I could show them my indoor line, smallest radius over 5’, one #4 switch, rest #6 or larger… it can be done.
Victor Smith said:and that from you??? - the man with the smallest largescale layout ever seen? the small diameter curves are no problem, if you remember what tunnels are made for. (to break up a layout into various scenes) just hide the curves in tunnels and show the straights. .
... indoors LS layouts often require using smallest diameter curvatures, scenery compression, foreshortening, stacking, all those ideas were parriah on this layout, and I'm sorry but, wow, room for one engine and 3 boxcars!.... it didnt look like much fun to operate.
I still have 3/4 or so of a circle of 12" radius curves, Atlas, I think.
In Half Zero, can you imagine?
Also, the old Mantua Booster (0-4-0 side tank) had a minimum radius published as…2-1/4"!
With Mantua freight cars coupled to it, 11" radius.
I have a Penn Line mini-dismal, and early Penn Line adverts showed it running on a circle of track where the inner rail was a silver dollar:
http://www.hoseeker.org/pennline/pennlinehistory/early1.html
So, the Half Zero guys have a history of less-than-R1, eh?
Maroons!
Korm Kormsen said:The reason it works for me is that I dont insist on rigidly adhering to prototypical scale and gauge rolling stock sizes, my engine and 3 cars will take up less space that one standard gauge car on Koesters layout, also Koester would never freelance the layout, it would HAVE to rigidly based on some real world prototype locality in order to be kosher in the "serious" MR community. I'm not "serious" so it doesnt matter what I model.Victor Smith said:and that from you??? - the man with the smallest largescale layout ever seen? the small diameter curves are no problem, if you remember what tunnels are made for. (to break up a layout into various scenes) just hide the curves in tunnels and show the straights. .
... indoors LS layouts often require using smallest diameter curvatures, scenery compression, foreshortening, stacking, all those ideas were parriah on this layout, and I'm sorry but, wow, room for one engine and 3 boxcars!.... it didnt look like much fun to operate.
Victor Smith said:And that "lack of seriousness" is what makes you a "serious" player in the large scale community, Vic, something that Tony will never understand.Korm Kormsen said:The reason it works for me is that I dont insist on rigidly adhering to prototypical scale and gauge rolling stock sizes, my engine and 3 cars will take up less space that one standard gauge car on Koesters layout, also Koester would never freelance the layout, it would HAVE to rigidly based on some real world prototype locality in order to be kosher in the "serious" MR community. [b]I'm not "serious" so it doesnt matter what I model.[/b]Victor Smith said:and that from you??? - the man with the smallest largescale layout ever seen? the small diameter curves are no problem, if you remember what tunnels are made for. (to break up a layout into various scenes) just hide the curves in tunnels and show the straights. .
... indoors LS layouts often require using smallest diameter curvatures, scenery compression, foreshortening, stacking, all those ideas were parriah on this layout, and I'm sorry but, wow, room for one engine and 3 boxcars!.... it didnt look like much fun to operate.
Steve Featherkile said:
Victor Smith said:
Korm Kormsen said:
and that from you??? - the man with the smallest largescale layout ever seen? the small diameter curves are no problem, if you remember what tunnels are made for. (to break up a layout into various scenes) just hide the curves in tunnels and show the straights. .The reason it works for me is that I dont insist on rigidly adhering to prototypical scale and gauge rolling stock sizes, my engine and 3 cars will take up less space that one standard gauge car on Koesters layout, also Koester would never freelance the layout, it would HAVE to rigidly based on some real world prototype locality in order to be kosher in the “serious” MR community. I’m not “serious” so it doesnt matter what I model.
And that “lack of seriousness” is what makes you a “serious” player in the large scale community, Vic, something that Tony will never understand.
yep! that is the disadvantage, that we are in a hobby for old billy-goats. some of us forgot, that a hobby could be supposed to be fun! edit:
Plan? PLAN? The only PLAN I use around here lets me figure horsepressure of a steam engine!
