A 4 x 8 Layout Design Post-Mortum

[SpaceMouse]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

Edit: See the Layouts

[BRAKIE]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

Chip,I didn't look at any of the layouts even though I believed a 4 x 8 beats no layout.

However..As of last month's Layout Design SIG meeting I am having other thoughts.So,as of now I am caught between two thoughts that of a standard 4 x 8 footer and a operators pit type layout which can be larger.

[MisterBeasley]

1. I've been busy with other things.  Ski season is here.  On weekends I tie long boards to my feet and slide down slippery mountains with wind chills around zero.  (It's really more fun than that.  I'm just trying to keep the lift lines short.)

2. I'm not really good at layout design.  I can make broad, sweeping generalizations, but when it comes down to it, I'm a scenery guy.  My layout is a lot of fun to work on and to show off, but not very good for operating interest.  So, I'd rather not give anyone bad ideas.

[Autobus Prime]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

SM:

The 4x8 is one of those things that gets very little love but a whole lot of use.  Some people really, really don't like them.  I believe that, like anything else, they have their advantages and disadvantages.  I did like the contest a lot, though I wish I had submitted my upgraded V & E. :)

Great contest.  We should do these regularly!

[selector]

Chip, FWIW, I appreciated your efforts to unify the membership around a topic that deserves some serious debate, especially since the subject is so close to home for all of us at one time or another. 

I agree with the sentiments of Mr. Beasley that many of us can talk a good line when it comes to armchairing something offered for public comment or debate on this forum, but it is probably true that few of us have the courage or the knowledge to have a serious and standardized whack at a 4X8 plan.  The time of year may not have been the best considering that there is much going on in preparation for winter, Christmas, vacations, and many guys have time to actually build track right now.  That may be part of it, but mostly it is that the subject invites discussion that few want to entertain because it requires defending one's preferences, and it often gets testy.  I think that after our late summer's thrashings, particularly on the weekends, many of us have lost our nerve or our stomach for baring ourselves too much.  Read that, "It's just not worth it."

The view count, if nothing else, should be somewhat gratifying.

-Crandell

[fwright]

My excuses:

I ran out of time to submit my own design.

When I went to your site, I was unable to expand the plans to examine them in detail.  Could only see the thumb nail size.

Fred W 

[loathar]

I'm not trying to be mean or a sour puss here but the whole 4x8 thing has been done to death and didn't need to be elevated to "contest level." Your not going to improve on the 40 or 50 published track plans that are already out there.
Come on Chip...You've got like 15 4x8 threads going on the first 10 pages of this forum. The horse died...stop beating it...
(again, NOT trying to be mean. Just being honest.)

[Blind Bruce]

Chip, right now I only have leased enough space for a 4X8 so I am very interested in your contest. I have not yet figured out which layout had the most votes! How ab out a rundown on a first page?

[secondhandmodeler]

I don't feel qualified to judge others work.  I also know very little about layout planning.  My two favorites were the ones that came in first and second.  I couldn't offer an opinion on the rest though.  I suppose I could have voted for the two I liked.  I think the exercise will help a few people though.  There was much more that two loops on all of them.

[0-6-0]

Hello I thought it was a good contest. I agree with secondhandmodeler I am not qualified to judge peoples work .There still was some good ideas there and maybe someone can use them. I found some. I am going to try and use on my layout. Yes the 4x8 has been worked and reworked so many times but you never no someone out there my have a new idea. Thanks everyone for your work and time Frank

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

I'm not trying to be mean or a sour puss here but the whole 4x8 thing has been done to death and didn't need to be elevated to "contest level." Your not going to improve on the 40 or 50 published track plans that are already out there.
Come on Chip...You've got like 15 4x8 threads going on the first 10 pages of this forum. The horse died...stop beating it...
(again, NOT trying to be mean. Just being honest.)

I'd have to say that there was a pretty good chance of coming up with plans that were improvements on published plans.  A lot of good thinking has happened since most of those plans were developed.  I think it was a good idea, and it got some discussion going that was really useful.

As far as the number of posts on 4x8s, l'd have to say that based on how many people's first post is 'I only have room for a 4x8, what should I do?' it is a topic that should be discussed.  And this page of designs is another source of idea, many of which took good steps outside of the oval with a passing siding.

Personally, I am in the 'are you sure you really want a 4x8?' crowd, but I am also almost smart enough to figure out that the 4x8 is always going to be an important part of the hobby, and giving it serious discussion is a useful endeavor!

 

[markpierce]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

Edit: See the Layouts

You should have posted the contest at the LDSIG Yahoo site http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ldsig/

Not only would you have gotten additional responses, they would have been from people with a high level of interest and expertise.

Mark

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

I think anyone in the hobby is qualified to judge the layouts.  There are so many different levels to judge them on.  Sure, there is the technical side, but, especially in a 4x8 that might be the least important.  What might be the most important is that it looks 'interesting' for a beginner, and yet has the feel of a real railroad, rather than a racetrack.  Then again, if YOU liek a racetrack, it could be right for you.  I think anyone can chime in on that.

