what is the best radius for a 4x8 layout ? I would like to have two ovals. I can find any track plans like this and that has a crossover in it.
jtw
Running two ovals can be done but you will be very close on the sides. It has been discussed here before. 18r on the inside and 22r on the outside. It was suggested 15r but I would not go that route if you have large loco's you plan to run. I don't remember if a crossover was involved. I will try to locate that post for you.
If you go to anyrail.com you can download a free version of it to help design your layout. The free trial will only let you use up to 50 pieces unless you prefer to purchase the full version to help design your whole layout. It run's about $50.00.
Jerry
jt
Having troubles finding that post. Found the anyrail design that I did,but I am sure there was other's. Notice this is done on a 5x8 not 4x8.
(http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l499/jeborne/ovalloop22rand26r_zpsf4ea1f3b.jpg) (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/jeborne/media/ovalloop22rand26r_zpsf4ea1f3b.jpg.html)
Jerry
Found it!
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php/topic,22455.0.html
you might want to look at the series of layout plan books atlas has out. there are many 4x8 designs in there.
jtw, here is another site that has 4 x 8 layouts and what kind and how many tracks are needed. This is just a sampling of some 4 x 8 plans. If you go to "thorstrains.net" you will see some others.
http://www.thortrains.net/marx/kdlayhoa.html
Hope this helps! Good luck with your layout!
Dear All,
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php/topic,12474.0.html
And Photo Too, of Full Maxx's 4' x 8' with 22"R and 18"R ovals.
Note 1: Jerry's drawing above uses 26"R and 22"R ovals, which is why it won't fit on a 4' x 8'.
Note 2: The Crossover's two main rail lines are not electrically isolated (separated) from one another.
They work a lot easier with DCC, no mods needed.
If used with (traditional analog) DC-Block Control
[for running 2 separate trains on 2 separate ovals with 2 separate power packs],
some rails and underside connection foils will need to be cut on the crossover.
Note 3: Beware of undesirable "S" curves on Thor Trains layouts.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Joe Satnik
Edit: Added Italics and 3rd note.
Edit: Corrected Jerry's name.
Joe, I don't understand why you say that running DC with these crossovers would need modifications to work properly. You are not changing the direction of the loco when running it through the crossover and aren't most (at least the meant to run on DC) turnouts, insulated turnouts?
Please explain your reasoning so I can understand, if you would not mind.
Thank you Joe.
on dc, you'd want the two loops isolated from each other. the ez track crossovers do not have gaps so you have to make your own. in addition, there are pcb connections on the underside of the crossover which must be cut. this was all explained on here a couple of years back. do a search and you'll probably find the thread.
Jeff, can't you just tell me why you would need them isolated on DC? I don't see how the polarity on the rails is being changed, unless I am completely missing something.
Thank you.
you are missing something. on dc you need to be able to control your trains separately, by connecting different sections of track to different controllers. you do this by isolating sections of track, and connecting each section to a switch which allows it to connect to either of two (or more) controllers. that's block control. connecting the entire layout to just one power supply without the use of block control means everything on the rails responds to the controller, with no independent control.
even in its most primitive form, a dc layout running two trains on different loops would still need to have the loops isolated from each other for independent control.
Book #12 - A good reference for DC Block wiring:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_sacat=0&_from=R40&_nkw=complete+atlas+wiring&_sop=15
Thank you both for getting back to me.
Yes Jeff I understand about DC block control and how it works and have already said I have read up on it and planned on implementing at least 2 blocks it in my next layout, this was on a separate topic here. You were posting on the same topic where I mentioned this, the one where the fella said he likes using Bachmann SD40-2s.
I have previously seen a great YouTube video on block wiring-a Canadian fella, running N scale.
And Joe thanks for the reference material, but I have what I need. This included reviewing a previous posting here on the topic of block wiring, that you and Mr. Ward were a part of. Mr. Ward seemed to disagree with a statement you had made Joe with regard to the common rail and reversing the direction switch on the respective power packs.
What I am not getting is why the above pictured layout would need to be blocked in order to run on DC? I did not see anyone mention wanting to run 2 trains independently, at the same time, during this current discussion. I only see a question about having 2 ovals and possibly a cross over.
Am I still missing a reason to have to isolate the 2 loops in the above pictured layout? I am not being wise, just trying to be sure I am not misunderstanding what is necessary and what is not, for what has been asked here.
