4'X8'

[Jetrock]

douginut: If you like N scale, a 2x4 "domino" is enough space for a layout comparable to a 4x8--although the same caveats apply! A 2x4 can also be integrated into an around-the-room shelf layout too...my current layout is the union of three modules connected together. I started with the yard, then built the other two--a fourth module which will mark progress around the second wal of the garage is next! That will add about ten square feet--the module after that will mark the first step beyond the 32-square feet "4x8 equivalent" surface area...

[countershot]

I Don't and never will look down on people with 4x8 layouts, i had one for a while and i am not made of money. it takes a while to ungrade.

[Darth Santa Fe]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jetrock

Indeed--the problem with a 4x8 is not that it's too small, but that the intact 4x8 sheet of plywood is a ridiculously inefficient use of the space! Consider that you need two feet of clearance around each side of the layout, that 4x8 foot layout (32 square feet) actually consumes a 6x12 area--72 square feet!

I have a little idea for having a 4'x8' layout that will save a lot of space. My idea looks like a 3' tall cabinet that's 2' wide and 4' long, has 2 3' wide by 4' long folding sides that make the whole thing a 4'x8' when unfolded and some wheels to make it movable when it's folded. If I use the idea when I build a layout, I'll be sure to post pictures. If it's good enough, maybe one of the Model Railroader editors will see it here and want me to do an article on it because it's such a great idea![:D]

[Don Gibson]

A 4'X 8' is piece of ply with track on it
Simple?- yes. Inexpensive?- maybe. Inovative? - seldom.
But Conserving space?- WRONG! Anything wider than 3' needs walk-around space.

A 4'X8' takes up lot's more room. (just try operating a 4X8 in a 4'X8' room.) most 'smaller room's today are 10'x12'. A 4X8 will take up all of it.

3 sheet's of ply will fill the same room, with two ea cut crosswise (4'X4's) and the third lengthwise (2X?) to fill the same room with YOU in the middle. You reach everything, and can have curves up to 44"r. Entry can be a ' lift up' section. Cost of 2 extra sheets of ply - $15-$30

'Guilding the Lilly': Sheet Foam on top of ply allow's for easy river bed;s, culvert's, hill's, canyon's and other realistc RR terrain.

Same idea cutting ONE sheet of ply into 4 equal sections (2'X4's) and installing board lumber between sections - gives 22"r. cirves.

[pj1775]

Jim:

I was a member of the elite 4x8 club!! Think nothing of it. There are some beautiful layouts out there of that size. If anything, I truly believe that the modler tends to be more detail-oriented with such space. Now that I own my own home and have since began construction on a larger layout, it is easy to lose that small-space detail touch.

Forget what anyone else says - it's all about your personal enjoyment.

PJ

[hminky]

I am building a 4x8 layout to test ideas for my future large layout. Originally I was going to dispose of it. Now it has turned out so well I will incorporate it in the larger layout.



I chronicle my adventures on my website:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/

Thank you if visit
Harold

[dgwinup]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse



I have a Digitrax Zephyr and 3 UT5 jacks. I can reach any part of the layout with a throttle. What I can't do is reach a car for ucoupling at half the places I need from the control panel where I throw the switches. So if I placed 3 cars on three tracks I would have to throw a switch, go to the other side and uncouple, go back and throw a switch, go to the other side and uncouple, go back and throw a switch, go to the other side and uncouple, go back and throw a switch...ergo the problem

The layout looks like this naked,

The control pannel is on theother side of the bridge. You can barely see it, it is black. Most of the switching is done in the "yard"--which is really industry set outs and engine service.

Chip,

You already have the DCC. Put stationary decoders on the turnouts.

Or you could just move the control panel to the other side of the layout. (Notice how easy it was for me to suggest that? As long as I don't have to rewire everything, it's easy!)

Darrell, quiet...for now

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dgwinup



Chip,

You already have the DCC. Put stationary decoders on the turnouts.

Or you could just move the control panel to the other side of the layout. (Notice how easy it was for me to suggest that? As long as I don't have to rewire everything, it's easy!)

Darrell, quiet...for now

The real solution would be to rewire the layout with dual controls. That would be tough the way I have set up with lights showing directions. My son can look at the lights and see how the turnouts are set the way it is now. If I put in dual controls, the lights might read wrong. I'd have to do a new system.

The turnouts are EZ track. Can stationary decoders control them? I never thought of it as an option.

[Anonymous]

Let's not forget, George Sellios started out on a 4' x 8' too.

Like several have added on this thread, it's a simple math equation that the same room occupying the 4' x 8' will provide much more running room than a table top layout, but there is as many reason to not do away with the table top as there is to tear it down.

