Model Train Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been working on both standard and narrow gauge HO, and after building a 30' HOn3 flat car, I started getting this nagging feeling that narrow gauge was going to look like an N-scale train running on the HO track. I know, I know... it's the same scale, but every time I saw that n flat car sitting next to my 50' standard gauge car, it just kept reinforcing the perception.

Last night I'd had enough. I have a 2-8-0 loco kit in the works, so I set up the shell on the base, and sat it on the track next to my 0-6-0. Ahhhhh such relief to see that they really are similar-sized. Yes the narrow gauge has smaller drivers and the tender is only about half the size, but scale-wise when they are together on the track it is much easier to see that I'm really dealing with the same scale. Of course adding other details like an engineer in the cab would also help reinforce that.

Now I really need to get that 2-8-0 finished and running on the track!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
When AHM first introduced Minitrains HOn2 1/2, I liked the fact that the N gauge track had wide spaced, irregular ties. It completed the picture. For me, the appeal of narrow gauge starts with the track.
When you add the tiny wheels, seemingly oversized cabs, and overhanging bodywork it really starts to come together.
I guess what I'm saying is that the appeal of narrow gauge is more readily apparent when the elements compliment one another. There's really nothing else like it.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
It will definitely be fun working with as I build the new layout, but it looks like I'll be building everything from kit. I think the hardest piece I'm working on though is trying to route the narrow gauge track around a double-slip turnout. Considering the era, I may just try to build a dual-gauge double-slip as a stub turnout. Oh what fun...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
It will definitely be fun working with as I build the new layout, but it looks like I'll be building everything from kit. I think the hardest piece I'm working on though is trying to route the narrow gauge track around a double-slip turnout. Considering the era, I may just try to build a dual-gauge double-slip as a stub turnout. Oh what fun...

hand built two double slips on last layout there buggers to build but is you are just running the N/G through on one-track shouldn't be too bad (maybe only one bottle of scotch ) you should try this in duel gauge if you want a mess to build, I've been trying to figure it out for two rail, just about decided to make it a electric line for warehouse district on layout.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I actually figured out a way to eliminate the double-slip bottleneck, so things are looking a lot better now. Still fighting with my grades, it simply amazes me that in a 12x12 layout I'm having trouble even keeping the grades below 3%. I'm only trying to rise up 4.5 inches but apparently that is too much to ask. Ah well, at least I got most of them down to a 2% grade.

Working turnouts through a paved road... wow that's just a whole new ballgame. I don't even want to consider that. If your track is early enough, maybe consider using stubs instead of points?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
I actually figured out a way to eliminate the double-slip bottleneck, so things are looking a lot better now. Still fighting with my grades, it simply amazes me that in a 12x12 layout I'm having trouble even keeping the grades below 3%. I'm only trying to rise up 4.5 inches but apparently that is too much to ask. Ah well, at least I got most of them down to a 2% grade.

Working turnouts through a paved road... wow that's just a whole new ballgame. I don't even want to consider that. If your track is early enough, maybe consider using stubs instead of points?
why the grades is it to pass over another track? if so have you thought about dropping the track that goes under down like 1% or .5%, even at .5 it would drop required grade to go over .5% less. just a thought:)

as for the lap turnout , the turnout it self is not a problem got a working model on bench , the big problem is two rail electrical and keeping a small 4 driver loco from staling, that's why I'm thinking about a live overhead , then the rails would all be common. the reason that I'm doing it that way is the same as the proto photo, cross streets in a warehouse district.

Ps going to put a HOe on layout at later date collecting parts to build a 2-4-4-0 for motive power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
The track that passes underneath has already been dropped to -1.0 inch, so the total difference would be about 5.5 inches. The pass is meant to be a large trestle bridge, so the larger the difference between tracks, the more impressive the trestle will look. But also this is supposed to be a mountain pass, and it's hard to make that look impressive when you can't get the train to climb more then 4.5 inches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
The track that passes underneath has already been dropped to -1.0 inch, so the total difference would be about 5.5 inches. The pass is meant to be a large trestle bridge, so the larger the difference between tracks, the more impressive the trestle will look. But also this is supposed to be a mountain pass, and it's hard to make that look impressive when you can't get the train to climb more then 4.5 inches.
well you could do like the real ones and pick a long climb with a loop back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
oh I've looped it as much as I can. The best I can hope for now is to make adjustments based on actual loads once I start setting up the track.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
oh I've looped it as much as I can. The best I can hope for now is to make adjustments based on actual loads once I start setting up the track.
one alternative would to be like the one that run out of Silverton and use switch backs that would limit you to short trains though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
According to the train odometer on XtrkCad, I have about 124 inches of track in which to climb as high as possible. Unfortunately that only gives me about 2.5" of rise at a 2% slope.

Ideally I want to use a 2-8-0 to haul about 10-15 empty hoppers up this slope, but most likely I'll have to gang a couple locos together. This line is going to be dual-gauge, and it's the standard gauge that will be hauling the long trains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
According to the train odometer on XtrkCad, I have about 124 inches of track in which to climb as high as possible. Unfortunately that only gives me about 2.5" of rise at a 2% slope.

Ideally I want to use a 2-8-0 to haul about 10-15 empty hoppers up this slope, but most likely I'll have to gang a couple locos together. This line is going to be dual-gauge, and it's the standard gauge that will be hauling the long trains.
you could double the hill. if say the loco could handle 14 empties up the hill and the train had 26 the crew would split the train at 13 hoppers take them up the hill leave the rest of train on either main or siding taking rest up hill then leaving them on a siding back down the hill pick up the rest of the train go up then leave it on main back into siding pickup empties put train back together and go on there way. there was a series of story's in I think the railroader magazine in the 60' and 70's by a man who worker on the GRS in its hay day, the doubling was one of them. would make for interesting operation's.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top