"Operating" your layout.

I don't see why you couldn't operate it that way...after all, the trains and track are simply the "players" in the act; you write the "script"... 

Mark in Oregon

I do "operate" when moving freight, but when running passenger cars I just let them glide around, sit back and take it all in.

Operation helps give it some purpose and makes you do some thinking to accomplish the task.

Good thing is you can make it hard or easy on yourself, plenty of ways to run your railroad.

I have been to a couple of HO layouts and one O layout specifically designed for operations.  The HO layouts were in relatively large basements with lots of room for yards, industries, stations, and trackage between industries.  The O layout was also in a basement but due to the larger scale was very crowded with the industries right next to each other, and the yards were smaller.  The O layout still had lots of operating opportunities.

Operation of all three layouts was enhanced by using handheld controllers, DCC for HO and TMCC for O.  You could walk right along with your train which made you feel more connected to it.  One layout had the switches controlled through the remote (or controller on the layout side next to the switch), the others the switches were manual and the engineer (or someone acting as a conductor on two-person teams) switched them as needed.

Nearly all uncoupling was done manually, with only a few places with electromagnetic uncoupling.  Since you were always right next to your train, that made sense.

All these layouts mostly used companion industries; load the empty at one industry, move to and unload at another industry, then return the empty to the first industry.  The HO layouts also had through freights coming from and going back to hidden staging tracks.  They would drop off or pick up cars from a yard, and a separate engine would take them out to/bring back from an industry.  The O did not have a staging yard because of the room needed for it.

Lots of things you can do, but unless you have lots of space you will be limited in you "operations".  I personally would go to a command control system (DCS, TMCC, or both) which would make things more realistic especially if you have multiple folks running at the same time.  TMCC I think would be easy to incorporate into your conventional layout.  Unfortunately this means buying TMCC engines or upgrading your postwar engines to TMCC. 

My O gauge layouts are relatively small and I run them as a railfan - just sit back and let the trains circulate through the realistic scenery - over bridges and rivers, through tunnels, alongside hills, past towns. In my opinion, the size, presence and sounds of 1:48 model trains make it less necessary to run them with "operation" than smaller scales. Those O gauge features are enough to keep me interested without it. I would therefore guess that "operation" is less common in O gauge than in HO or N. It also seems to me that it is more feasible to build a model railroad for "operation" in the smaller scales because more complex and realistic track plans can be fitted into a given available space. But, the way to do it is whatever way you prefer.

MELGAR

With conventual the forward, neutral, reverse is too much monkey motion and gets old fast. 

I operate but find no need for car-cards or markers or switch-lists. There are 28 cars, an SW1500 and an old UP Hack in play. Four industrial sidings and five "industries". Interchange with the outside world is a return loop in the next room. No space for an interchange yard so interchange switching is handled with the ol' 0-5-0. There are four sets of equipment that cycle from interchange to set-out to pickup and return run to interchange. Because of differences in loading time and unloading time at different industries the consists are constantly changing.

Oh, and The Royal Gorge rolls through once a day. Out of character and out of place (one industry is a refinery in Bradford/Petrolia/Karns City/wherever) but hey, it's the Plywood Empire Route where we're stuck in [some imaginary] 1964 where and when anything is possible.

Lew 

I run two types of freight operations on my carpet layout -- a twice-around using a cross with three spurs.

For example, 1.  Simulates a task such as picking up coal from a tipple, delivering it to a factory on a siding, then loading up a boxcar with whatever widgets the factory produces, and delivering the car to a different siding.  You can also return the empty cars (MTs in operations parlance) by reversing the order.

The second example simulates using waybills without the fuss.  For each freight car I own I've created an index card with the car number listed at the top, and other stats.

2. I decide which box cars, gondolas, etc. I want to use in my session and lay out the corresponding cards (on the floor) in numeric order from the lowest number to the highest.

Using multi-sided dice that's most appropriate for the total number of cars, I generate the order of my consist.  For example, say I have four cars.  If I roll a "3", then the car represented by the third index card becomes the first car in the consist.  If I next roll a "1", the index card with the lowest number indicates the second car in the consist, and so on until all the cars are assigned.

If desired, I repeat the process with the cards and dice to determine which of my three sidings to drop a car off at (or pick it up from).

It's simple but simulates operations pickup and delivery.  I just place the index cards in the order of the consist for the pickup run.  After the consist is assembled, I place each specific card at a given siding to show where each car in the consist gets dropped off.  

