I need your help planning the order of construction of my layout.
My operating layout will be on one level but I want to put a staging area below it. I haven’t made a final decision on layout height but I’m thinking about having the operating level somewhere between 42" and 48" above the floor. I can’t go much higher because of reach in considerations.The height of the staging level has not been decided but I want to be able to reach in about 24" so there has to be some distance between the main level and the staging level. I will use a single track helix to get in and out of the staging.
Building from the bottom up, i.e. building the staging level first, would seem to make getting at the underside of the main level rather difficult. Flexibility is not one of my major assets. On the other hand, installing the staging after the main level is in place would seem to be pretty awkward too, especially when it comes to getting the track properly aligned. I have been thinking about building the staging to the point of having the sub-roadbed done and sturdy enough that I can lie on it to work on the underside of the main level, but I know that getting in and out will not be easy. In fact, it will be a major pain. I also haven’t figured out how I would get inside the helix to retrieve an errant train if the bottom of the helix is too close to the ground.
Building from the bottom up as a lot easier and faster. And plan for way more staging that you think you need!
Unfortunately - as my layout grew in size - I kept adding more equipment and ran more trains during our 2 monthly OPs Sessions.
This then required more Stagging than I had initially planned for.
I had to make a decision to add more staging and had to do so under existing benchwork that I could not remove to provide access.
So I had to do the subroadbed in pieces to get it under the benchwork above and lay track streaching my arms to full lenght to reach the back of the stagging area.
It wasn’t much fun but I really needed the staging. Now that it is done - no big deal!
But my arms and back were sore for a number of days after that build session.
I did this 3 different times. Unfortunately - trying to preplan what a railroad evolves into over 15 years - no one can guess - let alone plan for that far into the future when doing your initial planning.
And NOT making changes to your layout once built - is a sure fire way to get bored quickly with the old layout.
With my layout at 15 year old - it is just as fresh as it was when I began - WHY? Because at every OPS Session - the Operators will suggest changes to make their work easier or faster and I take these suggestions and decide if they will truly help or not.
Most of the ideas are added as they will really help - so the layout is constantly being upgraded.
This is what I see wrong (for lack of a better word) with most of the layouts our OPs Groups run on - NO CHANGES!
The layout is just the same it has been for the past 10 years or so and there isn’t anything new to see when we visit. The Operations is just the same as it was 5 years ago as it is today - and the Layout Owner wonders why is regular Operaors don’t want to run trains during his 2 monthly ops sessions. It is BORING!
My current HO (11x15) layout is the second one built in the same room, with lower lever staging. Both were a solid 2 percent incline, and I was able to wind the incline so as to allow a pretty good separation of the two levels towards the end of about 13-14 inches. My suggestions…
Two percent is the max incline I would use for HO. That translates to a two inch drop for 8 feet of incline.
Make sure you have a long vertical easement where the incline meets the main level. Using the cookie cutter method, its not hard at all.
Whatever you build must be as good as you can make it. That means nice flowing curves, plenty of feeders, and reliable turnouts. Although I used Atlas above the table controls, Tortoises or other undertable machines might be best in the long run.
I ended up with 6 storage/staging tracks. I should have put in a couple of more. However, you need to make them somewhat accessible with the ol “0-5-0” switcher.
After the fact I added a few strings of Christmas white LED lights. Definitely a big plus!
The lower level and incline is not an easy build, and I can’t imagine doing it after the main level is in place.
The key to this whole thing is planning and drawing up detailed “blueprints”. If you “cheat” on curves or turnouts to make things fit your space, you will pay for it later. The end result will thank you for doing it right.
With a little planning, there is also a lot of the traditional underneath work than can be done without crawling under the layout or eliminated altogether.
You can install switch machines before attaching the subroadbed to the risers then flip it over and put in place.
You can leave enough slack in your wiring so it can be pulled to the front of the benchwork for soldering.
Attach cleats to the subroadbed in advance so risers can be attached with the screwdriver horizontal vs vertical.
Tortoise switch machines can be installed from the top - the foam users do this frequently.
Make more of the subroadbed cookie cutter style vs tabletop.
