Looking for 4 x 8 plans for my article (Show me)

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

I’m looking for 4 x 8 plans for my article. They can be your designs or modifications of someone else’s-just nothing copyrighted. I’ll give you credit.

I intend to point out the pros and cons of each design. (Don’t worry. All 4 x 8 layouts have cons.) It would even be better if you pointed out out the pros and cons. After all, who would know better. Pictures of the finished layout or work in progress that shows the scope of the layout are also good.

Start by posting here. If you can’t, email or PM me and we’ll work something out.

2

Well, you can start with my son’s that I’ve already posted about a billion times.

808×417 65.9 KB

This is “Rader’s Authority of Transit” or the “RAT Lines”. It’s purpose is to be the transfer railroad between many class 1s servicing a large city such as the TRRA in St. Louis. The yard representing both ends of the transfer. This also allowed many foreign locomotives on to the right of way.

Design is an out-and-back utilizing a point-to-loop, with a figure 8 continuous run. Two simultanious working trains. One out on the “main” and another yard goat. Three trains could be on the track simultaniously if they share (one run then the other run) using “run around” like a passing track.
minimum radius is 18", maximum elevation 0, max grade 0.
yard capacity 20. Industrial capacity 9.

The original idea for scenery was for it to be industrial city center type where the crossing of the figure-8 represented two railroads crossing each other requiring an interlocking tower. This crossing was to be the focal point for the scenery. The urban scenery would have explained some of the heavy trackage; However, my son wanted a “mountain” so the planned scenery never came into being and the left side became a mountain in a tunnel.

The original design did not have the run-around track on the main. It was added only two weeks after the original completion. Adding it eliminated on of the industrial tracks and required the use of a second curved turnout. Also the original design did not have the ladder bypass track in the yard instead it had the traditional locomotive excape crossover at the end of the two longest yard tracks. That gave it a great caboose track, but basically wasted most of the yard capacity. Finally the original design had only one locomotive storage track off the turntable.

3

Try Model Railroader’s Cripple Creek Central. I don’t have the plan on hand, but it is in the 1991-1992 MR mags, and the book: HO Layout from Start to Finish.

Pros:A nice amount of switching to be done, with some nice scenery opportunities, and a backdrop sort-of in the middle at a slant.

Cons: 6% grade to a quarry… A little steep, and the interchange track has enough room for 2 40’ (or maybe one 50’ and one 40’) cars. Staging would help this. The tracks are close to the edge of the board, but it gives a nice 22" radius (If you used the atlas plan, the Kato one is… well… Interesting.)

Hope it helps and sorry I can’t get the plan on the website.

Mark

4

Thanks TZ, I will download it.

Mark, I can’t use a copyrighted track plan. But it is a good idea.

5

Okay Chip,

Why I bit on your request, I’ll never know…here it is, ready for disection, vivisection and disemboweling…

Don Z.

6

Uh, because it is a brilliant plan?

Can you either post or PM me your name and the pros and cons of this layout as you see them?

7

The main issue with this design is the limiting radius. The inside leg of the double curve on the left side is a 15" radius. As long as the user realizes the best use for this design would be as a switching layout with 40’ cars and an SW7 or NW2 loco, that wouldn’t be a problem. Another con is the short leads to get from the ‘mainline’ tracks into the working loop…

To be honest, I didn’t think of operations when I designed this…I just started putting track on the screen.

I think the main ‘pro’ to the design is the amount of open space available for scenery and structures…it’s not overrun by track to the point that there’s no room for anything else.

Just my [2c]

Don Z.

8

Here is 4x8 intended for operations, drawn in Xtrakcad by me, based on an excellent plan proposed by Linda Sand in the article “One plan, three options” in Model Railroad Planning 2002. Click on image below to see plan in a readable size.

A discussion of the layout:

A skyboard/backdrop run down down the middle of the layout, dividing the layout into two 2x8 scenes - a rural/semirural scene with a passing siding and three industries on one side of the, and a yard & interchange scene on the other half of the layout.

