Quote from: Ralph S on March 20, 2026, 01:05:04 AMWasn't expecting that video would go viral on this topic, but since its part of my learning experience, I'll add this comment.
J, sorry I hijacked your image and redrew it to show my existing 4x8 layout.  I wanted to have 3 loops but didn't quite make it.  If that video used larger than 4x8 then here's my 4x8 using only EZ Track and Fleischmann 18-degree curve switches.  I'm leaning toward that fact that the raised track area is actually above the existing 4x8.  Therefore, produces the illusion that all of the video's layout is on a 4x8.  If this is true, then my new section I should definitely create a upper and lower level in order to obtain additional space for my layout.  I alluded to that when I suggested I put in a helix type riser to an upper level.
Diagram Note: Below the black line is the second 4x8 which I'm questioning.

The plan is on a 4x8 table. The fact that it has an upper level and hidden trackage does not change the table size. But it allows you to do more with the space you have. I can relate to this having limited space myself. And if you are going to add an upper level in limited space a helix is a bad idea that will eat up half your 4x8. But if you do as the layout in the video did and build a ramp, or as I am doing and build a mountain grade, you can gain elevation in a way that doesn't bury half your railroad.

BTW, I am not trying to hijack your thread. I have alluded to my currently under construction railroad, which will have two seperate and independent decks with a connecting track between them all in a 5 1/2x 10 space. I will post photos of it when construction reaches the point when trains can run. In my own thread, of course.

I have found the non sound Bachmann decoders do not support CV5 and CV6, the max  and mid voltage settings. But you should be able to adjust those on your FA2. I can't give you any specific values to enter. What I do to speed match is to time each locomotive over a fixed course, then adjust one  of the locomotives to match the other by comparing the times. For example, if at top speed A takes 10 seconds but B takes 12, I'd start by lowering the value of CV5 by 20 percent. That would get you close, and you can make further small adjustments from there. Once you have CV5 done, do the same with CV6 after running both locomotives at half speed over the course. My course is a 6 foot section of track which corresponds to 1/10 of a mile in HO scale, making it easy to estimate the scale mph the locomotives are running.

That one actually appears doable. I assume the New Haven is a branch line and not the main? Otherwise the plant shifter would have to come out onto the main for headroom.

Quote from: trainman203 on March 10, 2026, 09:02:58 PMI don't know how this will reproduce in this form, but this Sanborn map is a view of some long-gone very compact street running switching trackage in my hometown, reminiscent of the 4x8 under discussion. The T&NO comes in from the left. It crosses the vertically running MP several times. The T&NO was in this location at least 20 years before the MP arrived.

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g4014nm.g033751952/?sp=9&st=image&r=0.346,0.184,0.575,0.669,0

Looking at this map raises some questions. There has to be an interesting story here. My understanding is that the later railroad to arrive must pay for any necessary junctions to the existing railroad, and for a tower to control things if necessary. Could the T&NO have purposely added more industrial spurs in order to increase the cost of the MoPac coming to town? How was the issue of T&NO fouling the MP line to serve these industries handled? Did they have to get permission to foul the MP? Or were speed low enough and traffic light enough that visual right of way would suffice?

As Len has stated DCC Onboard are non sound decoders. What you describe is the decoder doing what it is supposed to do. 

A 4X8 is a 4X8, but not all 4x8s are created equal. If your space is limited, you have to think outside the box. I prefer working on a compact layout like this, rather than around the walls. For one thing I am not a flatlander. I grew up around Appalachian railroading, and prefer winding railroads to long straigntaways. I am, by choice, working on a two deck 5x10 as we speak. I used the expanded area to scale up two smaller track plans I built and enjoyed running. I was able to use 22 and 24 inch curves instead of the 18 inch ones a 4x8 would force me to use. My big Alcos will have a place to stretch their legs, and mountain grades to climb.

To me, the thing that the guy in the video has accomplished is that he's taken the space many so called experts write off, and built a convincing belt line type railroad. These were pretty common in industrialized areas, where their purpose was to gather cars for the nig railroads they connected with. often they were owned by a group of larger railroads, and served as a neutral terminal road that kept the big guys from fighting each other in the streets over the traffic generated.

Quote from: trainman203 on March 06, 2026, 08:20:06 PMUntil I see an actual track plan of the Sioux town layout with dimensions, I'll never believe that layout is a 4 x 8.  The perspectives in looking at distance views on that layout are just too long. I am a retired architect with some art training too, and I believe I can speak with some authority about this.  At 8:24 is one of several overall views that cannot possibly be on a 4 x 8 surface.

He has used Atlas Snap Switches and some very sharp flex track curves. That said, I was able to duplicate the track plan in Anyrail with 18 inch radius curves. expanding it to 4 1/2 x 9 allowed the use of Atlas 4s. This railroad could not be built with EZ track in 4x8 because of the difference in geometry between the Atlas and Bachmann switches.

This would be a non sound GP38-2 right? SOundtraxx will be of no help here.

The lights shouldn't have been flickering on a DCC locomotive. The light function my have burned out.


The usual default reset is CV8 at a value of 8 but this doesn't apply to all decoders.

Have you considered a refinement of that basic plan, where the branchline actually branches off the oval and climbs above the mainline to a town? The area under the town could hold a small two track staging yard so you could have an eastbound and a westbound train laying over there. The visible side of the mainline would be the interchange with the branch, with cars spotted there for pickup by the mainline trains. The town area would make a good stub ended terminal, like many shortlines had, and due to its elevation over the mainline you'd get alot more precious space for industries.

How many industries you have depends on what industries you want to use. A coal mine will take up alot more room than a small factory but will generate more traffic. The size of the buildings you want to use matters alot. Off hand i'd say you should be able to get at least 6 in that space if you're creative.

It seems counterintuitive, but you can fit more in if you don't use those 18" radius "standard" switches and opt for #4s and #5s instead. In fact, other than making loops of track for train set running, I can;t think of a good reason to use the "standards" at all.

This video shows one man's solution in a 4x8 space: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxcpLD6f-sc

I can't speak for NCE because I use DIgitrax. But i've had a similar experience with programming Bachmann decoders, and for me the workaround is to put a 1000 ohm resistor across the rails of the programming track. I've soldered the ends of the resistor to alligator clips to make it easy to hook up as not all decoders require its use. Try it on your system and see if it helps.

Where is your layout located that temperature would be a factor?

Is this a wood kit? It doesn't look like the Plasticville version.

I agree with their usefulness in tight situations like that  crossover. That is why I invested in the jigs to make my own. My new layout will have 8 of them, including one in a crossover as you described. Another place they come in handy is extending a passing track into a curve. When you have a single track mainline, you live and die by the length of your passing tracks. If using curved switches gains you an extra carlength or two it's worth the investment.

Years ago a number of manufacturers offered 18-22 inch radius curved switches, but I haven't seen them new in a while. 18-22 corresponds to the two most common radii in sectional track. The biggest problem I see with the currently available curved switches is that they are of uncommon radii, or degrees of curvature and thus do not work easily with sectional track. This isn't a problem for more advanced modelers who tend to use flexible track cut to fit the situation, but for a beginner trying to keep things simple it can be frustrating.




https://www.ebay.com/itm/187840650261?msockid=35b3f0e29a8a603a274be6339bcd6188