Hey all, im currently designing a 3 level layout and one possible underground level for coalmine, goldmine and an abandoned mine…Anyway my question is do any of you have a multi level layout and if so how do you get the trains from one level to another? I dont have a 30x30’ area to work in so im trying to improvise, im currently thinking a spiral of some sorts but im not sure if that will work or not. So tell me how you get your trains from one level to another. Thanks Alot and have a good day
check the 4th image from top on this link for a nice helix.
http://www.the-gauge.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2569&perpage=15&pagenumber=4
Also there has been discussion on a ‘nolix’ - same idea, but stretched out long and thin so the trains are visible for part of their transit.
::drooling:: i wish i had that kind of space…but thats kind of what im doing, instead of a bare staging area the staging area will be the rail yard…i wonder what the dimensions of that ?helix? (is that what you guys call a spiral incline?) is…
Ive got a 10x12 space to work with but i think i could manage something like that…going to the drawing board…
A helix in a space your size will eat up a lot of space. I’m assuming you are in HO. It would be easier in N.
I’m editing this in, I must have had a bad night last night as this is the second post where I just didn’t get it right. You have a good space for a helix. The easiest way to build it is by doing it in the link above. The support lumber he uses (on the vertical) is a bit much, I would use something not quite as wide.
By the way folks, occassionally I tell people they can use small cheap L brackets in helix construction. In the picture of the Helix at the Gauge forum given in the above post by Glen, you will see the L brackets at work. L brackets are the easiest way to build a helix… trust me.
I have gone round and round on this helix thing several times (pun intended). It looks good on paper until you start to consider maintenance of two levels or more and what it truly means. A 30" radius helix is 15’ of track per loop. at 4" rise per loop you need three loops minimum to get 12" separation between levels. Want 18"? add another loop and a half which means you are going to use 45’ to 68’ of track in the helix so the train is going to be gone from sight for a long time. Want a larger radius? Add 3’ of track to each loop for each 6" of radius. The you have a cantalievered level to consider and the construction requirements. Why do we want to do this? We’d do better to model a subway and just have holes in the facia where the stations are. The idea is to see trains not hear them. I’m back to one level and large radius turnouts. We want more accurately scaled and prototype equipment and then make a layout for the stuff that deifes logic. Shouldn’t we be making #12 -16 turnouts and larger radii to make the realism greater? Granted some (maybe most) don’t have the space or time to do that and I’m not knocking anyone who thinks differently. I’m not a rivet counter. I am just being drawn in this direction because one of the facets of the hobby is you acquire knowledge along the way. Intentionally and unintentionally. Don’t we need to process all the information to produce the best modeling we are capable of? I have no problem whatsoever with people who subscribe to the typical viewers question of, How many trains can you run at once?" Or are we trying to reproduce a model of the real thing? If so helixs, 18" radius curves, condensed buildings and #4 turnouts don’t cut it. Please do not get angry at my comments I am not trying to denigrate anyone or what they want to do. I am just presenting my current thinking after giving the idea of a helix serious thought and almost building one. In case you wondered I don’t suffer with my insanity I enjoy every minute of it.
I am building a multi level layout. I am using a helix to connect the upper, lower and staging levels. Here is the links to a few under construction photos. My helix is big, so that my not help solve your problems. You also could use an around the room helix, where you layout climbs most of the way around you room to get to the upper deck level.
The helix is 82" wide. The two tracks are 38" and 35" radius curves. I have no trouble pulling 15-20 cars or so with two engines. Each turn climbs 4". This part of the helix will climb 2 1/2 turns. There will be another helix on top of this one to connect the main level with the upper level. I should fini***he helix this week. The rest of the curves are cut. I am wiring as I go.
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB270065.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB270066.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB270068.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB270070.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB280071.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB280072.JPG
http://webpages.charter.net/dmnolan/PB280073.JPG
What scale is the layut with all the photos of his helix? I believe it is and 82" helix?
Concerning the guy that sees no purpose in the helix. You must have a very large space to build your layout in or be using a very small scale. The purpose of the helix is simple. to allow more space to build your layout scenes within a smaller room. Bu using a helix, though not prototypical, it allows easier acces to multi-level designs which allow for more trackage. You can’t get something for nothing. Yes, your trains will be out of site for a period of time, unless yo design a special loop in which they appear out in the open on a trestle or something. If I have a room that will allow a 12 ft by 30 fot layout I can expand my layout size and scenery opportunities by going mulit-level. With a 6 ft helix (just throwing a simple number out there for perspective), I can now have (basically) tow 12 ft by 24 ft areas with which to build in instead of just one 12 ft by 30 ft area. You could forego the helix for a steady climb all the way around the layout from one level to the next (would be more prototypical), but this could create many operational and layout design limitations. As far as multiple trains go. If it is your home layout and you are the only operator, then one train and the’primitive block/analog/dc’ system would be “right up your alley”. If it is a club or a home layout with multiple operators you need to do something else. We have gone DCC. NO BLOCKS! We “drive our trains” not the track… This is way more ‘prototypical’ than a one train at a time ‘block layout’ deal. Yes, the helix is really not prototypical, but it serves it’s purpose and is the price one must pay to gain layout space. If you can find a way to get get something for nothing, please, by all means, let me know.
