# 4x8 falls mill layout



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

I have been working on this for about 3 weeks on and off . Mostly on weekend when i can . Anything that anybody has built this or done something close to it let me know if any tricks or secrets to tell would be good. Frame is done / foam is on / outside radias is done and cork roadbed / made the run around and working on the switches on her right now . Thats my update so far . Using atlas code 100 and flex track.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Mark

Put some pics of your progress here on this thread. Our
members will be glad to offer any advice or suggestions.

Don


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

mark olmstead said:


> I have been working on this for about 3 weeks on and off . Mostly on weekend when i can . Anything that anybody has built this or done something close to it let me know if any tricks or secrets to tell would be good. Frame is done / foam is on / outside radias is done and cork roadbed / made the run around and working on the switches on her right now . Thats my update so far . Using atlas code 100 and flex track.





DonR said:


> Mark
> 
> Put some pics of your progress here on this thread. Our
> members will be glad to offer any advice or suggestions.
> ...



Yes, it looks great so far? :dunno:

Thanks, I have not used this in a long time,
:ttiwwop:


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)




----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Very nice compact layout. You got a lot of switching
capability built into a very small space. You can
even increase that by nating a team track with
more than one industry on it. 

I see a crossing used in a spur situation often. I like it
but couldn't figure a way to do it on my layout. 
Looks good on yours.

Don


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

Looks like you're off to a good start. 
Agree with Don nice layout for the space. 
Good continuous running and switching as well but with room for scenery.

Magic


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

That is a very nice track plan for a 4x8 space.

Take your time, do your best work and you could end up with a real little gem of a railroad.

Good luck!


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

I've seen that track plan a lot over the years. Nice to see someone finally build it.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

I had seen the layout plan before somewhere... Not sure where I had seen it but I know that I had seen it before...

Nice but is it on the back of the truck? Mobile table, eh?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

There aren't any tricks to building that layout specifically, but probably several dozen generic ones that would apply. A read through this forum will reveal most of them.

The number one trick: take your time with your trackwork, and do it right. Smooth and kink free. Shoddy trackwork --> poor operations --> endless frustration --> fed up with hobby.


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

*layout update*

check out new pictures


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

*layout update*

more pictures to check out


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

*layout update*

more pics to enjoy with


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

*layout update*

more pics to see part 4


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

XXXDeletedXXX


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

*layout update*

more pics part 5


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

Looking good. :smilie_daumenpos:

You have a long way to go, but in the end you will never be done.
And if you do you might be like some and rip it down and build another.


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

mark olmstead said:


> check out new pictures


On the second picture, the inside track entering the turnout. Looks like you've got a nasty kink.

Did you first draw the center-lines for the entire plan before starting to lay track?

Kinks can wreck havoc.


----------



## mark olmstead (Jul 12, 2012)

yes in the picture it looks to be a nasty kink but after running my box car back and forth it did not derail . if you look at the cork it will give you that look but it is not that way . yes i did draw out the track plans on the layout.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

I can see these nails used to hold the tracks down. TBH, it is darn ugly. Do you have suitable nails (spikes) to use? 

Were the tracks soldered together? Just curious....

Other than that, it is looking cool.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

bluenavigator said:


> I can see these nails used to hold the tracks down. TBH, it is darn ugly. Do you have suitable nails (spikes) to use?


For a quick fix, paint the nailheads a flat black to blend in with the ties.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Mark

The hobby shop should have spikes made for attaching track to foam and the
like. They come in black. You simply push them into the foam.

How well are the nails holding in the foam. I used the spikes on Homasote
and it holds them tightly.

The tracks are looking good.

Don


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

This is the site that you got the plan from? 

http://www.layoutvision.com/id48.html

Other than that, may I make a suggestion to make it more interesting? Not that you have to do this part. On the double bridge, why not raise outside track a inch or two higher than inside bridge?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Yes, it is a LayoutVision design. The "Copyright Byron Henderson" on the plans indicates that. Maybe he didn't get it from there, but that was the original source.

