15 " radius tract

[brian9911]

would the loco and cars of the following set Bachmann HO Scale Train Set Digital Diesel Commander Union Pacific 00503work on 15"radius track ?
B1=Submit  Bachmann item number 44505 HO 15" Radius Curved. Nickel silver track with gray roadbed; 4/card

15" Radius Curved Track is best used to make railroad curves in tight spots on your railroad layout and appropriate for locomotives and cars with short wheel bases   I have a table appox  35 3/4 wide by 58 inches long    is 15" radius too tight  for  30"  using 15' radius track each end  30"  + 18"  = 48" length  would the turning radius at both ends be too tight    what loco and cars wheel base be too long 

[Len]

The cars from that set would probably be ok on 15in radius curves, if you operate slowly.

I have serious doubts about the loco though, both because of it's length and the wheelbase of the trucks.

Something along the lines of a 44 or 70 tonner would be more appropriate for that tight a curve.

Len

[Doneldon]

Brian-

You might find that your loco and rolling stock operate around those curves just fine ... as long as they are not connected to one another. There are several problems associated with tight curves; one of the most difficult to correct for is couplers. The ends of your vehicles will be so far to the outsides of the curves that the couplers are likely to either let go or cause a derailment. The only solutions to that of which I am aware are, first, using Talgo trucks, and second, using couplers with longer shanks which can move from side to side to a greater degree than standard couplers. Each solution creates its own problems, however.

If you bump around on this board you will find many modelers advising against the use of Talgo trucks. They aren't prototypical, for one thing, and they tend to derail cars, especially when backing. Longer swiveling coupler shanks are also unprototypical, they make your trains look ridiculous even on straight tracks, they can be problematic when backing and they are difficult to install and adjust since no one actually makes such couplers and the hardware, like draft gear boxes, they need to operate with some reliability.

I suppose you are bummed by now, but you needn't be. While your surface is frankly undesirable for anything other than a switching railroad, industrial scene or a mining or lumber layout, each of those can be an interesting and worthy modeling plan. Each will let you run trains, just not in a circle.

A switching layout can be intriguing as you devise ways to change the order of cars in your trains and put cars in a particular place on your pike. Industrial scenes or dioramas can be modeling jewels and they preserve the operational possibilities of a switching set up. Mining and lumbering railroads can be a load of fun. You can use steep grades, sharp curves, crossings and all sorts of track arrangements as you plan ways to get workers and supplies to a remote point and back to civilization. Such a railroad could easily have a mountain setting with trains needing switchbacks to ascend to the industrial sites and perhaps reverse running to get ore and/or logs down to the industries which will process them or send them out into the rest of the world for processing. Designed carefully, any of these options can be built with an eye to later incorporation into a larger railroad when you have the space and resources to expand.

So, don't be discouraged. Your space is surely limited for an HO railroad (you could try N-gauge but it sounds like you are already invested in HO), but you are not without viable and rewarding modeling options. Study up, peruse track plans on line and in magazines and I'm sure you'll find something to suit your interests. And welcome to model railroading!
                                                     -- D

P.S. You aren't alone. All model railroaders I have met in more than 50 years in the hobby have lacked the room to build the railroads they want, even those with whole basements full of trains.

[jward]

best advice i can give is to stay away from 15r curves, they are far more trouble than they are worth. your locomotive will work fine on 18r and larger curves. if you don't have room for 18r curves, maybe you should be in N scale.

[Jim Banner]

Donneldon brings up a valid point but there is an easy solution - used eased curves.  Eased curves start off at a wider radius then tighten up to the minimum radius.  Coming out of the curve, the radius again wides before going straight.  You can approximate this  by replacing the first and last pieces of 15" radius track in the  semicircular ends of your oval with pieces of 18" radius.  You know your rolling stock can go from straight to 18" radius.  Going from 18" radius to 15" radius should be equally easy for it.  Your table width will accommodate the slight extra width very easily.  I would suggest buying just one package (4 pieces) of 15" radius E-Z Track and testing this out before investing heavily in all the 15" radius track you need.