(nPLAN/33000)
(4 (for power strokes a twin cyl locomotive) * average cylinder Pressure (about 1/2 boiler pressure) * Length of stroke in feet * Area of the piston in sq in * Number of revolutions per min)/33,000
I usually find it easier to make the end product fit the part, than the part fit a plan. The rest is in my head, so only I know if and/or how bad I screwed it up. 
I have concluded that there is NO single PR agency at Kalmbach that unifies all of their publications to continually maximize the publication exposure of ALL the RR hobby scales – especially “G”.
I’ll go further: The Kalmbach magazines are THE single pictorial/information source for the entire hobby and they treat the entire hobby as if it were absolutely and singularly disconnected from any connection to “G” outdoor railroading — EXCEPT when inside the magazine folds of their Garden Railroad magazine.
How else can you explain advertising in Model Railroader subscriptions for Garden Railroader and then purposely leaving out ANY reference to “G” outdoor railroading in their illustrated track plan books? That’s ANY reference. Nada. Nothing. Zero. Is the presumption the indoor modelers have no interest in seeing at least one track plan and a completed outdoor layout in real time?
Selah,
Wendell
Wendell Hanks said:
I have concluded that there is NO single PR agency at Kalmbach that unifies all of their publications to continually maximize the publication exposure of ALL the RR hobby scales -- especially "G". I'll go further: The Kalmbach magazines are THE single pictorial/information source for the entire hobby and they treat the entire hobby as if it were absolutely and singularly disconnected from any connection to "G" outdoor railroading --- EXCEPT when inside the magazine folds of their Garden Railroad magazine. How else can you explain advertising in Model Railroader subscriptions for Garden Railroader and then purposely leaving out ANY reference to "G" outdoor railroading in their illustrated track plan books? That's ANY reference. Nada. Nothing. Zero. Is the presumption the indoor modelers have no interest in seeing at least one track plan and a completed outdoor layout in real time?Selah,
Wendell
Sheesh Wendell,
Have you been holding out on us? Didn’t know they had two publications in their lineup covering railroading in the Garden. So far I’ve only been reading Garden Railways - not regularly, just when I deem it interesting enough. 
PS BTW don’t you browse through the mags first? Still looking for LS track plans from Kalmbach? Check this out!
If I had a garden to build it in (upper floor apartments tend to be a spot shy of garden space) there are several layout sections and two entire layouts from Kalmbach’s old 101 Track Plans book I’d like to use.
Plan 55 Belfast & Moosehead Lake R.R. is one to be used in its entirety. But with additional main to make loop out of point to point.
Other candidates to employ whole, 11, 18, 21, 22, 30, 31, 32, 81, 83.
Largest number of this group are small loops with a couple spurs and sidings.
11 is a small yard to industry horseshoe shape.
MR has published several G gauge layouts over the years, including Bob Treat’s outdoor Snowy River Rwy and Malcomn Furlows indoor Mexican Hat Canyon Rwy, including recently John Franzen’s last indoor LS layout before he passed away, so its not like large scale is banished ony to GR by any means. I’ve seen alot less large scale coverage in RMC than MR.
HJ’s search did show MR having at least several large scale garden RR track plans – however, the last one was in 2004. Could the marketplace for “G” signaled MR magazine’s editorial group to make 2004 the point of closure on “G”? The comparison of “G” infrequently to other scales still makes a statement
HJ is right! Yes, we do have one garden RR mag. I had brand name anxiety. Yet, I do remember Russ Reinburg’s Outdoor Railroader photo-loaded magazine that was welcomed during the months Garden Railways wasn’t published. Great photos!
HJ-
Very insightful is your “building in the garden takes more thought…” Consider the damage from walking on the track to pull weeds in resident plants. Who walks on indoor layouts? So easy to forget this feature. Sure, there are the dedicated that use the gravel roadbed and find out later that stepping on the track creates “dips” and “dents” in the rails and then there are the weeds, ah, well, they seem to find residence. What of the bamboo shoots that crevice their way through any of the slightest openings.
Meanwhile, the adventure of “building” and “maintaining” becomes its own hobby in garden railroading.
Wendell
Wendell Hanks said:That's pretty much left to the cat.
Who walks on indoor layouts?