[8D]
I model in HO scale. I should have included that in my original post. I built the helix big because I didn’t want to have problems with operation (I wanted a easy grade) and I had the space. It is in a back corner of the basement. I have used a helix on several previous layouts and learned the hard way about steep grades and single track helix. A double track helix adds flexability (at least on my track plan.
Concerning DMNolan’s layout and helix. It looks GREAT! I’'ve actually learned a couple things just form looking at the photos you posted. TAHNKS!
If anyone that has varying levels of experience with helix building and design can help us with a couple of questions, please view my post under “Helix Design”. I’ve posted several questions there in hopes of gettting some clarification on are helix design. I’m sure that there are no wrong answers, but there may be some better ideas out there.
We would greatly appreciate any help any of you can give us. We would just like to make the best helix we can the first time with the least amount of operational problems. I’ve always learned to evaluate the experiences of others. This can help to keep you from making some bad mistakes that require correctling later.
thanks
Be careful! Just because you can draw and build the helix, doesn’t mean that your train will climb it. Remember, the smaller the circle, the steeper the grade! Grade is the units of rise per 100 units of run. An 18" radius circle (36" diameter) is about 100" of run, 4" rise makes the grade 4%. TOO STEEP! To climb that, your train either needs a lot of locos pulling or very light loads.
Given the space you have, I liked the suggestion of streching the circle into an oval, for a longer run and gentler grade. But an oval still takes up a lot of space. Consider a dogbone shape along one wall with the curves in the corners. This would allow for plenty of length and the straight sections could be flat against the wall, consuming as little as 4" of depth.
Someone else mentioned the elevation gain needed per loop. Make sure to use your NMRA guage to measure the head space from top of rail to bottom of benchwork, and plan where your wires are going to power the track.
Multi level layouts are great. You can get a lot of track into a small space, just remember track isn’t everything. Leave room for scenery.
Big_Boy_4005:
Glad you mentioned the spacing for the wiring. We nearly forgot all about the wiring with all of our other concerns.I’ve now added that to our list of things to keep track of with the helix. Most of our club layout wil follow the walls. This requires that the two levels both traverse through the two restrooms. to get from one end of the building to the other. This means that both levels will travel through about 20 foot of tunnel area in order to traverse through both (back to back) restrooms. Have no fear, we have a camera car, but the restroom tunnels will not feature clear walls to permit ‘restroom viewing’. The tunnels through the restrooms (back to back restrooms) will feature access doors to the tracks in the event of a derailment or “track related incidents”. These tracks will also feature at least three code 83 re-railer tracks in each line to help rerail trains, if necessary, without having to access them. The track in the ‘restroom tunnels’ will be level and have only a gentle curve (very minor, almost non-existent) in them to facilitate some line up problems we encountered with the walls. Though the building is about 30 ft by 60 ft, we (do to the wall and door arrangements) do not have the wall space to attempt the ‘dogbone helix’ design you described (good idea, though). Wish I could supply a picture of the layout design and building/wall plans. We also will have plenty of scenery. With the oval shaped helix design ideas, we plan on extending the oval (somewhat) in one loop such that the track pops out of the “helix mountain” into view on a trestle or similar effect. It would get pretty boring for your train to disappear for 1-2 minutes out of view in the helix. At current state, we are looking at about 1-1/2 scale miles of track (apporcimately) in each helix. We’ve computed the grade to be about 2% to 2.1% 9depending whether you are on the inner or outer most track in the helix). We just want to be as sure as possible that most of the trains belonging to club members w
In response to the question about how much space I have lit is less than most people and I am modeling one mile of the PRR through Philadelphia. There is plenty of industry on either side of the main to do this. Most of us railfan by standing in one spot and watching the train go by. I’m not advocating what I am doing for everyone. I am just suggesting my thinking that stacking levels doesn’t look prototypical and subconciously (sp) does influence how we think about what we see as does #4 turnouts and 18" radius curves. There is no problem what-so-ever with doing it. I once had a railroad that I tore down after getting to the fifth level with one to go. Having done that I think less is more and #12 turnouts (which are 15mph on the PRR) are going to have a more prototypical feel than #4 or 6. The idea is to enjoy what we do not make it a job. At this point I’d rather have fewer non-selectively compressed buildings and more prototypical trackwork and far less maintenance, wiring, problems, etc… It is a value judgement like the kind and color of car you drive. I will still run lots of trains. You can’t do the corridor and not run a lot of trains. But that is the point. With less I can do more of what I want not have to do.