Going back through some of the comments:
1) Elevation changes on a small 4x8 like this are problematic because there really isn't room to do it right. A 2% grade, which is already pretty steep, requires 50 linear inches just to change elevation 1". That would just barely fit on the outer oval.

2) You may want to rethink your response to the kink that was pointed out. Unless you're absolutely certain that every piece of equipment you own now or in the future can handle that kink, singly and in longer trains, go back and fix it. That's exactly what I was talking about in my first post. I made the same mistake on my previous layout, and I never stopped regretting it.

3) Adhesive latex caulk is an alternative to track nails that you might want to consider.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

I am confused by this comment - 2% grade, which is already pretty steep.

I thought that 3% grade is okay. Am I wrong? 

Just learned how grade was calculated. From what I understand, 1% grade mean 1 inch rise at every 100 inches. 

Does that mean 1% is the maximum grade?


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

YOUR maximum grade will be determined by what locomotives you want to climb that grade, how many cars you want them to pull, and how much the cars weigh. When the loco's wheels start slipping, your grade is to steep or you are hauling too many cars. Also, your maximum grade will be less on curved track than on straight track, because the curve adds rolling resistance.

If you already have some trains and track you can put them on a flat board, hook up a transformer and try elevating the board a little at a time to see when the wheels start slipping.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

Oh okay, will test by jacking up my table's one end up with my floor jack and see how steep my locomotives can climb 

Hummm... where did I put my level gauge at...


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

There are other considerations to a layout's maximum grade than just pulling power. On an earlier layout, I had a 3% grade, which wasn't a big deal when I was running short trains and small locos. Then I got an Alco PA; a long loco with long, 3 axle trucks, and a 2-8-2 Mikado steamer.

Either of them should have pulled my entire car fleet up a 3% grade, but low and behold, neither worked. At the bottom of the grade, both locos were prone to digging their front coupler into the ties as they started up the grade. At the top, both would "pop a wheelie", where the front wheels (pilot truck, in the case of the Mike) would come off the track and derail, because the rest of the loco was still on the incline. Also, several of my longer trains would come uncoupled as they came on or off the grade.

Extensive track rework and some coupler maintenance eventually solved these problems, but it was a long, painful process. My new layout is limited to 2% with significant easements at each end of the grade.

So, 3% might work, or it might not, depending on what you're trying to run.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Just to reinforce what CTValleyRR said...

Easements are really important with grades. An easement is a gradual transition from the level track to the maximum slope -- at both ends. When you are calculating the grade you are not including the easements. So, if you calculate that you need, say 10 ft of track to get from one level to another at x%, then the total run of your incline will be significantly longer than 10 ft to allow for the easements. I do not know a magic formula for calculating how much more track the easements will require. That depends in part on how long your locos and cars are. But it is safe to say that the steeper the incline, the longer the easements must be.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Very important point, CTvalley.

MtRR75, I was writing while you were posting, 
sorry I'm repetitive of your post.

It is necessary to begin and end a grade with transition grades, else
the problems he describes. Let your flex track naturally flex test it
with locos and long cars, then
build your support. It's also a good idea to avoid track joints at
either end of the grade.

Don


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

bluenavigator said:


> Oh okay, will test by jacking up my table's one end up with my floor jack and see how steep my locomotives can climb
> 
> Hummm... where did I put my level gauge at...


Good Point! Make sure that your track is level before you start -- not the table -- the track.

One problem with this method is that you can't test curved track this way, because as the track curves the track's grade decreases. So whatever grade you decide that you can do on straight track, you should reduce that some if you are planning curved grades -- again no set formula -- I'm guessing, maybe 1% less should be safe.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

Right now, my table has 22" curves and 24" straights connected together into an oval loop. That is the largest oval that can be fit in 4' x 6' table. Of course, it will not go high like 3 inches because there is no room for that long track to raise to such height. 

At moment, nothing is being permanent yet. 

In future, I am going to expand that table into 4' x 10' by adding 4' x 4' table. Also, it is possible to add another part of the table to expand the table into L or U shape.


----------

