I dont mean to be harsh but I think you need to do a bit more planning, maybe look in to an atlas book or their website. What operation(s) are going to be on your layout? Also lay some track down and play with it see how it fits on the table, the track on these two plans are coming right up to the edges of the table, this is the same mistake I made in my planning stage, just because the plan that you designed on the comp looks like it will work doesnt mean its is, almost all the spurs on both plans you can only get one car maybe two. Also avoid s curves they are killer! Dont be afriad to experiment.
Whoa! Too much track my man! Take a look at the following books Realistic Model Railroad Design The Model Railroader's Guide to Freight Yards The Model Railroader's Guide to Industries Along the Tracks The Model Railroader's Guide to Industries Along the Tracks 2 The Model Railroader's Guide to Locomotive Servicing Terminals All are available from Modelrailroader. The first one is essential, the rest expand on the ideas. If you want to have a nice layout, and not just a mindless pile of track, plan it like the real thing does, you see railroads are built to make money, no more then that. The real thing avoids complex trackwork where ever it can. Take a look at how the real thing builds it, then plan your layout that way.
8' x 4' layouts limit what you can do in HO and like Mark I am not keen on either of these two layouts. I am assuming the the grid squares are 12" If that is the case you will end up with tight radius curves 18" to 20" that will limit what you can run on your layout, eg. small steamers and 4 axle diesels. But to answer your question I do perfer the layout 1 over layout 2 simple is best. You can still have fun with a small layout although it can be a challenge to create a layout that will sustain your interest in the hobby. What I would like is maybe a scenic divider through the middle of the layout and have two towns one either side. It would give the impression that the trains have some place to go. You could have either a double track loop or a single loop. Have some spur lines to industry and you could make a really interesting layout. Just an idea. Do some searches for layout design here at T.B. Best to learn from others who are doing the same thing.
As an alternative to a 4x8 design, check out the following: http://www.layoutdesignservice.com/lds/samples/betterbeginnerlayout.htm (There was actually a discussion thread on one of the forums about this yesterday. Not sure if it was this forum or another one.)
Welcome to trainboard I don't mean to be harsh either, but I have a 4x7 layout at home that has been in 3-different styles and I still don't have the wiring down through the bench work. It might move again. Running trains on a layout is the best way to try out the fit. By all means watch those tight curves they will get you frustrated. That said Welcome to train board and by all means ask a lot of questions there are hundreds of experts here ready to help.:shade:
I know nothing about layout design, but cleggie's suggestion for a scenic divider is spot-on. It can even be a diagonal divider, to give you uneven and interesting spaces to fill. Mine's a boring "lengthwise through the centre". Mike
Have you been looking at Thortrains? That site, often offered as advice to beginning track planners, has many toylike, chaotic plans whose echoes I detect here. I won't be the first person to criticize a crowded layout. I like my plans somewhat more complicated than perhaps is the current trend. I will, however, point out the too-short spurs and some locations where tracks appear too close together. The first plan is a double-track oval with a lot of spurs, and could be redesigned into something workable. The second has no overall routing - the biggest no-no in my book. What exactly are you looking for in a layout?
