The little layouts need to be featured

I agree with you on many points, but however, human nature is to look at the large and expensive and not the average everyday.  In the publishing world, this relates to the selling of magazines and advertising, which is how they stay in business.  I think I mentioned on this forum before the example of car magazines.  Have a car magazine that feature minivans, Ford Fusions, and Toyota Camrys that everyone drives on the cover and content of the edition, it will not leave the newsrack, or if an online publication, get minimal hits.  Feature a Ferrari, Porsche or a Corvette on the cover that 90% of the readers can't afford or have any legitimate use for, and the magazine can't stay on the shelves.  Same goes for boats, home improvement/landscaping, etc. 

The model train hobby is no different.  Unfortunately, most modelers - regardless of scale - don't want to read about a 4x8 or a single side wall switching layout that they can see at home everyday.  They would rather read about a basement filling layout and take some of the ideas from that layout and see if they can fit it in to their own world.

I'm the opposite. I like seeing what one can do with a small layout and am amazed when seeing pictures of areas, scenic, etc. Then find out it was all done in a 4X8 or 5X10 area. This gives me ideas and also suggestions to pass on to those that have a limited area to build a layout. Be surprised how many hesitate to get into, or move up to "O" scale because they think they need a bigger area.

Put me in for seeing more smaller layouts.

As I have noted many times over the 13+ years that I have been the editor of this magazine, I am willing, able, and very happy to include O gauge/O scale/O scale narrow gauge layouts of ANY size in the pages of OGR. The only requirements for featuring a layout in the magazine are that the layout be O gauge, O scale, or O narrow gauge, and that the layout include some distinctive features or aspects that are likely to interest and appeal to a majority of our readers (I know full well that it is impossible to satisfy everyone).

In our current Run 311 (April/May 2020) we present the first installment of a series of articles that describe the planning, building, detailing, and operation of an On30 layout that measures just 54" long by some two-feet wide. That layout is designed to be easily transported so it can be shared with the public, and thereby inspire others to consider our great hobby. The construction techniques used can also easily be applied to any size layout and any modeling scale.

There are a whole lot of terrific layouts out there that have not yet appeared in OGR or any other publication, and I suspect that the vast majority of them are what might be considered "small" for O gauge or O scale. I would be interested in seeing/considering as many of them as possible if the layout builder or owner is willing to share his or her accomplishments with the entire O gauge community.

I enjoy all layouts of whatever size, but since I am restricted to having a 4x8’ one, tips and ideas for making the most of small layouts are doubly appreciated. The new Run 311 just arrived in my mailbox on Thursday, and I am already enjoying reading about that small layout Allan referenced  here. 

Just to clarify in case, I didn't say I was against small layouts.  I am all for them, I was just explaining the reason why most publications may not feature them.

As I have mentioned several times in the past, the cover story on OGR Run 251 (Aug-Sep 2011) about the O Gauge Layout on a Door contest caught my eye in a long since closed LHS and was the first OGR edition I ever purchased.  It opened my eyes to O Gauge which I had always ignored, and that a basement filling layout wasn't the requirement for entry.  That and the frequent pictoral articles by Jim Policastro hooked me on O.

I joined the forum on August 2, 2011 .  

A track layout on an area of 2' x 16' is little for O gauge. Any area less and then you have to go to S scale/S gauge, or smaller.

Andrew

Hi Allan: I am glad that we have the Forum for a lot of us to show off our many smaller, less detailed layouts. But truthfully, 4'x8' or carpet layouts with little to no scenery or modern control systems really don't end up in magazines. Sorry.  

Just for those who didn't read it last month: the President of the TCA has asked for members to send photos and articles of postwar & prewar layouts to the TCAQ. 

IMO, layouts in a small space can be magnificent. Some of our Forum members have accomplished this by making beautiful dioramas with artful scenery and weathering that appears in their photos and videos. Arnold

4x8 or 5x9/10 is probably all the room I’ll ever have for O gauge, so I love seeing smaller layouts.  I lean toward traditional/toy train style but I like seeing them all.

A hijacked 4 X 8 space was all the real estate I could convince the CEO to let go. As is, I built it on top of three file cabinets that we use for all of our important papers. Actually the area over the cabinets is only 39" wide.

My first real layout in 30+ years and I'm having a ball. The forum has been a big part of the experience and enjoyment. As much as I want a bigger layout, I am realistic that at this time in our lives, this will have to do.

The layout is all 027 and packed with track and switches. I'm squeezing in scenery where I can. I can run two trains and do some switching which keeps me satisfied.

Love to see some props to smaller layouts.

I like to see large and small layouts in print and here on the Forum.  

