Want to expand my 4 x 8 layout

Hi Larry,

How would the extension be laid out? I would give it a shot in the next day or two if I know how the table would be added to and what you might have in mind. I got a new hard drive a few weeks ago, but I think (hope) I still have your old layout plans around here somewhere.

If I can find the old plan and Moonman wants to also give it a shot, I'd be happy to post the RR-Track file for him.

Thanks RTR. Well, the addition would change the main part from 4 X 8   to 4 X 10 and add a piece 2 x 3 onto the far right corner.

Larry,

    Think about adding another level, I am going to put a 2nd level on the Christmas layout this coming year.  I had 5 levels on my Game room layout, it ran real well, especially with DCS.

PCRR/Dave

FasTrack makes nice mulit level layouts.

Perhaps a two track yard along the far side of the 2 ft. wide section, then a space for a point of interest (operating or static), and a third track spur along the front edge to service the structure.

Use the tracks you now have in the center, for this new rear yard.

Personally, I would eliminate the inner loop and have just a passing track on the large loop - it doesn't have to be as short as the section on the right, it can go around the bend to the other side - just break it up visually. Then you can fill the center with scenery.

Dave

Guys, I like both ideas.  A 2nd level would be really nice to have and I think a long passing siding would be better than the tiny inside oval.

I'll keep hoping that I can come up with something.  I am definitely addi9ng the 2 ft X 7 ft section onto the end of the existing table. It just fits the room and still lets me open and close the blind and window.  Although being on ground level next to a sidewalk, I usually keep the blinds and window closed.. I cant make the table wider as the other side of the room houses my computer table, bookcases, etc.

Found and modified the old file a bit. Here is a quick, easy revision with the new space added. Grid is 6 inch squares, so see if I got the add on parts in the right place? I see a couple folks have posted some more ideas.

I'll see if I can do one like Dtrainmaster proposed. If I read his post correctly the passing siding would leave you with a switch on the back of the layout, which If I remember correctly you had trouble reaching on one of the previous layout attempts? If I'm not reading it right, maybe he can clarify it for me. I also posted the RR-Track file if anyone else wants to take a crack at a new design.

If you add a second level as PCRR suggested, I don't think there is room to connect the levels without a pretty steep grade? Possibly a separate loop on the second level? I have not attempted a second layer in RR-Track before, so it might be ugly too!

Larry,

What is it that you miss doing from the old layout or just feel something is missing to keep you interested a little longer?

How are you adding it to make 10' or butt to the 8'?

RTR12    That is what I thought might be my only plan. But the addition is 7 ft long, not 6.

I find this quite boring. Someone suggested a long passing siding instead of the inside loop.  And I do have a switch on the back of the layout. I bought a REMOTE  0-36 for an extra siding there.   I kinda like one of the other drawings you or RTR did before.

And I really think I like one that is in 4 x 8 layouts by ACE. His ids done with older 0-31 track but maybe could be adapted.  I been running the 2 loop layout and is just BORING.  I'm open to new ideas even if I need a bunch of new track. Even 1 or 2 new swiches would be ok.

Moonman - your 1st drawing is what I will have,

After reading Moonman's post I thought I may have had the addition wrong. From your picture above and stuff about the window I misunderstood the add on part so I re-worked it.  It is just a starting point, something to look at. I'll try to fiddle with a passing siding if switch placement is no longer a problem.

Ace has posted some very nice small layout plans, he is very creative with small layouts. I haven't seen around in a while, miss not seeing his layout plans.  Can you post the one he did that you like, or a link to the thread. Maybe Moonman will come up with something as well?

RTR   On Jan 28 in 4 x 8 Layout ideas  Ace posted a layout "Use non derailinf switches"  It looks really interesting

Use "non-derailing" switches for easy operation.

rtr12,

Forgive me for hacking your drawing with "Paint".

You will have to check sizes, etc. to see if these fit together - this was just cut and paste.

#1 My original idea that I posted.

Pros:   Opens up layout, provides yard area and factory spur. Adds passing siding.

Cons: "S" curve, no yard lead.

But doable for confined space.

5 switches

#2

Pros: Eliminates the "S" curve, adds yard lead and separate long spur for the factory.

Two different ways to run the loop and the passing siding.

Cons: ?

5 switches

#3 Combination of 1 & 2.

Pros: Adds a third way to run the loop or, have two independent loops - but only when the yard lead is not needed.

Cons: Adds clutter to area by yard.

7 switches

Dave

Not a problem (any help appreciated), your hacking in paint looks as good as my RR-Track layouts! I have attempted to re-create your number 3 layout, looked like the most promising to me. More pros, less cons and more track and loops.  We will have to see what Larry thinks about it. At least I have the table shape corrected now.