You'll know when the timing is right and the experience you gained tabling will carry you far into your next layout.

Keep it fun.

[oleirish]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mondotrains

Hi Folks,
I'm 57 years old and probably older than many of you on the forum and therefore will speak to you as a "father" would. For you older guys, I'm probably not telling you anything new that you haven't already discovered.

The size of the layout has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of fun you can have in this hobby. It's the "journey" that we must all learn to enjoy and not the finished product, whether it's trains, high school or college educations, or whatever endeavor we are embarked on.

Model railroading is all about going to train shows with a list of "wants"; driving to the local hobby shop and seeing what's new; getting on the internet like I did this morning and discovering a tank car at an on-line retailer that's been out of production for some time and now anxiously awaiting its arrival in the mail. Model railroading is getting as excited about that big train show coming up as we did waiting for Santa when we were 5 years old.

Trust me....I've seen huge layouts that lack the detail and drama of some of the 4 x 8' layouts I've seen. That doesn't make any layout better of worse. If someone is enjoying their layout....that's all that matters and nobody should discourage anyone.

I've said many times that if more people discovered model railroading, there would be a lot less problems in this world. Those guys that sit around drinking and smoking at the local bars would be closer to home and would be spending their money creating something they'd enjoy, rather than destroying their lungs and livers.

Well, enough of my "dad" philosophy.
Enjoy yourself....as one of my best friends always says.
Mondo

[^][^][#ditto][#ditto]
I'am 63 your right on,but a few don't look at that way[V]
JIM

DANG I gotta put some coal in that tender[:D]

[fwright]

Actually, for turn-of-the-century modelling in HO/HOn3, a 4x8 is a very pleasant size, especially with extensions. And I do like to just let the trains run (at least once a week). The "switching puzzle" shelf layouts get old at times, too, with the limited back-and-forth.

My fantasy layout is actually a 5x8 peninusla with extensions going to terminals/towns on shelf modules around the walls. The 5x8 is just a blown-up verison of a 4x6 track plan I have. I worry I would even get that ever "finished" to a satisfying level. But I will never allow a duckunder or access hatch again, or a fold-up/removable design that requires rolling stock removal/0-5-0 handling on a regular basis!

For Chip: If you are using twin coil switch machines, you can easily add push buttons at a "local" control panel right in front of your yard, wired in parallel with your existing control panel. The push button (or momentary switch) setup allows as many parallel sets of controls as you want. Your lights at the main panel may or may not work properly - if they are thrown by the switch machine contacts they will always be correct; if thrown by the control switch they won't.

I have never used Tortoise machines so I don't know how easy they are to set up multiple parallel controls.

Or use DCC as others suggested.

Fred "old school" "lone-wolf" Wright

[Jetrock]

A 4x8 set up in an interesting way, like the "diamond" configuration, a collapsible/concealable design, or the old backdrop-down-the-middle trick (like the Pacific Coast Air Line) are ways of teaching that old 4x8 dog new tricks.

I suppose I'm the oddball in finding no need for a loop, but calling any shelf layout a "switching puzzle" is just as much of a generalization as calling a 4x8 loop a "toy train" configuration--my layout is intended for switching and operation, but it's not a switching puzzle. It's a functioning layout, intended to model the way that a prototypical industrial belt line serves industries by moving them from yard to industries and back. A 4x8 can also be set up for operation and switching--but I don't have enough room for a 4x8 in my garage!

[BRAKIE]

A 4x8 foot layout need not be more then a improved train set with unrealistic grades and space eating mountains.But,thinking outside of the box and the use of a view block one can turn that simple basic loop into a nice operating layout by using several unrelated industries and car cards and waybills.Again thinking outside of the old 4x8 planing box one can have a nice operating layout.Now add details and mini scenes you will have a very nice 4x8 layout that is far superior to the normal oh hum 4x8 with its unrealistic 5% grades and space eating mountains.[:D]

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jetrock

A 4x8 set up in an interesting way, like the "diamond" configuration, a collapsible/concealable design, or the old backdrop-down-the-middle trick (like the Pacific Coast Air Line) are ways of teaching that old 4x8 dog new tricks.

I suppose I'm the oddball in finding no need for a loop, but calling any shelf layout a "switching puzzle" is just as much of a generalization as calling a 4x8 loop a "toy train" configuration--my layout is intended for switching and operation, but it's not a switching puzzle. It's a functioning layout, intended to model the way that a prototypical industrial belt line serves industries by moving them from yard to industries and back. A 4x8 can also be set up for operation and switching--but I don't have enough room for a 4x8 in my garage!

