Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Beginner building a 4x8

4691 views
25 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Beginner building a 4x8
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:36 PM

first off I have built several layouts with my father, but that was back when I was 8 and 10, so I have a little idea where to go with this but not alot.  I am limited to a 4x8 layout and would like alot of veriety in the layout.  I had really thought about going with On30 but after alot of thought I will stick with the original idea of N scale.

I have always been a fan of coal mines and the towns around them, so I would like to model after the hocking valley RR or the Ohio River & Western.  The OR&W was narrow guage but I'm not a stickler on details and this will be a fiction railroad anyway.  I would like two small towns and a coal minning camp.  I have played around with alot of layouts and designed alot of different ones on RTS and I have came up with one that I really like, I would like your guys opinion on the layout. The only issue is I have no idea how to export it as a picture or take a screen shot on a PC(I'm a mac guy)

  • Member since
    August 2007
  • From: New Bedford, MA
  • 253 posts
Posted by Jake1210 on Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:59 PM
To take a screenshot on a PC, what you would do is press the "Prt Scrn *over* SysRq" open up paint, (or similar software) paste it by pressing "Ctrl+V" save it as whatever file type you'd like to, and upload it onto an image hosting site. I personally use www.photobucket.com. Hope to see some layout pics soon! And also, since you were considering On30, may I just chime in a suggestion of HOn3? HOn3 cars & stock can take some pretty tight radii. (~18 for 2-8-2's just to give an idea) but, I warn you, it is a wee bit expensive. But, just a little bit less than On30.
  • Member since
    July 2007
  • From: Colorado
  • 472 posts
Posted by Greg H. on Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:00 PM

First off, decied why you want a 4x8.

Is it because that's the size of a piece of plywood?

If it is, that is not the best reasion - figure that you will need at least 18-24 inches of additional space, it to move around it.

I went with a 4x8 ( actualy 5x8 ), because my layout is going on the top of the dinning room table, and I can walk around the entire thing to get at place on the layout.

Greg H.
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:36 PM

Thanks Jake, I knew how to do it back in the day but I haven't needed to do it in such along time I just forgot it.  I liked On30 because of the size and detail, the price didn't seem too bad because I was buying less buildings/cars/engines.  I thought HOn3 support was still pretty hard to find?  I have several boxes of HO cars and engines from other layouts and kits over the years, I just didn't think I would be able to fit enough on the board to suit what I'm looking for but I'm not set in my N scale ideas quite yet.  I will be going to a local train show this saturday to get some ideas and finalize my ideas hopefully.

Greg-I had the 4x8 board already made into a table for another project that got scrapped.  I have it up against two walls so I will only have access to two sides.  Reach should not be an issue as the board is lower to begin with and it will be grading up into the two corners.  The only issue I see with fixing derailed trains is the tunnels that will be up against the wall, I will have to move the layout to get to them.  But that is a hassle I am willing to deal with.

 

and here is the layout I have came up with so far, I haven't yet figured out an easy way to do elevations and terrain with RTS. The inside loop will be elevated, the top left corner is under a mountain and will be for staged trains.  I will probably extend the track there a little more once I figure out how many cars I will be running and needing to fit.  ask any questions because I'm sure the layout isn't the easist to fallow without Heights

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:14 PM
Here it is with a little bit of color
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
  • Member since
    July 2007
  • From: Colorado
  • 472 posts
Posted by Greg H. on Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:23 PM
At first glance, I would say that if you flip it so that the layout lays with the upper right at the most hard to reach place, you will have less problems as most of your elevation changes and most of your turn outs will be easier to reach.
Greg H.
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:39 PM
I didn't really think of doing it that way but it would make it much easier and I shouldn't ever need to pull it out to get at it. I will switch it up and see how I like it
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 10:28 PM

well it's not a perfect change but it does give me an idea of what it would look like

 

I can't make a decent yard to save my life
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Thursday, October 25, 2007 10:52 PM

alright, I fixed it a little

  • Member since
    August 2007
  • From: New Bedford, MA
  • 253 posts
Posted by Jake1210 on Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:12 PM
 Jon French wrote:

Thanks Jake, I knew how to do it back in the day but I haven't needed to do it in such along time I just forgot it.  I liked On30 because of the size and detail, the price didn't seem too bad because I was buying less buildings/cars/engines.  I thought HOn3 support was still pretty hard to find?  I have several boxes of HO cars and engines from other layouts and kits over the years, I just didn't think I would be able to fit enough on the board to suit what I'm looking for but I'm not set in my N scale ideas quite yet.  I will be going to a local train show this saturday to get some ideas and finalize my ideas hopefully.