Jim

[lirrman]

I have a double track main line.  In order to fit one inside curve into the available space I used the easement method Jim mentioned.  I went from 22" to 18" to 15" back down to 18" and finally another 22".  I matched the outside curve with flex track spaced at 2 1/2" on center to avoid bumping.  All my diesels, including the six axle types, went thru the easement with no problem.  Even smaller ridged frame steamers made it.  Longer steamers were dispatched to another route.  The one concession I made to the 6 axle diesels was to use the longer shank "KD" couplers to reduce the sideways pull.  I used a lot of lichen and foliage around the edge of the curve to hide the obvious overhang of some of the longer passenger cars.  Yes, even 85' passenger cars made it through the easement.  They don't look particularly good but the curve is away from the front of the layout and the the extra scenery hides the overhang.  And, so far, like the painter who is critical of his own work, I'm the only one who seems to notice. (Nit pickers and rivet counters are not invited)
LIRRMA

[on30gn15]

Not so many these days but in the 60s and 70s and early 80s there were a number of published, and successful, HO track plans employing 15in R curves. Kalmbach Publishing's book 101 Track Plans has about 8 of them.
Edit - Now I have the book in hand - see plans #1, 2, 10 (my favorite for switching), 16, 17, the inner oval on 32. Most of those are circles and ovals, one or two a 2-lap oval, which might employ 18R in some locations.

As the prototype modeling movement has gained strength over the decades there has developed a general dissing of that size of curve in anything other than the trolley modeling community.
I've used standard HO diesel switcher and GP sized loco mechanisms for freelance box motors and some of them can, unmodified, handle 9 inch curves. And a lot of 40ft cars could too; but as ther underbody detail has changed over the decades the outboard wheels often rub against the coupler pockets at that radius.

And another way to look at it is - would the manufacturers, Atlas and Bachmann for example, tie up their money for years and years in making track that's unusable and therefore unsellable?

would the loco and cars of the following set Bachmann HO Scale Train Set Digital Diesel Commander Union Pacific 00503work on 15"radius track ?

Yes. GP-40, GP-38, Fairbanks Morse, mechanisms will go around some insane curves still coupled to cars. But 15 is usually the smallest practical put in use.

You might find that your loco and rolling stock operate around those curves just fine ... as long as they are not connected to one another.

They can go around 10 inch radius connected to each other; would you care to see a demonstration?

And because the GP-40s tend not to have the pilot detail sticking out - coupler cut lever in particular - the 38 and 35 do, they will stay coupled to cars on tighter radii than those will.

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

And another way to look at it is - would the manufacturers, Atlas and Bachmann for example, tie up their money for years and years in making track that's unusable and therefore unsellable?

Good point.

[jward]

another way to look at it is, they make it but do they recommend its use? in atlas's case at least, the answer would appear to be no except in certain extremely restrictive situations, but never on a main track. how do i know this? atlas have a whole series of layout plan books with over 40 layout plans. in all these plans, 18r and 22r are used extensively. 24r is not. but only because it wasn't available when the books were first published. 15r was, and you will find most plans do not use it. those that do restrict its use to spur tracks.

i also have one of the ez track plan books, and i do not see 15r used there either. they don't even use it on the cass scenic railroad plan, which was designed for shays and 40 foot cars. if any plan would be appropriate for 15r that one would due to the extremely sharp curves on the prototype.

btw, whoever at bachmann who was responsible for the plan book, you did a great job. it would be nice to have a couple more books like this...

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

I would much prefer to use 22r and 18r in order to have a double loop for running trains, but owing to space considerations I'm forced to use 18r and 15r if I want to run more than one train at a time. Fortunately, I run mostly old-timers, both engines and rolling stock, and they generally don't have trouble with 15r, but it's a mixed bag.

I have not attempted to run my Spectrum eight-wheelers on 15r, but my Mantua and Rivarossi 4-4-0s have no problem with it. I have some Mantua Atlantics that will take the 15r--and one that won't.    My Rivarossi "Casey Jones" 4-6-0 will run on 15r, but my Mantua Rogers 4-6-0s don't like it all. F-unit diesels (four-wheeled trucks) have no problem with 15r. I was also recently surprised to find that my "vintage" Mantua/Tyco streamlined passengers cars (with their truck-mounted horn-hook couplers) will also run on the 15r without uncoupling, derailing, or bumping into each other. The overhang of these cars is horrendous--but they handle the 15r curves.

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

Something I ran across that seems pertinent:

The February issue of Model Railroader has an article titled "4 Compact Track Plans." One plan, which they call the South Jersey & Delaware, is a 4 x 8 plan, but the accompanying text says the plan is based on one originally published in the December 1978 issue of the magazine that "used 15" radius curves to fit the HO scale layout in a space about 3 x 6 feet."

I found it interesting to stumble across this after I was reading this thread.