Thank you gentlemen.
The layout will work fine without isolating the inner and outer loops if you only want to run one train (or two trains, one on each loop) with one power pack. They would need to be isolated if you want to control each loop/train with a dedicated power pack for independent control.
PS Jeff
I would like to point out, that when I posted my question to Joe @ 9:08:08 PM, it was in response to his un edited posting, which I now see was modified somewhat since my question and yours and his responses. Please see the editions for what Joe changed in his original post. I point out, in his original post, where he also confused you for Jerry he did not include the italics with (for running 2 separate trains on 2 separate ovals with 2 separate power packs). (What is up Joe with making the edits btw?)
It was based on Joe's original post, that I had asked my question about the need for blocking.
I can only guess, you pointed out I was missing something, based on your reviewing Joe's edited post, not his original one.
My original question still stands: if running the above pictured layout on DC and only running 1 train at once, off one power source, is it necessary to have the loops isolated?
Thanks.
Thank you Thomas for your assistance.
What confused me about what Joe said, was his original post did not include the wording about running 2 trains from 2 different power sources. This is why I did not understand why he said blocking was needed and why I asked my original question. I don't know why he went back and edited his original statement after my question (kinda like a politician or baseball player caught on steroids :D) which has led unfortunately to all this back and forth with Mr. Ward.
I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question concisely and understanding why I was asking what I was asking.
thank you guys for all the help.
Quote from: jbrock27 on July 24, 2013, 12:32:34 PM
PS JeffMy original question still stands: if running the above pictured layout on DC and only running 1 train at once, off one power source, is it necessary to have the loops isolated?
Thanks.
jb-
The two loops do not need to be isolated if you are running a single train on DC, or if you are running one train on DC on each of the two loops. In the second case, both trains would run the same direction unless you have physically reversed the polarity of the wiring inside of one of the locomotives.
On occasion, answers on this site get more complicated than is strictly necessary. I'm as guilty of that as anyone. I believe this happens because we expect to see complicated questions which we think require complicated answers or we are trying to cover all of the possibilities when the original post isn't explicit enough. We should probably ask for clarification more often instead of trying to imagine what the posters mean when they aren't clear.
-- D
Thanks for chipping in Doc.
It was Thomas who finally got me the answer after all the shenanigans caused by Satnik's first post, when he left out certain statements, which led me to ask my question for clarification. Bc what he first said, did not make sense to me. For some reason after I posted my question, Satnik went back and revised his post. Only he can answer why he went and did that. In the meantime, Mr. Jeff Ward appeared more than happy to enforce that I was missing something, when in reality, it was Satnik's original post that was missing the something-the words he later added. Satnik's only response to me to in whole mess was to tell me to go get a book on block wiring-CLASSY!
Someone needs another HUG!
Yes, I would really, really like that.
Hey, my birthday is coming up-I expect to get some nice, heartfelt birthday wishes....
Re: the above-it's my low tolerence for b...
Quote from: jbrock27 on July 24, 2013, 12:32:34 PM
PS Jeff
My original question still stands: if running the above pictured layout on DC and only running 1 train at once, off one power source, is it necessary to have the loops isolated?
Thanks.
in theory, if you only ever planned on running one train at a time, you wouldn't need any gaps.
as a practical matter, it is a good idea to plan for the running of that second train and put your insulators in when you lay the track, in order to avoid the hassle of ripping up your track to put them in later. it is better to have them and not need them, than to need them and not have them.
I see the wisdom in that Jeff. Thank you.
Quote from: jward on July 24, 2013, 10:32:01 PM
Quote from: jbrock27 on July 24, 2013, 12:32:34 PM
PS Jeff
My original question still stands: if running the above pictured layout on DC and only running 1 train at once, off one power source, is it necessary to have the loops isolated?
Thanks.
in theory, if you only ever planned on running one train at a time, you wouldn't need any gaps.
as a practical matter, it is a good idea to plan for the running of that second train and put your insulators in when you lay the track, in order to avoid the hassle of ripping up your track to put them in later. it is better to have them and not need them, than to need them and not have them.
Just cut the rail, no need to take any track up in order to provide gaps.
