John, an example of my own layout which I am sure you will recall. It shows somewhat the same slope and situation…stacked tracks.
Yes, I like that one too. In your picture, what is the distance from the upper level tracks to the backdrop (how thick is your mountain there) and how much distance is there between your upper tracks and your lower tracks? And what is the total depth from the edge of your layout to the wall?
Approximate / guesstimate measurements are fine-- just trying to get a gut feel for the depths in your photo.
John
John, looking at the centerline in front of the engine, and then going 90 deg to our right, engine’s left, is about 4" to the backdrop.
In this one, the distance to the centerline is more like 2" to the backdrop where the coupler between the second and third car is.
In this view of the layout, you can see better how close the apex of this end-curve is to the backdrop.
Crandell
Wow, that’s nowhere near as deep as I was thinking-- I could give that up and still have 2-ish feet in front to do the foreground scene-- my benchwork is around 32-inches in the area I’m planning this. I I could technically give myself another foot or so if it seems warranted, at the expense of shaving a smidge off the center peninsula. Oh, and I reckon I have a couple of inches of wiggle room too that I always forget about-- that’s enough to sneak a track through by itself… I wish I could figure out a way to flip it around though so I didn’t have to do the turnback. That’s the one element in my plan I wish would go away. If I did that though, the location where I would have to meet the upper deck is right at the limit of my “negotiated track space” and I’m not certain it would fit right going in that direction.
Thanks for the info. I think what I have in mind is actually possible.
What is the approx grade I’m seeing in this picture (above) ?
Hey Crandell,
I don’t mean to hijack the thread or anything, but that’s a great overview shot of your layout.
Thanks, Mark! It is weird for me, but I get a lot of positive response to that yellowish photo, and I’m not sure why. Maybe it is because it puts some of my layout photos into some sort of resolution or perspective for people.
John, the grade for the right of way is deceptive in this photo. It is very close to 2.6% at the close turnout. Behind the camera, it is about 3%.
Crandell
You’re right, I would not have guessed that steep. What does it take to pull a freight train up that hill? Say 20-ish cars?
I can pull 14 BLI H2a coal hoppers with plastic fake coal loads and a caboose with my Paragon J1 2-10-4, but my PCM heavy metal Y6b 2-8-8-2 can handle 20 cars and a caboose. All the other engines, including a Rivarossi H-8 2-6-6-6 will struggle. A Paragon Niagara 4-8-4 srubs its tires on the rail heads just a bit pulling three Walthers Heavyweights, an IHC dome car, and a BLI reefer.
Bottom line…think seriously before resorting to a grade higher than 2.5%. They are very demanding.
Crandell
Yes, that’s exactly why I was asking. That sounded pretty steep. I was thinking three or four unit lashups. Mine is going to be relatively steep also. The CAD program says its around 1.5 - 1.8% (which is easily acceptable to me). My own eyeballs and ruler suggest it’s going to be closer to 2.2 - 2.5%. I’m not sure how the CAD program is getting such rosy numbers. Although its possible that I have an elevation set wrong someplace. That could account for the discrepancy…
John