|
While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry" in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
|
Ed, Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See “” in ?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National Narrow Gauge Convention. My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules. Tom K. ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout" ? While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry" in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
|
PS: Locating the legs ? of the module length in from each end results in the best distribution of bending forces on the module, as those structural engineers following this group will attest to. Locating legs at the ends creates the worst distribution of forces. ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]> On Behalf Of Thomas Knapp Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 11:45 AM To: [email protected]Cc: thomasknapp@... Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout" ? Ed, Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See “” in ?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National Narrow Gauge Convention. My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules. Tom K. ? From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout" ? While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry" in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
|
I would dispute the use of quarter points. Theoretically this gives no moment mid span which increases the moments over the supports relative to shorter overhangs. It also increases the risk of someone leaning or falling
onto the end of the layout and tipping it up.
The optimum length from the end depends on whether you design for the dead load - known as a Uniformly Distributed Load - for the risk of the accidental load which would be a point load at mid span or end of overhang.
The UDL formulae are Wl^2/2 for the overhang and WL^2/8 - the overhang moments where l is the overhang length and L the span length. For point loads it's Wl and WL/4.
This gives optimi of c1/5 points for UDL and 1/6 points for the point loads, remembering that the accidental loads are very unlikely to occur at the end and middle simultaneously.
Personally I'd go for the 1/6 point.
Archie
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
PS: Locating the legs ? of the module length in from each end results in the best distribution of bending forces on the module, as those structural engineers following
this group will attest to. Locating legs at the ends creates the worst distribution of forces.
?
?
Ed,
Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See
“” in
?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends
connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching
legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross
frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National
Narrow Gauge Convention.
My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules.
Tom K.
?
From:
[email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
?
While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm
the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry"
in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit
overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
|
Archie, Yes, the quarter point is a simplistic analysis of a uniform load, but is close enough to distributing the bending moments and works quite well with a ladder frame with cross members at a nominal spacing of one foot.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 5, 2018, at 12:40 PM, Archibald Campbell < fdonmedway@...> wrote:
I would dispute the use of quarter points. Theoretically this gives no moment mid span which increases the moments over the supports relative to shorter overhangs. It also increases the risk of someone leaning or falling
onto the end of the layout and tipping it up.
The optimum length from the end depends on whether you design for the dead load - known as a Uniformly Distributed Load - for the risk of the accidental load which would be a point load at mid span or end of overhang.
The UDL formulae are Wl^2/2 for the overhang and WL^2/8 - the overhang moments where l is the overhang length and L the span length. For point loads it's Wl and WL/4.
This gives optimi of c1/5 points for UDL and 1/6 points for the point loads, remembering that the accidental loads are very unlikely to occur at the end and middle simultaneously.
Personally I'd go for the 1/6 point.
Archie
PS: Locating the legs ? of the module length in from each end results in the best distribution of bending forces on the module, as those structural engineers following
this group will attest to. Locating legs at the ends creates the worst distribution of forces.
?
?
Ed,
Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See
“” in
?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends
connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching
legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross
frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National
Narrow Gauge Convention.
My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules.
Tom K.
?
From:
[email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
?
While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm
the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry"
in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit
overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
|
On October 6, 2018 at 2:15 AM Thomas Knapp <thomasknapp@...> wrote:?
Archie, Yes, the quarter point is a simplistic analysis of a uniform load, but is close enough to distributing the bending moments and works quite well with a ladder frame with cross members at a nominal spacing of one foot. Tom K. -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -
In my 81 years in model railroading, and as a retired mech. engr. I have never worried about 'bending' of a module -- if it's that heavy with plaster, etc. then it's probably not portable anyway, and common sense says no one is going to place something heavy on it.
Max on Cape Cod
|
Jim and Barbara van Gaasbeek
IIRC, Linn Westcott recommended supports 1/5 in from each end in his book and articles on benchwork.? But that wasn’t for a free-standing layout that might receive end loads. ? ? Jim van Gaasbeek
|
?
?
-------Original Message-------
?
Date: 10/06/18 07:16:41
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
? Archie,
Yes, the quarter point is a simplistic analysis of a uniform load, but is close enough to distributing the bending moments and works quite well with a ladder frame with cross members at a nominal spacing of one foot.
On Oct 5, 2018, at 12:40 PM, Archibald Campbell < fdonmedway@...> wrote:
I would dispute the use of quarter points. Theoretically this gives no moment mid span which increases the moments over the supports relative to shorter overhangs. It also increases the risk of someone leaning or falling onto the end of the layout and tipping it up.