No muss, no fuss.  It can be fun trying to determine which direction to run the train in and what's the best (most efficient) order for drop off for a given car/siding based on the random order created by rolling the dice.

That's what works for me for freight simulations. Have fun with whatever you decide. 

Tomlinson Run Railroad

Yes, my layout is designed for operation, car cards and all. I happen to have a very large space, made even larger by having most of it triple decked. The bottom level is staging. The mainline is about 600' long. The layout has about 3500' of track and over 300 switches. There are 13 yards and over 30 industries. The layout is prototype based.

This 40' long scene is the Hiawatha Milling District in south Minneapolis. It has 7 elevators and mills, a scrap metal dealer and a lumber yard.

This is Dayton's Bluff, just east of downtown St Paul, where BNSF, CP and UP trains all pass through. Three lesser railroads can be seen in this area as well.

This is just an overview shot of aisle two of four. Three of the yards can be seen here, upper and lower left, and upper right. Lower right is Newport, MN with four industries.

This shot just shows all the levels of the layout. Roseville, MN is just an extra little switching area with six industries above the upper deck on peninsula two. St Paul on the main level has three industries. The lowest level is the big hidden yard with parking for five trains on each of five tracks for a total capacity of 25 trains max.

I have to agree with Dennis' comment about conventional trains and switching. It will get old fast. Command (TMCC, Legacy, and DCS) is much better for that. If you insist on post war, you can convert them.

Interesting operations in O is very possible and it is easier to read car numbers O!     Of course the sequence reversing as mentioned above can be annoying but probably not so bad once you get  used to it.     I operated a layout in my first house that had about 6 industries and two interchange tracks  using 3 rail with sequence reverse.    The track had a loop, but operations were point to point in sort of a twice around with a grade.    I had a dozen or so freight cars.    The operation started with getting a loco and caboose at the engine house at the end of the line in a "town".     I used tabs on top of the cars to route them, similar to car cards with 2 sided waybills.    One side of the tab had an industry and the other side had the name of an interchange, PRR or C&O.    The crew (me) would start by picking up the cars in the town after getting the loco and then runing around the layout to a few other industries and picking up cars there.    about 3/4 of the way to the end, was the C&O interchange.    I would pick up incoming cars from the interchange there and set out C&O cars and then go on to the PRR interchange at the end of the line and do the same.    They usually took me about 1/2 hour.    Then immediately or later depending on what time I had, I would run back to the origin dropping cars to the various industries as noted on the tabs on the cars.     I had separate little boxes for the tabs for 3-4 car types - boxcar, gondola, hopper etc.    When the cars were on the interchange, I would remove the tabs and replace them with new ones with the industry tab facing up.    I would pick tabs out of the boxes randomly.    After putting the cars in the industries, I would flip the tabs over telling me which interchange to take the cars to.     

The size of the layout and the complexity does not limit the interest and fun of operations.    It does limit the number of jobs/crews you have.    A very small layout might be a one person job.    A very large layout like some of the HO ones, might be for 20 people.    And there is everything in between.

My current layout is still O but is 2 rail and I went to DCC about 5  years ago.    Before that I used straight DC and block control.    Each logical block had a rotary swtich that could connect it to one of 4 mainline throttles or a local throttle, or be turned off.    That type of control would be the same for AC postwar.    The only difference is that with DC, the direction is polarity controlled, so there is no sequence reverse.     With block control you need to think through the block boundaries to allow flexible operations, and you also need to be able to shut power off to many of your stub sidings.    

By the way, Bob Bartizek in Ohio, and Dave Simpson, in my area both have 3 rail layouts that are operations focused.    Locally the O scale club, a guy up north who is in O Scale, I, have 2 rail operations focused layouts.     So among my friends, operations in O scale is very common. 

Elliot"

Elliot, I couldn't agree more. I've been running a Lionel NW2 (conventional) but just made the change to an MTH PS3 SW1500. That thing crawls! Now I've ordered  a DCS Remote Commander because I'm tired of forward-neutral-reverse-neutral.

Lew

I learned a while back I am not at all interested in delivering or picking up freight cars.  I do however like to operate passenger rail.  I have a 3 track stub terminal/staging yard in one room where I can "release" a passenger train to the layout, visit the junction passenger station some 35 feet away, have it circle back not quite all the way back to the staging yard, return to the 3 track junction station where that passenger train now visits the upper return loop and then returns to the stub terminal.  If I insert a freight into the mix or add a second passenger train that follows the original route I have more than sufficient operation.  Siding on my layout have become a place for operating cars to hang out or have some animation going on.  I have learned real railroad operations are too much like work for me at least.