 

[SpaceMouse]

First of all, I am not unhappy with the way the contest went. I know how hard it is to come-up with a plan and develop it for a such an endeavor. 13 designs was a fair number.

I thought, though that if I were to do another contest, I might want to make some improvements.

Although I am disappointed in the voter turnout, my goal here is understand the efffect rather than to whine about it. Again, some of the more prolific posters did not weigh in.

My apology to Fred and other FireFox users. Aboutl half-way through the voting I figured out why they could not get to the layout pages and fixed it. So I know one thing to do to improve the voting.  

[SpaceMouse]

You should have posted the contest at the LDSIG Yahoo site http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ldsig/

Not only would you have gotten additional responses, they would have been from people with a high level of interest and expertise.

Mark

There are several people who are members of that group that frequent here.  

[SpaceMouse]

I'm not trying to be mean or a sour puss here but the whole 4x8 thing has been done to death and didn't need to be elevated to "contest level." Your not going to improve on the 40 or 50 published track plans that are already out there.
Come on Chip...You've got like 15 4x8 threads going on the first 10 pages of this forum. The horse died...stop beating it...
(again, NOT trying to be mean. Just being honest.)

With all due respect, there are people here, myself included have not seen all 40-50 published track plans. I think that the people who posted showed creativity and an ability to think outside the box. If someone else has done these ideas before, I'd love to see the original plans.

[exPalaceDog]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

Edit: See the Layouts

First, 4' by 8' is a very arkward shape and size.

But second, to judge a design, one needs to know the requirements it is trying to meet. What to desires and interests of the intended user/s.

Have fun

 

 

[Dave Vollmer]

Chip,

I checked in from time to time, and although I offered my support of 4x8s (I had one when I was in HO), you also can guess why I didn't participate in or judge in the contest.  People say the 4x8 is restrictive.  I agree, but I also agree that sometimes it really is the best use of space, depending on the arrangements of the surrounding walls (windows, doors, etc. that one intends to continue to use).

But the only thing more restrictive than a 4x8 is the assumption that HO is the only scale appropriate for that space.  Although one can cram an O27 layout into that space, N scale jumps out as being an even better choice for a 4x8 table.

Had the contest been 4x8s in all scales, I would have pulled out the big pencil.  I've been draming up a multi-level Colorado Midland Hagermann Pass layout in 4x8, but it's N scale, using the MDC/Athearn old-time cars, coaches, and steamers.

[IRONROOSTER]

I voted.  I suspect this was interesting for people with limited exposure to 4x8 plans.  But after 35 years in the hobby I have seen a lot of HO 4x8 plans for general purpose railroads.  Frankly, the best ones are by John Armstrong. 

The area that is less explored you excluded in your criteria:

 

18" minimum radius for Post 1920 non-geared locos. 15 inch minimum for geared and pre-1920 steam. #4 turnouts or greater. Grades should be 4% or less. 

Some interesting things can be done with sub 15" radius in narrow gauge, traction, old time etc.  This is an area that has not been covered extensively.

But the real problem with the 4x8 is that it is too small.  It's better suited to TT than HO.  An HO table top really needs to be larger.  A good size can be made from 2 sheets of plywood each cut at  5'4".  The 4 pieces can be arranged in 5'4" by 12' layout (or 5'4" x 10'8" - using the two large pieces, 1 small piece, and a part of 1 small piece).   Either size would allow for a decent size yard, a mainline, etc.  You could also put the yard, branch line, etc. outside the mainline loop for a much more interesting layout.

But for all that, I started with a 4x8 (John Armstrong design from Track Planning for Realistic Operation, 1st edition - not in 3rd edition).  I had a lot of fun with it and would build it again if that was all the space I had.

Enjoy

Paul 

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

But the real problem with the 4x8 is that it is too small.  It's better suited to TT than HO.  An HO table top really needs to be larger.  A good size can be made from 2 sheets of plywood each cut at  5'4".  The 4 pieces can be arranged in 5'4" by 12' layout (or 5'4" x 10'8" - using the two large pieces, 1 small piece, and a part of 1 small piece).   Either size would allow for a decent size yard, a mainline, etc.  You could also put the yard, branch line, etc. outside the mainline loop for a much more interesting layout.

But for all that, I started with a 4x8 (John Armstrong design from Track Planning for Realistic Operation, 1st edition - not in 3rd edition).  I had a lot of fun with it and would build it again if that was all the space I had.

Enjoy

Paul 

The whole string of events that led to the contest was that there is a recognition that 4x8 is not optimum, but that a lot of people are going to use it anyway.  The idea was see what creative ways there were to get the best out of the less than ideal situation.