The optimum length from the end depends on whether you design for the dead load - known as a Uniformly Distributed Load - for the risk of the accidental load which would be a point load at mid span or end of overhang. The UDL formulae are Wl^2/2 for the overhang and WL^2/8 - the overhang moments where l is the overhang length and L the span length. For point loads it's Wl and WL/4.
This gives optimi of c1/5 points for UDL and 1/6 points for the point loads, remembering that the accidental loads are very unlikely to occur at the end and middle simultaneously.
Personally I'd go for the 1/6 point.
Archie
PS: Locating the legs ? of the module length in from each end results in the best distribution of bending forces on the module, as those structural engineers following this group will attest to. Locating legs at the ends creates the worst distribution of forces.
?
?
Ed,
Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See “” in ?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National Narrow Gauge Convention.
My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules.
Tom K.
?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
?
While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry" in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
? |
|
?
?
-------Original Message-------
?
Date: 05/10/2018 20:40:18
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
?
I would dispute the use of quarter points. Theoretically this gives no moment mid span which increases the moments over the supports relative to shorter overhangs. It also increases the risk of someone leaning or falling onto the end of the layout and tipping it up.
The optimum length from the end depends on whether you design for the dead load - known as a Uniformly Distributed Load - for the risk of the accidental load which would be a point load at mid span or end of overhang. The UDL formulae are Wl^2/2 for the overhang and WL^2/8 - the overhang moments where l is the overhang length and L the span length. For point loads it's Wl and WL/4.
This gives optimi of c1/5 points for UDL and 1/6 points for the point loads, remembering that the accidental loads are very unlikely to occur at the end and middle simultaneously.
Personally I'd go for the 1/6 point.
Archie
PS: Locating the legs ? of the module length in from each end results in the best distribution of bending forces on the module, as those structural engineers following this group will attest to. Locating legs at the ends creates the worst distribution of forces.
?
?
Ed,
Our modular group has been using “Ultra-light” modules for the past fifteen years. (See “” in ?p.?36? and “” in ?p.?89.) Most of these modules use 1 x 1 mortised and glued oak framing topped by 1” foam insulation board. I bundle four 48” long sections together hardboard ends connecting all four and with a trap around the middle with a handle I can easily carry all four (16 feet of modules) with one hand. (each module is typically 5 lbs. in weight.) One key is that the legs are NOT rigidly attached to the modules. Rigidly attaching legs to modules imposes a lot of stress on the module frame. Our modules have a cross piece located 12” in from each end. The legs are a standardized, lightweight folding system of 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched to fit the 1x cross frames, and the modules simply sit on top of these legs. (I first read of simply setting modules on supports in one of Ian Rice’s layout plan books.) These modules have been to hundreds of train shows, one even traveling to Warwick Rhode Island for the National Narrow Gauge Convention.
My more recent modules have used 1 x 2 Poplar framing topped with ?” black foam-core board. This has proven even more rigid than our older modules.
Tom K.
?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ed Weldon
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
?
While we explore this subject I'd like to point out that "small" is as seen by the beholder.? If I can take a layout on a bus in the city or check it as luggage on an airplane flight I might call it "small" for my purposes.? OTOH if I'm the owner of a construction crane rigging business with a nice big airconditioned shop building my "small" layout would likely be defined by what my equipment can easily move without too big a crew or permits from the local cops.
I kinda like the 24x48 module size having once gotten started in that direction in hopes of participating with a local module group.? Now the nature of modules is that they need to be of somewhat more robust construction than a single "pack and hand carry" in a portable case display module.? But these types share one common problem.? They're subject to handling shocks and vibrations that are a good bit stronger than what they will experience in the train room.? A very small layout like a pizza size has the benefit overy low mass and relatively high stiffness of its litttle parts.? Beyond that some amount of vibtation/shock isolation (blocks of foam) around the layout in its carrying box is easier to do.
If some of you out there have built your own carrying cases or found some commercially available container that works real well how about starting a thread here on carrying cases and tell us about it.
EdW
? |
|
Tom - You've given me some good information here to experiment with. But lacking ready access to the two magazine articles you cited I remain a bit hazy on the leg construction "1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched"? Is the 1/2" dowel a spreader between two legs?? I'm missing something here..... EdW
|
On October 6, 2018 at 2:48 AM Jim and Barbara van Gaasbeek <jvgbvg@...> wrote:?
IIRC, Linn Westcott recommended supports 1/5 in from each end in his book and articles on benchwork.? But that wasn’t for a free-standing layout that might receive end loads.
Jim van Gaasbeek -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -? -
Design is of course compromise, and having built many a model railroad table I've always used L-girder legs attached to the main rail and joists because it's lighter and stronger (all 1" pine vs attaching a 2x2 or 2x3).? In locating the legs on a ladder frame you can attach to one side of the joist or the other.? My outdoor benchwork for G scale is all 4x16 modules using 2 sheets plywood, and 6 legs.? As a registered value engineer I consider cost and don't like waste.
