4 x 8 Design Contest***LAST DAY***

[chadw]

OK spacemouse, my layout's name is the Newport Northern.  Check your Pm's too.

[SpaceMouse]

Okay, one last thing. Think of a name for your layout because that's how people will vote on them.

[SpaceMouse]

We have some nice one's here. Only three days left.

[Texas Zepher]

OK here is an entry that I drew up just for this contest.   It is based on the same concept as my 1979 N-scale layout, although scaled down quite a bit.  This actually seems to be a common theme and concept for small layouts as I have found other examples in the literature.  It is commonly called a "continous run with branch" design.

The Ward City Mead & Eckley  WM&E

The main layout represents a shortline interchanging with a class one.  There are two small towns represented.  The continuous run loop represents the class one with which the shortline interchanges.  It has hidden storage for trains to be staged, including one stub ended.  The mainline class 1 train drops off cars for the short line.  The track going straight back from the main turnout is meant to be the interchange track however it will only hold a few cars.  The actual branch could be used for an interchange; however, the grade might make it difficult to spot things there.

The short line daily takes the cars and spots them at the appropriate industries.  Industries have single serving tracks that will require internal moves.  The industries will require a variety of freight car types to make the roster interesting.  There is no turn at the end of the line so if steam power is selected it will have to run the train backwards one way or the other.

The two towns can be separated by just scenic elements or with a backdrop as indicated by the line.  The backdrop and the tracks are slightly off kilter from being exactly parallel with the edges of the board.  This hopefully helps distract the eye from the rectangular edges of the 4x8. 

Mainline has outside minimum radius of 22".  Shortline minimum radius is 18".  I've used 22" easements were possible.   One will imediately notice some of the very short (one car) industrial sidings.  They could be extended and/or curved for greater capacity at the expense of looks and making the railroad's civi engineer look like a drunk b#$T(#@.   I prefered having more industries variety of rolling stock over quantity.  If I were to extend one track it would be the quarry.  Here a vertical "wall" of rock behind the track would make most sense.

Finally if one didn't mind a steep grade the stub end staging track could be extended on around the corner and down along the entire length of the layout.  Two trains could be stacked linearly on that track. 

The track plan:
 

The lower level:


The scenery concept:

The original N-scale Layout:

[steinjr]

 Here is my contribution to the 4x8 layout contest. It is based on an idea presented by Linda Sand in the article "One plan, three options" in Model Railroad Planning 2002, lightly modified by me.

 Linda's original layout was something like this (my drawing, not a copy from the magazine):

 My modified layout (Edit: let's call it "Loopy Bridge and Terminal Railroad - LBT RR" - it combines continuous run, bridge traffic and classification/industrial switching ) looks like this:

 Highlights:

• Continuous running (18" radius curves) through two scenes
• No complex track work - uses flextrack, Peco short turnouts and a wye turnout.
• Railroad has a purpose - bridge traffic between interchange 1 and interchange 2, plus local switching.
• Variety of industries - 6 industries on the switching half of the layout.
• Trailing and facing sidings (needs runaround moves)
• Can arrange meets between trains (has two double ended two sidings and the possibility of using the long single ended siding at the lower half for meets - if you back into or out of the siding).
• No staging - but you can attach a cassette (or a shelf layout) to either interchange track.
• When you get tired of running in circles, you can do as Linda Sand proposed in her article - cut the layout in two (along the backdrop), and arrange the two parts as an L or an I (2x16), making it part of a larger layout. Only tracks you in principle need to modify is the main curve - where the two halves will join together.

 And the reason I can squeeze in more than Linda did is 18" radius curves vs the 20" radius curves Linda used, and that Linda didn't overcrowd things quite as much as I do.

 I think this one should be possible to build and operate, as long as you use short cars (40' cars) and short diesel engines (say GE 70-tonners or Alco S1s). It might to have the potensial for shortish operating sessions for one or two operators. 

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[C&O Fan]

Ok if this is meant to be a 4x8 for a beginner then my first design is far to complex being triple decked with an internal helix.

 This design could be done by a total novice laying section track.