I'm working on my 11x11 around the walls layout now.  

AmFleet , I participated in that door contest, was totally post war. But then it grew and grew some more!!

RSJB18 posted:

A hijacked 4 X 8 space was all the real estate I could convince the CEO to let go. As is, I built it on top of three file cabinets that we use for all of our important papers. Actually the area over the cabinets is only 39" wide.

My first real layout in 30+ years and I'm having a ball. The forum has been a big part of the experience and enjoyment. As much as I want a bigger layout, I am realistic that at this time in our lives, this will have to do.

The layout is all 027 and packed with track and switches. I'm squeezing in scenery where I can. I can run two trains and do some switching which keeps me satisfied.

Love to see some props to smaller layouts.

 Looks like an action packed layout'.. As they say' it's not the size, but how you use it that counts'...

You do not have to wait for a magazine to cover smaller layouts.  There are two on this great OGR forum you are reading now, with complete details and pictures on how they were built.

My layout consists of two independent, portable, small layouts hooked together.  The first is 11ft x 5ft 9 inches of O27 track with 15 Marx 1095 switches and can run four trains at once with blocks and relays.  It features a homemade $10 turntable and homemade round house and a track plan control panel with two Lionel LW transformers.  It was started in 1976 in Jamaica and operated as single layout until 1989.  The link below shows how it was built in the first 22 posts of the link below.

https://ogrforum.com/...ra-027-layout?page=1

The second layout is 7ft 6 inches X 4 ft 7 inches with O27 track and 8 Marx 1095 switches.  It has a track plan control panel and one Lionel LW transformer.  This smaller layout was built in 1989 and can be operated as stand alone layout.  The link below shows how it was built starting with post 23.

https://ogrforum.com/...ra-027-layout?page=2

These two stand alone layouts are configured as an L shape and makeup my total layout and was portable and up during the winter months until 2012 when a permanent space was provided.

Charlie

Thanks Ted- gotta be sensible about what I buy (no Big Boys), but I'm having fun.

I strongly agree that the little layouts do need to be featured. Small layouts are what most model railroaders, including myself, have the time, money, skills and space to build, and I am more interested in reading about them than the huge ones most often seen in magazines. While it requires knowledge, skill and planning to build a large layout, I think it may be more difficult to build an operationally interesting or realistic model railroad, as I have attempted, in a small space. And even a small railroad can provide a lot of modeling activity, especially if the modeler likes to build structures and scenery. My 10’-by-5’ layout is pictured below.

MELGAR

0-36"

0-19

0-21 ......

.....0-21 

0_27

Jushavnfun posted:

All train magazines feature great articles and a show huge layouts that  are bigger than my house and more layers than a cake baking contest I think it's time that the magazines need to refocus on the little guy who has the 4x8, a 5 by 8 , a lay out using fast track gargraves, postwar or modern and show what they have done because there's probably more those around in a really big ones and we all started with that .

I totally agree!

For me, its the well designed track-planned and implemented elaborate layouts that I enjoy reading about. The magazines seems to showcase more highly detailed scenic layouts of all sizes. I appreciate attention to detail, yet its what the builder has done to make a layout more interesting and fun to operate, especially in terms of being creative and utilizing the space they have to work with.

I think magazines all do a great job of sharing both large and small. However, they can only share what is shared or sent in to them. I personally like seeing them all, as I get ideas from all of them.

I am building an 8' x 12', as I do not care to have out in a garage. I have seen many detailed large and small plans, and enjoy them all, and incorporated ideas into mine. I plan on sending into OGR for consideration.

Joe Gozzo

Allan Miller posted:

There are a whole lot of terrific layouts out there that have not yet appeared in OGR or any other publication, and I suspect that the vast majority of them are what might be considered "small" for O gauge or O scale. I would be interested in seeing/considering as many of them as possible if the layout builder or owner is willing to share his or her accomplishments with the entire O gauge community.

Well, if you're silly enough to run an article about Razorback Traction and the gi-raffes, heaven knows I've posted enough articles on the forum...   

Mitch 

Adding some simple eye candy here....I still have my Christmas Carpet Central up and running....yup, its a basic, sparse affair..

falconservice posted:

A track layout on an area of 2' x 16' is little for O gauge. Any area less and then you have to go to S scale/S gauge, or smaller.

Andrew

The history of Lionel is built upon the foundation of the typical consumer's 4'x8' sheet of plywood train layout. Or a little larger if you were blessed to have the space. Were it not for that, Lionel as a company wouldn't even exist. And you certainly wouldn't have all the variety of scale products we have today.