The staging will have 5 tracks all between 10’ - 14’ each plus a reverse loop that is 48’ long. The smallest radius on the staging tracks is about 35". Turnouts are Peco Electrofrog Mediums with 2 curved turnouts as well. The helix is 26.5" radius @ 2% with a height of 3.4" from track to track. That’s where I’m a bit concerned. The helix will have access from two sides but retrieving something from the center will be very difficult. Maybe I should build in some removable track sections, although if I don’t get those right they could cause problems themselves. I’ll have to put a dog cushion on the floor in the center of the helix[swg]
Speaking about lighting (which I completely forgot to mention) I use the undercabinet Puck lights with the Halogen type bulbs and have them on a timer.
With them being so bright and the amount of heat they generate - I didn’t want any fire problems.
I did try some LED puck lights but the first batch weren’t bright enough.
I now have some that are supposed to be brighter but I havn’t installed them yet to tell.
The reason I went with the Puck lights as I could attach them to a 1x2 board and then easily screw the board to the underside of the upper benchwork as trying to use the tiny screws they provided and working upside down just wasn’t working for me!
I am thinking of using Peco switch machines in the staging area because all I need to do is cut a hole in the sub-roadbed big enough for the switch motor. The hole won’t matter since there won’t be any ballasting obviously.
The main level will use Tortoises, but I hadn’t thought of dropping them down from above. They could easily be mounted on a plate that would be recessed into the sub-roadbed. Very creative! My back feels better already.
Bringing as much wiring to the front of the layout is also in my plans.
My thoughts were they are too dim yet and I am trying to keep each of my mulit-level layout light values constant and brightness at the lower levels as my upper levels are.
I use a LUX meter to record the light values of the lighting at track level and will add more ceiling lights to keep the layout light at a minimum of 100 LUX.
While I am NOT having much luck with the lower levels of lighting as some areas are a bit too low and the light won’t spread out as much as I would like -
The LED strips is something I have looked at but as I stated above the level of light is not what I had hoped it would be - for the amount of work I would have to put into mounting multiple strips of lights to get the LUX level up to my layout standard.
I was hoping to do it with a single strip but this may not ever be available!
When I built my multi-level layout, I built the upper level first, completing the wiring and track laying at table level. Then I mounted the 24" upper level on shelf brackets (ala Tony Koester’s method). This section is 18 x 2 ft, with a 4x2 ft “L” attached on one end.
The lower level (30" x 18 ft) was then built away from the final position and when the track was laid and the wiring complete, I did some basic scenicking along the back wall area. Once completed, the entire unit was placed under the upper levels.
Helixes are used at both ends of the sections to connect the two.
RicZ
PS: I used two LED rolls of bright LEDs to illuminate the lower level. They actually make it brighter the the upper level that I had CFL spot light installed to illuminate. Micro Mark sells the LED rolls - 15’ long.
My plan for the layout I will start construction on as soon as the detached garage/workshop/layout room is done is to build the lower return loop and staging tracks first and then build the level above it. I plan to install and get 100% reliable functionality for all track, turnouts, controls (tortoise and stationary decoders), and occupancy detection before building the level above
The lower return loop and staging tracks are at 38" elevation and the lower level above it (large city) is at 45" elevation. There are basically no turnouts in the city area above the lower return loop area so it should just be track feeders and structure lighting wires needing to be installed on the underside of the city area.
At least that’s my plan.
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” Mike Tyson
BTDT, in several ways. I do have significant hidden trackage and would not have been able to provide the operations bounty I have without it. So an admittedly necesssary evil. That said, I figured if I was going to maintain it, I had to be able to reach it to build it. Although I did build much of the roadbed as I built and laid track on the main level, I did not lay track until the main level was done in most cases.
My center penisula is Durango. The mainline east to Chama leaves the room, then drops down an approx. 2% 1.5 turn helix to the Chama staging loop underneath. There are only two tracks, but my narrowgauge trains are short enough that with sequence ops I can just stack 3 passenger and 3 freights on each track and dispense as needed.
I would argue that you’re planning on too much space between decks. Mine is about 10". Now, I can see needing more if you have 5 or more tracks to reach across, but having less distance means less helix and fewer problems climbing out of that hole underneath.