This also makes it possible to later cut the 4x8 apart along the bacdrop, and turn it into a 2x16 straight shelf layout or a 2x8 + 2x8 L-shaped shelf layout, with minimal changes to the layout - only thing you must change is the actual connection from end of 2x8 board to end of the other 2x8 board - the rest can be used as it is.

A possibility for continuous run with 22" radius curves.

Industry tracks are curved to maximize length. Industries chosen (team track, cattle loading/unloading pens and scrap dealer) does not need buildings to be modelled, and can take various types of cars.

The runaround on the industry half of the layout will allow you to run the engine around up to four cars - ie so you can pull or set out all the cars on any of the industry tracks (which have capacities of 3 or 4 cars) in one operation.

On the yard/interchange half of the layout, there is a small yard, with tracks that take 2, 3 and 4 cars respectively. A yard lead, capable of holding the engine and 3 cars is also provided. Engine plus 4 cars if you just want to clear the first turnout inside the actual yard.

Runaround allows you to run around up to three cars.

Two interchange tracks, representing “points east” and “points west”.

9

Steinjr.

Love the plan! I have to resort to using a 4x8 and this plan has the switching that I would want. However, I would use my own industries, not the pre-planned ones. Also, you forgot to label what kind of tunrout…i.e #4, #6. I am so happy because I could also use a BlueLine Heavy Mike on this too.

A true touchdown.

Thank you.

10

Hi Alex (wasn’t it ?) –

The turnouts in the drawing I posted were Atlas Code 83 snap turnouts (no 540/541). I also went back now and verified that Peco code 75 short turnouts (SL-91/192 and SL-92/192) should work - those are about a #4 or so.

This is not a layout suitable for long engines, long cars and high speed, so #4 turnouts should work reasonably well.

Smile,
Stein

11

That’s wonderful because I already have 4 snap switches in the basement.

12

Here is one I designed and with the help of people here I was able to fine tune it.

The only thing that I didnt like about this layout was that there was not alot of room for the coal loading. I could only handle 2 cars at a time there and the tunnel that was in front of the mine was more of a pain than anything else. You had to uncouple the cars before going through the tunnel or you are not going to get it uncoupled because the front coupler on the second car was stuck in the tunnel opening.

I had to make some changes… The engine house was moved to the south east corner where the warehouse was located and the warehouse is located where the engine house is. Here is a picture of the layout or at least as far as I built it.

I built this benchwork to be portable and for the most part I succeeded but I couldnt get the full 4x8 frame and scenery out the door and down the stairs without really messing it up. I tore this one down and built my new 5x9 that could be broken into 4 pieces.

If any one comes up with pros and cons for my layout please feel free to let me know. This layout was limited in its operation but good for round-y-round and scenery.

13

I remember this one. The pros & cons should actually be in a thread over in the “layouts & layout building” forum. Was that about 18 months ago? Seems like pcarrel was one of the others in the discussion.

14

Wow some one remembers my track plan!! (im happy LOL) After we went through all the stuff planning and designing it I did really like it and I may build that one again for my son when he gets a wee bit older. Here is the thread that takes the layout through its evolution.

http://www.trains.com/TRC/CS/forums/1/712855/ShowPost.aspx#712855

Again feel free to use any of the variations of the layout for your paper.

15

I think Dave Vollmer will have something good to contribute, his N scale PRR is a fine example even if it isn’t exactly 4’x8’. He must be really busy with his military duties since I havn’t seen a post from him in a few days, at least.

The way I see it is if you’re planning on limiting your size to 4’x8’ you’re probably better off going with N.

16

“Cumberland and Country”-scenic divider 4x8.

The original intent is to have some warehouses on the city side to hide the right side entrance from the scenic divider. And some trees on the country side to hide the entrance there.

17

Here’s Walther’s 4x8 if you just want to model engine service facilities

18

Here’s another fun one: A complete steel mill layout on a 4x8. This one belongs to Peach Creek Shops:

19

Nice Don,

Can you PM me your full neme to give you credit.

Also, can you give me the pros and cons about running that layout?

20

Where can i download some simple design software to comply with your request ?