Track radius for long HO locomotives?
Frank
suggested track patterns as we begin to plan a layout that we'll be
building together.
Most of the patterns in the Atlas book are based on 18" radius curves
(and, in some cases, 15"). For one of his first locomotives, however,
my son asked for a Bachmann GS4 Daylight for Christmas. This is a
pretty long locomotive, and we've been running it on the living room
floor with 22" radius track.
Can locomotives like the Daylight handle 18" curves? Or do we need to
upsize our plans? Thanks in advance for any input.
John A. Zelinsky
would suggest as a minimum for long wheel based locomotives, 24 inch
would be better, and a long loco looks better on the higher radius
curves. Am not familiar with the loco you mention but some locos are
manufatured to go around 18 inch radius curves but the coupler overhang
is incredible on the outside rail. Could lead to a lot of derailments
because of this. If you have got to use 18 inch radius then I would
suggest locos that are compatible with that sharp a curve because they
will operate better and look better too which means also that the
rolling stock should be of the short type rather than the long modern
type. Its your call however.
Whithomer
You would be better off expanding those plans by 50% to 24" or even 26-30".
And, your trains will like it better. However, larger radii take more space.
Homer
Robert Heller
In a message on Sat, 06 Jan 2001 15:02:43 -0800, wrote :
F> My son and I have been looking through one of Atlas's books of
F> suggested track patterns as we begin to plan a layout that we'll be
F> building together.
F>
F> Most of the patterns in the Atlas book are based on 18" radius curves
F> (and, in some cases, 15"). For one of his first locomotives, however,
F> my son asked for a Bachmann GS4 Daylight for Christmas. This is a
F> pretty long locomotive, and we've been running it on the living room
F> floor with 22" radius track.
F>
F> Can locomotives like the Daylight handle 18" curves? Or do we need to
F> upsize our plans? Thanks in advance for any input.
It might. You can always buy a couple of pieces of Atlas 18" radius
curve sections and see. It will likely *look* odd, even if it runs
through the curve. You will most likely face a serious speed
restriction -- that is, it might work OK *slowly*, but detail at speed.
Atlas snap track packs are fairly cheap, so this would be a low cost
experiment.
F>
F>
--
\/
Robert Heller ||InterNet: hel...@cs.umass.edu
http://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/~heller || hel...@deepsoft.com
http://www.deepsoft.com /\FidoNet: 1:321/153
Michael McIntyre
>upsize our plans? Thanks in advance for any input.
Don't know the loco, but if you're running any diesel with more than
four axles or any steamer bigger than around an 0-8-0 or so the Atlas
track plans are worthless.
Download the free planning software from their site and come up with
something on your own. I spent a lot of time trying to up-size some
of their plans, and it just isn't worth the time.
Take a schematic you like and build something that looks sort of like
that on your own. Draw a few layouts to get the hang of it, and
you'll probably end up departing radically from any of their plans
anyway.
Buy a copy of Track Planning for Realistic Operation and read it a few
times...
---
D. Michael McIntyre | mmci...@swva.net | USDA zone 6a in sw VA
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/index.html
Fred Dabney
>
>upsize our plans? Thanks in advance for any input.
As a general rule, trainset makers like Bachmann, and the
regular Athearn line will be designed to accept 18" radius
curves, sometimes at the expense of proper detailing, such
as having the couplers mount to the trucks so they can
swing on the curves.
In Athearn's case later models like the Genesis, and the
big GE's will not work since they have body or frame
mounted couplers. And almost all the other premium lines
like Atlas, Stewart, P2K etc don't have those compromises
anyway so aren't going to work well on the smaller radius
curves.
One thing which is easy to overlook is that often a model
will navigate very sharp curves running alone but will not
without derailing or causing the cars it's coupled to to
derail on those curves. So, if you test a model on an
18" radius, place a section of straight track and a section
of the curved track, each segment long enough to hold the
car and loco being tested and run from one to the other.