 The one non Atlas product is the curved radius turn out on the inner main line which is a Peco with an outside radius of 18' and an inside radius of 15"

  Advantages are

 Simple

 Section Track

 Double Main lines

Reversing loop

Sky board in the middle makes trains disappear

 Loads in empty's out enhances operations  

 Disadvantages 15" inner track limits access only 4 axle diesels and short hoppers

could be used on the inner main reversing loop

   Two hills with a valley in the middle Coal mine on one side power plant on the other OR if western scenery is preferred Ore mine/Steel mill  

 Other buildings on the back side are builders choice i.e. Walther's background buildings

Gray rectangle could be a passenger platform

  If I had more time and better software I would put the mainline crossovers on the radiuses on diagonally opposing corners

This would allow longer trains and a continious running passing siding

 

 

[selector]

Gosh, that almost looks...........purposeful............, Chip.

I like it.   That works for me, considering your intention.

-Crandell

[C&O Fan]

Terry,

I used XTrkCad software to draw the plan. It is free software, available at:

http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage

Don Z.

Thanks Don I bookmarked it and after my open house i'll give it a try !

[SpaceMouse]

Here's my offereing. Is a sNOHOw guage.

 

[Don Z]

Terry,

I used XTrkCad software to draw the plan. It is free software, available at:

http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage

Don Z.

[C&O Fan]

Crandell,

Here is my interpretation of your plan:

Don Z.

Don

What Software are you using to draw with ?

[selector]

Whoa, you guys are goooooooood! 

[steinjr]

Crandell,

Here is my interpretation of your plan:

 Cool - Don's interpretation of Crandell's plan looks much better than the way I drew it !

 Mmm - if you drop that upper right hand corner industry track anyways, how about pulling the diagonal main a little upwards in the upper right hand corner and turn that short switchback between the diagonal main and the yard area into a longer interchange track with room for about 5 40' cars ? Rough idea:

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[selector]

Don, thank-you for your efforts, too.  We have an assembly line going with this problem child.

The scale at the side of Stein's latest drawing shows a problem in length now, so my software is playing tricks on us, either the scanner's or the imagery software in my computer, at railimages, or here.  Whaddaya do?  I think that my plan will work, with some adjusments/deletions?, a beer or six, and some salty language.

I supply the last two.

-Crandell

[Don Z]

Crandell,

Here is my interpretation of your plan:

Don Z.

[selector]

Cool, Stein!    There might be some promise in this plan after all.  One of the hazards of doing it freehand, and in a hurry, is that you forget that track has a width and that turnouts must have a specific geometry and length.

Again, I sincerely appreciate what you have done on my behalf.  You're a real trooper! 

-Crandell

[steinjr]

Yes, it is HO, but I must say that what has turned up posted looks a bit thin...as if it were stretched longitudinally.  I have just checked my measurements for the outer border, representing the edge of the plywood, and I still get 4X8"...my scale in the drawing.

In fact, when I hold my ruler up to the screen, I get 3.75" X nearly 9", so there in an artifact of distortion that I am unable to explain.  Darn!

Any ideas?

Edit - Stein, I rotated the image which does seem to have reduced the drawn thin look, but maybe by too much.  In any event, this new version seems to be more in keeping with what I have before me on the desk....I think.

I appreciate your taking the time to help me out.

-Crandell

 Sorry - I played a bit more with it in xtrakcad - and it seems like you can get most of the stuff you drew in on your rough sketch into a 4x8 layout without too much hassle. I had put in the turnouts for the yard in a non-optimal way, making the yard tracks quite a bit shorter than they had needed to be.

 Looks like it might be a challengewith the two switchbacks that go between the diagonal main and the yard area - as drawn in the figure below, it would seem to only leave room for a short engine and two cars.

 Not necessarily a huge problem if the 4x8 is connected a bigger layout, and most traffic for the yard comes from the track that goes leaves the layout in the lower left hand corner.

 

Smile,
Stein

 

[selector]

Yes, it is HO, but I must say that what has turned up posted looks a bit thin...as if it were stretched longitudinally.  I have just checked my measurements for the outer border, representing the edge of the plywood, and I still get 4X8"...my scale in the drawing.

In fact, when I hold my ruler up to the screen, I get 3.75" X nearly 9", so there in an artifact of distortion that I am unable to explain.  Darn!

Any ideas?

Edit - Stein, I rotated the image which does seem to have reduced the drawn thin look, but maybe by too much.  In any event, this new version seems to be more in keeping with what I have before me on the desk....I think.

I appreciate your taking the time to help me out.

