My first "adult" layout was a 5x8 in a 9x11 spare bedroom. Two 4x5 modules with quick disconect wiring where needed. Used heavy duty casters with locks so I could move it off solid wall if needed. Double main line had 22 & 24in. radius and interesting switching moves including switchback. Served me well until the basement was finished and built my RR empire. LOL
Don R.
CTValleyRR wrote: As soon as you start adding L shapes, dog bones, cockpits, and other protuberances so that you see train no matter where you look in the room, the room becomes a train room and a source of conflict with others, especially non-railroaders.
Packers 1 wrote: steinjr wrote: Smile, Stein Looks like a design from the newest MR. Wasn't it set in nebraska or something? i don't wanna run upstairs and look at my mag. right now.
steinjr wrote: Smile, Stein
Smile, Stein
Looks like a design from the newest MR. Wasn't it set in nebraska or something? i don't wanna run upstairs and look at my mag. right now.
Not exactly the same design - I didn't bother go find the magazine (or to look it up in the track plan database) either - just scratched in something based on the same rough concept idea - 4x6 with triangular tail shelf.
Looked it up in the track plan database now - it was called "Oklahoma and Western". But it could have been pretty much anywhere.
The designer of that plan had made a more interesting track plan than the one I scratched in - mine was just to illustrate the concept that cutting a 4x8 plate can produce interesting results, without massively increasing the complexity of making the layout for a beginner..
Here is the link to the one from MR: http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=2545 .
Autobus Prime wrote:Mark N : Well, sure, there are all sorts of degrees of interest. I don't think you should feel irrelevant to this forum because you take things farther than most people. There have always been lots in the middle, but it would be boring if everybody did the same thing. You should post more of those great layout photos you drop on us from time to time. I enjoy those a lot, just like I enjoy reading about Carl Traub or Janos Ero's scratchbuilt brass, despite never having done that work. Anyway, a lot of us take something farther than average.
Midnight Railroader wrote: CTValleyRR wrote: As soon as you start adding L shapes, dog bones, cockpits, and other protuberances so that you see train no matter where you look in the room, the room becomes a train room and a source of conflict with others, especially non-railroaders.Fortunately, this is not true of everyone's situation.
Fortunately, this is not true of everyone's situation.
No, but it is a valid point. Even though those of us whose preferred reasoning and decision functions tend more towards thinking/judging than towards feeling/perceiving (ie those of us who are far more interested in "will my solution work well technically?" rather than in "how will my solution make other people feel about me?") has to acknowledge that there are quite a few non-technical factors that you might want to take into account when you make a decision about what style layout to build.
Guess I should consider myself lucky, since I have a wife who is quite comfortable with me being personality wise an INTJ (or a reasonable approximation thereof), and has learned that when she needs to convince me to do things her way, she does it best by pointing out why her way is the most logical and efficient solution. She tends to be right too - at least 75-80% of the time
Grin, Stein
marknewton wrote: Autobus Prime wrote:Mark N : Well, sure, there are all sorts of degrees of interest. I don't think you should feel irrelevant to this forum because you take things farther than most people. There have always been lots in the middle, but it would be boring if everybody did the same thing. You should post more of those great layout photos you drop on us from time to time. I enjoy those a lot, just like I enjoy reading about Carl Traub or Janos Ero's scratchbuilt brass, despite never having done that work. Anyway, a lot of us take something farther than average.AP, thanks for the compliment! But I've been a bit slack lately, nothing much new to show on the layout. I've been working on something a bit bigger:Cheers,Mark.
True, but it is often a factor. Or, in my case, gets the wife used to seeing a train layout. She doesn't push back so hard when you start talking expansion.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it.
I did leave a way to expand off it so it didn't end up in a corner some where collecting dust.
That project was my building block for my railroad. It was a simple plan that I change a bit from the original plan I got from a track planning book. I kept it simple so it would be fun to build and not a large one that never got done. I like to run trains not to build the Hoover Dam and never get to run anything.
4x8 are fun too!!! RussellRail
RRTrainman wrote:You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it.
RRTrainman,
Nice work! operating interest, too.
I've had 'real' 4x8s in the past, and that 'gotta do it NOW' loop of toy train track on cardboard would have fit on a 4x8 with space to spare. And you should see what some of our Japanese brethren have done in spaces that make 4x8 look HUGE! It's not the size of the layout, it's what you do with it.
Don't disparage the Hoover Dam. While it was under construction, it was served by a complex, busy and very interesting rail network. (One feature - battery-powered locomotives hauling immense buckets of fresh concrete from Lomix to the base of the dam. They recharged from third rail laid in the 1600 foot tunnel on the route.)
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Autobus Prime wrote:Nice. Looks like a maximum traction truck. What sort of work are you doing on it? What's it going to go on when it's done?
After reading through some of this topic, I've made a drastic decision. I'm not going to build a 4X8 for my sons to play with. Instead, I'm cutting an inch off one side and two inches off an end and building a 94"x47" layout for them!!!! So there. You 4'x8' fans and you anti 4'x8' guys can all attack me now instead of each other.