Jet,Sadly to many modelers of all age groups think a switching layout is no more then a time saver switching puzzle. [xx(] This is caused by misinformation and understanding of what a REAL switching layout is. Take a well design INDUSTRIAL switching layout along with car cards and waybills one is set for a hour or so operation by switching at scale speeds and allowing time for the brakeman to do his work..[:D] Of course this type of industrial switching layout comes from thinking beyond the time saver design.Leave that design for what it was meant to be a SWITCHING PUZZLE and not a real industrial switching layout.

[hminky]

My Pacific Coast Line Railway is used mainly as a switching layout but is nice to just go down and run the trains around the oval.
There are two things that model railroading could have less of:

1. The Timesaver as a layout trackplan, why not just have realistic switching scenarios.

2. This obsession with staging, to paraphrase the late great Frank Ellison why cover up tracks that can be used for more operating fun. I think real estate is too expensive to be used for car storage. Ellison proposed using that staging track for operation, make it a division point, a working yard.

Just a thought
Harold

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by hminky



2. This obsession with staging, to paraphrase the late great Frank Ellison why cover up tracks that can be used for more operating fun. I think real estate is too expensive to be used for car storage. Ellison proposed using that staging track for operation, make it a division point, a working yard.

Just a thought
Harold

Here's where I beg to differ, for I am one of those with an obsession for staging. Most 4x8 are designed without staging in mind and have to make do.

And I respectfully submit, that you Harold, have more staging than any 4 x 8 layout I have ever seen. IF I may post your layout.



You have two distinct scenes each of which becomes staging for the other. It is brilliant. You may not have an obsession of for staging, but it is planned so well into your layout, that it doesn't look like staging doesn't matter.

But for the rest of us, we should think about staging before we build. Then we can artfully disguise it like you do.

As for being a waste of valuable space, on a larger layout think of cost. If an average layout costs $50 square foot and takes 50 hours of labor /square foot, an undecorated hidden staging area might cost 1/10 or 1/5 that. What it does for operational ability makes that space the most cost effective space on the layout..

[hminky]

Chip
There is no staging on my layout. It is the standard 4x8 with two towns. I just haven't worked on the other half. The only feature that is not standard is the loads-in/empties-out connection in the middle. See my web article about that at:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/operation/lilo/

That layout plan is a modified version of the On30 design from the 2002 Model Railroad Planning annual. It really isn't even my plan. I have built several other operational small layouts and never felt the need for staging. I have built those without the scenery divider and operated them with two towns. I once had a figure 8 spaghetti bowl with four towns on a monitor shaped 4x8.

You shouldn't condemn the 4x8 unless you built a well planned 4x8 and didn't like it.

Just a thought
Harold

[vsmith]

Mouseman

Thats a terrific interpretation of the classic 4x8

Excuse me but historically almost every 4x8 i've seen was either set up in a garage or basement where limited walkaround space wasnt an issue. I remember back as a kid in the late 60's and early 70's the promos for using 4x8's

The 4x8 was promoted as the easiest, quickest way to get people started in model railroading, as all that was nominally required was the sheet of plywood, a some 1x4's under and a pair of sawhorses. It allowed an easy way for dads and kids to take the christmas tree set and make it something more substantial without having to do the more involved and complex 1x stringer type benchwork.

However, some examples I remember seeing were pretty flimsly, my favorite being when I was a kid seeing one comprised of only a sheet of plywood with the sawhorses under allowing the ply to warp. Kids dad wasnt the sharpest tool in the woodshop.

I agree that if you have room for a 4x8, nominally you have room for a minimum 8x12 folded dogbone layout against 2 walls which can be made using the same technics, by just cutting up the plywood sheet.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by hminky

Chip
There is no staging on my layout. It is the standard 4x8 with two towns. I just haven't worked on the other half. The only feature that is not standard is the loads-in/empties-out connection in the middle. See my web article about that at:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/operation/lilo/

That layout plan is a modified version of the On30 design from the 2002 Model Railroad Planning annual. It really isn't even my plan. I have built several other operational small layouts and never felt the need for staging. I have built those without the scenery divider and operated them with two towns. I once had a figure 8 spaghetti bowl with four towns on a monitor shaped 4x8.

You shouldn't condemn the 4x8 unless you built a well planned 4x8 and didn't like it.

Just a thought
Harold

I am not condemming the 4x8. But I think for most people there are better options.

And I respectfully submit that your unbuild side is staging for your built side.

And when it is built, it is still staging for the other side.

And the side that is built now, is staging for your unbuilt town.

That is inherent in the design. It is a well thought-out design.