Max on Cape Cod
|
On October 6, 2018 at 7:25 AM Ed Weldon <23.weldon@...> wrote:
Tom - You've given me some good information here to experiment with. But lacking ready access to the two magazine articles you cited I remain a bit hazy on the leg construction " 1x2 Poplar and ?” dowel with the tops of the legs notched"? Is the 1/2" dowel a spreader between two legs?? I'm missing something here..... EdW
-? -? -? -? -? -? -? - I use a 1x6 in multiples of 24" or 48" from an 8 footer [32" would create waste with only 3 legs], or 30" legs from a 1x10, or 36" from a 1x12, or 48" from a 1x16.? I cut a diagonal 1" from the edge at one end, and 1-3/4" from the other edge at the other end?for a nice tapered leg.? photo shows tapered legs on my dining room 'Box Table' I designed and built.
Max on Cape Cod
|
This is probably one of those "how long is a piece of string?" questions but my personal definiton of a small layout as one that a sole modeller can transport on their own to an exhibition or meet in a normal sized car along with stock and control gear (and ideally a second operator( then set up and operate on their own if necessary)
My own H0 layout is 5ft 3ins long on a tapered board that folds horizontally to form a box. A simple fiddle yard plugs into one end and it represents a small French terminus on a short line.?
In the UK there is more of an emphasis on complete layouts - usually fed by a "fiddle yard"- and modules are far less popular.?
If you're a US modeller and want to know more about this then it's worth watching Kathy Millatt's two videos on the subject
https://www.kathymillatt.co.uk/blog/2017/10/19/anatomy-of-an-exhibition-layout/
Kathy is a British NMRA Master Modeller whose how-to videos are really good. These videos are based on a clinic she gave at one of the NMRA annual convention. Kathry is currently one of the judges on a British prime time TV series in which, in each episode, three? teams of modellers compete to build a complete layout in three working days, programme six will be the grand final . After two episodes the series is proving remarkably popular, gives due respect to the many artisic? and craft skills involved, and looks set to give a real boost to the hobby here.
|
The Great Model Railway Challenge.
Full episodes on YouTube.
|
I think the designation "small layout" depends on what scale/gauge is being modeled. A 4x8 Z scale layout would seem very large. A 4x8 in 1/2" scale would seem very small. I am building a 1/2" scale Gn15 layout in a room just 13'x15'. Not overly large for a scale that eats up layout space at a fantastic rate.?
I consider my layout to be a small layout.
Larry
|
I agree that what constitutes a small layout is relative to the scale/gauge. I have a 16mm (32mm gauge) layout on a board 4ft x 2ft. I claim this to be a small layout, very small...
------ Original Message ------
Sent: 15/10/2018 18:55:54
Subject: Re: [small-layout-design] What is a "small layout"
I think the designation "small layout" depends on what scale/gauge is being modeled. A 4x8 Z scale layout would seem very large. A 4x8 in 1/2" scale would seem very small. I am building a 1/2" scale Gn15 layout in a room just 13'x15'. Not overly large for a scale that eats up layout space at a fantastic rate.?
I consider my layout to be a small layout.
Larry
|
On 10/16/2018 12:51 AM, Barry Loraine wrote: I agree that what constitutes a small layout is relative to the scale/gauge. I'm undecided.? The problem is that in my mind, "small" equates to "portable."? I, and I think most, would say a layout 3' by 6', with a scenery height of 2' or less, is about the limit of portable. After all, it ain't portable if it won't go through a door :-). I'm talking complete layouts here - of course a large layout can be portable if it's modularized. Given those limits, I'd say S scale or smaller, is just about required, and S is stretching it.? For O and larger, 3'x6' is a great diorama size :-). OTOH, if you equate "small" with "limited" then the relativity is valid.
|
OK, I'm really pushing the small layout idea here.? I'm building a 46 x 72x 12 high "portable" to fit in the back of my pickup. Transport over the ground will be on a special hand truck. If I find myself having to take it off the hand truck too many times to go through 30-36" wide doors I may have to use large swivel casters constrained by a lever actuated primitive steering system; so it can "side wind" through those doors at an angle.?
|
How many nitpickers can quibble over a small layout??
As many as want to!? ;-}?
|
? I'm beginning to think there are many definitions of 'small layout'. One is 'fits in a car'; two: fits in 'bed of truck'; three: based on 'acreage', etc.
Max on Cape Cod
On October 17, 2018 at 7:42 AM "James Macintyre via Groups.Io" <steampun@...> wrote:
How many nitpickers can quibble over a small layout?? As many as want to!? ;-}??
|
Thomas Knapp
