While I don’t have any elevated rail crossings on my simple pt-to-pt, and there is no need to elevate it, I had planned to, to add interest. But because of the small radii and limited distance, I’d like to avoid unnecessary problems.
So I wonder if it’s worth the trouble to avoid the flatland look and how much elevation would make a difference?
I prefer to let the track be as level as possible, and let the landscape do the verticals… Just as in the real world, the railroad cuts thru the landscape and use fills and bridges where necessary. So do the same in the model!
If you want to get high enough to cross over track belwo, you’re talking in the range of 3.5" to 4" – essentially the clearance over your tallest piece of rolling stock plus whatever roadbedd necessary to carry it in crossing over the track below.
I’m not going to bother with the math, but to do a figure-8 up-and-over on a 4x8 is pretty steep, maybe more the 4%? That will take roughly 8’ of running track, perhaps a bit more as you should include a transition vertical curve at the ends of the grade.
Just a half inch is noticeable for a road crossing, which would be just over 3ft in the real world.
You can go about it two ways- raise the track or lower the ground. I think the taller banks look pretty good on the tracks. It doesn’t have to be a cliff, but you can incorporate the bank as the side of a ditch, creek, or the like. A lot depends on what the subgrade is made of as to how easy it would be
I’m also a fan of keeping the track level while letting the terrain do the elevation changes. It doesn’t take much to add that kind of visual interest. This is a shallow stream:
Down by the docks in Mooseport, in a more urban environment, I added a narrow old canal:
Yes, I always planned on adding Envirotex. Love that dirty water.
So, it doesn’t take much elevation change to “force” your railroad to build a trestle or a short bridge.
Even a relatively small difference in elevation between two tracks running near each other can make a big difference visually. My previous layout was a twice around (roughly 6’ by 16’) where the inside loop went up a 2% grade to be about 1" higher than the outside one. It had little to no effect on train lengths but did look good.