How much curve is desirable in a dog bone layout?

[Mister Bill]

I am in the early stages of designing a mostly dog-bone type layout. There will be double track and room for some long, straight runs, which I happen to like, especially when trains pass each other. However, unannounced curves could be pleasing to the eye, also.

What portion, say 50/50, would you suggest to allocate to curves in an otherwise straight run?

Or, is there sufficient curve eye appeal with trains entering and leaving yards, passing lanes, and sidings?

I have no grades or overpasses.

I know it is my decision, but what would you do?

Bill

 

[3 Fingered Jack]

It depends... Real Railroads only had curves when they had to, of course. Curves could be required because of terrain as a example. If your trains run through Iowa flat lands then there would be few curves. If you are in the Rocky Mountains there would be more curves. Basically the right of way needs to be determined by the topography. As model rail roaders we of course built the scenery after we lay the track but BOTH have to be thought through in the design process.

What makes a model railroad interesting is when everything "fits". .. when the design of all the parts... trains, track, structures and landscaping fit together into a whole that is realistic.

There is a argument that was made by John Armstrong that cosmetic curves could be added to otherwise tangent (straight) track to add visual appeal ... a place to watch trains. The cosmetic curves would be very large radius... for example 40-50" inches in N scale.

 

[D&J RailRoad]

Long sweeping curves are always interesting to watch trains go through. A curve that changes the direction of travel, maybe 10 - 15 degrees that is 20 or more cars long is always a train watching spot.
Check the curves on my layout in the attached video. The first two are sweeping curves of about 100" radius. The first curve changes the track direction by 90 degrees.

[YOUTUBE]X-A_89z3MHQ[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Secondhandmodeler]

Ken, I just figured out why Atlas is short on flex track, you have it all!

 

[D&J RailRoad]

Ken, I just figured out why Atlas is short on flex track, you have it all!

You could be right.

 

[Iron Horseman]

I am in the early stages of designing a mostly dog-bone type layout. There will be double track and room for some long, straight runs, which I happen to like, especially when trains pass each other. However, unannounced curves could be pleasing to the eye, also.

What portion, say 50/50, would you suggest to allocate to curves in an otherwise straight run?

Would the long straight tracks also be parallel with the edge of the bench work?

I also agree with the others that truly straight track isn't very interesting for train watching. A gentle curve lets someone see the train better.

 

[trailrider]

Well, it also depends on how much room you have. My layout is essentially a backward "G" in a 14' x 13' 7" room. It is essentially a folded dogbone with yards inside the return loops at both ends. I mostly run passenger trains and with 3 ft. aisles, relatively tight curves are the norm. My widest curves are 20-inch radius, with 18" in places and even 15" at tight spurs, etc. Sure broader curves would be highly desireable, but sometimes you don't have much choice.

 

[kjchronister]

Trailrider... I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to this or a "proper" ratio.

Having said that, I'm contrarian on this one: I don't feel the need to force sweeping curves or use my limited space with tracks running caddywumpus across the layout. Instead I lean more toward what actual railroads do... Go straight most of the time, curve only when insurmountable obstacles force it...

And I don't find that boring, myself. I 'add interest' by altering my terrain vertically (e.g. having the land rise and fall beneath the tracks which go over land, over berms, over bridges, etc.) and horizontally (e.g. have hills with projecting "ridges" out into the scene, have roads that cross the scene diagonally, etc.

(FWIW, I also think most folks put way to much track / sq. ft. on their layouts, but that's another story)

My 2c. YMMV.

 

[trailrider]

I agree one should only be limited by "terrain", which in my case means not trying to go through the walls of the room (especially since my wife has NOT granted "trackage rights" into her study, the adjacent room! And since I model in HO, which isn't weatherproof, I am restricted by the walls keeping out the weather! As to putting too much track per sq. ft. on the layout, I resemble that...greatly! My problem there is that I have 60 years of accumulated rolling stock, only half of which will fit on my layout at a time...IF I practically fill up a lot of the sidings. So I am guilty of putting as much track on the layout as I can practiably fit. NOT recommended practice. But then I tend to run passenger trains continuously with only occasional freight runs, generally unit coal trains from the Beardstown mine to the Midwest Power & Light Company coal-fired electric plant near "Aurora", Colorado (or is it St. Paul, MN??? haven't made up my mind yet). I do run local stock cars from a rural area to the Oscar Meyer meatpacking plant at Galesburg, where strings of refers are being iced at an ice plant nearby. The refrigerator cars can then be sent up to the Kroger distribution plant in Aurora. Empty hoppers are exchanged for loaded ones at the electric plant. To climb the 3 percent grade from Galesburg to the West, freight trains may be hauled by double-headed (Mantua) Burlington or C&S 2-10-2's or a single 2-10-4.

The one rule of thumb in this hobby is HAVE FUN!