On my Siskiyou Line, I have built a mushroom style multideck design. (Don’t know what a mushroom is? See: http://model-trains-video.com …)
I use a two-turn helix to get from the lower deck to the upper deck. I’ve run on lots of layouts with a helix and the part I dislike the most about a helix is the way it swallows a train for what seems like an eternity. Even my little two-turn helix has over 40 feet of track in it, and the branch is only 160 feet long … which means 25% of the entire branch is in a helix.
If you can avoid a helix by going around the walls to gain altitude, then do it. If you have to have a helix, then climb / drop as much as you can the two levels to get them as close together as possible before you get to the helix.
You can find more info about my layout design wia the website link on my signature.
I am one year into my n-scale 2 level layout with a helix. I ‘scratch-built’ my helix from plywood- it took me a weekend to construct, lay cork and track. It was frustrating and isn’t prototypical in grade but it is functional and that’s what I was after.
I have been around and around on this one myself. My latest thinking is along the lines of necessary evil. Sketched out the Nolix but decided I didn’t want to run through the same scene twice at different levels. Don’t like the long run in the helix, but softened it a bit by having trains climb a grade to the helix in the open, cutting out one turn. I decided to double track my helix to get serial staging on one of the tracks when the layout is running point to point during operating sessions.
I am hiding staging underneath the layout, so I haven’t solved all the problems. In a 13’ x 23’ room there is not a lot of space. By having a helix I can get twice as much layout in the same space. Construction has barely begun. It will be interesting to see how the plan gets modified as I go along.
Staging represents “the rest of the world.” You need to use that to your advantage when dealing with unprototypical space. You can count in a helix also. Just think of it as the area that your layout is modeling ends at some point such as the entrance to a tunnel for the helix. Beyond that point is the rest of the world. Since in the real world trains will be comming and going past that point you want to model that in your layout. Throw staging in under there to give you the trains from the rest of the world.
The biggest part about model railroading, is having fun. Whatever floats your boat. Some people love prototypical operation, some like switching a lot, while others like seeing how long of a train they can run. Though I have never ran a 300+ car train with locos spread throughout. [:-^]
While I can appreciate the frustration of not seeing a train for a long time and wondering where it is (I like your “shadowbox” trick in your helix, by the way), couldn’t one locate their helixes in such a way that they provide a sense of distance and separation between scenes on a layout.?
Absolutely! An excellent observation. An issue of Model Railroad Planning (don’t recall, but it was maybe 4-5 years ago now) had a very comprehensive article on the helix.
One of the key observations was that if you are going to include a helix on your layout, put it in a place that provides a natural break in the flow of running the train.
For example, it’s a bad idea to plop a helix down right in the middle of a mainline run. But using a helix like I do on the Siskiyou Line to get from the main down to a branchline on the lower level works okay because the break feels “okay”.
Other places the delay of a helix works:
to get from staging to the on stage railroad. Some delay is acceptable in this case, and even having the helix out in the open is okay, since you are not on the visbile layout so more “model railroad” thoughts seem all right, since you are not quite “on stage” yet on the visible layout.
to get between levels using a “long tunnel” as is common on the old NP and GN trackage in Washington State.
Sorry I’m late to the helix party. How about O gauge 10 feet in diameter??? Maybe the best advice is “don’t try this at home”. (even though I did)[swg]
i am also building a multilevel layout (2) one for staging and the other to run my trains. I used woodland scenics risers and over a little more than 12 feet i dropped around 8 inches.
8" in 12’? that’s probably 6% in the middle of the grade - that’s one hell of a hill. Also 8" is pretty tight clearance for staging. See other threads here - others advise 12" minimum to get your hand in to the tracks at the back when the inevitable happens.
that’s why the helix comes up all the time: except in the biggest rooms you just can’t get enough separation between levels with reasonable grades (say 3%)
One suggestion on building a multi-deck layout I haven’t seen mentioned here is the advise to make the aisles a bit wider than you normally would on a single deck railroad.
