We recently discussed the trend towards more size, and i often see members looking for plans for smaller layouts, so I thought I would relate my latest encounter with the "size actually is what it is all about" MRR gurus. The scene is the library in Colorado Springs, where I found a Model Railroad/Kalmback book on "small track plans. I read the intro remarks, wherein the author said he regard the 4x8 layout as the basic building block and intended to focus on that and smaller layouts. Perfect. check out book, go home, settle in, and... One 4x8 layout. One. A single small switching layout. The rest of the book jumped immediately to 8x10 for most of the book, then to 12x12 - "perfect for the average spare bedroom" - in what particular neighborhood, I wonder? - and finally to a 10x20 behemoth. What part of "small layouts" does MRR/Kalmbach not understand? 4x8 is 32 sq ft. 8x10 jumps to roughly 2.5x that, and 10x20 in on another planet entirely, half of the avergae two-car garage. Even that ludicrous "spare bedroom" layout comes in ad 144 sq. ft. - over four times the author's stated "building block" goal. Exactly how does this hobby define "small layout"? Anything less than the endless array of giga-layouts featured in the MRR Magazine? Does not require a realtor's license and city council permit to plan? And why is it that the "small layouts" are still designed for HO? Why is there no correlation within this hobby between small layouts and small scales, such as N? This hobby is obsessed with size, to the exclusion of all else. Mega-layouts, huge locomotives, gigantic structures...if Freud were alive and a member of this forum, I can only imagine what he might think. OK - I feel a little better now. I will no resume my fruitless search for small layouts designed by rational people for small scales; however, I may change my screen name to "Diogenes".