# *UPDATE! LAYOUT ASSEMBLED!* Opinions on 4x12 Layout Track Plan



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

This is my current plan for my 4x12 layout. Outside are 22 inch radius curves, and the inside are 18 inch. Tell me your opinions/suggestions of it! 
It is just for fun; I'm not modeling anything specific. Building planning will come after track planning is finished. Its not supposed to be 100% prototypical.

*UPDATE*: The board is finished, and track laid! :smilie_daumenpos:
Trains run pretty good! I still have to insulate the outer from inner loops with an eletrical block and plastic rail joiners, but other than that its lookin' good!


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

BTW All track is Bachmann EZ track with Nickel Silver Rail.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

It's really hard to comment on someone else's layout when you don't know what they want or what they're trying to achieve.

I'm assuming that you like railfanning -- that is, watching trains go around. Because there isn't a lot else for them to do. Which is fine, if it's what you want.

Your locos also always travel in the same direction (clockwise or counter clockwise). Again, just an observation. It may not matter to you.

You have to back trains into your sidings or you will bury your loco. Depending on the direction of travel, this will make either one or two of your sidings effectively unusable, unless you intend to park entire trains and leave them there.

And how many locos / trains will be on the layout at once?

All that said, I'd throw it together and run it for awhile. Then you will discover for yourself whether this meets your needs or not. 4 x 12 is a pretty good space -- if you have access on all 4 sides. If not, you will have trouble reaching the back.

And if you DO have an aisle all around, consider making a doughnut shaped layout around the perimeter of that 8x16 space -- you'll get twice as much layout in about the same footprint.


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

Hello, and thanks for the reply!

I intend to run passenger trains on the outer loop going counter- clockwise, and freight trains on the inner loop going clockwise. this way the sidings will be in use. There will be a loco repair shop and a warehouse on the spurs on the right side of the layout, and on the spur on the outside loop there will be a platform station. All of the other building plans will come later. 

Thanks again! :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

I like it.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

*flat land*

Well you asked for comments...
Nice to have that much space to work with.
Looks like all flat land to me. Why not raise some parts?
Can you reach inside the back of the tunnel to clear derailments?
Try to eliminate the S curves with a short piece of straight track to transition from left hand curve to RH curve.
The inner yard seems to be connected to the outside oval, how will an inside freight engine use the yard?


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

It wont be flat land. There will be many parts raised, however, I'm not familiar with my track program enough. For the back of the tunnel, I will lay it as nice as I can so there wont be any derailments. If there are any, The back of the tunnel will be open, and I can reach my hand around the side of the layout. 

I dont really know what you meant about the 'S' curve.. 

If you are talking about the curve in the inner loop on the left- hand side, that will include built- up land inside of it anyways.

Thanks!


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

18" radius track with an S-curve makes longer cars look a little funny, toy-like, as they snake through. They also slow a train down, friction on wheels with a long train. 
If you accidentally put 18" radius s-curve on a grade (like I did) it severely limits the number of cars a weak locomotive can pull.
So, on the left side, the inner loop, going clockwise toward the tunnel, the train is on RH curves and transitions to LH curves. Put a straight track in between, and adjust the rest to make up for it.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Nothing wrong with just watching trains run. That is pretty much how my layout operates. I have one dead end yard to change from mainlines to branch line railroads and depending upon direction of travel on the mains, the train must also be backed in before switching to the branch line.

A whole train can also be parked there to allow others to run. There is minor track switching operations in the station area, and crossovers located at spots where I need them to go around a waiting train at the station, or to switch mainline tracks.

Mine is geared towards German and Austrian passenger service between secondary towns and villages. It is not meant to depict a major rail terminal such as Frankfurt or München, or even Ulm.

I like your trackplan. It looks great for running trains.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

You need "a connection" (i.e., crossovers) between the two loops, to shift trains around.

Not sure I get the need for the diamond.
Instead, delete the diamond and run the two "inner spur tracks" from the inside loop.
Turn the single-track spur (at the bottom) into a siding, turnouts on both ends.

_Or..._
Eliminate the spur on the bottom.
Straighten out the inner loop (with crossovers at the bottom).
Enlarge "the yard" at the inside of the layout.
Instead of the yard tracks parallel to the inner loop, "angle" them slightly for "variation".


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

I like this style of layout. I am a railfan type who loves folded loops where I get to stand in the middle and be surrounded by terrain and backdrop. I feel immersed that way. Limits operations often, a valid criticism.

Also, it's essentially 'roundy-round', and has tiers and nested curves mostly at the ends...at least, mine does. It takes some doing to make it look more realistic because you have to break up the tiered lines a bit.

Don't forget...I like this. It's how I have made my last two layouts...around the room, folded loop, and I get to stand in the middle of it all and enjoy train scenes and sounds.

The wider you can make the curves, the more potential you have to run later/larger rolling stock and locomotives. Most of us end up wandering a bit from our initial loves, and we find that we have limited our ability to 'expand' by having curves that are below 20" radius. Just wanted to throw that out there. If there's any chance you can eke out another 8" of width/depth to your layout, you can expand those curves...some.

Last observation from me, a lesson learned two layouts ago; avoid long tunnels. The one running along the back keeps your "I wanna see trains run on my loop layout" hidden too long IMO. Remove the leftmost two feet at least. Move that western portal to the right a fair bit. Your choice of course.


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

This is an updated plan based on your guys' responses. Is this one improved? Thanks alot! :smilie_daumenpos:
Edit: I have yet to update the tunnel system.