I learned on my 4th layout, I think, that without operations, the layout got boring very quickly.    I built 3 in high school, and one after I was married.    I got them built and wired and scenicked and ran the trains for a half hour or so, and then started to think about the next layout.    I realized on that last one that I was asking myself "is this all there is?".    I lost interest in the layout when it reached a "finished" stage.  

That is is just me.   I enjoy the challenge of figuring the moves required to do the work assigned.   It is sort of like a large game board that is somewhat animated.    

You could build this with O72 switches and uncoupler tracks on a narrow area of the layout. 

Inglenook

It will create some operational fun. In between waybill operations or just a few sidings.

It does fit better with numbered switches. But, you don't have those unless you fit some Ross' #4 into your Lionel tubular.

Here is a collection of 'nooks:

With the SCARM file attached for use under a Creative Commons License

Here a large layout with operating potential:

With the SCARM file attached for use under a Creative Commons License

And a small one that I will start to build inthe next couple of weeks:

For the operating concept for this one see my post: Track Plan - Self Layout/Switching Layout - 19 by 2 Harbor Stub: Request for C&C

SCARM file attached for use under a Creative Commons License

I have always owned "Operating" layouts over many years in O scale the latest is the Steel Mill layout and probably my last. I call it "The Last Great Project".

I share operating the layout with two other blokes and we run every Friday where possible, we have a lot of fun switching endless cars around the Mill all day long.

The Green lines are the staging and main yard, the Blue lines are the Steel Mill and the Red lines are the common carrier railroad, lots of railroads, plenty of action ! 

Thanks. Roo.

Roo,

Any willingness to share dimensions?

Rob.

The layout size is Approx. 26feet X 26feet.

Thanks, Roo.

May if I transcribe it into SCRAM and post it to this thread?

John,

My layout is made for operations.  Nothing is 'conventional' control but I have done operations on conventional layouts.  You will be limited but it is possible.

Right now my programs are hand written but I am playing around with JMRI.

I believe operating layouts are a growing facet in the O gauge community.  

Once you get a true taste of operations, it is hard to go back.  I discovered as a young boy that running trains around and around in a small circle was pretty boring. 

It can be difficult designing a track plan that satisfies all aspects of running though.  A point to point is the most prototypical, but it is nice to be able to let trains run when you aren't having operating sessions too.  Hidden staging yards are excellent for giving trains a place to go and disappear.  A single-track mainline makes for great operating if you have ample passing sidings.  Double-track mainlines offer more flexibility and with passing sidings are able to handle larger volumes of traffic.  Yards work best if you have long yard leads so you can switch cars while traffic is still free on the main.  Passenger operations need ample station stops to give "jobs" for their engineers and conductors.  Having a large, big city terminal as a base for these operations is a big plus.

I love freight car switching, making up trains, delivering to local industries and all, but my 3-rail couplers leave so much to be desired that I may have to switch to all Kadees.  Cards necessitate unique car numbers on all cars which is not complete on my layout.  I love the idea on my layout of switching industries on my upper Milwaukee Road branchline, delivering these cars to my lower level Eola classification yard, and then trains taking these cars to my Proviso Yard for further distribution.  This gives me train jobs for local switching, a local freight to pickup setouts to Eola, switching in Eola Yard, mainline freights to Proviso, and switching and train make-up at Proviso.  Passenger operation support two long distance trains and local passenger and commuter trains at once.  I try to run with two-man teams of engineer and conductor with them switching jobs mid shift.  We then have a yard master for each yard that controls operations within the yard limits, tower operators to control switches at key interlocking locations, and dispatcher overlooking all operations.  

An interesting twist is that when we are running more modern (after Amtrak) we have freight train priority and pre-Amtrak has passenger train priority.  

It takes a fairly large group for operating everything described above, but it can be scaled down based of the size of the available manpower.  And I can still run multiple trains in continuous loops unattended either alone or when showing the layout to non-train friends and visitors.

Art

David Minarik posted:

John,

My layout is made for operations...

...and for viewing. 

What a fabulous looking layout!

