Large Scale Central

Aesthetics vs Function

Track and Trestles
#1

Aside from the fact that I hate the look of the train on the curve, will it be a functional problem? I thought I had the curves figured out. I thought they were at least 10’. USA on-line catalog says that the min. curve is 8’, so I thought I was good to go. AS you can see, I can’t do the string method to figure out my curves. I’m also not impressed with the combination of passenger engines and freight, now that I see it on the track. I guess I will have to switch to a freight engine. And living in CT, I would like to stay with the New Haven theme; decisions, decisions, decisions!!! Will my engines derail?

#2

Perfect example of “form follows function”. Or I guess here it could be “forum follows function”. :wink:

#3

I see plenty of room to widen those curves a lot more.
The gentle “S” curve is ok. Anything tighter would be problematic.
I would suggest, (and I know you have in mind that you want modern diesels, but…) smaller switchers or a logging, mining layout.
Take a look at Shawn’s. Beautiful layout in a small space.

http://www.largescalecentral.com/LSCForums/viewtopic.php?id=14524

#4

Yep, you’ve got a pair of long engines on a normal curve. The box says minimum which is the smallest they will handle. It doesn’t say they’ll look right when on the min. curve.
I run passenger equipment and I have one loop with 10’ curves. I don’t run them on that loop much anymore since I put in a loop with 15’ minimum radius curves. They look better.

#5

John and Dave, thanks for the input.
I was thinking about going with the Alco S-4 Switcher, it’s only 17 1/4" long, so should be OK on my layout.
And yes, I may try to widen the curves as well.

#6

I love that paint job. Those are beautiful engines, but yes, too long. If you want to spend some time, you could cut out a middle section of each and have a unique “shorty.” Once in a while their will be an NW-2 on ebay in NH. That’s what I have running on mine and it’s not TOO bad on the tight curves. Availability is limited for the NH Diesels. Good luck.

#7

I don’t see any pics just “?”.

#8
shelley sherbondy said:
.................

I’m also not impressed with the combination of passenger engines and freight, now that I see it on the track. I guess I will have to switch to a freight engine. And living in CT, I would like to stay with the New Haven theme; decisions, decisions, decisions!!!

…


Shelley,

That’s why some of us advocate picking a theme first - carefully! - and then sticking with it. OTOH you could open a museum railroad. :wink: :lol: :lol:

#9

Yes it looks like I am well on my way to a museum railroad. :slight_smile: I think these guys will be relegated to being “Shelf Queens”; until I can plan an expansion or I’m dead, which ever comes first LOL :slight_smile:
I unfortunately was enchanted with these engines, which is why I got into G-scale. Believe it or not I did think about a theme, and that was the Shoreline East railroad. I live along the shore and have my train running around a working pond/waterfall. I just underestimated the turning radius of these guys. I thought I had the room to pull it off. Live and learn. I will make the layout work though. :slight_smile:

#10

The other thing you could do is hide the curves with mountains and trees. If you can’t see the whole engine at once, it doesn’t look so bad. Fool the eye.
Don’t feel so bad, I would love to have a GG-1!

#11

Looks good Shelley

#12

Shelley,

Widen the curves to the max - the outside of your ballast strip - then narrow the right of way to look “normal”. Hide the really tight curves in cuts - just stack up the rocks and fill in between with soil.

:slight_smile: BTW what do you mean

SS said:
AS you can see, I can’t do the string method to figure out my curves.

what’s there to figure? :slight_smile:

#13

I guess I should have said I wanted to try to determine “figure out” my radii before I put in the ballast strip, then I would have known that I needed to go bigger. I was trying to make it only as big as it needed to be. I know, I know, it’s always better to oversize than undersize. I did make templates out of card board as someone here suggested and they were 12’. Because as you can see I have trees and a pond on the inside, which didn’t allow me to string out the curve radii. I think I will try to “trick the eye” and also make the curves bigger.

#14

Shelley… Your RR your rules as long as YOU are personally satisfied with it is all that matters!
:wink:

#15

Yes, Rooster, and if you rebuild a few times you gain a lot more experience. :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue:

#16

Shelley I have the same locos in MoPac colors and pull freight cars all the time with them. They were used for that as well as for pass service so your ok there. Just try and hide some of the curves and you will be ok. It looks good.

#17

Geoff a quick question about your locos. Do they require any “special” power source, and is it difficult to get sound? I plan to head over to Power & Sound to gather more info on this matter soon.

#18

Use a garden hose to lay out the curves…

Uh, remember to turn off the water first though, ok?

tac

#19

Unless the garden hoses elsewhere are considerably different than the ones I am used to, smoother curves would be laid out with the hose pressurized. I would also recommend a cardboard, or some other favorable/inexpensive material, template of the minimum radius/diameter curvature you have set forth as your standard.

Bob C.

#20

Just came upon this thread and re-read. It’s never stated, but is the curve 10’ diameter? I think it is, those long cars will have that kind of angle. Will it derail, I don’t think so, my E8’s are longer than the USAT PA’s. These are all 10’ diameter Aristo. (and I have a MUCH nastier S curve - shame on me!)

(http://www.elmassian.com/images/stories/misc_train/10cars.jpg)

Greg