Help me Please. While some of you are tinkering in your train rooms I have a little experiment for you. Take a 6’ board and lift one end 2 1/2 to 3 inches. Now stand back and tell me how bad this looks. I know that this is pretty steep but because of concessions to the Wife on the size of my layout I need to get enough hiegth to run one track over another for about 8’ and I think I can squeeze out 6’ to 8’ for the up and return grades.
Thanks in advance.
Ron
In 6 feet you are looking at just over a 4% grade. In 8 feet its 3%. Forget small or not-great-running locomotives. A lash-up of 2 or 3 high quality diesels and you should be OK. Big, heavy steam (I’m thinking, for example BLI/Precision Y6B) might just handle it. Geared locos such as Bachmann 3-truck shay will do well, just as they did on the prototype. Good luck.
Ron
Could you possibly lower the grade for the lower track. In other words, if you only want a 2% grade for the upper track, can you find a way for the lower track to descend at a 2% grade under the overhead track? It can come back up again after the crossunder.
I have used this at two points in my layout plan.
Dave
hi,
How easy it seems, how hard reality often is…you will need vertical easements at both the top and the bottom of the grade. It might easily cost you 2 times a foot.
smile
Paul
Ron,
the impact of grades on layouts is often underestimated. Anything above 3 % should only be used on logging layouts, operated with geared steam.
In the real world, grades usually stay well below 2 %, although there are some places, where grades run up to 7 % (Bernina line in Switzerland).
What Paul is hoping you’ll see immediately is that you don’t have the full 6’. You must start at zero grade and rise up in a vertical curve to whatever the grade must now be to get the elevation you desire and transition back to level again at the top. Those two sections eat into your usable constant grade hugely, so much so that you will end up with 4.75-5% grade when the transitions are engineered into the grade. And as your grade steepens, your transitions have to be that much longer to get from level to constant grade and back to level again.
The suggestion to split the difference between the lower and upper levels where they cross is a good compromise.
Crandell
I would really consider Dave’s recommendation of lowering the base track. Even if you need to alter the benchwork or cut into the foam( foam base). You can lessen the grade to something more managable in that 6ft. You only need 3" of clearance. A ballasted deck bridge done with 1/4" ply can keep that railhead to railhead dimension to about 3 3/8- 3 1/2". You can apply side bridge girders or earlier period wood truss to the plywood sides. If you can depress that lowered track 1’, your only looking at a rise of 2 1/2". This may be much more workable and can include the vertical easments needed.
A basic track plan would really help.
Ron
I started with a 12’ layout and grades approaching 4% it didn’t work. My cross over is 1/2 up and 1/2 down for the two grades. As mentioned.
Lee
Hey everyone, Thank You for all the advice and information. My plan was to hide about half of the mainlines total length under itself down one side of the entire layout, creating the illusion of a longer run. Below is my original track plan for my mainline but I have shortened the length of the layout from 12’ to 10’ and I was allready having an issue with the grade before. So I guess I will have to rethink the entire idea on my mainline, I am also planning on as large of a turn radius as I can so that I can run some longer steam locomotives and passenger trains. My whole railway is based on a fictional excursion and railway museum type of operation with some freight operations, this way I do not have to limit my trains to any one era.
Again Thank You for all your input and advice.
Is this to be a semi-permanant or permanant layout? Don’t know if your module design is for ease of construction or for future diassasembly. Is this around the walls?
The elevations of the main are changed throughout the modules, I suggest this, as a permanant layout done open grid w/ risers would simplify an eliminate quite a few issues w/ the elevations. You can deck the open areas in ply or foam for scenery and still have removable scenery sections to access that hidden mainline if for some reason underbenchwork access becomes cumbersome. To gain added clearance for lowered track, the upper portion can rest on a much thinner ply set on risers, 1/4 or 3/8" should work if you set the blocks/ risers properly… Remember that running track over track w/ sw motors above will add additional interference. May need to shift that lowered track or offset linkage from sw motors.
hi
you are in big trouble, if you keep those 34 radii the usable length of your passing siding will be about one foot.
smile
paul
Although you could use two curved turnouts, say Shinohara #7.5’s, and extend your siding somewhat.
I don’t really understand the need for the hidden trackage as you show it.
Crandell
If you modify your layout plan you might not need as much of a grade.
