Coombe Barton Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 If you consider a 9ft diameter circle with baseboards 6 in wide, that makes 8ft diameter inside, then that's 1923 sq in. The total run, assuming a just over 4ft radius circle, would be about 26ft. I'm not able to enter now (workload and research load increased) but I was considering making this out of 8 boards each just over 3ft long, so transportable. In my plans I had a station, with a loop, a goods shed in a loop, a couple of sidings and a three road fiddle yard occupying one of the boards, giving a scenic and onstage section about 22ft long (decent enough). There was some scope for scenic work as well, maybe a line on an embankment and a canal. I'd based this on my local station, Market Bosworth. You could squeeze an extra inch width on two of the boards and still be within the 2010 sq in. As I said, no entry from me but perhaps an idea for someone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam '43003' Tanner Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 If you were to use some slight gradients on the offstage section, you could have the yards below the scenic section. Is doing so, you could also have a continuous run on the scenic section should chose to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Russ (mines a pint) Posted December 6, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 6, 2009 Always found the ides of circular layouts fascinating , but doubt I could manage the joinery... think what you fit in N! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted December 6, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 6, 2009 This is a bit like my overgrown test track plan..round the shed in 6 inches wide (or summat) I do like the idea of sat there with a glass watching a train or 2 circling the room.... Dead right. Most of us acquired our interest from watching trains go past. While real trains almost always only go from A to B, just sitting and letting your fave models rip on a roundy-round for a while is very pleasing in its own right. It also does an ace job of lapping in new models. The OP's idea is tremendous - but as noted needs some skills in the carpentry area. TT, N and smaller could have a stunning layout here, as could OO9. OO/HO & up maybe less so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 The bigger problem I see is having enough space - a 9ft square room at least - to build it in. But if I had that then the potential is probably well beyond a year to complete. Unless it was a club entry perhaps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zabdiel Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 A 4ft radius is fairly generous in 00, with a 3ft radius then it would fit in less space - or could be made longer and fit in a rectangular room. In fact I've been thinking along these lines - but not particularly for a challenge layout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Russ (mines a pint) Posted December 8, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 8, 2009 Dead right. Most of us acquired our interest from watching trains go past. While real trains almost always only go from A to B, just sitting and letting your fave models rip on a roundy-round for a while is very pleasing in its own right. It also does an ace job of lapping in new models. The OP's idea is tremendous - but as noted needs some skills in the carpentry area. TT, N and smaller could have a stunning layout here, as could OO9. OO/HO & up maybe less so. In a smaller scale You could split the area up into more than one scenic section anyway, the curve would lend itself to this, you could also split it onto more than one level too, someone (Khris?) did this in the 2006/7 challenge, but it didnt get finished (it was very ambitious, in terms of levels and buildings!) in HO/OO:http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page91/ward.jpg this sort of thing?- still say it would look better in a smaller scale? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Burkitt Posted December 8, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 8, 2009 Taking this idea a bit far, if you went right down to T scale (1:450) you could model the entire Glasgow "Clockwork Orange" Subway with no compression within the 2010 square inch limit. You'd have to use boards just 2 inches wide, with slightly wider boards possible at stations, and the whole thing would have a diameter of 26 feet. No idea how you'd model the tiny subway trains in T scale though! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Burkitt Posted December 8, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 8, 2009 Now getting really silly, some more calculations show that if the boards were only the width of the tunnels, you could model the entire 22km long London Underground Circle Line in T scale within 2010 square inches. It would be about 18 metres in diameter from Notting Hill Gate to Aldgate. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew1974 Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 This has got me thinking... ...I'm thinking a 8 inch wide board allows for a bit of scenery, or loops...this would work with an inside radius of 3 feet....could make a great scenic test track....so many ideas so little time (and money and space!!!). This would still give approx 20ft of run. And you could cut all of the board tops out of one 8x4 sheet of whatever your prefered baseboard surface is...just about! Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonB Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 There were a couple of aborted entries in the 2007 challenge which used narrow boards, one mentioned above was a sort of helix (IIRC)and a clever design. The other, not a roundy-roundy, was called "Long Thinny", (the name says it all!), the owner/builder ran into difficulties with stability of the baseboards, a search of RMweb3 should find it, and lessons learned before committing saw to timber! Don't be put off by those two valiant attempts, we would all like to see solutions to such a problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted December 20, 2009 Author Share Posted December 20, 2009 If you do a circle then the stability should be better than a long thin layout. I had planned this on my original suggestion but as I said work took over. (as it is I've spent since 6 this morning trying to remotely repair systems that are not my responsibility, which shows why I could not commit) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.