I have been spending tons of time, lately, on making a track-plan on paper for my Tate’s Falls and New Luxembourg RR, a freelance shortline in north-ish Ontario. I’ve read tons of articles about the layouts themselves that are multi-level, but never why people chose them. ON my layout, I am going to have steep hills, layered limestone cliffs, and rushing rivers, much like what is found in central Ontario, like around Peterborough, Barrie, and Lake Simcoe area, don’t know where any of that is use Google maps. Anyway, the hills would slope up to be 2 or more feet tall, and in a 13x14 room, I’m crammed on space for my towns and villages.
MAIN QUESTION: WHAT IS BETTER MULTI OR SINGLE LEVEL LAYOUTS.
My first layout was not multilevel. My second I made multilevel after wanting to have more operational capability, but not a lot of space. I did not use a helix as they take up a lot of room, but instead use tracks that run between the levels sometimes hidden with back drops and hills and sometimes visible on the sides of hills. There are 3 levels with the lowest for staging. You don’t have to have each level be the same size. Between the various levels and the tracks between the levels you can get quite a bit of mainline running.
what is better, a Ferrari, a Jeep Wagoneer or a tractor?
You will have figured out that at a price, the length of the visible main will be twice as long as the main on a single deck layout; is this worth the trouble? If your mountains are over 2 feet high, add trees and the difference in height will be easily 3 feet or more. You have to go around your room twice to get to that altitude. (a 10 to 12 turn helix would be an option too)
Your druthers are more directed to scenery then to railroading. Desks so far apart will be hard to work on and hard to appreciate; one is to low the other to high.
Trackplanning is taking decisions too…if you want more space for your villages, use wider shelves, but again this comes at a price; it might result in reach-in and maintenance problems.
And last but not least, how many operators are involved, no use building a second level as long as one level gives you enough railroading and construction fun.
It might be an idea to show some of your plans, so you could start talking about the things you like and don’t like. And compare them with your list of wishes(druthers). A drawing of your room, with doors, windows and other obstacles could be a good starting point.
And yes, no one ever was able to change a small room into a ballroom, the real work is about to begin.
I am pretty new to the hobby and this site but, If you are thinking multi level plan for it. I didn’t and wish I had. I started out flat (boring) and once I soldered up all the track on the flat I thought I needed more being I still had track leftover. Honestly now knowing more I would not even build a flat surface. It has been more work making adjustments to raise and lower sections. The benchwork method seems like the way to go!
My current 3 level ATSF layout was started in 1984 after building 4 other layouts between 1957? and 1983. On this layout I used a helix between top and middle deck as I had an area that was suited for it, and on the middle to bottom deck I used a long mainline hidden on a grade under the middle deckwork. Like both, would recommend to anyone wanting multideck to use either helix or grade, or both as I did.
If you are going for scenery, single deck layouts are the way to go so you can express the grandeur of the area you model and not worry about running into a deck above or below your scene.
If operations are your main reason, then a multideck layout can give you double the run to improve your operations.
If your talking HO scale in that size room, and you want scenic rolling hills, I would say one level only would be your only choice, as stated. If you want “run length”, multilevel!! Now, in N scale you could pull off both “scenics” and “run”, even on a multi level.
I am building the Tehachapi Loop in my basement. All the trackwork is done. When the track loops back on itself at Tunnel 9 the grade is so steep (for me) to get back to my helix that I am planning to build along the wall about 2 feet above the exsisting benchwork just to make that downhill run a whole lot smoother. If you have no room for a helix, you might look into what Tony Koester did with his layout. Another option in 13x14 is a continous climb through all of your scenery to get a long run. That then begs the question, is this point to point or run forever while you sit and enjoy. That will most likely tell you exactly what you need to get started and really enjoy your railroad. I kind of rambled on but my layout is 16x24 and a monster for me to build. If you plan carefully your pike will be fun to build and a lot more fun to operate. Good luck.