Mark in Oregon

I like to 'operate' my layout occasionally - as well as just run trains. My layout follows a somewhat whimsical theme of a fictional Welsh branch line based on a BBC show. I created a deck of operations cards from the goings-on in each episode in the series. Then when I am in the mood to operate, I shuffle the cards, randomly pick one and do what it says as in, 'Go to Llaniog, pick up a pair of new boots at the station, and an empty coal truck. Then go to Pugh's Fuel depot to fill the coal truck. Drop off the boots at Dinwiddie's mine, and coal at the Grumbly Town gasworks.'  Or 'Meet Banger's Circus train at the junction and bring to their winter quarters.' That sort of thing. Very simple.

It's VERY possible to conduct operations, switching, etc., with conventional postwar equipment.  I personally had no problem with the F-N-R sequence of the e-units.  Some modern-era freight cars were too light or balky for reliable coupling and uncoupling, so we made a rule that if it doesn't couple or uncouple on the first try, lift the car and engage the couplers by hand.  Yes it spoils the illusion a bit, but it's the only way.

For a multi-operator conventional railroad, you'll need electrically insulated blocks and probably some type of cab control system.  Folks did it this way for almost 50 years before command control.  Your Z-4000 remotes will provide freedom to walk around with the train if that's what you want.  If you ever decide to go command, you'll have to install an ERR AC commander in each loco.  Right now that's about your only option for Postwar.

One limiting factor you'll have is room size.  Compared to N, O gauge takes up a LOT of space.  Depending on your room size, you might find that a double mainline works better for multi-train operation than a single one.  Or perhaps a single track main, and a yard with a lengthy lead independent of the mainline that serves a couple of industries.  Especially if you're using Postwar equipment, don't be shy about using sharp curves.  Those traditional trains look pretty good on 21" radius (aka O42).  Personally I wouldn't build a new layout with O31 and Lionel #022 switches, unless that's all you have.  I've been begging Steve at Ross to make his great switches in O36.  Keep bugging him and we'll all have more options!

The next factor variety of operations is the number of turnouts / switches.  Quality switches are EXPENSIVE!  There's no getting around this, so don't cheap out and buy someone else's used junk.  If you're going to build a layout with 20+ switches in a spare room, your trains will be passing over those switches several times a minute.  So you want good ones that won't cause random derailments every third lap.  Again I would recommend Ross, although some folks have good experience with Atlas O (if you can find them!)

The final limiting factor that led me to give up on Postwar, is slow speed operating characteristics.  I love steam!  But most of the postwar steam locomotives just won't operate for any significant distance at realistic switching speeds.  The gear ratios are all wrong with no obvious way to improve them.  Unless your layout is dead level with excellent power distribution, you'll have to jockey the throttle just to keep the speed under 25 scale MPH (a convincing slow freight.)  This is especially true once the motors are warm, or the locos are running light without a train.  For me personally, "toy train" speeds spoil the illusion and make it apparent that you're just going around in circles.  The 773 Hudson is ok, but it's scale-sized and pretty big for traditional trains and Plasticville buildings.  You might also be able to find a prewar 227 steam switcher and install Postwar couplers.  So your choices for steam are very limited. 

If you like diesels, you have some good options.  Dual-motored F-3's, FM TrainMasters, GG-1s will run as well as any modern era loco without speed control.  Good-quality single-motored locos like the 622 switcher, 2023 Alcos, GP-9's should be operated in pairs (the two independent motors "help" each other, and even out the power pulses at slow speeds), although 25" of locomotive is a luxury on a small layout.  The little motorized units run slower, but they're noisy, maintenance-intensive, and can only pull a few cars.

Bottom line, you can definitely build a multi-person operations-oriented railroad with Postwar equipment.  The four considerations you have to deal with are a block system for independent control of conventional trains; a track plan that supports purposeful multi-train operation; quality track switches; and motive power that runs smoothly at scale speeds.  I wish you luck and think it's very worth doing!

The small layout I am working on is designed to be just such a beast: waybill-directed operations with older Lionel trains. The idea is one yard of many in a major rail terminal. It receives trains from staging, representing home road trains terminating at the yard, and transfers from other yards in the city. Cars are sorted into trains and sent on their way.

