Skip to main content

The initial design is Atlas-O O54/O63.   Further down is Atlas-O O72/O81.

At the end of the thread is S-gauge S48/S54.

 

I have been thinking and designing around a concept with these constraints:

  • Sectional, potentially transportable
  • Sections based on standard 4x8 or 5x9 sections, possibly trimmed down (3x8 by example)
  • Minimum of O54 diameter
  • Two track mainlines (so O63, to work with O54)
  • Human accessible, so reasonable reach and access to most of the layout
  • Interesting and attractive track plan, with operation possibilities and train running interest
  • Reasonable grades, 3% or less.

So here is my first version

ModularV1b

This idea has two 3x8 sections, one 3x6 with a 1foot extension section, and four sections making up the curveback blobs, 68" in length (diameter of O63).  The can be assembled from 4x8s or 5x9s, but with some waste in materials.

Attachments

Images (1)
  • ModularV1b
Last edited by Ken-Oscale
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I would respond that the modules are based on say 4x8 or 5x9 sheets.  But, the actual modules are 3x8 and then 5x5 for the curvebacks.  So more transportable that you might think.  The 3x8 modules will go around curves and up stairs OK.  The 5x5 sections I have not tried personally. 

The 5x5s are circular/curved corners, which can help a lot getting around obstructions.

Thanks for the discussion!

Last edited by Ken-Oscale
@Seacoast posted:

A Great Layout design once again Ken. Just thinking out-loud, How about 2’x4’ modules that you could bolt together? How big is this layout? Is the scale of the boxes Grids 4” ? Have a good day.

Yes, the grid is 4".  Yes, could use smaller sections, but that increases the construction complexity.  I did not mention minimizing complexity of construction as a design goal.   If I put a great priority on transportability, then smaller sections would be better.

Last edited by Ken-Oscale
@PRR1950 posted:

Ken,

If, as you say, the mainlines are using O-63 and O-54 curves, how can your end blobs be only 5 x 5?  Wouldn't they at least have to be 5.5 x 5.5 to handle the O-63 curve?  Maybe you should re-title the thread to "Design of a Modular O63 Layout."

Chuck

Wow! Big mistake on my part, the blobs are actually 68" in diameter.  So consequently, they must be sectioned, I suppose two sections.  I will revise.  Thanks for pointing this out.   

I started with an idea in mind (O54), and then forgot to check to see if the evolution was still inside that idea, and I had expanded beyond it.

@Will posted:

Modular for shows or modular for when you move? How often would they be taken apart and moved in other words? Smaller better for frequent moving. George mentioned 2 x 4s but I wouldn't use those for anything but a permanent layout to save money. Overkill structurally.

 

Hi Will, 2'x4' modules size, not 2"x4" grid framework Lumber.

 

Here is a satisfyingly long and interesting out and back route from the yard, serving the main industries as trailing point moves.

  • Starting at the yard throat at 1
  • past the cross-over at 2 to reach and serve Morton Salt at 3
  • passing the mine entrance at 4 and then taking the crossover at 5
  • then continuing through 6 to take the steel lift-out bridge at 7
  • then under the bridge at 8 and around to serve the power plant at 9
  • then continuing past 10 and past the steel bridge switch at 11
  • then take the crossover again in the opposite direction at 12 
  • serve the mine at 13, and then around the curve at 14
  • through the crossover straight, at 15, and then the yard throat return at 16.

Sectional3e

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Sectional3e
Last edited by Ken-Oscale

Out-and-Back route from the yard serving industries as trailing-point moves.

This variation adds set outs (optional) at the connecting route in the upper right corner:

  • Starting at the yard throat at 1 (left-hand running)
  • past the cross-over at 2 to reach and serve Morton Salt at 3
  • passing the mine entrance at 4 and then taking the crossover at 5 (now right-hand running)
  • then continuing through 6 to take the steel lift-out bridge at 7 (left-hand running again)
  • then under the bridge at 8 and around to serve the power plant at 9
  • then continuing past 10 and optionally set out interchange cars at 10B
  • past the steel bridge switch at 11
  • then take the crossover again in the opposite direction at 12 (now right-hand running)
  • serve the mine at 13, and then around the curve at 14
  • through the crossover straight, at 15, and then the yard throat return at 16.

Sectional3f

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Sectional3f
Last edited by Ken-Oscale

The maximum grade on the curved turn-back loops is 2.9%.  I prefer 2%, but less than 4% is acceptable.  So 2.9% is a win.  Because the grades are entirely curved (O54 and O63) the grades will feel steeper in operation.  Its not a large layout, so 50 car trains are possible but not normal operations.  

Sectional4c

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Sectional4c
Last edited by Ken-Oscale
@J. Motts posted:

Hi Ken, that is really nice, I like your design and the operational abilities.  A plan very well thought out with many possibilities.  What size room is that for?  Thanks for sharing.

Thanks J. Motts, I appreciate that.  The layout space is 11'8" wide, and 17' long, so would fit in a room with those dimensions or larger.

-Ken

Regarding the O54/O63 plan, the two parallel mains are actually long:  2 trains per main is easy, 3 trains possible, and even four trains per main can be done (assuming all trains are well speed matched) with 10 car trains.  For train watching, 2 trains per main (4 trains) would be pleasant and interesting.

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Ste 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×