Now most people don't think of what you did when they design a 4x8 layout. If they understood the concept of staging and it's relationship to model railroad operations, they might get to the point where they see the adantages of your type of situation. Even a 4x8 layout is a substancial investment--I've heard $50/sq ft and 50 hrs/sq ft--so we're talking $1600.

It is my thinking that if a person is going to invest $1600, they should think long and hard about the plan. Explaing the concept of staging is necessary to help a person get the maximum potential out of a layout. I submit, that a person whould have to understand that concept before they could see the value in a layout like yours.

The fact that you can make do without staging doesn't decrease the value of staging. Ceratinly understanding what staging is and does allows you to "make do" without it better.

And none of this changes the concept that if you have space for a 4x8 table you have space for a 9 x 13 shelf--which can give you 4 scenes to work with instead of 2--staging or no.

[hminky]

Chip,
There is no staging. I don't build trains and store them in a yard bring them on the layout to another yard, then between operating sessions move them back to the old yard. That is staging.

Harold

[SpaceMouse]

IF you bring trains from an unseen "rest of the world" and ship them off to an unseen "rest of the world" that is staging. To use a play or "stage" metaphor, you are taking them "off stage." When they are "off stage" you can fiddle with them or not and restage them for the next op session.

You have a scene and an off stage. You do staging.

[oleirish]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Don Gibson

A 4'X 8' is piece of ply with track on it
Simple?- yes. Inexpensive?- maybe. Inovative? - seldom.
But Conserving space?- WRONG! Anything wider than 3' needs walk-around space.

A 4'X8' takes up lot's more room. (just try operating a 4X8 in a 4'X8' room.) most 'smaller room's today are 10'x12'. A 4X8 will take up all of it.

3 sheet's of ply will fill the same room, with two ea cut crosswise (4'X4's) and the third lengthwise (2X?) to fill the same room with YOU in the middle. You reach everything, and can have curves up to 44"r. Entry can be a ' lift up' section. Cost of 2 extra sheets of ply - $15-$30

'Guilding the Lilly': Sheet Foam on top of ply allow's for easy river bed;s, culvert's, hill's, canyon's and other realistc RR terrain.

Same idea cutting ONE sheet of ply into 4 equal sections (2'X4's) and installing board lumber between sections - gives 22"r. cirves.

I'am going to give you a problem MR.GIBSON,I had an 10'X14' room one year ago,my bother-in-law came to live with me,so to keep an 40year marrage togethor,I gave up my train room,Now according to you I should have given up my railroading because all I had left was a 42"X10' space in the master bed roomOH! forgot I have 42"X43"space for my work bench.
A] give up model railroading
B]get an devorce
C]try a smaller airea
D]move to a new house
Bye the way I'am on fixed income(retired)
What would you have done???????[?][?]
Do you think people are dumb enough to try this??,sure , you can't have an 4'X8' in a 4'X8' room[?]Bye the way I had an around the room set up,with lift up walk through!
JIM[:(!][:(!]

[hminky]

I think the 4x8 reputation comes from the bad track designs of most of the project railroads in Model Railroader. If you are going to build a railroad it doesn't take any longer to build one that operates well than one that only has "toy train" running.

Just a thought
Harold

[oleirish]

If I can help some one I will,but will not run them or there layouts down!!
JIM

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

IF you bring trains from an unseen "rest of the world" and ship them off to an unseen "rest of the world" that is staging. To use a play or "stage" metaphor, you are taking them "off stage." When they are "off stage" you can fiddle with them or not and restage them for the next op session.

You have a scene and an off stage. You do staging.

I don't know Chip - I don't think Harold's "behind the backdrop" section is any different than, say, a different "leg" of a U-shaped layout. Just because you don't see it when you're standing in a particular area, that doesn't necessarily make it "offstage".

It's more like a scenic divider.

Staging generally refers to an unscenicked area where the 0-5-0 is welcome to mess with cars & loco's, etc. The "other side of the barrier" of Harold's layout is just another scene.

I don't think Harold has a scene and an "off-stage". I think he has a finished scene, and another scene that just happens to be waiting to be finished.

There's no fine line of the definition of staging frankly, but if Harold isn't using it that way, then it's really not staging - not anymore than a tunnel that a train could dissapear into, etc.

[hminky]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oleirish

If I can help some one I will,but will not run them or there layouts down!!
JIM

Project railroads in magazines are not like railroads built by "civilians". They are done by "experts", according to their DVD. They receive money to build the layout. They should be held to a higher standard. I would not say the same thing if the project railroad was built by a "non-expert".

Layouts are like dogs and children they my not meet our expections, but none are mediocre.

Tony Koester's large scale layout is a really great example of a shelf switching layout. It could be built in a smaller scale.

Just a thought
Harold