After deliberation on choosing a track plan for my first 8 X 4 layout, I have almost decided on the "Cactus Valley RR" plan with one small alteration to facilitate a return loop. Anyone with access to the plan will see a siding at the bottom left. If I extend that track to join the line just before the concrete portal, I will have a return loop. I just need to adjust the elevation from 3.5" to 2" in about 2' 6" of track, and the building on that siding will vanish.
For a small fortune, I intend the showpiece of the layout to be a gold mine, the "Deer Creek Mine" kit by Sierra. And the steel through-truss bridge in the centre will hopefully be constructed of logs if I can find a suitable kit or plan. The other siding in "town" will be a two loco engine house and station track. I will run American 4-4-0s and short stock on the tight curves.
I would appreciate any constructive comments if anyone has the time.
Ron. (South Australia)
Ron,
That 1.5" rise in 30" results in a 5% grade. Most 4-4-0 models do not have much pulling power - My Tyco 'General' can barely pull itself up a 3% grade...
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
Though the Cactus Valley RR is a nice layout to look at, it is basically just a figure 8 loop with a passing siding and a couple of industries to serve.
It has a couple of major drawbacks:
Connecting two tracks to have a return loop doesn´t really add anything to the operation other than that your train is now running in the reverse direction.
The Cactus Valley RR has been discussed 3 years ago and you may find some interesting points in that discussion:
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/213620.aspx?page=1
Ron HumeI just need to adjust the elevation from 3.5" to 2" in about 2' 6" of track
That doesn't appear to allow for transitions from level-to-grade, so it will be even steeper than Mr. Bernier notes.
As I commented in your other thread a few days ago with a link, the Cactus Valley is likely a poor choice for a newcomer to the hobby for all the reasons Ulrich mentioned.
Again, here's that link to the earlier discussion (same as Ulrich posted, but active).
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/213620.aspx
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
By the way, builder Dave Frary has placed his copyrighted Cactus Valley articles on his website as a .pdf.Note that he is a very experienced builder -- there would be better choices for a newcomer in an HO 4X8. And better choices in HO in about the same space than constraining oneself to the 4X8 at all.
Good luck with your layout.
Hi Ron
I would try and find larger locomotives a 4-4-0 is going to struggle on those grades try and steal a bit of extra length and width to get the grades down a bit.
The sharp curves will not be as much of an issue its a mountain railway so bigger engines and short trains will be fine and pretty much right.
Some one I forget who does a nice 4-8-something that is very much in the early 4-4-0 style so this would be a good substitute and will still look great with a short train in mountain scenery.
If you can gain a bit of extra room from somewhere to ease the grades a bit see if you can fit the original plan with the addition of a balloon loop somewhere
That will give a better operations out come than chopping the plan to get a balloon loop in.
Just my thoughts.
The train prices are pretty make that very ouch!! but think about moving the location to South Aus the colours in the artical don't look that different to some pictures of South Aus I have seen
regards John
Thanks John. I'm committed to the 4-4-0 American locos, they are the sole reason for a layout. So with your info re grades, I guess I'll have to look elsewhere for a track plan of a similar nature. As to scenery; I spent eleven years in Alice Springs and have photos of great rock formations there, so will use that colouring, probably similar to the "west." Sadly, 8 X 4 is about as much space as I can scrounge. So how do people work on a five foot layout? I sounds awkward to me.
Ron.
Thanks for the input. Back to the search for a similar layout with lower hills!
Thanks for your response. Back to the hunt for a similar layout with lower hills!
Ron HumeSadly, 8 X 4 is about as much space as I can scrounge. So how do people work on a five foot layout? I sounds awkward to me.
I wish I had a footprint of 8 X 4 ft. for my layout In any case, you have to make do with what you´ve got!
A Google search using the key words "8 by 4 HO scale layout track plan" will result in a number of interesting ideas. Look for a layout without any grades, but with a chance for some dramatic scenery as you envision it for your layout.
Just an idea:
You´ll be fine with the rather sharp curves and switches, as you intend to run locos with a short wheelbase and rather short cars only.
What most 8 by 4 layouts lack is staging. Staging is the "outside world" allowing your trains to "go somewhere", which really enhances operation.
Staging doesn´t need to be much - starting from a single track on a detachable or foldable extension to your layout up to a multi-track affair with a traverser connected the tracks.
Keep us posted on your ideas!
I'd avoid a "figure 8" track plan because the operational "gains" if any from the figure 8 connecting track come at the cost of eating up space that could be used for so many other interesting things.
Model train 4-4-0s are, as others have pointed out, not well suited to both pulling cars and going up grades. Even on level track they are good for just a few cars which is fine because so were the prototypes. I'd explore track plans (and benchwork styles) that permit considerable variation in the topography while leaving the track itself more or less flat with at the most very modest grades (.5 to 1% is what I mean by modest). The L girder benchwork system is well suited to that because the roadbed goes only where the track goes: you aren't wasting money by buying the sheet of plywood and then either cutting most of it away for gulleys and valleys, or hiding it under foothills and mountains.
Dave Nelson
Do a google search for Ian Rice layouts. I think these layouts a perfect for 440 american engines. Dont be afraid of the saw when designing your layout. The corners of a 4x8 layout are usualy a waste of space and scenery. Good luck.
Steve
Hi Choops
I mostly agree with your coments.
But not about the corners they can be awkward to scenic but can be succesfully sceniced
Without them my layout would not have its tiny but adiquate sized loco depot.
The station would be missing its bay road and point of future but as yet unplanned extension and I would have no convienient location to mount point swiches on the facia so don't be to quick to condem corners they have there uses.
The saw however is very handy for all sorts of things.
regards
John
With a five foot wide layout.
You reduce the working space to two approx two feet six inches or there abouts wide work areas.
By putting some sort of backscene or other scenic divider in the center of the layout this goes in at construction, before any thing else does so needs a bit of thought and planning.
Once its in and done you can then comfortably work on both sides of the layout.
The other way is a duck under into to a central operating well which can become a pain in the back as you get a bit older.
Also look at how you could cut the sheet of 8X4 this can actualy gain a larger layout that uses space far more efficiently
Giving you a bigger layout without compromising other uses the room may have
remember an 8X4 actualy needs a lot more space so you can easily get around it.
Looked for Iain Rice layouts but they are in book form from MR now, but thanks for the suggestion. I'm taking a look at the "Rock Ridge Central" layout out of a winter 2013 mag now. If I lower the grades to 0 and shorten the diagonal track for a township, it may work. I could position the gold mine on the hill with a z gauge hand truck line on a trestle to the mullock heap. I'd reduce the lake to a small creek to save space too. The minimum radius is 18" with easements, and the turnout minimum is no. 4, so the 4-4-0's should be ok with short trains. Or I could go up the hill with a Shay or the like. And goodbye tunnels!