I’m dealing with an L shaped space about 12’ x 16’ in HO. I want to use a dogbone style layout to go around the corner, having the lppos at the ends. The loops will be situated on probablt 4’ x 5’ areas, and in between the loops will be made up of 3’ shelf. What do yall think? Anyone have or done one like this?
Sounds good. Do you really need to go 3’ deep on shelf? 30" or 24" easier to reach into.
I agree! Absolutely do not go over 30 inches 0n the shelf unless you have 48 inch long arms!
No. I would rather go with a 2’ shelf. My inexperience was just telling me two feet might not be enough. Do yall think it will? it’s going to be a coal mine/logging operation. I was thinking of the coal mine on the loop after the 16’ run, because I wanted to make a run up a mountain. Will 16’ be enough room for a nice grade? I appreciate all of yall’s help. this is a father son project, and we’re very excited.
how far up do you want to go on that grade?
if it is 4in it will be about a 2% grade
if it is 8 in, it will be about a 4% grade
2 ft shelves should be fine
in this case, you just model certain portions of a large industry
I don’t know if we’ll model anything in particular. I might take some ideas from something. I’m not sure yet. I think I’ve asked this in another forum…but didn’t get an answer. Isn’t a 4% grade a bit much? You asked if I was going 4" or 8". Well, I want to go as high as possible. I had intended to start the grade on an 8’ setion before the 16’ run, go around the corner and begin the 16’ run. That will give me 8 more feet to begin the grade.
Without a concrete idea of what your layout will be ‘about’, you are flailing around in the dark…if I may be so blunt, Rob. Please consider developing a notion of what theme and capabilities you want in your layout. From there, devising a workable track plan should be a matter of trial and error…lots of graph paper and a sharp pencil.
Yes, 4% is a bit much. It will look toy-like, and I believe that you will eventually come to regret your choice if you actually build it into your track plan. I could say go ahead with 3%, but no more…unless your idea is to build a mountainous logging road with Cimaxes or Shays, or even tank engines. In that case, you could model grades around 5-7% and still have it look great.
If I read correctly, you are currently envisioning a long grade of 8’, a plateau, and then another grade to rise up to a higher bench on your layout. Okay, but try really hard to draw what it will look like when finished, and then see if it is going to look ‘right’. A clear picture in your mind will go a long way towards generating the actual track plan. This is an important first step.
It is going to be a Shay looging road. I wasn’t going to have a plaeau between the 8’ run and the 16’ run. The 8’ run will just be 90 degrees from the 16’ run. I already know hands down what shape the layout will be. It’s going to be a folded dogbone. I know some think it’s boring, but it’s simple, and I know I can’t srew up too bad if I keep it simple. Thanks for being blunt. That’s what I need. I have looked at, and downloaded the Westside Lumber Company layout. It is very similar to what I want. They have some under and over stuff in theirs that I don’t want to use. Other than that, I think what I have in mind is REAL close.
Are you saying I can model a Shay road at 5-7%? Isn’t that a bunch? Won’t the locomotive have trouble with that? Like I said, it is going to be a Shay logging road. At least that part of it.
Dang Good suggestion!
True. But be careful! Assuming you fini***he layout, will a logging line have enough operating potential to keep you interested? Hauling logs to the mill might get boring. On the other hand, logging lines have some very “funky” equipment. If you are a model builder rather then a “runner”, such a layout might keep you busy for years.
Have fun
Yes, it is a bunch but that is what shays are designed for. I’ve never modeled Shay’s but the prototypes were designed for much steeper grades than that (up to 14%). Here is one with a load that the caption says is a 12% grade.
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/shay06.Html
Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you’re thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide ‘shelf’ running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture…
and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture…
and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little ‘hill’ beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum.
I agree with Expalacedog in that you’re eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space… i.e. turnouts, business’, yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT… I’ve come to a halt with mine and I’m rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I’ll probably go ahead with it in the end. I’m in no hurry… 
I’ve been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn’t uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines… well… theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you’re going to do the hills and valleys that run beside the track also.
Personally, I think it is an interesting aspect of railroading. I’ve seen it done by experts in On3 and it was a thing of beauty.
But, a
Thank you very much for the pictures. At least now I know I can run 4% safely, and probably more. All of you have been very helpful.
[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12
Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you’re thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide ‘shelf’ running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture…
and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture…
and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little ‘hill’ beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum.
I agree with Expalacedog in that you’re eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space… i.e. turnouts, business’, yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT… I’ve come to a halt with mine and I’m rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I’ll probably go ahead with it in the end. I’m in no hurry…
I’ve been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn’t uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines… well… theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you’re
Git you some of this one!!!
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/shay05.Html
The incline is so apparent in this photo that you can see The man standing is leaning with the lay of the land.
Rob, I rode on a 2-8-2 Tank engine a month ago. It was designed for heavy grades hauling. A plaque beside the water glass on the backhead said to not let the water level fall below a line near the top of the glass on grades of 9 degrees. That is NINE degrees.
Having people you don’t know telling you to have a sober second look at your pet plan is disconcerting, I’m sure, but we sure don’t want to see you building ‘neat’ things into your layout that won’t be so neat after a few hours of running it. Better to bite the bullet now and make the changes that will make your layout a real pride and joy…with the little bonus of not being boring. [:D]
Hey no sweat. I don’t take it personally. I know I’m stupid, that’s why I came here for help. At this point in my layout, I can change anything, because I haven’t laid the first piece of track.
there have been a number of threads here concerning the pulling abilities of our model locos . some seem to be even better than the prototype , some don’t seem to do anywhere near as well . also there seems to be a lot of variation even among identical models .
so before you design a steep grade into your layout you should determine if your locos can handle it while pulling the number of cars you expect them to . maybe cut a piece of plywood 8’ x 3" , attach some track and prop it up at the correct angle . put your loco and a few cars on it and see how it goes .
There have been a few comments like “assuming you’ll fini***he layout”, and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can’t tell me how to do this, but it’s important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don’t include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated.
Rob, because I’m inexperienced myself I can’t help you with the layout very much. I’m still struggling to get mine going, but the rest of these people can. Thanks for the link to the old Shay photos, they make nice wall art when redone on the computer.
Jarrell
P.S. so you’re from around Gray, eh? [;)]