This is because as you are leaning forward to operate on the lower level, you’re, uh, caboose is sticking out into the aisle, er, behind.
After many years finally graduating from a book shelf pike (Jan 03 RMC) area to something more average in area - even have a room size building set aside for the new pike. With a rough 9.5 ft x 10.25 ft space (yikes nearly square) to work with and trying to avoid a duck under or lift out (at least for operations) in consideration of running trains for a long time to come, working towards a double deck arrangement in HO with a 3.5 turn helix. On paper at least it seems to work - but at the price of more than half the area hidden and nearly a scale mile of hidden track. While the scenes look like they’ll work and the overall operational concept works, just wondering if this is overkill for the space. Or, would a more typical rr design concept work better. Oh, for reference looking at appalachian type coal RR with main exchanging cars with a shortline or branchline. Got one of those neat bachmann 2-6-6-2’s I’d like to show off and geared lokies on the branch.
In a layout the size your are contemplating wmshay, a helix would be “the main” event. I think you should abandon the helix.
Alternative number one: find the MR issues which have a layout which is around the walls with staging around it’s outside perimeter. You could have staging set up as such.
The other alternative: you won’t like this one, but I’ll throw it out there anyway. I have a room that is 13 by 7 widening to 13 by 9 1/2 - what you would call a small bedroom or a study; for us, it was a study. When I finally realized this was all that was available in the house for a layout and I wanted an empire I switched to N scale. The problem you face in HO is the demanding curves
So I have a double decker which is has a nolix area (no helix) for elevation gain.
I’m building a layout that has two, three and four levels. I have 3 helices, one at the end of each peninsula. Not difficult to build and really increase the amount of railroad you can model. Only draw back that I don’t like is having the trains out of sight for any length of time. I can post more pictures if anyone is interested.
I too am constructing a 2 level layout. It’s in a 35’ x 25’ basement. The levels will be connected by a 5 turn helix. The top level benchwork is 70% complete and the bottom 50% complete. It’s HO and will be a model of the New Haven’s Springfield double track line from Hartford Ct to New Haven, CT and the Valley branch line from Hartford,CT to Old Sayborook Jct. CT. 3 yards- 1 25’ x 30" 14 track stub end yard; another staging yard 25’ x 14" 8 track yard and a 12 track 20’ x 30" double ended yard. Plus a small 7 track passenger coach yard. Should be fun to operate.
My thoughts on two-level layout may not fit everyone’s criteria, so I will start out admitting this is a special case.
This is NOT 2- level layout to get longer mainline run.
Maybe it is partly not deciding what to model and wanting everything.
I like the Santa Fe east-west secondary mainline through the piney woods approximately 50 miles north of Houston. I have used it as the theme of my small 3x7 “table” layout,
( http://www.railimages.com/albums/kennethanthony/aad.jpg )
which I consider inadequate mainly for not having enough layover staging to run full complement of trains: daily through freight each direction, local peddler east one day west the other, couple of extras, doodlebug one way in am return pm with a way to turn at least on one end.
I also want to model Santa Fe passenger trains Texas Chief, California Special, Ranger in Houston and Galveston area, ie Houston and 50 miles south. Like to model the area AND the traffic. Would fill as large a space as I could ever imagine having. 2-car garage size in N scale.
I would like to have both.
Some connection between the two themes but NOT NECESSARILY LIVE RUNNING. In real life, the two parts of railroad connected 50-60 miles west of either of the modeled areas. Some cars shipped from Houston level in one session might continue on other level in next operating session by hand movement from lower staging to upper staging. Not a whole lot, no more than a dozen say. Layouts on two levels would still have to arranged so busy switching/operating areas on one level not directly above/below each other.
Piney woods line minimally operable by one operator, better for two, three about max.
Big city passenger terminal and island seaport 3 operators minimum, up to 5 or 6. Could operate one part of layout without the other or both, depending on how many operators available.
Anybody ever done anything like this?