A few design considerations that come of using old, conventional equipment:

1. Staging is located below the layout, and rather than use a conventional yard, I used several loops. This means e-units can be locked out before descending to staging, ensuring that MU-ed diesels will not get "out of sync".
2. Being that it is a small layout, the limited tractive effort of many older engines is not much of a problem. For me, eight cars is a drag freight.
3. The trains do run pretty fast, so a continuous loop is a must. No point-to-point switching layout, this. The train runs in circles until I decide I've watched it long enough. At that point, it's reached its "destination" and the rest is done according to Hoyle.
4. Even with command control, I never much liked arranging meets; it felt stressful. And I'm usually by myself, anyway. So I decided just to run trains sequentially. Of course, if someone wanted to do multi-train operations with postwar, it would certainly be possible. People ran with insulated blocks and cab control for decades.
5. It is hard to find older Lionel cars where there are multiple numbers of the same car type for the same railroad. Placing the layout in a terminal helps with this: anything and everything shows up at any given time. You can also get some more numbers by using the early postwar cars: several were numbered in the 2400-series, and then re-issued in the 6400-series when they changed to magnetic couplers. Much more variety is possible by expanding the roster to include the mechanically-similar offering from MPC and LTI.

As for switching, different people like different things. I've been using locos with three-position e-units to switch since forever, and I can't see how flicking the 'direction' lever twice instead of once to back up is so annoying. On the other hand, watching an Odyssey-equipped engine loaf along at one mile per hour makes me just about crawl out of my skin. Life is too short. I'm switching at 40mph and no one can stop me! It's not like there's anything inside those boxcars to break, anyway.

A final observation is that there is a difference between operating and modeling. An operator tries to simulate the action and motion of railroading. A modeler tries to recreate a railroad in miniature. Most of the time, these two things overlap--as in "model railroading"--but there's no reason they have to. They are, in fact, quite different. Modeling is about capturing details; operating is about abstracting an essence from them. Modeling takes a photograph and builds it in three dimensions; operating takes a railroad and flattens it into a straight-line schematic. For modeling purposes, there are definite limitations to using old Lionel trains, but there is no reason a person can't operate with them. For all their un-realism, the fact is, they couple and uncouple, and go forward and backward at variable speed, and that is really all you need for operations. Yes, they are too fast--but that's a modeler's problem. Only if you are concerned about scale do you care about scale speed. In the abstract, all you need is for the the fast trains to be faster than the "slow" ones. What speed they go doesn't much matter, until you get into the modeling end of it.

Well stated. I would add that to some degree even the largest, finest model railroad becomes a caricature the moment trains start to move because a giant model pike is still only a few scale miles in length. It is then about whether the caricature is effective or not. Good caricature allows the brain to suspend disbelief and allows the action to seem real at some level. 

Lew

Here's one more thing I would like to add... A lot of books have been published about realistic model RR operations.  I personally find this one more approachable than most.  Look carefully at the layout diagrams.  Because if your track plan lacks certain key features, you might find it hard to conduct realistic operations.  Great topic!!

No reason why not I'd say, but I would think about converting to DC and bypass the postwar reverse units.

There were some famous British O gauge layouts years ago that operated to with toy-trainish scenery, timetable operation and clockwork locomotives - definitely hands-on. Some were whimsical, some deadly serious with full signals, the works.

I recall pics of stations that were nothing more than two tracks and a sector plate for the locomotive runaround - space was tight! Each station had winding keys with clock-dial charts for each locomotive giving the exact number of winds to get its train from one station to the next. 

The South British Railway and Norman Eagles' Sherwood layouts come to mind, but I think you'd have to dig through some Brit magazine back issues to find photos. Very few online, but some - the Sherwood layout seen here:

 http://www.binnsroad.co.uk/rai.../sherwood/index.html

My layout is an around the wall, walk around operation of 5 two rail point to point branch lines on three levels w/ conventional control.  There are ten+ yard / town linear zones along 200 feet of walls with several staging yards and 3 peninsulas.  Guessing about 97 turnouts and 1100+ feet of track in 2k sq ft.  

As I approach each section there are local AC & DC controls which permit hands-on shifting, point throwing, uncoupling and on site operation of five turntable all with curly cords.   While shifting a peddler freight,  a thru train, doodle bug or RDC can run through on either AC or DC.

The operation blocks average 2 plus feet deep and 10 to 16 feet long.

There is also a new three rail mountain point to point division that runs freight and passenger  through three towns automatically and a lower deep valley Galloping Goose point to point.  The 3r runs keep my sanity.

This RR is admittedly too big for one person, but as it comes together I find contentment in its basic roots.

I have a box of fried $$$$$ gizmos that taught me really enjoy the simplicity of conventional control. 