Good point Roger. I have an X-Acto razor saw on hand for just those occasions. I have yet to make the layout with the blocks that I plan and when I do, I will be using the Atlas insulated rail joiners to make my isolations. In the event I goof something up once everything is locked down, I have the razor to help fix those boo boos. Or I guess, I could also use my Dremel tool for those fixes, just have to be sure to wear eye protection.
Roger-
Cutting the rails is the only way to go for installed track. Many folks slip a
piece of styrene into the gap and then trim it to the rail contour and paint
it. It becomes invisible.
-- D
Considering you have to be able to walk around it to work on things, a 4x8 actually takes up a lot more space than most people think. Cutting the 4x8 up to make an 'around the wall' shelf type layout may actually give you more operational possibilities, and allow for larger radius curves.
Check out some of the Kalmbach books for around the room ideas, you might be pleasantly surprised.
Len
Quote from: Len on July 25, 2013, 12:25:00 PM
Considering you have to be able to walk around it to work on things, a 4x8 actually takes up a lot more space than most people think. Cutting the 4x8 up to make an 'around the wall' shelf type layout may actually give you more operational possibilities, and allow for larger radius curves.
Check out some of the Kalmbach books for around the room ideas, you might be pleasantly surprised.
Len
I agree 100% with Len. A 4 x 8 takes up way more space than people think and is, in my not so humble experience, the worst use of a sheet of 4 x 8 plywood.
A 4 x 8 plywood sheet requires a minimum of 24" all around for very cramped access, 36 inches is better. If you place the 4 x 8 against one wall, you cannot reach much more than 30 inches into the 4 x 8 so the rear centre is in accessable. If you place it in a corner, access is even more restricted.
Beside, a good model railroad does not need mindless tail chasing, that gets boring really fast. Follow Len's advice and check out track plans on variations of the 4 x 8. Sadly, even MR continues to push the 4 x 8, especially around Christmas.
Quote from: rogertra on July 25, 2013, 01:36:46 PM
Beside, a good model railroad does not need mindless tail chasing, that gets boring really fast. Follow Len's advice and check out track plans on variations of the 4 x 8. Sadly, even MR continues to push the 4 x 8, especially around Christmas.
True, of course, but I suppose that's something that someone new to model railroading can get up and running fairly quickly, don't you think? People don't buy train sets--even good Bachmann sets--at Christmas with the expectation that they won't have their railroad running until Easter. Don't you think it's important for "newbies" to get something operating quickly so they don't lose interest?
Besides, if the "bug" bites 'em really good, after a few weeks of continuous loop running over the holidays, they can cut that 4 x 8 sheet of plywood into pieces and use it in the construction of a more sophisticated layout.
Incidentally, good point about how much space a 4 x 8 really takes up. Imagine how much more space would be required if someone followed the old, old suggestion of setting up on a ping-pong table!
Roger and J Bar-
You both make some excellent points. I firmly believe that a shelf layout is superior to the 4x8 in almost every case, but table layouts do have their place. If nothing else, they may be the only alternative to not having a layout at all. So let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
As J Bar points out, 4x8s get railroads running quickly and the plywood is reusable. Another advantage is that table layouts, or at least some table layouts, can be hoisted up to the rafters in the garage or basement or folded and stored when they need to be. Shelf layouts which are in the way are most likely to stay in the way. Sometimes a 4x8 is all a model rail can swing financially. Or maybe a modeler lives in an apartment which prohibits attaching anything to the walls. Also, there's a huge stock of 4x8 track plans which new modelers can consult so they don't agonize over an original one too long. Last, a table layout doesn't require any fancy carpentry skills as might be the case when building a shelf layout, things like providing enough rigid support and making sure adjacent pieces line up correctly and stay there.
Would I choose to build a 4x8 for myself? At this point in my life, no, but I've built them in earlier times. And the layout I recently built for my grandson is a 4x8 because that's what fits with his family's home and lifestyle.
-- D
A 4x8 can also be put on rollers like I had mine.
I think it's sad to discourage newbies from doing a 4x8 layout for a lot of the reasons mentioned above. It's a great way for a person to get his feet wet when learning about scenery, wiring, and track planning.
I have to say I agree with JBJ, Doc and T-Squared.
designing a 4x8 is an art form. and a well designed 4x8 can have enough operating interest to provide years of enjoyment. if you doubt this checque out this site:
http://s145079212.onlinehome.us/rr/bcsj/index.html