 

Actually, with the development of Blackstone Models (A division of Soundtraxx [www.soundtraxx.com] which specializes in HOn3 equipment, [www.blackstonemodels.com]) & Mountain Model Imports (A division of Precision Scale Co. [No website found, but a complete line of models can be found at www.caboosehobbies.com] -Note that the D&RGW K-28, K-36,  K-37, & all C class models are due in Dec. 2008 but, since it takes two years to build the average 4x8, it wont be that bad.) makes it much easier to obtain HOn3 scale equipment.

But, this is YOUR railroad, do what YOU want, I am just offering a suggestion.

And on a subnote (I'm almost done! Don't worry!) might I recommend XtrkCAD for layout planning, that way you aren't just stuck with Atlas' line of snap track. I really prefer it over RTS. Again, your choice...

--Jake-A 13 year old Massachusettsite (Not sure if that is right, I'm just used to the term Masshole...) planning a D&RGW in the 30's...

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Kansas
  • 808 posts
Posted by jamnest on Friday, October 26, 2007 8:14 AM

Have you considerd an around the walls layout? 

Consider cutting your 4x8 plywood into four 1x8 sections and run them around the wall.  While I have a nice basement now, I have spent a lot of time in small apartments.  A sectional layout in a spare room, that sat on 48" 1x2 legs permitted me to use the room for other things, yet still have a nice layout with a larger radius.  As a sectional layout, I could take it apart and move it to my next residence, adding additional sections or staging yard if I had room.  It also had the advantage of letting me walk around the layout with my trains.  There have been a lot of plans in Model Railroader for shelf layouts.  You can even download some of these track plans from this web site.

In the end it is your layout and you need to do what works best to you.

 JIM

Jim, Modeling the Kansas City Southern Lines in HO scale.

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: Maryville IL
  • 9,577 posts
Posted by cudaken on Friday, October 26, 2007 9:07 AM

 Jon, frist welcome to the site and back in the train hobby. If there is one thing I would do over it would be either.

 1 Gone with a 3' wide bench.

 2 With mine being 4' wide, move it away from the wall.

 Mine is fairly low at 37" and I am 6'4". It is hard to lay rail laying on your stomach. Good detaile work is all most impossible and if there is a derailment in the back you will flatten a lot of trees to get to it.

 Just because you have a 4' X 8' table does not mean you should use it, that is what I did. My bench started out as a L shpe 19' x 4' x 13' slot car track. I used green out door carpet and was adding a few trees when the train bug bit. With slot cars the most car you can have derail is 2, I used a magnet on a stick to get a car that came off the track. That will not work with trains.

 Making a sectional track that can be broken down when not is use to save spaces would be a good idea. Plus with either a L or a U shapped bench looks a little more real to me. Mine is now a G shapped.

 On the moutains, use foam and plaster so they can be taken off the bench. My range is a little over 13' long and I can pick them up, helps if there is a mess in the tunnel.

 Think about what has been posted and if you have any rails yet try laying them on the back of your bench. If you fine you can do it easly then 4' will work for you.

 

                       Cuda Ken 

I hate Rust

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: The mystic shores of Lake Eerie
  • 1,329 posts
Posted by Autobus Prime on Friday, October 26, 2007 10:07 AM
JF:

I think your designs look pretty good. They're nice and uncrowded, too, with broad curves. Big mainline equipment and long trains would look quite nice, and that lets you use the heaviest N-scale equipment, which should benefit your operations.

I like this one the best:

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa28/filmsomething/layout3.jpg

You might want to connect the short yard runaround and passing siding at the lower right corner, so you can combine their functions, and then turn the yard ladder 180 degrees, so the tracks branch from the middle of the runaround and then fan out to the right, not the left. This way, you can meet and run around longer trains, and also allow the yard engine to work without blocking the main.

It might also be desirable to bring the short branchline on the left side off the foreground track.
That would eliminate nearly all switches from the back, so you could push the table up against
the wall, or into a corner, and have a popout or two for the few times you need to rerail stuff.

I'd stick with the 4 x 8 and no grades for now. Personal experience tells me that somebody with a desire to model railroad but not a whole lot of time is very likely to get bogged down if he tries to get too elaborate right at the start. A 4 x 8 island is easy to build and gives a long (infinite) run for a relatively small benchwork investment. People are always saying "around the walls, around the walls", any more, but all the same the majority of model railroads I see outside of magazines are islands.

