it is interesting to see what folks have done with small spaces in HO.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

Nikola said:


> I am the heretic here when it comes to narrow layouts and tight curves.
> 
> I once had a layout the same dimensions as OP; maybe a foot longer.
> 
> ...


Yes, like this! Sorry I missed your post when I previously posted. This sounds like the layout I referred to. A masterful job nonetheless. I don't hate switching layouts but would rather run continuous. My skill level in track work will have to improve before I attempt it but it's on the list. I am in the same situation, the day when I can build a larger layout again may never come. 
But we do what we can do. 
Have fun, everyone!


----------



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

Alright tons to reply too and My phone doesnt want to let me quote everyone so Im going to try and address all of you here.

CTValley, I'll post the picture again right here.










Thats what I mean by the crossover, it would eliminate the need for the loop and woild still act as a run around. As for doing a 44Tonner My favorite locomotive is an SW1500, already have one too haha. So I wanted to cater a layout around that and being able to out it to use. 

As far as graph paper, I would rather wait and get it done on a PC program for it to be super accurate. Is there any programs for track design that you can do on a phone through apps or maybe a website?

@Cyclopse

You are right I did overlook the aspect that it was narrow guage, in legnth too! 🙃 I figured 1.5ft would be an extra 7 inches on the 11 initial inches if his layout and would compensate for the different guaging. I didnt do this for the horizontal or the 3feet that I modeled off of. 

Seeing this I may split this into 3 modules and just do the main city as part 1, do the left part after the loco house as a second and do the right side as a third and than go from there. I think it would make more sense to do that and it would allow me to have more area on the left of the loco house since it will be its own module. 


Thanks for the website that will be insanely helpful!!! And by the L do you mean the double section of track on the left with the bridge that goes over it?

Thanks again! I'll definitrly be documenting the whole process and giving you guys updates!


@Nikola

Thanks thats really rad you got all of that into such a small space. Me personally, I love puzzles, and switching is just a mind game and a puzzle. Its like chess in a way, but not boring as hell 😂 I'm a very Point A to Point B type of person. I love the journey inbetween, ever corner slightly different with its own unique properties. Its why Circuit racing gets very boring for me and having a train continually go around the same track the same way drives me nuts, hahah. I can see how some people like it though, I love em for my Xmas tree 😉 But we enjoy this hobby in different ways! Thanks again glad to hear of other layouts being done in similar constraints.

@Flyboy

Already have HO trains. Moreso, I'm 6'3 and sometimes have trouble working on my car cuz my hands wont fit everywhere. HO will already take a ton of dexterity from me to be able to alter my models. I couldn't imagine going N scale, much too small for me. Good idea though, that definitely would be the right call for someone a bit smaller than me 😂

@PRRfan

Thanks for the info. Maybe I will go 16" radius on the branch lines and try to keep the main at 18" or bigger. I'm not sure yet til I get around to using a PC to figure that out.



Thanks all so much! I'll update things as i start to get the ball rolling more.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

LanOsb133 said:


> Alright tons to reply too and My phone doesnt want to let me quote everyone so Im going to try and address all of you here.
> 
> CTValley, I'll post the picture again right here.


Sorry... I do a lot of my posting from work (no, on my lunch break). I often can't see images if they're not actually embedded in the text. The internet gestapo here blocks access to any site where there might be inappropriate content... such as photobucket.

I guess I will have to get on tonight from home and check it out.


----------



## sliderule01 (Dec 3, 2016)

I like SCARM - easy to use, and free.


----------



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

Alright inbetween starting my new job (50+ hours a week) and having to deal with band practice, the DMV and relatives visiting from a few states away, I finally got the ability to get SCARM downloaded and the track plan made.... Its a bit bigger than I was expecting... 4 times bigger infact lol. Its 26'x4'. Now my options are that I can make it in 5 - 5.2'x4' modules or I can make it in 3 - 8.5'x4' modules. I'm leaning more towards the 5 foot modules just so they can be transported easier, as an 8 foot module will stand 2 feet taller than me and sounds like a real PITA to move around. 

Anyways here is the trackplan in SCARM, I still have the right yard to do, but my main trackplan ends where the last siding to the right is. 

Also I have "beefed up" the track plans and the main line is 22" radius. Things like the lumber yard and some of the sidings are also 22' but the track that connects to the lumber yard from the turntable is 18" meaning sw1500 and road switchers only! (Same with the track that goes straight upward near the right side of the layout, thats 18" aswell) Let me know what you guys think of the plan.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

LanOsb133 said:


> Alright inbetween starting my new job (50+ hours a week) and having to deal with band practice, the DMV and relatives visiting from a few states away, I finally got the ability to get SCARM downloaded and the track plan made.... Its a bit bigger than I was expecting... 4 times bigger infact lol. Its 26'x4'. Now my options are that I can make it in 5 - 5.2'x4' modules or I can make it in 3 - 8.5'x4' modules. I'm leaning more towards the 5 foot modules just so they can be transported easier, as an 8 foot module will stand 2 feet taller than me and sounds like a real PITA to move around.
> 
> Anyways here is the trackplan in SCARM, I still have the right yard to do, but my main trackplan ends where the last siding to the right is.
> 
> Also I have "beefed up" the track plans and the main line is 22" radius. Things like the lumber yard and some of the sidings are also 22' but the track that connects to the lumber yard from the turntable is 18" meaning sw1500 and road switchers only! (Same with the track that goes straight upward near the right side of the layout, thats 18" aswell) Let me know what you guys think of the plan.


Let's see, 6' x 1.5' to 26' x 4'.

Is your new job budgeting for school districts?


----------



## LanOsb133 (Mar 7, 2017)

Nikola said:


> Let's see, 6' x 1.5' to 26' x 4'.
> 
> Is your new job budgeting for school districts?


No but if I build in modules I can easily find a place to set it up lol 😂 I will probably do a smaller 6x2 time saver just to have something to run while I build the other. Gotta adapt to reality or ditch the plan entirely.


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

Nikola said:


> I am the heretic here when it comes to narrow layouts and tight curves.
> 
> I once had a layout the same dimensions as OP; maybe a foot longer.
> 
> ...


Do you have any pictures? I'd be really interested to see that!


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

/6 matt said:


> Do you have any pictures? I'd be really interested to see that!


I do have pictures. They are pre-digital, I only have one set of prints, and they are stashed away somewhere.

If I come across them I will definitely post them up.


----------