In a single year of 1952, Lionel produced in excess of 180,000 short 027 operating milk cars. Even during the MPC years, product production runs were in the thousands, most of which were purchased for running on smaller layouts. Even today and I didn't need Lionel to admit to it to know, but it is the starter set traditional line of trains that keeps Lionel in business and pays the bills. In other words, the traditional products are helping to subsidize and make the scale ones possible. 

I agree, that the larger more scale proportioned train products do look better on a larger layout. And yet, very often we see threads here from people wanting to know if they can run such and such an engine on tighter 036 FasTrack curves. Why? Because the majority of people in the hobby have smaller layouts. So be thankful there are people with smaller layouts who are still buying trains.

I do agree with the first post that it'd be nice to see more smaller layouts. But I also agree with what @Amfleet25124 wrote in his first post. Which helps explain the disproportional emphasis on scale trains and larger layouts. Not only that, but it is more of a challenge to get interesting detail photographs of smaller layouts: Not impossible, but more difficult. Usually the photos end up being overviews of the layout as a whole.

Personally, I now have the smallest layout now that I have ever had. It looks better to me in person and in my own imagination, than it probably would in photographs... unless a photographer on the caliber of Fred Dole was taking the pictures.

All that aside, if you want to get an immediate fix, here's a couple older threads on this very subject. Albeit some missing photos now at this date. There are more threads, but many of those are missing most of the photos.

https://ogrforum.com/...t-a-layout-on-a-door

https://ogrforum.com/...e-your-small-layouts

Some have commented in the past about the difficulty of using this forum search function. Well, to that I say, Google can be your friends in this endeavor. 

https://www.google.com/search?...bih=604&biw=1280

I suspect the little layouts are not featured because the magazine does not receive either photos or an article about them.  Maybe the owners are intimidated by the skill and scope presented by the larger layouts, I know I am, but I learn something from just about everyone.  I know some articles like what makes a great layout will serve to both inspire and intimidate.  I don't mind seeing OK layouts, those are for the rest of us.

Glad Brianel gave a great cheer for smaller layouts. Many years ago, Mrs RedJimmy bought me someones' nice  4x8  027 layout. Before I knew of MTH Railking or paid much attention to "traditional sized" Lionel product....after a few years of owning it, ....I foolishly dismantled it.  Yup, I saved the track and trains, yet it sure served its purpose of enjoyment.  Now I rely on building/ rebuilding a Carpet Central from time to time....go small layouts.....!

My 5x9 postwar style layout. Not large but can get a lot of action going in a limited footprint.

Allan Miller posted:

As I have noted many times over the 13+ years that I have been the editor of this magazine, I am willing, able, and very happy to include O gauge/O scale/O scale narrow gauge layouts of ANY size in the pages of OGR. The only requirements for featuring a layout in the magazine are that the layout be O gauge, O scale, or O narrow gauge, and that the layout include some distinctive features or aspects that are likely to interest and appeal to a majority of our readers (I know full well that it is impossible to satisfy everyone).

In our current Run 311 (April/May 2020) we present the first installment of a series of articles that describe the planning, building, detailing, and operation of an On30 layout that measures just 54" long by some two-feet wide. That layout is designed to be easily transported so it can be shared with the public, and thereby inspire others to consider our great hobby. The construction techniques used can also easily be applied to any size layout and any modeling scale.

There are a whole lot of terrific layouts out there that have not yet appeared in OGR or any other publication, and I suspect that the vast majority of them are what might be considered "small" for O gauge or O scale. I would be interested in seeing/considering as many of them as possible if the layout builder or owner is willing to share his or her accomplishments with the entire O gauge community.

So Allan, where do we send the photos for your review?  Thanks'... 

Allan Miller posted:  "As I have noted many times over the 13+ years that I have been the editor of this magazine, I am willing, able, and very happy to include O gauge/O scale/O scale narrow gauge layouts of ANY size in the pages of OGR. The only requirements for featuring a layout in the magazine are that the layout be O gauge, O scale, or O narrow gauge, and that the layout include some distinctive features or aspects that are likely to interest and appeal to a majority of our readers (I know full well that it is impossible to satisfy everyone).

There are a whole lot of terrific layouts out there that have not yet appeared in OGR or any other publication, and I suspect that the vast majority of them are what might be considered "small" for O gauge or O scale. I would be interested in seeing/considering as many of them as possible if the layout builder or owner is willing to share his or her accomplishments with the entire O gauge community."

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I agree  with Allan.  If you want to see smaller layouts published, start writing and photographing.  I have an article that I have procrastinated finishing for years.  It is about half done.  I better get going.  NH Joe

Details don't require a large space'.. to be effective'. O Gauge trains are made to run.  That's where the large layouts come in.  Lots of trackage and plenty of running.  That makes the big ones interesting.  However, there are very nice really large layouts, that lack in details, compared to their smaller cousins that are loaded with excellent fine details and scenes.