--
Hear something obscure from the world of early blues and jazz
at 10 pm Friday, 9 pm Saturday night with host Fred Dabney
from the Back Room of KRWG-FM, 90.7 FM, Las Cruces, NM
<fda...@nmsu.edu> <www.krwgfm.org>
Old Sarge
longest radius you can afford, I have just recently found out is the
better.
Fritz Milhaupt
>
> To All: Articulateds can negotiate an 18inch radius with ease, but the
> longest radius you can afford, I have just recently found out is the
> better.
Ummm... If we're talking HO, I agree with that statement only to the
extent that you're talking about Rivarossi articulateds and the P2K
2-8-8-2.
With the exception of some smaller logging locomotives, most brass
articulateds won't successfully negotiate an 18" curve. At least not
without a _lot_ of modification.
N scale articulateds on the other hand tedn to look pretty nice on an
18" radius...
-fm
Webmaster of Rails on Wheels' web site, at: http://www.railsonwheels.com
The e-mail addresses in this message bounce to frustrate harvestbots.
See my web sites for my actual e-mail address.
Old Sarge
scale, not N. I can heartily agree that N would look good in that radius
of turn. As for the other articulateds NOT being able to take that
radius, I won't be finding out as they are out of my spending range.:-)
Daniel A. Mitchell
30" minimum radius ... some as much as 36". Even when they run well, the
overhang may be a problem.
Many brass 4-8-4's need about the same radii to run well. Generally
anything with a 4-wheel lead truck will require a wider radius curve. Even
a few 4-6-2's I've seen need over 30" radius. On the other hand, many
ten-coupled locos, due to their smaller drivers, may have a shorter rigid
wheelbase than big high-drivered 4-8-4's, and hence be more flexible.
Truly long RIGID wheelbases are the biggest problem. Some PRR Duplexes,
4-12-2's and such (NOT articulated) may require 40"-48" radius curves in
HO.
Rather minor modification (to lead & trailing truck linkages, etc.) will
sometimes reduce these dimensions by 2"-4".
Dan Mitchell
=========
Richard Strebendt
> Agreed. All but the smallest HO brass articulateds will require at least
> 30" minimum radius ... some as much as 36". Even when they run well, the
> overhang may be a problem.
>
> Many brass 4-8-4's need about the same radii to run well. Generally
> anything with a 4-wheel lead truck will require a wider radius curve. Even
> a few 4-6-2's I've seen need over 30" radius. On the other hand, many
> ten-coupled locos, due to their smaller drivers, may have a shorter rigid
> wheelbase than big high-drivered 4-8-4's, and hence be more flexible.
>
> Truly long RIGID wheelbases are the biggest problem. Some PRR Duplexes,
> 4-12-2's and such (NOT articulated) may require 40"-48" radius curves in
> HO.
>
> Rather minor modification (to lead & trailing truck linkages, etc.) will
> sometimes reduce these dimensions by 2"-4".
Another thing to keep in mind is the curved portion of your turnouts (track
switches). I have a 2-10-2 that I took to the club to run one day. The yard
is made up of #4 turnouts. As the engine went through them, the sqeal of the
flanges against the rail told us that the engine was trying to straighten them
into #6's ! On the mainline the engine had no problem with the #6's. So, if
you plan to run long wheel base engines, keep the turnout numbers high. This
will also help with the rediculous overhang you will see when an articulated
loco goes through the turnouts as well.
--
Richard Strebendt rstre...@lucent.com
IHP 1F-429 x98302 http://ans.ih.lucent.com/~res
Train Man
Gorgeous engine. Gladly shelled out the cash for it. It would run on a 30"
radius curve (somewhat) but there better not be anything within 4" on either
side of the track (poles, etc). Fortunately, I was right next to it when the
smokebox hit a phone pole and was able to catch it before it hit the floor.
There was no damage other than the empty feeling in my back pocket. Oh well,
some lucky ebayer has it now...
Jeff