HEdward wrote: After reading through some of this topic, I've made a drastic decision. I'm not going to build a 4X8 for my sons to play with. Instead, I'm cutting an inch off one side and two inches off an end and building a 94"x47" layout for them!!!! So there. You 4'x8' fans and you anti 4'x8' guys can all attack me now instead of each other.
What you should do is lop 2" off the 8' side, and extend it off one end short end, making the layout footprint 16' in length. That gives you a single-track 8'-long staging yard. That way you have a 96" x 46" layout with an 8' by 2" extension, which we all know is the best size for a layout, and waaaaaay better than a 4x8.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Autobus Prime wrote: RRTrainman wrote:You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it. RRT:Nice work. An interesting thing is that it looks like a midwestern setting, similar to the 4x8 posted earlier, but it also looks bigger. I think a major factor is that your ballast shoulders are narrower, and that the color of the ballast seems somewhat darker. The wide, prominent ballast of the other road creates an illusion of shorter distance.
I agree. That is really nice work, given the constraints the 4x8 format impose.
As far as I can tell from the pictures RRTrainman's track plan looks like this, with a 22" radius loop, a 20" radius loop and an 18" turnback at the far end:
Good idea to have the crossovers between the two loops arranged like that. I also like way the you have put in the industries there. And the structures and scenery looks good, of course.Great job!
Dave Vollmer wrote: HEdward wrote: After reading through some of this topic, I've made a drastic decision. I'm not going to build a 4X8 for my sons to play with. Instead, I'm cutting an inch off one side and two inches off an end and building a 94"x47" layout for them!!!! So there. You 4'x8' fans and you anti 4'x8' guys can all attack me now instead of each other. What you should do is lop 2" off the 8' side, and extend it off one end short end, making the layout footprint 16' in length. That gives you a single-track 8'-long staging yard. That way you have a 96" x 46" layout with an 8' by 2" extension, which we all know is the best size for a layout, and waaaaaay better than a 4x8.
Hmmm. Now ADD an inch on one side, and ADD 2 inches to the end, and you'll really have something!!!you'll have a layout BIGGER than a 4 x 8, and a real model railroad empire!!!
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
Don Gibson wrote: It seems to me that there are people building 4X8's in basements, buying $300 engines, and $50 cars, using income and space limitations as a 'cover' for effort.
It seems to me that there are people building 4X8's in basements, buying $300 engines, and $50 cars, using income and space limitations as a 'cover' for effort.
So what? There's nothing wrong with that. It's supposed to be fun, not work.
- Harry
HarryHotspur wrote:The problem with these train-on-a-plank layouts is they all have a hole in the middle of them.
I could cut holes in my 47"x94" sheet at the center of each circle of the figure eight. Then I'll have hole and a spagetti bowl and not be 4'x8' so everybody will be happy with my work. Right?
HEdward wrote: HarryHotspur wrote:The problem with these train-on-a-plank layouts is they all have a hole in the middle of them. I could cut holes in my 47"x94" sheet at the center of each circle of the figure eight. Then I'll have hole and a spagetti bowl and not be 4'x8' so everybody will be happy with my work. Right?
Only if it mounts on the walls.
HarryHotspur wrote: HEdward wrote: HarryHotspur wrote:The problem with these train-on-a-plank layouts is they all have a hole in the middle of them. I could cut holes in my 47"x94" sheet at the center of each circle of the figure eight. Then I'll have hole and a spagetti bowl and not be 4'x8' so everybody will be happy with my work. Right?Only if it mounts on the walls.
I'll mount it on the wall from one end. The boys need to be kept on opposite sides while operating the trains. They're good kids but they are still boys and as such want to do everything themselves.
steinjr wrote: Autobus Prime wrote: RRTrainman wrote: You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it. RRT:Nice work. An interesting thing is that it looks like a midwestern setting, similar to the 4x8 posted earlier, but it also looks bigger. I think a major factor is that your ballast shoulders are narrower, and that the color of the ballast seems somewhat darker. The wide, prominent ballast of the other road creates an illusion of shorter distance. I agree. That is really nice work, given the constraints the 4x8 format impose. As far as I can tell from the pictures RRTrainman's track plan looks like this, with a 22" radius loop, a 20" radius loop and an 18" turnback at the far end: Good idea to have the crossovers between the two loops arranged like that. I also like way the you have put in the industries there. And the structures and scenery looks good, of course.Great job! Smile, Stein
Autobus Prime wrote: RRTrainman wrote: You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it. RRT:Nice work. An interesting thing is that it looks like a midwestern setting, similar to the 4x8 posted earlier, but it also looks bigger. I think a major factor is that your ballast shoulders are narrower, and that the color of the ballast seems somewhat darker. The wide, prominent ballast of the other road creates an illusion of shorter distance.
RRTrainman wrote: You can do so much will a 4X8 layout. My first project was a 4X8 and I still have it and run it.
Actually there all 18' radius turns, you can't really see the staight pieces on that end. But you can do it that way to with 22', 20', and 18' radius turns also it would cut into your staight-a-ways.
Egads! Double tracked figure eight is 96" long!!! Hmmm......Trains running right at the edge of the table. At least their going uphill at the time.
BTW-my main layout, whenever, is designed as a modified 4x8 plan, widened, extended and an ops area and staging yard added. It is 6x20 and isn't abutting any walls. So now everyone can be mad at me!!!