The problem is you have two places where the track has to pass over the other, one at each end. Cutting that back to one location should help.
Make two laps of the layout, with one lap “inside” the other Have the laps cross on one end only. A train now has most of a full lap around the layout to gain (or lose) elevation. That should drop the grade well below 3%.
hi,
i posted it already in one of your other threads:
About a 3,5% grade, shortening your layout till 10 feet will not help you.
Smile
Paul
Hi and Thank You All for your input. Paul I still have the track plan from one of my previus posts.
I was falling into an old habit of trying to shove to much track into to small of a space, my thinking was that if a train on the mainline was to disappear under a hillside and by adding a siding to pull onto allowing another train to use the mainline, that this would create the illusion that the first train had completed a longer journey as it had been hidden from view. Just trying to play with the minds eye so to speak.
Anyways I can now can see that this is just not going to work. To adress some of the questions about my modules, currently I am building this in a 20’ X 24’ shop that is primarily my Wifes glass and pottery studio and my workshop. The whole idea is that the layout can be dis-assembled and stored when the Wife has large art projects going on, and we know that we will be moving in the near future so it is portable. I also hope to have a larger space in time and this way the layout is easily expandable as space permits.
Again Thank You for all the input and please keep posting any thoughts you may have.
Ron
Drgn
What about a double loop?
Ron, It seems that if this “modular” layout will need to be setup and dissasembled on a regular basis, you may just what to keep it to a much simpler design. You are already facing troubles with the elevations. By simplifying the plan and keeping the track on one level you will have a better running layout. I could see all sorts of troubles in the construction and trying to have take apart sections of elevated and breaks on grade and turns could eventually turn into an operational nightmare every time you set it up. I would suggest part of the layout incorporate a switching yard on 2 of the modules and then do as a modular club for the remainder. If your wife needs some room, you could at least keep a portion of the yard/ switching sections up and running. This may give her the space she needs and you could still “play”
Eventually if you aquire a new space, the yard modules and posibly other turn and industry portions may be better suited to fit into a new plan. Modules with various curved/ elevated track would most likely have to be scrapped. Just a thought.
drgn trappr
You can do what you want in a 10’ X 4’ and have continuous running with I think 21" to 22" curves some what the way I set mine up. A switch yard would have to be on the inside of the inside track. The train goes by on the outside once then on the inside track next time around. My yard caused me to increase that spot to 5’ to accommodate the yard tracks. Here is an old picture that might help to explain my system. I hope my attempt to explain the design helps.
Lee
Hey Lee,
Great photo and I think that is more in line with what I will end up with. I am really glad I posted this before I actually started laying track, otherwise I would have a real mess on my hands. Things are at somewhat of a stand still for a few days, I need another sheet of plywood and a couple of sheets of foam to finish the last two modules, and I promised the Wife I would not spend anymore money on trains this month. Good thing it was the short month,LOL.
Thanks
Ron
Ok lets try this again! Here is a new track plan showing the module configerations. I also wanted to adress some questions. The layout will need to be taken down from time to time to allow the wife and I full access to the studio space but the layout will be up 80% of the time. Alignment should not be any problem, my Wife is a mixed media sculpter and I by default have become her mechanical engineer, she designs and creates the pieces then I have to figure out how to make them transportable. This sometimes requires a piece to be made in a moduler fashion with precission alignment when re- assembled at a gallery or show.
My layout now consists of two 2’ X 4’ , one 2’ X 8’, one 2 1/2’ X 8’, and one 2 1/2’ X 3 1/2’ modules. We know that there is a move planned in the not to distant future, so this will allow for the move also, it will also be readily expandable as more room becomes available. The move should be into a new studio and it will be two stories with the Wife down stairs and my space upstairs.
Please look this over and tell me what you think, it has been a long time since my last layout and now that I have the time I want to get this phase started.
Thanks
Ron
The green line is the main line the red is industry sidings and the brown may be a future frieght line. The main line is my only concern now so that I can get the track down and run some trains.http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/themes/trc/utility/[
:550:0]
:350:0](http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/themes/trc/utility/%5B!%5BPhotobucket(http://i1188.photobucket.com/albums/z417/DrgnTrappr/Scan001.jpg)%5D(http://s1188.photobucket.com/albums/z417/DrgnTrappr/?action=view¤t=Scan001.jpg):350:0){kind=link}