Let's talk radii

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Guys, this has been an incredibly great thread. Thanks for all the great info!

I fired up my old Win XP VM and cranked up RTS (I really need to learn a newer program, but it worked for now).

Here's what I came up with.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

The tightest I've got there is some 18" in the flextrack areas, but the "sectional" (which will really be flex in real life) is all 21.25". I think that's a decent balance for the area I've got.

[mmagliaro]

Ed,
If you do want to find a new track planning application, look at Anyrail.  I tried at least a dozen programs, including
the most popular ones that I shall not name.   I think Anyrail whips them all.  Too bad it's Windows-only.
https://www.anyrail.com/index_en.html

[C855B]

^^^^^ +1.

The GC&W is planned entirely in AnyRail. It was the only layout planning program of the six or seven I tried where I wasn't driven to impact-test the mouse against the monitor.

[basementcalling]

^^^^^ +1.

The GC&W is planned entirely in AnyRail. It was the only layout planning program of the six or seven I tried where I wasn't driven to impact-test the mouse against the monitor.

Completely concur.

[nkalanaga]

Jagged Ben:  Long cars, especially light long cars, on the front of a long train are a problem for the prototype as well.  According to BN rules from the early 70s unloaded 89 ft flats should be handled at the end of the train.  Of course, if the entire train is empty TOFC flats, that can be a problem...

For models, a loaded TOFC flat, of an autorack, can be top heavy, which is a problem on sharp curves, while it seldom causes problems on the prototype, except maybe in high winds, or when taking a high-speed curve at slow speeds.  There the "excessive" superelevation can cause the slow moving train to tip over.  That can also be an issue on model track if the curve isn't properly laid.

[robert3985]

So photo #1: what is the radius here we are looking at? Also what is the width of the layout here?

Your overall post is sticky material imho. 

Photo (1) Big Blow on spiral radius, superelevated mainline trackage at Echo Curve heading east out of Echo to Wahsatch:

Thank yew...Thankyewverymuch...

Since both curves are spiral easements, they have no constant radius.  I laid them out using a single Masonite spline 1" deep X 1/8" thick, which is an easy way to get close to a true spiral easement...then added additional splines using yellow hot glue and yellow carpenter's glue on either side of the central spline for a subroadbed for each track that's about 1.25" wide.  However, the curves are never less than a 32" radius at their smallest.

The "width" of the layout is difficult to determine also because the fascia "flows" rather than being straight.  However, I took measurements this afternoon from the point the camera was at to the wall, and that was 6' 7" with a 15" bottlenecked aisleway.  My portable sections on my layout are 6' X 3', but sometimes they're narrower or wider.  This spot is on a 6' section at a corner, running into another 6' section, which starts at 4' 8" deep (there's a 1' X 6' removable section against the skyboard) at the east end of Echo Yard and angles down to 3' deep as you travel westward 6' away.

Here's a photo showing an overall view I took at the Hostlers Show in Union Station in Ogden about five years ago, which I can't do in my layout room.

Photo (1) Overall View of Echo Side of Layout at Hostlers Show 2010:


You can see the non-linear flowing fascias vs linear skyboards and why it's difficult to say just how wide the layout is except at specific points.

To sorta keep this relevant to this thread, I would suggest that sharp inner corners be rounded and track designed to not be parallel with the fascia,  which makes for better aesthetics as well as allowing broader curves to be used.

More questions 'bout my layout should be PM'd to me to not hijack this thread.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Every time someone talks curves, I remember this photo in N Scale Magazine years ago. It was a winter shot of a Monon drag freight in winter scenery. It was one of the best shots I have ever seen. The train seemed to snake through rolling hills with a subtlety I never seen before. It also used wither hand laid or Atlas C55 track and the combination was great.

I hope to capture this on the Boston Line. Mainlines will be 30+ inches while the tightest curves on industrial trackage will be 22-25 if all goes well.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Every time someone talks curves, I remember this photo in N Scale Magazine years ago. It was a winter shot of a Monon drag freight in winter scenery. It was one of the best shots I have ever seen. The train seemed to snake through rolling hills with a subtlety I never seen before. It also used wither hand laid or Atlas C55 track and the combination was great.

I hope to capture this on the Boston Line. Mainlines will be 30+ inches while the tightest curves on industrial trackage will be 22-25 if all goes well.

Yep, that was Lance Mindheim's Monon, and has served as an inspiration for everything I've done since.

[jpwisc]

Guys, this has been an incredibly great thread. Thanks for all the great info!
...

Here's what I came up with.
...
The tightest I've got there is some 18" in the flextrack areas, but the "sectional" (which will really be flex in real life) is all 21.25". I think that's a decent balance for the area I've got.

Ed,
To minimize the visual impact of the corner in the front, you could move the track above "NCR North" closer to the backdrop and make a broad curve in the middle of that straight segment, it will reduce the curve on the left.

[Angus Shops]

24" is is my minimum and it looks pretty good. My layout is an around the walls arrangement with no peninsulas, so most of my major curves are "inside" corners. However, there is one large "outside" corner (like a corner you might find on the end of a peninsula) where I was able to use a really wide radius and it's turned out to be one of my favorite "railfanning" spots. So I suggest, from a purely visual perspective, try to keep the "outside" curves as wide as possible and cheat a little on the "inside" curves if you have to. I run a lot of passenger and the gaps between cars close up (from the operator's viewpoint) as the trains moves thought the inside curves, and with the wide radius on that outside curve, the train looks much better.

Geoff

[jagged ben]

Jagged Ben:  Long cars, especially light long cars, on the front of a long train are a problem for the prototype as well.  According to BN rules from the early 70s unloaded 89 ft flats should be handled at the end of the train.  Of course, if the entire train is empty TOFC flats, that can be a problem...

For models, a loaded TOFC flat, of an autorack, can be top heavy, which is a problem on sharp curves, while it seldom causes problems on the prototype, except maybe in high winds, or when taking a high-speed curve at slow speeds.  There the "excessive" superelevation can cause the slow moving train to tip over.  That can also be an issue on model track if the curve isn't properly laid.

Yeah, it's a bigger problem for models, all around.  For example, say your operation scheme says a car is loaded but it's a boxcar and as a modeler you don't actually add or remove weight from it. 

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Yep, that was Lance Mindheim's Monon, and has served as an inspiration for everything I've done since.

Ah... someone sent me a link to the photos:

[nuno81291]

As the relative noob here I may interject that in planning my double deck (potentially 2 separate scales N/HO) it all depends on viewing height. If you plan to be eye level, you can get away with a bit shorter...beauty is in the eye of the beholder, my 85' passenger stock didn't look so good on 15" curves but it had no problem handling tighter... If you plan this to be a helicopter experiance I would try to afford greater radii' than if you plan to be sitting eye level during most ops/viewing... I am planning my latest revision as being eye level and narrow in depth such that I dont end up with spaghetti or unable to reach the furthest operational track... Aiming for 24" min mainline here and shorter on industrial. One of my inspirations is the Claremont & Concord which had absurdly tight radius and steep grades being an ex traction line...so your prototype should in part dictate what you decide to include or be inspired by...what looks right to me may not look prototypical to you unless you step into my neck of the woods Regards