-Crandell

[steinjr]

I hope my crude hand drawn sheet below can be accepted in lieu of the much nicer depictions everyone else is posting.  It is not to scale, except for the slab outline.  It is meant to be a schematic for later refinement, so the real thing would take some fiddling in the way of spacing and geometry.

I usually prefer some capability to run continuously, but I figure this limits creativity to some extent.  You have to cram a closed loop into it.  So, I thought I would take the approach that this would become part of a greater whole in time, hence the central interchange and the terminal outer curve.  The track plan requires extensive running to get from the inner through main (name the railroad) to the outer route ending at the yard and servicing.  I am a fan of the double-slip switch, so I shoehorned to of them into the yard.  The last two facing point turnouts are only facing point to allow a reversing engine to escape past its drag into the butt-end tracks on the ladder.  It could always run behind and clean up the positioning with a shove if the consist were long enough.

Anyway, here it is.

 Roughing in the outline of a H0 layout based on your schematic, using 22" radius curves and Peco small turnouts, a 90' turntable (12" in the model) and a GE 70-tonner engine with 40' cars:

  

 Is your plan N scale ?

 Stein

 

[ereimer]

HO only??

Eeh! H-ow O-rdinary, I was gonna give it a whirl in G , but since this is a private party, I'll just say 'Bah humbug' and go back to my workbench!

can you do a timesaver in G on a 4x8 ? that might be interesting to see 

Yes easily, you actually only need as little as a 2 x 8 to do a classic Timesaver, I did an Inglenook switching puzzle plan on a 2' x 6' area with the idea of it being a portable something for shows, but given the loss of the GATS here I could only see taking it to 1 or 2 shows a year, not worth building for such a limited venue.

2 x 6 Inglenook, using HLW Mack engine and HLW shorty cars

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/Microlayout%20Study%202x6%20Inglenook.pdf

2 x 8 Timesaver, using same rolling stock as above

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/Microlayout%20Study%202x8%20Timesaver.pdf

 

 

very neat . i'd love to see one built , any examples ? 

[selector]

I hope my crude hand drawn sheet below can be accepted in lieu of the much nicer depictions everyone else is posting.  It is not to scale, except for the slab outline.  It is meant to be a schematic for later refinement, so the real thing would take some fiddling in the way of spacing and geometry.

I usually prefer some capability to run continuously, but I figure this limits creativity to some extent.  You have to cram a closed loop into it.  So, I thought I would take the approach that this would become part of a greater whole in time, hence the central interchange and the terminal outer curve.  The track plan requires extensive running to get from the inner through main (name the railroad) to the outer route ending at the yard and servicing.  I am a fan of the double-slip switch, so I shoehorned two of them into the yard.  The last two facing point turnouts are only facing point to allow a reversing engine to escape past its drag into the butt-end tracks on the ladder.  It could always run behind and clean up the positioning with a shove if the consist were long enough.

Anyway, here it is. Edit - rotated the image to landscape which has improved its aspect ratio, maybe too much?

[SpaceMouse]

Cut 4' x 8' strip into ...

That does bring up a valid question.  Does the 4x8 have to be a 4x8 rectangle or can they be cut up.  For example can one cut a piece off to make a 4x6 with a 2x4 wing?  Or two triangles off the end to make a hexagonal shape layout design?

Think one solid uncut sheet of plywood.

[Greg H.]

Doesn't that start getting away from some of the reasions to do a 4x8 in the first place?

[Texas Zepher]

Cut 4' x 8' strip into ...

That does bring up a valid question.  Does the 4x8 have to be a 4x8 rectangle or can they be cut up.  For example can one cut a piece off to make a 4x6 with a 2x4 wing?  Or two triangles off the end to make a hexagonal shape layout design?

[SpaceMouse]

Everyone else is weighing in so I figure I might as well.

My layout is a point-to-point with allowances for a roundy rounder. One thing I would point out is that there is a switchback. This is one of those rare occasions where a switchback pretty darn convenient. The train heading out of the yard pulls next to the siding on the main. Pulls the cars to switch puts them on the siding then pushes the cars behind the train on the main. It then pulls the cars onto the lead and switches the train out.

 

Features:

Operations for 2-3 people
Full functioning yard
Engine service
Industrial switching  
Passenger service
2 scenes
Town vignette
Crossing with interlocking tower
Yard represents working staging

 

 

[chadw]

Here's my entry.