Conventional can be simple and interesting without beating up the smoke detector.

Roo posted:

I have always owned "Operating" layouts over many years in O scale the latest is the Steel Mill layout and probably my last. I call it "The Last Great Project".

I share operating the layout with two other blokes and we run every Friday where possible, we have a lot of fun switching endless cars around the Mill all day long.

The Green lines are the staging and main yard, the Blue lines are the Steel Mill and the Red lines are the common carrier railroad, lots of railroads, plenty of action ! 

Thanks. Roo.

 

Even though the layout is small compared to some American layouts there is enough action to keep three men busy all day.

There are four main control points see photos and compare them with the track plan. The layout is a mess at the moment as it is being worked on but next week we will be in action again. The photos I snapped this morning sorry for the mess. I am also cleaning the locos at the moment getting them ready for the next session this is a once a year cleanup. Thanks Roo.

Here is a better view of the plan. Thanks Roo.

QUOTE - Unfortunately this means buying TMCC engines or upgrading your postwar engines to TMCC. 

OR...you can always go BPRC and do away with all the layout wiring.

Most of my battery powered engines run fine at slow speeds, I do have 1 or 2 that start moving at a higher speed than I would like but they're not that bad.  Surprisingly, my RailKing Imperial 0-6-0 is one of the slowest engines I have under BPRC, so the MTH engineers got the gearing right on that one!  Even my 14lb Williams brass N&W J 4-8-4 takes off at a creep.

I have 2 RailKing 2-8-0, one has very slow speed and one takes a bit more voltage before it moves.  I suspect grit in the gear train, just haven't done anything about it yet so it must not be a big deal.

I have a Weaver 4-6-0 (chassis under a homemade boiler) that runs smooth as silk (thanks Ed Rappe!).  I have engines from all the makers (MTH, Lionel, Atlas, 3rd Rail, Weaver, Williams) using BPRC and things are good.

The actual operation (movement) of the engines and "operating the layout" using battery power is no different than running using any other command control system, except there's less to know to get a train moving.  Turn on the Tx and Rx, turn the direction knob in the direction you want to go, and turn the throttle knob to move the train, that's all there is to it.  No thick manuals to read, no track wiring issues. My DCS and TMCC systems are in storage at this time.

ZERO failures in over 4 years!  Oh wait...I did have 1 engine quit on me but that was my fault, didn't tighten down a terminal screw good enough and the wire came out.  No damage done.  Haven't replaced any batteries yet either.

No matter which system you use, you CAN "operate" your layout, you just may not be pleased with the smoothness at which some of your engines run at slow speed.  The old conventional F/N/R IMO can be used, but once you go digital you'll not likely go back.

It's a shame the makers don't offer Plug&Play so we could simply plug in the system of our choice.

Strummer posted:

David Minarik posted:

John,

My layout is made for operations...

...and for viewing. 

What a fabulous looking layout!

Mark in Oregon

You should see it on HD video!

@Bob Delbridge the original poster asked about doing operations with Lionel postwar.  Those have one or two wound-field, 3-pole universal motors that can easily draw 2 amps per motor at 12-18 volts.  They will run on DC, but there's no current battery technology that fits in a boxcar, that would run them for very long.

Your other comments affirm what I already said.  The specific locos you mentioned are among the lowest-geared in the whole history of 3-rail O!  If the gear ratio is right, it will run well with no need for gimmicks like speed control.  

Williams N&W J: 40:1 gear ratio (1990. Brass scale model, wide radius curves)

Weaver 4-6-0: 25:1 gear ratio (1992?  Brass scale model, widely-spaced drivers, O36 or better for best results)

RailKing 2-8-0:  28:1 gear ratio (1998.  Roughly scale-sized, with limited cast-in detail. Longer rigid wheelbase than a 736 Berkshire, with rubber tires on both sides of the last axle.  O36 or better to reduce binding and excessive flange wear)

RailKing 0-6-0: 36:1? gear ratio with small drivers (2002?  Also a scale model, but O27 compatible. Excellent loco for a small layout.)

The Williams J is the oldest one you mentioned.  It was made in 1990 and requires wide-radius track.  No traditional O gauge steam locos made before that time will run at realistic speeds.  Postwar steam locos are geared around 9:1 or 10:1 with the motor integral to the chassis.  The speed of their series motors varies considerably with changing load.  Unless a skilled machinist develops a comprehensive retrofit, they just aren't usable for scale operation.