Sectional Layout Design, 3 Variants: Atlas-O O54&O63; Atlas-O O72/O81; American Models S48/S54.

Pleasing looking layout.  Grades are steep on a curve, but depends on equipment and consists.  Modules that are 4 x 8 and 5 x 9, even 3 x 8 not very transportable.

I would respond that the modules are based on say 4x8 or 5x9 sheets.  But, the actual modules are 3x8 and then 5x5 for the curvebacks.  So more transportable that you might think.  The 3x8 modules will go around curves and up stairs OK.  The 5x5 sections I have not tried personally. 

The 5x5s are circular/curved corners, which can help a lot getting around obstructions.

Thanks for the discussion!

Ken,

If, as you say, the mainlines are using O-63 and O-54 curves, how can your end blobs be only 5 x 5?  Wouldn't they at least have to be 5.5 x 5.5 to handle the O-63 curve?  Maybe you should re-title the thread to "Design of a Modular O63 Layout."

Chuck

A Great Layout design once again Ken. Just thinking out-loud, How about 2’x4’ modules that you could bolt together? How big is this layout? Is the scale of the boxes Grids 4” ? Have a good day.

Modular for shows or modular for when you move? How often would they be taken apart and moved in other words? Smaller better for frequent moving. George mentioned 2 x 4s but I wouldn't use those for anything but a permanent layout to save money. Overkill structurally.

Sectional might be more appropriate term.  Modular implies interchangeability.

Brendan

@Brendan posted:

Sectional might be more appropriate term.  Modular implies interchangeability.

Brendan

Thanks, I agree.  Title changed.

@Seacoast posted:

A Great Layout design once again Ken. Just thinking out-loud, How about 2’x4’ modules that you could bolt together? How big is this layout? Is the scale of the boxes Grids 4” ? Have a good day.

Yes, the grid is 4".  Yes, could use smaller sections, but that increases the construction complexity.  I did not mention minimizing complexity of construction as a design goal.   If I put a great priority on transportability, then smaller sections would be better.

@PRR1950 posted:

Ken,

If, as you say, the mainlines are using O-63 and O-54 curves, how can your end blobs be only 5 x 5?  Wouldn't they at least have to be 5.5 x 5.5 to handle the O-63 curve?  Maybe you should re-title the thread to "Design of a Modular O63 Layout."

Chuck

Wow! Big mistake on my part, the blobs are actually 68" in diameter.  So consequently, they must be sectioned, I suppose two sections.  I will revise.  Thanks for pointing this out.   

I started with an idea in mind (O54), and then forgot to check to see if the evolution was still inside that idea, and I had expanded beyond it.

Thanks for the critique!   Revised, and highlighting the section boundaries.

Here, I tried to bring part of the track away from the rectangular walls, for the scenic effect:  the trains and track running through the scenery.

Perhaps a mountain & tunnel:

Very nice design and fantastic use of space while still leaving plenty of room for scenery.

@Will posted:

Modular for shows or modular for when you move? How often would they be taken apart and moved in other words? Smaller better for frequent moving. George mentioned 2 x 4s but I wouldn't use those for anything but a permanent layout to save money. Overkill structurally.

Hi Will, 2'x4' modules size, not 2"x4" grid framework Lumber.

A turntable barely fits

Better yard, with a short yard lead

Better yard complex: passing track and yard lead:

@Seacoast posted:

 

Hi Will, 2'x4' modules size, not 2"x4" grid framework Lumber.

 

Oops, my bad.

Experimenting with terrain in the turnback "blob" at the bottom: