Hi guys need some HELP!!! ! HO scale HELIX OR NO-LIX ???
I have a large shed 19.3x29.5 feet, I want my layout to be 3 shelves around the outside. my dillemma is getting from level to level avoiding a helix . I was thinking a no-lix but this poses headaches with scenery loss and trying to hide the track on the climb as well as access to the track to clean it and derailments.[8o|]
I was thinking of biting the bullet and building 2 helix 1 at one end to get from bottom level to middle, then one maybe at the other end to get to the top. Could I fit 2 helix (32inch radii outside, 30 inside) in this size shed or would i be better off to build the one big helix and have the trains coming back down to the helix end to climb up to all levels? I was trying to avoid turnouts on the helix to get out of it at the middle level as this can cause more trouble than anything else!!
With 2 helix (one at each end) I presume this would be easier than the one big one, this would also avoid trains having to be at one end to go up the helix.
Using the 2.2% ‘transcon standard’ for a grade 60 feet (one scale mile) long, you’d get a railhead-to-railhead vertical separation of just about 15 inches. Stacking another on top would put the uppermost level at eye level, or close to it, unless your lowest level is a lot lower than most modelers would want.
If built as a single continuous grade, this would run along the two short walls and one long wall of your shed. It could be operated as a helper grade, or simply allowed to dictate the length of your trains.
The same grade in the form of a normal helix would cause the train to disappear for the length of its passage, which might or might not be acceptable. My personal plan for a tall helix is to use the Tzu-Li Shan spiral of the Alishan Forestry Railway as a prototype. The track wraps 'round and 'round a spur mountain, partially in tunnels, partially on the surface. It isn’t a perfect circle, or anywhere near it, but it’s visually far more interesting than the outside of a bass drum, which the normal helix resembles.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - more or less)
Put two helixes in virtually the same space, but don’t interconnect them. That’s what I’d do anyway. For very little difference in actual space used, this will save a lot of operation headaches and complications, while consolidating and minimizing space devoted to the helixes.
Having built one myself, a no-lix is not that complex. It’s all about “bending” plywood (or laths if you’re into that) and following the grade. So I wouldn’t necessarily discourage you from that. Too much hidden track is just not that interesting. I’ve gotabout 50’ of main that is the back side a giant dogbone that’s hidden. I regret it but couldnj’t really avoid it. It works well, you just can’t SEE[8D] it. Helixes are like that, too, so consider all your options.
Chuck has a good point about working it into operations, too. I recently started operating mine as a helper grade. It really adds action and interest, while realistically slowing down operations.
Have you thought about an elevator? It takes up a lot less space. There is a topic around the forum somewhere, where I described how you could build an elevator.
That’s pretty much my opinion. Elevators are neat, but they can be a project in themselves once you start to figuring out what all is involved. Yes, one that is long enough to hold an entire train would be particularly difficult.
I can also see them working in restricted space layouts, where a double-deck is mandatory to squeeze everything in and there’s not much room, if any, to gain elevation.
In your case, you’ve got plenty of room for any of several options. The thing to do is to narrow them down. You might try designed the transition between levels for both a helix and a no-lix and then size up what the remaining space is. The exact answer probably depends on how your space is configured, so you’ll want to give attention to the rest of the layout’s basic design in connection with a more detailed set of studies on the most obvious options for gaining the needed elevation.
An elevator can be as long as your space allows. John Armstrong’s original ‘dehydrated canal lock’ was designed to handle a Y6, sixteen hoppers and a caboose - in O scale!
My own elevator is hidden, part of a ‘empties in, loads out’ arrangement at my big colliery. It handles a complete TTT train (four 7-axle articulated hoppers with a 4-axle brake van at each end) with some to spare. Basic material is steel stud (my go-to material for everything.)