I point to Melgars, and SIdehacks, Trumptrins, and many others members on this forum'..

My own 5' X 13'  a nice loop and a figure 8 in the center'.. lots of details... The ubiquitous night shot'... 031 & 036 radius ..

I have three 30" X 96" office tables joined together for a 7 1/2' X 8' display layout in a small spare bedroom. I have three loops of track, two standard and one LGB R2. The outer standard is 072 tinplate while the inner loop is 042. The middle loop is LGB's second large radius after their basic 48" diameter curved track. I have a number of smaller tinplate buildings such as a Lionel 126 station, an AF 102 station, an MTH 437 signal tower, two different color 436 power stations, an MTH weigh scale, and a small MTH elevated signal tower. I am able to run a three car state set pulled by a Lionel Classics 400E on the outer loop and an MTH 408E with a three car 200 series freight set on the 042 loop. The LGB loop has a German 0-6-6-0 mallet pulling three 19" Austrian coaches and a postal/baggage van on the rear. WORKS for me! ☺

I am in dialysis so photos will be added this evening. SORRY, no O gauge!

l think a lot of this is, speaking for myself, that our layouts are often slow works in progress, and as a result it can be hard to feel like  "someone else would want to see this". One thought I had would be maybe the  magazine could showcase layouts in progress, maybe check in from time to time to show how the layout goes from "eh" to "wow!". As others have written about layouts, that finished layout we see is likely the work of years of building, tearing out what doesn't work, redoing, you name it. Plain structures became amazing models, blah landscape becomes neat, etc. Seeing that, maybe someone will look and say "wow, that guy is where I am, maybe my layout would be of interest'. There is no criticism in this meant towards the OGRR staff, rather than an idea on how to encourage people to share their layouts in the magazine. I am not likely to be in any kind of shape for a long while to have something to submit, but being selfish there may be a day when I see a layout and say "mine is in the same shape that layout was, wow"

bigkid posted:

One thought I had would be maybe the  magazine could showcase layouts in progress, maybe check in from time to time to show how the layout goes from "eh" to "wow!".

That is already being done, and has been done in the past. In the current issue of the magazine is a "Second Section" update on Brian Mount's layout build, along with the first of what will be a series of articles about the construction of a small portable layout that can be displayed at public events, and the first of what will be an occasionally updated feature about a FasTrack modular group known as the Mod Squad. We will continue to provide updates of that group's activities over the coming months and beyond.

In addition, from time to time we publish a feature known as "Return Trip Ticket," which is an updated look at layouts that have been featured in the magazine in the past. All that is required is an expression of interest in "updating" things by the layout owner.

Subscribers to the magazine likely already know about this continuing initiative. I know this to be true because I regularly receive correspondence from readers who like the "earlier" and "later" comparisons.

As I recall, OGR magazine had a series called "O gauge in a small space", (or something similar). It seemed to be hit or miss as far as appearing regularly. It was excellent but for whatever reason it just disappeared.

Steve

Really NO criticism - OGR does a great job of covering a broad range of topics, and WELL! ☺

Rescued Trains posted:

As I recall, OGR magazine had a series called "O gauge in a small space", (or something similar). It seemed to be hit or miss as far as appearing regularly. It was excellent but for whatever reason it just disappeared.

Steve

It hasn't really disappeared, Steve, I just no longer give over space to a logo, and prefer to just point out the "small layout" aspect in the title or overline of the respective article, and/or on the cover.

I am delighted to run small layout features, and actively encourage their submission. We do look for layouts--any size layout--that has something unique, distinctive, or different to offer our readers, but I think that is to be expected of any publication that is showcasing a hobby (or any other subject).

Heres a first draft of my next layout. 8 x 12.  It features fastrack throughou . 036 curves and 036 switches.

Top level (blue) is standard set track packet, with a simple mountain, similar to post war Lionel displays.

Purple is Lionel double pretzel loop with a siding added.

Dark green is a big rectanular loop with a siding added all around the 8 x 12 table top.

Approximately  15 assorted accessories,  Lionel, MTH. &Menards will be used.

All power will be Lionchief power supply and also traditional they a LW transformer, so I  can run both conventional and Lionchief. 

I'm probably about a month away from starting so as it goes I will post updates.h

I have a 4 x 12 former stage flat sitting in my shed. I'm thinking of putting this O27 layout on it, based on Ken Hoganson's plan in the Feb-March issue: 

Mitch