Hi doc and all others,
Allow me to add another ingredient to this thread and stir the pot a little.
I have a 7’x11’ room for an HO standard gauge layout, and am thinking of a second level.
No room for a helix so I am thinking of an elevator to raise trains from one level to the next.
Just one problem, I don’t know how to go about building one but it is another approach to think about.
OLD DAD
If I were going to do that I would have a section of track that could be counterbalanced and a pin mechanism of some type to lock it at the new level. I had a switching layout that used a switchback to gain a second level. The problem you will have is the same one I had. Your train will have to back into the second level. decisions, decisions!
Well, all I’m hearing is helixes helixes helixes. If you want to transition between levels,
and want to get a longer mainline run, then simply add a grade that runs around the layout perimiter, it will add operational interest, and you’ll end up with a longer mainline that you can see. That, an it’s uncomplicated, no links and pins and pulleys needed. Think of it as a giant one-turn helix. And I don’t have a gym to build my railroad in either, just an 8’ x 16’ space in my parents garage. I,m going for a track plan thats sorta a mushroom type, and when the layouts complete, I’ll have a mainline of 112’ !
and its all thanks to the “around the walls helix” as I’ve dubbed it. Now that I’m out of school for the holidays, construction will begin soon. Just goes to show ya that 13 year olds know what they’re doing.
P.S. That underground mine idea sounds like a winner!
Doc: Sounds like my entire layout falls in the
“Also there has been discussion on a ‘nolix’ - same idea, but stretched out long and thin so the trains are visible for part of their transit.”
category. My N Scale road is a shelf layout around the room going from 0" (about 40" from the floor) to about 9" via a mid section . These levels are stacked in a corner as loops (reversing for the upper and lower, a dogbone for the mid.
The rest of the layout meanders around the room climbing at about 1 1/2 % grade. The levels are kept from being boringly obvious by having one in a tunnel while the other is on display. The tunnels are also passing sidings. The display areas are single track with towns and industries on spurs.
so far the shelf is built only 2/3rds of the way around the room, and there is no scenery to speak of, but hopes are high!
Congrats! You’ve just described an idea invented in the 1950’s, if not earlier.
How to create more prototypical level transition in a short span on a shelf layout , upon which I wanted a flyover reversing loop for turning entire trains confounded me for some time. An idea that jumped into my head when designing and building a HO layout in Iceland, and which I employed in our current N-scale layout, was a split-level design, where the left half of the layout is raised by 1/2 the height necessary for rolling stock clearance (including layout board thickness) higher than the right half of the layout. Track sloping down from the right, tunneling under the left half, only requires a grade necessary to drop half the total clearance height, and a flyover from the left, circling over the right needs to rise about 7/8" inch from its origins to clear the right-end tracks by 1.5". This results in 2% grades for flyovers and underpasses in a space that would necessitate 4% inclines to accompli***he same rise were the main layout at the same level, end-to-end. Obviously, all tracks at board level end to end have to negotiate a 7/8" - 1" uphill climb from right to left (in N scale). Such track routing was done with distance-extending S-curves. But, this allowed for a realistic flyover grade, which I couldn’t have created without the mid-layout half-step. An additional plus was the ability to more gradually duck under the left layout half with a main line from the right, brought out farther to the left, in front of and below the left end of the layout, as a staging track.
i hope this isnt double posted,but here goes.has anyone considered switchbacks?iam sure there is pros and cons to this.haven`t tried it myself but would like to hear from someone who has.
Re. all about helixes… There is ALWAYS a prototype, dudes…Think about it…The Tehachapi Loop is a one layer helix. Around and up, eh? Seriously, using 2 tracks is great as the outer one can be ascending at a slightly easier grade and the descending lets you use dynamic brakes. One that big can also be an inline staging area. At least you can move around on the inside. My first one was 24"radius and with a center support was a mite cramped to rerail a derail. I too am going for larger turnouts and curves. I am presently building a 45 degree fully eased 72" radius curve to clear a river bend, and my full length passenger cars love to flow around it. John Colley Port Townsend, WA