At the left end of the layout there is a commuter station.  Below it is a dock.  Inside the loop there is an engine terminal with 5-stall roundhouse.  On the right side of the layout, there are several industries along the edge of the harbor.  At the bottom edge the tracks cross a vertical lift or bascule bridge so boats can reach the dock inside the loop.  The tracks at the bottom right pass the lighthouse and continue in to temporary staging, which can be replaced with an expansion on the layout.

The scenery would be mostly industrial warehouses with cranes on the docks.  The rest of the scenery can be filled out with whatever city buildings you like.

For operations there are both trailing and facing point spurs, and two diamonds that will need to be protected with smashboards or interlockings.  There is a run-around, it's just hard to find.  It is the reverse loop.  The consist would be placed in the loop and the engine run into the tail track.  The engine would then pull forward onto the other side of the loop putting it behind its cars.

Spacemouse this was a good idea.  I can't wait to see the results.

[PASMITH]

Yes, the second level is HOn30. I had two Joe Works brass locos ( Climax and Shay) and two scratch built Climax's built around N gauge diesel mechanism's

Peter Smith, Memphis

Joe Works? ...Lucky! I wanted those Joe Works/Flying Zoo Miniland series trains, but I could never afford them, even now they are still pricey. So I just converted Bachmann N mechanisms. Anyway looked like a nice layout, too bad it went bye-bye. My HOn30 layout went away when an earthquake sent it all to the floor in '94, oh well.

I am sorry to hear about your HOn30 layout demise. It sounds like you were living in San Francisco. I don't think there are many HOn30 r's left but On30 seems to becoming very popular these days.

Peter Smith, Memphis

[SpaceMouse]

The posting ends on Sunday of Thanksgiving weekend. At that point, we'll argue among ourselves for the top 5 (but the way we are going we only might get 8.) We take the top 5 (or 8 if that is all there is) and allow the general population to rank their favs. One with the most points wins.

[Autobus Prime]

Cut 4' x 8' strip into two 1' x8' pieces.  Cut remainder into 4" x8' pieces totaling six pieces. cut four  of the 4" pieces into one foot long trrapezoids to make 90 degree bends.  Assemble into railroad 1' x 8' on opposite walls separated by bridge sections 12' wide including 48" radius on the corners.  Put yard on one 1' x 8' section.  Put several industries on other 1' x 8' section using flats against wall.  Railroad is around the walls for 12' x 12' room.  Run trains.  Do I win?  :-)

ndb:

'Pends where y'are. If you're building that in a basement rec room and want room to swing cats, sure. In fact, John Armstrong made much the same comment in MR...in 1955, I think. Nothing is new under the sun - the around-wall plan is probably as old as model railroading. Published plans are rare in 1930s magazines, but those I've seen have mostly been shelf-style.

If you're in my 1910 basement which already has brick pillars, a bulky chimney, and heating equipment in the middle, and very few wall spaces that aren't already occupied with shelves, workbenches, or utility equipment that I do not want to block even with movable elements, not so much. Besides, I've tried both kinds, and I just find tables easier to start with. Maybe the best of both worlds is to start with something that you can later convert into a turnback curve.

Anyway, enough philosophizing. Here's the plan of my current railroad, with some scenic elements added. Let's call it an entry:

Venango & Erie, Phase 3, with some conjectural scenery, since at this moment the V & E, though operating daily, is still very much a Plywood Pacific:






Expect further entries before the deadline, probably based on this. I am trying to develop this plan by rapid forced evolution. Anybody got any spice?

Operations so far:

Construction supplies & equipment from landing to JF and W'burg RR construction areas
Stored construction equipment shuffled around. Kept when not used near RR office at W'burg.
Feed & grain from landing to JF feedmill (stunningly modeled by chunk o' 2x4 at present)
Passenger traffic between stations using old combine and coach. Combine also used as caboose.

[ndbprr]

Cut 4' x 8' strip into two 1' x8' pieces.  Cut remainder into 4" x8' pieces totaling six pieces. cut four  of the 4" pieces into one foot long trrapezoids to make 90 degree bends.  Assemble into railroad 1' x 8' on opposite walls separated by bridge sections 12' wide including 48" radius on the corners.  Put yard on one 1' x 8' section.  Put several industries on other 1' x 8' section using flats against wall.  Railroad is around the walls for 12' x 12' room.  Run trains.  Do I win?  :-)