Larry,

I will attempt Ace's layout in a little while, maybe this evening. From reading his notes I think it is done with tubular track? If it is and I can't re-create it in FasTrack, do you want one in tubular track? I know that would make you start over with a new track system, let me know what you think.

Yes, that will be the table shape.  One thing with the extra length, it sure leaves a lot of space in the centre for accessories, buildings, etc.

And Track.  I don't want to go to the old tubular switches but I would be open to MTH Realktrax.  I had a big layout with it before.

rtr12,

Looks good. I had no idea if any of what I did would actually fit together.

Working with this is a lot different, I run around the perimeter of the living room and O-90 curves.

Is there any way to kick the separate "factory" spur further to the left, closer to the table edge? This would leave more room for a structure between the tracks.

Perhaps a short curve section, or a longer straight, off of the switch; so as not to create too much of an "S" curve.

Or could the switch itself be placed further clockwise around the bend?

Larry, concerning the boredom that you mentioned.

If you can hide part of the run with a large mountain or structure, so the trains disappear from view at times, it will add interest.

PCRR/Dave's idea of a second level would accomplish this also, if part of the lower track is hidden under the mountain.

Dave

Yours fit pretty well. The plan Ace made is another story, he is very good at making layouts with easements and stuff, I on the other hand am not so good. I'll post that next, what I have of that so far anyway.

Here is your plan number 3 with the siding moved over a bit. I could slightly more, but I'm afraid the track will be hanging off the edge. I have no Fastrack (I use Atlas-O) and I don't know how close RR-Track can cut it without going off the table. The other two (end of 10' length next to the wall/window) could be narrowed closer to each other a little also to allow more room for items between the tracks you mentioned.

Ok, now here's my first attempt at butchering Ace's plan. Maybe he will be along to help out here (we can only hope). I think the width of the FasTrack is a big deterrent in making this all fit like Ace had done.  I haven't tried it yet, but I'm afraid the RealTrax will end up about the same due to the extra width with the roadbed. It does come in different curve sizes though.

One problem with this one is the reversing is only one way, no way to get back without backing up. Also, as you can see, I haven't been able to duplicate Ace's efforts, only butcher them. One more thing was the top right switch going down to the figure eight may not fit up just right. Had a hard time getting that one to connect. I will fiddle with it some more later.

And never mind the pricing in the parts lists, that is in RR-Track when you create the lists and I have no idea if any are even close to being correct. I had been deleting them previously.

Ok, I think I managed to somewhat reproduce Ace's Fine plan. It's not near as elegant as his, but I think it's functionally the same. The circled areas could be fit up problems with the Fastrack, I know it's not too forgiving. RR-Track fit them up, but it looks like there could be some mis-alignment and I don't know how much you can fudge with Fastrack.

Another problem is the track over hangs a couple inches in the lower right corner where the 4x8 meets the 2x7. Looks like a short piece (about 2-1/2 ft.) of 1x4 could be fastened some way with brackets and used to support the track in that corner.

The tracks are also very close together in a few places. The RR-Track export file does not show the full width of the track with road bed. I don't know if this would be a problem or not? I suspect it would and problems would occur if two trains met at one of these locations. 

Edit: Printed the layout to PDF and just now added the file, it shows the full width Fastrack so you can see how close the track really is in spots. 

And here is yet another butchering of Ace's elegant layout in MTH RealTrax. RR-Track seemed to put the track pieces together pretty well with no fiddling to get them to fit, once the correct length was selected to fill the space. The switch operators might be another story, but no warnings were given by RR-Track. As you can see from the circled areas, they did not fit well in several places. I am not familiar with RealTrax switches and have no idea if the operators can be re-located or not?

Should probably add that I only have Atlas-O track and switches, that's all I really know much about. I have very little experience with either Lionel's FasTrack or MTH's RealTrax. I did run into a couple of Fastrack pieces that would not fit up in RR-Track, it refused to fit them together. I ended up using different pieces where that happened so it did all fit. RR-Track and I did not have this problem with anything I used in the RealTrax plan.

RTR!@    Thanks very much for all the work you have gone  to help me out.   I really appreciate the effort.

Happy 4th of July to you. 

You're welcome! And Happy 4th to you too. (That is, if you all celebrate that up north there.)

Our day is July 1st.   147 yrs old here.

These are really some great ideas!  I am thinking about expanding.  Not too much that I get divorce papers but similar to what we have here! 

Forum member Ace has posted some very nice small layout plans in the past. Might try a search through some of his posts on layouts. Others have posted them also, but Ace's are the ones I remember seeing the most of.

This is a good thread as I am still getting ready to build my first layout.