 

[NevinW]

For me, I looked at the designs and felt there weren't any that liked that much more than the others although there were a few that I thought wouldn't work at all.  it was fairly complicated to look at the website and then write down those that I liked and then come back to this website and list my preferences.  I think that waas reason you didn't get more responses.  -  Nevin

[steinjr]

The 4 x 8 design contest took a month and yeilded some good designs. However, I'm currious what you thought was good and bad about the exercise.

Among other things, I'm curious why there was low particpation in the voting particularly from some of the the more vocal posters who give advice in the layout section. I also thought I might see a little more interest from the members of the LDSIG (Layout Deisgn Special Interest Group).

What are your thoughts?

 Well, just to add my 50 ore (about 9 cents ...) worth : maybe the focus was too much on voting and too little on actually _discussing_ the advantages and the disadvantages of various solutions to various design problems ? 

 A random selection of useful tricks from some of the posted layouts:

• A asymmetric center divider gives you more space to curve around the center, as in "Du Bois and Punxzy".
• You can have one line going diagonal corner to corner, and have a connection to another line that goes around the edge in at many different ways - two of which are a back-in (trailing) interchange spurs (ala Selkirk and Pacific), or a flyover type 225 degree (halfway between half circle and 3/4 cirle) curve joining them (ala Turkey Trail)
• Mixing normal gauge and narrow gauge can work well, if you have some vertical separation (ala Whisper River)
• Tucking in a couple of short interchange tracks in a corner, running the main off the curvede end of turnouts allows you to use corner space fairly efficiently. Same with using a turnout to take a spur off the end of a siding , or using Y turnouts to have two lines diverge very quickly, (ala own my Loopy Bridge and Terminal, building on an original idea by Linda Sand).

 There were more ideas too. The reminder that there is a large difference between a track plan and a track plan with scenery drawn in. Look at e.g the RAT line plan - just the track plan looks overly full. Add a scenery plan, and it becomes a very appealing layout.

 The voting was okay, but not the main thing - what we take home is ideas we can use in other places later.

 Maybe a cool idea would be to make the thing into a "design an LDE (Layout Design Element) based on this prototype location, with these characteristics" - ie deliberately design smaller bits and pieces which are intended from the start to be used as parts of other layouts, rather than a full layout in its own right ?

 Just a suggestion. Probably worth about as much as you guys paid me to offer it

 Grin,
 Stein

 

[Jeff H]

Well I'm new here and really don't have alot to say. I liked the thought and was getting excited to see some layouts and hopefully give me some ideas of my own.  When I got to the web site, all I could see was the thumbnails and not a blow up version.  Oh well.

[luvadj]

Being that it was my first experience in looking at a 4 X 8 competition, I thought it well done and very enlightening...The winner, by the way, was my first choice.

my .02 from the desert.... 

[SpaceMouse]

Well I'm new here and really don't have alot to say. I liked the thought and was getting excited to see some layouts and hopefully give me some ideas of my own.  When I got to the web site, all I could see was the thumbnails and not a blow up version.  Oh well.

Try it again. The problem with some browser was fixed.

[last mountain & eastern hogger]

Space mouse can you tell me where the winners are from your contest ??  I can't seem to find them even with a search.

Johnboy out......

[BRAKIE]

Well I'm new here and really don't have alot to say. I liked the thought and was getting excited to see some layouts and hopefully give me some ideas of my own.  When I got to the web site, all I could see was the thumbnails and not a blow up version.  Oh well.

Try it again. The problem with some browser was fixed.

Chip,BTW..I forgot to mention your 4x8 layout design contest was a good idea since many modelers still favor the 4x8 footer..

I really like entry #10.

[SpaceMouse]

Space mouse can you tell me where the winners are from your contest ??  I can't seem to find them even with a search.

Johnboy out......

Not many congrats so it fell off the front page quickly. http://www.trains.com/trccs/forums/1284427/ShowPost.aspx

[markpierce]

Well I'm new here and really don't have alot to say. I liked the thought and was getting excited to see some layouts and hopefully give me some ideas of my own.  When I got to the web site, all I could see was the thumbnails and not a blow up version.  Oh well.

Try it again. The problem with some browser was fixed.

I really like entry #10.

Brakie, this is only the second time we've completely agreed on something.

Mark

[wm3798]

I'm with Vollmer.  When you restricted it to HO, in my opinion you completely eliminated the single most effective way to put some truly innovative thought into a 4x8 space, that being, of course, the application of N scale.

There are a lot of N scale modelers out there, and when this kind of thing comes up, most of us just roll our eyes.  Then we go back to other internet forums that don't suffer as much from HO myopia. 

In a nut shell, I didn't participate because I didn't get the idea that it was an "open" competition.

Personally, I think there's a contingent of entrenched HO scalers who are afraid to admit that in a small space, N scale offers the possibility of a far superior model railroading experience. 

Fortunately, I don't suffer from such a "scalist" bias!

Lee