----------



## gregc (Apr 25, 2015)

how many trains do you expect to have on the layout at one time? you mentioned a passenger and a freight. Only two? Where do you park one while running the other?

you added the cross-over so that a train can run on both loops. Do you need a sidings so that one train can get around the other when on the same loop?

do you plan on hiding trains in the tunnels? should there be a siding on the tunnel tracks so that the mainline track is not blocked?

additional spurs at least allow cars to be moved between spurs attached to different points (loops?) on the mainline.

i just read that ovals on rectangles look better is angled a little instead of centered.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I liked your first plan better. It had more visual interest.

Remember, though, all we're doing is telling you what we think. At the end of the day, this layout only has to satisfy one person: you.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

HexTrains36 said:


> This is an updated plan based on your guys' responses. Is this one improved? Thanks alot! :smilie_daumenpos:
> Edit: I have yet to update the tunnel system.


Bleh. The first one was far more interesting, IMHO.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

*how about this*

This is fun, we get to design layouts and someone else has to spend the money


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I agree with J Albert. Why would you not have the
ability to run your trains from one circuit to the other?
You have the room to make the connection with
the addition of turnouts.

There also seems to be sufficient space to allow
more industrial or yard spurs. These add more
opportunities for a variety of train operations.
If possible, add a passing siding. This makes 
it possible for a loco to get before or behind a car.

Don


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

well i liked your rail road. i also like the one dennis put up there as well. that one looks pretty good to me. hahahahahaha


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

sid said:


> well i liked your rail road. i also like the one dennis put up there as well. that one looks pretty good to me. hahahahahaha


Did I post the wrong one? I modified his original to link inner and outer, and made yard dedicated to inner loop.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

I like the second version better - the S curves are a bad thing and need to be avoided.

See attached for how I see a simple 4x12 double loop. This way you can run two trains and have some sidings to have possibility to do some work when you get bored. Or at the least have minimal space to store unused equipment.

Since you not doing permanent at this point things can be impoved later on as you get a better idea of what you want to do.

Good luck


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Tankist has the best suggestion yet.

It has the two ovals, but they are connected
so trains can move between them.

It has some spurs for switching and a passing
siding so loco can get either end of a car.

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

DonR said:


> Tankist has the best suggestion yet.
> 
> It has the two ovals, but they are connected
> so trains can move between them.
> ...


Yes but that eliminates the elevation difference that helps add visual I test to an otherwise bland track plan.

While I don't disagree with avoiding S curves, that doesn't mean you have to eliminate all curves except 180 fmdegree turns at the ends.

As someone said above, a short straight segment between the curve pieces will fix that.

As far as overhang and toy-like appearance, you need to come out of the "4 by x" box to fix that. You generally need curves about 4 times the length of your rolling stock to eliminate that problem, which means about 42" radius in HO scale for an 80' coach. That appearance is one of the sacrifices you have to be prepared to make if you insist on small radius curves.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Or use shorter coaches.

Because of space constraints in much European housing, coaches are made in 303mm lengths _and_ 263mm lengths. No, they are not prototypical, but if your curves aren't prototypical, the shorter coaches will fit right in and look much better on tighter radii if you don't have the real estate for 42" radius curves.

Nice to have that much room, but many here in the States don't even have that much room. 84" width is crazy size for most of us. Add in 6" for margin on both sides and why not just lay a 4x8 shortways for the curves.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

I agree with the visual interest added by that bubble on the inside top rail of the original plan, plus it allows the chance for a train to wander in and around the scenery. Just don't make the curves come back in so far, maybe only bring them back in by 30 degrees or so, add the straights before reversing direction again, and you should be able to run trains reliably through that.

Was narrow gauge ever considered here? I think I remember OP saying there wasn't a planned theme yet, but for tight spaces narrow gauge can add a lot. Looking at late 1800's or early 1900's, 40-foot narrow gauge coaches appear to have been common, and they look pretty decent on 18" curves. Even just going back to that time period all of the cars were shorter. Everything I'm looking at on both standard and narrow gauge for my layout will be around 40 foot or less.


----------



## lajrmdlr (Apr 25, 2014)

.....


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

*Layout Plan Update: 9/1/18*

I think this plan is pretty good. I went ahead and added the straights where you guys said, and even added some things that I plan to add in real life. I also changed up the track work a bit. The buildings have been measured and put in, and they fit pretty well. I have MANY more buildings, but will plan or that later. So how do you guys like it? Thanks! :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

I would still add a second crossover , that way you will have flexibility to not change direction of travel


----------



## lajrmdlr (Apr 25, 2014)

There's only 1 Xover between the 2 tracks. Once on one track, you'll have to back up the get to the other. Put another Xover to the right. Also, there's no yard. Add one to have a from/to MR.


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

I would add a second crossover, but the switches seem pretty pricey.. Thanks!


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Meh. Your first layout attempt was much more interesting to look at. Especially because this will be primarily a "railfanning" layout, I would think that a more complex trackplan than the Daytona 500 would be desireable. An you're wasting most of the inside space on the right side. But you have to do what you want. Build it and run it for a while and see if it meets your needs.


----------



## MLP (Aug 2, 2018)

Let me throw in another wrinkle that I am dealing with right now--you mention you plan to run passenger trains on the outer loop. What length cars and what radius turns do you plan? On my 4x 10.5 layout, I have 18inch radius curves going across the "4" ft section with 18 inch rad. I find that my passenger cars and even a couple locos will not negotiate those corners.


----------



## HexTrains36 (Aug 28, 2018)

*22 Inch*

The outer curves are 22 inch radius, and the inside are 18". Ive been told that 99% of HO Stock will work on 22", so thats what I got. It costs more money, but it's worth it for the more flexibility you get from it. I would recommend you get 22" too. 

Thanks! :smilie_daumenpos:

-Hex


----------

