8 x 8 OO layout feasible? (2024)

Hi all

Just wondering if a maximum of 8x8 would work for a OO gauge layout?

I only ask as picked up a peco compendium of track plans there were 3 OO plans of 7x5 or 8x5 but wasn't sure if they are possible. Might be able to stretch things to 10x8 or 12x8.

Running wise looking at either a small non busy line or a heritage line so thought a loco and 2 to 3 carriages at most. Would that work?

It's very feasible, but perhaps the first thing to be sure of: is that the total space, including any operating/access space *outside* the layout, or are you thinking of that as the "train space". which will still need operating or access space outside it?

It will vary with location, but almost always with layouts of this size it is best to have the main operating area inside the layout.
It works better for the layout and the owner, both.
At that size a four coach train should be quite possible, with a tank engine or smaller tender loco (to 4-4-0, 2-6-0)

Are you happy with multiple levels and gradients, or would you prefer a single-level design?
Lots of choices to hone in on the best us of the space *for you.*

Chris.

Was thinking of a inside well. If it was 8x8 was thinking of 2 ft wide boards to leave a 4x4 well in the middle. Or something like it.

Would prefer single level design as just can't seem to get my head around gradients and multi levels and not sure my woodwork skills would help either.

Layout i saw is called Poppy Hollow to Barley Dean, is 8x7 and has a well in the middle.

I found a picture, on page 18, here:
http://flickread.com/website/pdf/56bdd10e935b7.pdf

It's origins date back to 1969, and the main feature I'd consider adding to bring it nearer to modern thought would be a fiddle yard or hidden train storage loops.
As shown it really can only handle 1 passenger and 1 goods train without starting to get over-full.
The loop at Barley Dean is a goods, not passenger, loop allowing the sidings to be worked by both "up" and "down" goods trains.

I could get 2-4 trains extra storage without turning the rural idea into a "as much track as you can cram in" layout.
a variety of arrangements are possible (some requiring more building skill than others) while leaving the existing stations largely alone.
(Poppy Hollow might need to move right, or right and forward, and the sidings there might need reversing.)

Chris.

Hi Chris

How and where would you fit the fiddle yard?

The other plans i like are in same book, numbers 11 and 12. Plans 13 and 18 i like too but not sure how best to fit into my space.

A point just in the tunnel on the right leading to some sidings in front of Barley Mow station...

I reckon two passenger trains, though, Chris, you could run one non stop through BM station... Or put a (short) platform on the loop at BM and move the signal box alongside the station building...

I'm not keen on either station track plans, though I do like the feeling of space the whole layout has. I'd look at some of Iain Rice's books on light railways for better station plans...

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/LIGHT-RAILWA ... 9602980/bd

(Look around and you'll get it cheaper.)

barney121e wrote:Hi Chris

How and where would you fit the fiddle yard?

Lots of possibles
1) bring top station forward and Rt a little, give it a raised town and station building and under that removable sectioned scenery two tracks each 2 trains long leaving and joining via tunnels or bridges away from the station area.

2) on the left side, make some or all of the 4ft space non-scenic. Top station again shifting right a little.
A 4ft 4-track traverse would be possible, or a range of other fiddle yards possibly easier to construct.
I do have something a bit unconventional in mind, but I have a tendency to that sort of thing.
4ft is ambitious. 3ft 6in train lengths would be easier. Still 3 57ft coaches and a tank engine, say 9-10 wagons and a brake van, for short wheelbase.

Chris.

I'll have a look at the other designs a bit later.

barney121e wrote:
The other plans i like are in same book, numbers 11 and 12. Plans 13 and 18 i like too but not sure how best to fit into my space.

My take, and only that.

11, to quote CJF "dates back to early O gauge practice". It is very toy-like, but none the worse, if that is whats you are aiming for!

12, is about having two trains running round and round as a major aim, and using one side of the layout for the best possible station and yard, with the other side non-scenic, set up to supply alternate train capacity

13, would be hard to do in 8ft x 8ft. Designing for 6ft trains would be possible, but lots would have to be sacrificed to get that feature. Probably any station!

18, is "trains in a landscape", design with not that much in the way of capacity or operation, once you mentally start to put trains on it.
A train running into the top "lay-by road" from either direction appears to have no good way out of it.
A simple modern image branch line with an attached preserved line operating out of a former bay platform could probably be arranged to offer more variety of operation than this. (including big steam engines operating tender first.)

Chris

Thanks Chris

I just find track planning seems rather hit or miss for me, mainly miss. I usually do n gauge but looking at oo as it is bigger and easier to do scratchbuilding buildings.

If it makes any difference, my interest is dmus, emus and diesels.

b308 wrote: I'd look at some of Iain Rice's books on light railways for better station plans...

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/LIGHT-RAILWA ... 9602980/bd

(Look around and you'll get it cheaper.)

Grabbed one... Didn't know about this book.
Rice's designs are undoubtedly smoother and more accurate to railway practice.
Does he demand more space, or offer less railway in a given space as a result of that?
At least sometimes, I think, but that's all part of "choices, choices"

Chris

Emettman wrote:

b308 wrote: I'd look at some of Iain Rice's books on light railways for better station plans...

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/LIGHT-RAILWA ... 9602980/bd

(Look around and you'll get it cheaper.)

Grabbed one... Didn't know about this book.
Rice's designs are undoubtedly smoother and more accurate to railway practice.
Does he demand more space, or offer less railway in a given space as a result of that?
At least sometimes, I think, but that's all part of "choices, choices"

Chris

Where did you get your book?

Chris

His plans tend to be a railway in the scenery rather than a train set so more to prototype. There are several in the book around the 10x8 size which could be reduced. I bought the book when it first came out...