QUESTION: What is the software you OGR experts are using to create track plans? I am using an iMac (Apple) so I cannot use PC software unless I install Windows (and I do not want to do that on my Mac).

Thanks for any track layout software guidance that I can use on my Mac.

LARRY: I think it's awesome that you are expanding your train layout. You inspire me. I see you are using 036 and 031 curves. The largest engines that I have are two Lionmasters (which can run on 036 curves): PRR T-1 and UP Big Boy. On preorder I have the upcoming scale Polar Express (I use Fastrack... I believe the scale Polar Express will require 060 curves). My plan is to set up my first-ever train layout with two loops: either 048 and 060 -- or -- (if I have enough space) 060 and 072. Then I'll need a yard area. I'm using MTH DCS at the moment and I have the Legacy 990 on preorder as well.

Keep up the great work, Larry! I will follow your progress. Thanks!!!!

There is only one for MAC, RailModeller. I understand dual booting can be a pain. Check the libraries in RailModeller for the track that you want to use.

Most use RR-Track and SCARM for Windows

Now that my layout needs to grow a bit, I was thinking for now to expand the 4x8.  Was thinking of doing one of two things.  1)Making the existing Layout possibly a 6x8?  expand the either the back of the layout or the front.  so that I will have an inside and outside loop.  2) making a totally different layout and connecting the two with a removable bridge to be able to have access to the utilities closet.  I haven't done the math and I am still thinking about the logistics.  But as of now I like option 1 the best.  I can add a new loop, add another siding for storage of my expanding fleet of intermodal husky stack cars or being able to run my lionel M7-Lirr passenger train on the outer loop and using the inner as strictly a freight operation.   

This is an older picture but might give you an idea of what I am talking about.  I figure if i do option "B" i will have more cost and not much more entertainment value, per say>  If I do option 1, i can still have all my trains on the track at once.  Not all moving of course but i won't have to put some trains on the shelf.

jjmmagoo,

From my study of O scale layouts, 5' x 9' provides the best opportunities in a relatively small, rectangular area.

However, if you define the maximum area that you have available, you can get creative and come up with some nice non-standard shaped designs. I have seen irregular shapes and triangles of sufficient size (still small) that have provided a lot of operational features to prevent boredom(increase entertainment value).

Break out the tape measure, negotiate with the property owners for a right-of-way lease and sketch the shape onto paper and post a photo of it. Just doodling on copies of the shape will surprise you. You can reach a layout design that way.

If you don't want to go up, why not down?   My brother and I did some hands on research for his next layout and found that a Lionel LTI era diesel would pull five cars up an 8% grade.  With that in mind, please see the doodle below. 

This idea is based on the layout drawn in earlier posts.  Use a turnout to continue the curve on the mainline, with going strait leading to an incline that gives access to a lower level.  The lower level has a reverse loop and a small storage yard.  This would allow you to make up a train, run it for a while, send it "off" to another city, and bring a new train back.  Trains leaving your layout and new ones coming on could add another aspect of operation.  Also, it adds a steep grade to conqueror but is not in a place that requires constant throttle attention. 

Making the grade longer would quickly shorten the main level loop.  If your layout is against the wall, the lower level turn around turnout would be hard to get to if there was a derailment.  Cutting a hole helps but crawling on the ground is never pleasant after the age of 8. 

I hope this helps you find what works for you,

Nathan

Here is a mockup to better illustrate what I am suggesting.

Nathan

Received my 2 DCS Steam engines, entered them into my New DCS set up, added my RS-3 and tested them all  1 track power connection, track signal 10 all around with all 3 engines. Have a Z-1000 for power and have only 2 engines powered up at a time.  Added the 2 x 7 ft extension on the back end of the 4 x 8.

I hope to change the layout and have an independent fig 8 and oval inside a bigger 0-36 oval., and the little yard on the far end.

Looks good with those handsome trains! It's nice when the electronics work as they should, eh?

I like. I can see a lot of potential, and switching. Looking good. Can't wait to see the buildings and stations.

HEY 3-RAIL LARRY,

Got a spare bedroom?  Don't mess around with those small extensions.  Fill the whole room with your layout...you deserve it!

Your 27-year-old son should find a job and move out, man...it's your house!

RIP TRACK

Hi Larry,

Your trains look great!!! Are you enjoying your project to expand your layout? How is it coming along? 

Here is something I originally came up with on a 4x8 table with a bit added now added, hopefully it will provide some ideas. It uses all O-36 and has lots of switches and passing tracks. I modified it to fit the space you have. There are a few rough connections fas-track should accept them. Just offering it to stir the imagination that is all.

Thanks Allin.  This looks very interesting!!