I suspect a lot of the advantage is psychological. I can only work for a short while here and there, and with a table's built-in limits, I can see how close I am to getting something working. I get overwhelmed when I try to build round-the-wall stuff.

If you get to dislike it later, you can always saw it in quarters and make an O or U out of it, or you could just build the table in bolted sections as I am currently doing with mine, to allow this kind of future expansion.

Have you considered building your railroad on a hollow-core door? I hear that's a popular thing for N scalers.
 Currently president of: a slowly upgrading trainset fleet o'doom.
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Friday, October 26, 2007 10:08 AM
Well where I have the table now it fits perfectly into the corner and the wall coming out on the side ends right when the table ends so it looks very clean.  I will be moving in the next year or less so an around the walls layout is not something I want to fool with right now.  I have a grabber from when I was in a wheel chair and with that I can reach a 5' distance so I dont think reaching a derailed train will be to much of a problem.  I can always move the table away from the wall If I am not able to get to something.  when I am doing all of the detail it wil be away form the wall so I can get to those parts easier.
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Mankato MN
  • 1,358 posts
Posted by secondhandmodeler on Friday, October 26, 2007 11:00 AM
Is there any way that you can put the table on wheels?  I think you're going to regret having it against the wall.  I had the idea of moving my 4x8 against the wall in the future.  The only way I can do it now is to lift it from underneith.  Sliding it is like having a 9.5 on the ricter scale earthquake.  Just something to think about.
Corey
  • Member since
    July 2007
  • From: Colorado
  • 472 posts
Posted by Greg H. on Friday, October 26, 2007 11:38 AM

Here is your original fliped 180*:

In this case all but 2 turnouts will be within 36 inches of the outside edge.

EDIT:  If you leave a 12-18 inch space between the left side of the layout and the wall, you could possably slide between the wall and la out to reach the other two turnouts, without having to move the layout.

Greg H.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, October 26, 2007 11:40 AM

You said you're not a stickler for keeping it narrow gauge, but I thought I'd expand on Jake's info based on this peculiarity of your area if you weren't completely set on N scale...

MMI and Blackstone will be releasing HOn3 C-19s (2-8-0s) next year.  While Baldwin sold most of these out west, one was bought by the East Broad Top as their #7.  The EBT sold this loco to the Ohio River & Western in 1913, scrapped in 1931.  So even a particular western design has a home in the east...

There is more and more ready-to-run HOn3 stuff (based on the western prototypes) being produced, too.  I'd personally like to see more eastern stuff, and Train & Trooper seems to be looking into that...although their smaller production runs mean higher prices.

I think you stand a better chance of an entertaining trackplan (and keeping costs down) if you stick with N, but just some food for narrow gauge thought...

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Friday, October 26, 2007 12:26 PM

I will consider the wheels, I am still trying to decide on the scale I am going to use.

 

Edit- you guys are too quick for me, I will look into the HOn3 a little more.  I'm guessing it runs on nscale track?

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, October 26, 2007 12:57 PM

 Jon French wrote:
I'm guessing it runs on nscale track?

Actually, HOn30 (which would be 2.5' track gauge) runs on N scale track...HOn3 (3' gauge) runs on its own type of track.  MicroEngineering and Shinohara make HOn3 turnouts and some decent flex track that you can order pre-weathered (the rails are at least).

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Friday, October 26, 2007 5:21 PM

A grabber will play heck on the detail parts of a nice locomotive or piece of rolling stock. I've used grabbers before in my warehouse and I've seen a lot of things fall.

  

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: Maryville IL
  • 9,577 posts
Posted by cudaken on Friday, October 26, 2007 9:19 PM

 Jon around the wall does not have to be fasten to the wall! I am sorry to harp on the table being 4' wide but in the long run I think you will have the same problems as my self. My Big Boy happen to derail and I flatten a few trees reaching it.

 Good luck, have fun and I hope I am not right. Track plain looks pretty good as well.

                    Cuda Ken

I hate Rust

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Cincinnati, Oh
  • 16 posts
Posted by Jon French on Saturday, October 27, 2007 9:34 AM
I wll look at a few other layouts and go from there, I might cut out a section and make it into more of a C shape. That way I could have access to all parts.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Saturday, October 27, 2007 11:23 AM

 Jon French wrote:
I wll look at a few other layouts and go from there, I might cut out a section and make it into more of a C shape. That way I could have access to all parts.

