The Carolina Sandhills Lines in HO Scale

[davefoxx]

So are the north/south markings true magnetic, or just railroad?

Heh, good eye.  That was a marking for "railroad-north" left over from the expansion of the Seaboard Central 2.0.  You're seeing the underside of a 3' x 6'8" sheet of 2" foam that once was the subroadbed for Hamlet Yard and the support for Raeford.  See?



Amazingly, that sheet of foam survived, because the Powergrab adhesive that I had used mostly pulled free with minimal damage and allowed me to remove the hills and delaminate the foam from the HCD, leaving a flat sheet of 2" foam that will be recycled into the new layout.

DFF

[davefoxx]

So you say now. Don't count the same techniques before you try them. 

Honestly, I think the techniques I used will translate to HO scale easily.  I'll build the kudzu exactly the same way with the same products.  Since the leaves were waaaaaaay oversize for N scale, they should scale out much better to HO.  And, since Kudzu Jesus will be larger, it will be easier to build with my clumsy hands, especially stringing the line poles in HO.

DFF

[Missaberoad]

especially stringing the line poles in HO.
DFF

HO you got to track down some of these... they are gorgeous.. 

http://rapidotrains.com/totally-wired/

[wazzou]

HO you got to track down some of these... they are gorgeous.. 

http://rapidotrains.com/totally-wired/

Yeah, they are nice but there isn't anything wrong with those Rix poles either.  I've been lobbying Rick at Rix to mold those in N Scale forever.

[wm3798]

On the one hand, I think you'll be frustrated quickly with the amount of space a tiny amount of HO will consume, with minimal return on the visual investment.  Small HO layouts are, in my opinion, cramped and limited in their operational possibilities. 

Compared to N, where a reasonable length train of 15-20 cars look and run well on a small door layout, especially when the scenery is well executed such as on your 2.0, or on Vollmer's well-worn J.D....  You'll be lucky to pull off a 10 car train without it looking silly on those tight curves.

On the other hand, N scale can be a demanding scale in terms of patience, where HO can accommodate the most bumbling practitioner of the craft.  I'm getting ready to up-end my switching layout because there are just too many track glitches and the equipment is so damn finicky.  And we won't even touch on the topic of the eye-sight of the aging model railroader...

I'll be interested to see what you do with this, but I'll miss those nice long(ish) trailer trains and Amtrakers...

If it was me, I would scrap the space-eating peninsula and run a nice N scale shelf layout around the room so those main line trains you seem to like can really stretch their legs. That's what I'm hoping for one of these days... You can scratch the HO itch at a club.  Everyone does it. 


Lee

[davefoxx]

@wm3798,

All valid points, but I haven't been running many long(ish) TOFC or Amtrak trains on the layout since I tore down the expansion over one year ago.  The truth is, I miss running them less than I thought I would.  I really feared that I would be disappointed being relegated back to a HCD layout over the past year, but I actually enjoyed the HCD layout with less stress over working on it.  Just switching nondescript freight cars and running approximately ten car locals has been fun.  This is exactly what the new layout will do for me, too.  And, it will not take up any more floor space the v2.0 with the staging yard/reverse loop deployed.  Also, the radii of the curves on the v3.0 will be the Ho scale equivalent of the N scale curves on the v2.0.

I hear you on the shelf layout, and I agree that I could do so much more.  But, I don't have the time, energy, or money to finish off the layout room.  The Seaboard Central 3.0 is much more doable and should bring me just as much joy as v2.0.  If it does, I'll be happy.

Thanks,
DFF

[MichaelWinicki]

As I stated earlier I think it's a heck of a plan for such a small area.

In my book the perfect plan has:
-A yard
-Some switching
-A branch
-Trackage leading to an "off the layout" destination
-The ability to run some double-headed trains– Meaning trains that are longer than they typical wayfreights found on the layout.

This layout tags 4 out of the 5.  And maybe at some point some clever staging could be incorporated to allow a longer train here & there.

[nuno81291]

I could not disagree with you more Lee in regards to the visual aspect. Saying there isn't much of a return is subjective, are you modeling scenery or a focus on the ROW? I could flip the coin and say in HO the focus shifts to a much more micro than macro focus. Not to discount the incredible work some do in n, but I'm willing to bet any of those modeler hand in HO would yield an even more detail oriented model/result. A single engine trundling with a few 50' box cars and covered hoppers has a certain feel in HO that just is not paralleled in N, and could not be. If we all had room for O/huge proto 48 or even a large HO layout I wouldn't be surprised to see many leave N for HO. N is a often a compromise for people without space, yes it is much more difficult to work in but the trade off is up to the modeler. My 10x10 shelf is much more enjoyable for me in HO than N, especially when it comes time to tear engines apart.