If you lay out your track plan as a continuous run you won’t need staging on every level. You just start at one end (say the top level end-of-the-road terminal) and run through to the other, stopping for (depending on he train) passengers, mail, express, milk, or to switch the piano factory and iron works en route. Eventually you reach the other end of the lowest level - which should be hidden staging, possibly of the John Armstrong ‘reverted loop’ variety to maximize the visible run.
Iron works? Just don’t try to model the Bath Iron Works. Their output product - US Navy destroyers…
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with grades!)
You can build the elevator as long as you want it to be. You could run longer trains than you could on the helix since the locomotives don’t have to pull the train up the grade. You don’t need a staging yard unless you were already planning on having one. If you do need a staging yard, you can use the extra space where the helix was going to go.
Well, yes. In the real world, there are limits though. Unless you’re going with metal, you’ll run into sagging issues once you get much past 4’ in wood. At least that is my experience as a woodworker with objects that needed to be relatively stiff and precise.
And once you’re over 4’, then it becomes a matter of whether you center lift or end lift the design. Both have advantages and disadvantages.
And we haven’t really discussed anything about control and logic circuits[;)]
That’s why I called it a project in itself. The skills needed to build and maintain an elevator aren’t there for everyone and it’ll be a darn frustrating project to keep operational if they’re not.
If you’re depending on it to get to the next level, everything soon shuts down if the elevator isn’t working.
Don’t get me wrong. I think elevators in the right place for the right reason by the right person are very cool things. An acquaintance even built one that was written up in a national mag and I had the chance to talk to him about it at a convention. Very cool stuff, but not for the rookie or faint of heart. It’s unlikely to be the first tool or even the tenth tool most will pull out when designing a layout.
Now if the OP comes up with so many things that need to be included there’s no space for connectijg grades, that could change my opinion. Maybe he would need an elevator. But I’m thinking that biting off a 3-decker is going to be plenty to get his arms around. Throw in needing an elevator and the frustration level may not be workable.
In steam, maybe. But with diesels, adding more units solves most problems of this sort. I’m pretty sure no ele
Are you talking about a no-lix here? Or something a little more involved?
I agree that simply making the main run through and back is a good solution. Put that loop at the bottom and make it staging. You don’t even need a loop at the other end, if you can make a point to loop work for your ops.
Sometimes, it might be better to put the loop at the top, above everyone’s heads. That way there’s nothing underfoot or in the way as you follow your train around the different levels. You wouldn’t want the switching yard to be too low on the bottom if you’rr doing point to loop that way, though.
Ok so Ive decided to go no-lix so because my maths is so bad How much run/rise do i need to get elevation to the next level ? My shelves will be about 12-14 inches aprt.
Ok guys can someone settle a debate for me Im having with my other designer of this layout? (yeah OK its the wife)
On the end of a shelf section, we are debating what size radius to use for the turn back loop on the end of the shelf , So we dont have the trains running to a dead end.
I’m saying we should use 28r , and she says it should need to be that big!
What radius would you suggest ?
I am making allowances for any type of engines that we want to run now and in the future, If i have a bigboy(or anything shall we say) wouldnt anything less than 28r be too small and cause problems?
Space isnt an issue as my shed is 29 feet X 19 , I know i’m asking alot for you guys to jump right into the middle of a couples argument but in times of desperation you turn to the ones who know best !! C’mon guys i dont mind if you prove me wrong!!
Time out. In a basement you get to the center from the basement stairs strategically located there. How do propose to get to the center in a shed that will require a door entrance?
Problems increase as radius decreases. If you can get a minimum of 28" radius, go for it. If you have enough space to have a larger minimum, you should do that. I hate to disagree with the lady, but these ideas are pretty well established. If your trackwork is perfect, then that will help; but, all other things being equal, your equipment will look and operate better on the broader curves.
Thats what im going for but in a smaller space. Entry to the middle of the layout will be via either a lift up section of double main line with not much scenery, or my other option i’m thinking of is a swinging section kind of like a door , if that makes sense. The shed does have two roller doors and a normal door on it but they with be covered by the layout itself, should work out ok.