The benchwork should be designed to fit the layout. The layout should not be designed to fit the benchwork. In the grand scheme of things, the benchwork is among the least expensive components. Better to get the benchwork exactly what you want/need.

 

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: Maryville IL
  • 9,577 posts
Posted by cudaken on Sunday, October 28, 2007 12:32 AM

 I will second that Spaces Rat! Big Smile [:D]

 Jon that would be the 3rd thing I would change! Built a new section that is free standing on 3 sides. By a lot of members here pretty good sizes at 5' foot wide and 9.5' long. But I have yet to find a plain that does all I want in the sizes I have to work with.

 If you look up my postings you could save your self a lot of head ach like I have right now. Around $500.00 in a bench still in foam and have yet to make a full run on the outer loop. But I run HO so you will be able to do a lot more in N scale.

 I will add that plain is some respect is the most fun. Gives you something to look forward to and keeps the heart and brain young.

                  Cuda Ken

I hate Rust

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Franconia, NH
  • 3,130 posts
Posted by dstarr on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 4:11 PM

 Jon French wrote:
Well where I have the table now it fits perfectly into the corner and the wall coming out on the side ends right when the table ends so it looks very clean.  I will be moving in the next year or less so an around the walls layout is not something I want to fool with right now.  I have a grabber from when I was in a wheel chair and with that I can reach a 5' distance so I dont think reaching a derailed train will be to much of a problem.  I can always move the table away from the wall If I am not able to get to something.  when I am doing all of the detail it wil be away form the wall so I can get to those parts easier.

If you are moving a in year, then a 4*8 makes a lot of sense, you can take it with you.  Around the walls gives you more track and less aisle in the same space, but they wind up being fastened to the walls, and they never fit the new house after your move.  

I would recommend sticking with either N or HO, and not get into the narrow gauge stuff especially for a first layout.  The narrow guage equipment is not as common, harder to find, a smaller selection, and more expensive than the standard gauge stuff.  I would postpone narrow guage for your second layout when you have more experience.  Both HO and N work, and work well, on a 4*8, cost is simular.  If you are into building rolling stock from kits or from scratch, or kitbashing, HO better.  If you want the most railroad you can fit in your 4*8, go with N.  

I don't see the minimum curve radius on your track plans.  HO equipment has to have 18" radius curves in order for the trains to stay on the track, and you need 22" to run long equipment. N wants a 10' min radius and 12 1/2" for bigger rolling stock.  Nor do I see the max grade you are planning.  4% grades are so steep that your locomotives will have trouble hauling more than a couple of cars up them.  I'd try hard to limit grades to 3% or less.  

   Have you read "Track Planning for realistic Operation" by John Armstrong?  If not, you will enjoy reading it, Armstrong discusses all sorts of things relative to trackplanning.

   The layout will look better if you avoid long straight runs of track along the edge of the table.  The run of track emphasises the edge of the table.  Better is to work in some gentle curves to give the illusion that the track is not constrained by the table top.  

   You will find you need access to all sides of the layout, for construction, track laying, trouble shooting, rerailing trains, cleaning track, fixing stuck turnouts and all the other things that Murphy's law causes.

   Since you are thinking of a coal mine, consider a big coal user, say an electric power plant.  Arrange for some concealed track joining the mine and the coal customer.  This way full coal loads can leave the mine and deliver to the customer.  Then the full cars can slip back to the mine to immerge as fresh loads headed out of the mine.  This avoids having to explain why loaded coal cars are going back to the mine, or empties are arriving at the customer.  

   Think about a deep river gorge, cut deeper than the level of the table, which can be spanned by steel truss bridges, or wooden trestles, or concrete arches or your favorite bridge. The trains always look good up in the air.  

  Think about a view block running down the middle of the 4*8, dividing the layout into two scenes.  

 

   

 

    

 

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: Aston PA
  • 45 posts
Posted by Chessie System on Monday, November 5, 2007 2:52 PM

 Jon French wrote:
Here it is with a little bit of color
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

 

Jon,

What scale did you lay this track out with in RTS? I am looking to build a similar style layout and like the track plan you built. Did you plan on running this over and under or just some elevation with a cross track? I am looking to build in HO scale and want an up & over like I had as a kid for under the Christmas tree, if your layout is HO scale could you post the file with the track size's listed?

Thanks!

C&O, B&0, Chessie System Nut.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!