And seeing TOFC or anything resembling a unit train on a door or slightly larger in N is just as cringeworthy as making that scene larger in proportion to the scale, atleast in HO the level of detail can be taken to the next degree, with all respects to equipment and scenery.

In fact after I went to HO I had no desire to return to the massive N club layout I was a part of that had regular ops sessions. However to be fair for anything with mainline or big scenery I still give N the upper hand. N is just too light, finicky and perhaps lacking detail if you are more into branch line or industrial switching than mainline ops. Cost is relative... A few engines for a layout the size of the HO SBD3.0 I guarantee would turn into a handful more with an N scale equivalent in the same space... the cost argument is lost on me. I can buy a box car in ho for 20-30, that car takes up the space of the equivalent 2x cars I would need in N for the same space. HO is absolutely where it's at when the focus is OPs and not the almighty 0-5-0 coming in to help a short wheel base N engine stalling on a speck of ballast or even looking at it funny.

[peteski]

Since you are playing the cheering team for H0, lets not forget to mention that the range of items (everyting, structures, vehicles, detailing and scratchbuilding parts, etc.) available in H0 is exponentially larger than in N scale.

As far as the running qualities go, there is no denying that H0 will run much more reliably (the laws pf physics come into play). But an N scale layout can be made to operate as smooth or even better than H0 - we hear those comments, from seasoned multi-scale operators during ops sessions on some N scale layouts I operate on.  They are surprised how well those tiny trains run!    Personally when I operate on H0 scale layouts I find those larger models clunky. The larger size makes them more like toys than models. But I realize that it is my personal view. I'm in N for the long run - I enjoy those fine small models.   

[Dave V]

I wouldn't go HO for mainline operations unless I had three times the space.  But for branchline or short line operations, I really think HO is a great option if you can do it.  Peteski's point about the availability of "stuff" is spot-on.  Take Pennsy for example.  To do the 4-track main in HO would require space I don't ever expect to have...but to do, say, the Octoraro Branch or maybe even the Bald Eagle Branch, not only do I have space, but now I have ready-to-run PRR branchline equipment like H-class 2-8-0s, P54 coaches, and N6b cabin cars.

I'm still very happy with my move to HOn3 and I'm sure Dave will be happy in HO...as long as expectations are managed.

[unittrain]

It all depends on what you want to model I guess, I tried HO before but wasn't happy with the compression, tight radius curves ect but I model double track mainline railroading which requires long trains and lots of rolling stock, N scale offers a decent amount of detail as with HO it's so much larger where do you stop with detail I could not use an Athearn blue box level model next to some Tangent or Exactrail equipment. I feel that when properly done N scale can be just as convincing if not more convincing because flaws in a model that stick out like a sore thumb in HO disappear in N. For me modeling mainline railroading requires as little compression as possible, and small switching operations don't do it for me, but that's me everybody has different aspects of railroading that draw them which is a good thing. I got a large bridge scene that would require just got over 7' of space in HO so I couldn't do HO without lots of space. But I will say HCDs and HO to me just don't go together well for convincing scenes.

[davefoxx]

Well, everyone has their opinions on what works best for him or her.  I'm certain that I'm making the right choice for my situation.  I really am enjoying these few pieces of HO rolling stock that I have.  A few more freight cars are to be delivered on Monday.

That said, my Athearn Genesis GP40-2 has developed a nasty grinding noise and squeal in the driveline.  I'm tempted to pop the hood to see what's the matter, but I'm also wondering if I should just return it to Athearn while its under warranty.  In the meantime, my Atlas GP40 is working flawlessly, making it easier to consider the warranty repair.

Taking another advantage of HO scale, I ordered up a batch of Sergent Engineering couplers, tools, and parts to begin the conversion.  It will be much easier to convert the fleet while its small and then just upgrade as pieces of rolling stock are added.  I look forward to this conversion, because these couplers do really work and look more prototypically.

DFF

[davefoxx]

Well, I know I said that the Seaboard Central 3.0 would not include the A&R, but then this happened:



This is a beautiful ExactRail covered hopper.  I also received an ExactRail Southern Ry. waffle box car and a small two-bay former Monon covered hopper patched for the Seaboard System ("SBD"):



So, the roster is slowly growing.  Because I'm not changing era or locale, these cars are very similar to what I have/had in N scale.  I was ecstatic to find the Southern waffle box car.  What I'm not going to do (I hope), but I did in N scale, is to purchase more cars than I need.

DFF

[pdx1955]

Well, you better start laying some track for those cars so you can see how room you have or not. Otherwise, it's too easy to keep on buying especially with the vast plethora available in HO. Before you know it you'll end up with too much and this time everything takes twice as much shelf space!

[svedblen]

Before you know it you'll end up with too much and this time everything takes twice as much shelf space!

It might already be too late since it actually takes 8 times the space! Twice in length, twice in width and twice in height   

Seriously though, keep going Dave. Those are beautiful models.