BTW, the LED line voltage light strips I’ve been using are ideal for underneath. They’re plenty bright enough and being enclosed in that tough clear sheath like a heavy duty extension cord makes them easy to snake through benchwork.
I’m working on a long 5-track staging section for my layout. I built it with a wood box frame and 2-inch foam, in 6-foot segments. The flex track ends at each segment boundary, with wiring between segments connected through terminal blocks. I did this for future portability and possible ease of reconfiguration.
These segments are very light. Since there is no scenery, they’re not terribly delicate either. With a bit of planning, you could build a segmented staging yard that would be easy to slide out from under the layout for construction and maintenance, and also to get it out of your way when you need to get under the “real” layout above.
My 5-track staging is only 17 inches wide. It’s completely flat on top. Another option would be to put the long section between the helix and the reverse loop on a shelf which folds up (or down) into the wall, getting it out of the way when you need to work beneath the upper level.
Building at least part of the staging so that it can be removable is a good idea. Certainly the straight sections could be built in two long pieces with three tracks each. Doctorwayne PM’d me with a similar suggestion. The sub-roadbed for the areas with the curves could also be made removable but I think I would elect to lay the curved track and adjacent turnouts when the roadbed is finally in place. Same with the large return loop.
I bought the LED strips on eBay and they were dirt cheap so if I need to run two or three strips that isn’t a big deal. The lighting in the staging level doesn’t have to be really bright - just enough to identify trains.
Here is where the staging plan sits now. I still have to tweak it to get the reach in distances shorter:
Mike
I think I still want to keep a fair distance between the staging and the main level. I’m a big guy, 52" chest, 21 1/2" neck - you get the picture, so I want the reach in to be as easy as possible. As far as the helix, I figure if I can get 1 1/2 turns to work then I should be able to get 4 1/2 turns to work too. If I have to break longer trains down to get them up the helix that’s just another operating feature.
Well, they don’t call me Tiny – and it would be pulling my leg ig the did. You’ll have much more reach in than I do.
But a couple of things to keep in mind. In case of a broken drawbar, you have almost 3x as much distance for things to spin before the crash at the bottom.[:P]
As a hidden track user, don’t forget your train is unseen until it escapes the gravitational vortex of the helix.
And you have much more staging than I do – and only a long single track to connect it to the layout. It might be worth considering a two-track helix, with one up and one down track to avoid potential congestion.
The way you have the 6 tracks arranged now, you’re “wasting” one of them to be a run-through. Why don’t you rearrange it so that the “wasted” track is the shortest one instead of the longest?
If you’re worried about parted couplers and runaways on the helix, use a pusher to assist in the climb. With the constant and relatively tight turn and the grade, you may need it anyway. If it’s not required once the train is at layout level, cutting it off is a good operational feature, which will add interest.
My reasoning behind not using the shortest track as the run-through was simply to reduce the number of turnouts that the run-around had to cross through. However, since the turnouts will all be close to the front of the staging area that isn’t really a big problem. Besides, if I can’t get the turnouts right on my staging, I may as well scrap the whole main level because there is one spot where the main line has to navigate 6 turnouts in a row.
It shouldn’t take too much to revise the staging plan. I’ll show you what I come up with.
Good point. Things could get exciting fast if a coupler breaks.
I thought about a two track helix but I wasn’t happy with the radius of the inner track. I suppose I could reduce the problem by using the inner track to go down to the staging only, but I’ll have to go back to the drawing board to figure out the track plan where the two tracks come on to the main level. I could put in another helix under the engine service facility. I actually had that in the plans for a while but I took it out in an effort to simplify the construction of the layout. I’ll have another look.
Making the helix visible won’t be a problem since it will all be below the sceniced area of the layout. I’ll just use a view block like a curtain which can easily be pulled back when needed. Then I’ll be able to sit back and watch all the excitement when a coupler breaks.[swg][(-D]
Wayne:
Pusher engines would solve the problem that Mike raises and, as you said, would add to operations. Besides, its a good excuse to buy more engines! Fitting a separate engine storage track into the staging would be easy.
