Hi all. I’m considering placing a second level as a branch line industry off my mailine, which goes around my layout and rises to 14" inches. Theoretically, this second level would have a small fascia (2 inch), just as a demarcation. So the height differential would be about a foot. Is that a practical and decent height between levels, and what is the optimum or “standard” space between levels, especially if one hopes to scenick both levels? I’m thinking the 12 inches may be too tight.
I’m looking for some input to see if my idea will be interesting or frustrating before I start cutting wood and drilling screws again.
I’d take some cardboard and make a full scale mockup to see if it would work out…stop by an appliance store, pick up a refrigerator box and have at it. I think if your layout is too low, the 12" spacing would limit visibility of the lower level.
Making the second level narrower can reduce its impact. I’ve got about a foot between, with top 8" deep the the bottom level’s 18". The upper level is a bit high, the lower a bit low, I don’t remember the numbers. But it looks like it will work:
Don, my lower level is at 43", wish i had made it lower but alas, the benchwork is done. Wanted to make it so my kids could see. I think that you’re right about the visibility at the lower level. Jeff, thanks for the photo, lets me see what 12" difference will look like. I think both of you are right…I should limit the depth of the lower level scene to 12 inches or so, even though that level goes back 30". That should help with the visibility and not looking as awkward.
I did some googling and found an article by the Gateway chapter of NMRA that recommends 14" minimum for the spacing differential, with 16-18" preferred. I’m going to take another look at the track leading to the top to see if i can increase the rise by a few inches. I may look at a stretch of 4% grades, even though I avoided them elsewhere. Because after all this an industrial branchline I’m considering. The current grade is 3%, so I have some room I might be able to use.
What anyone else recommends doesn’t matter nearly so much as what looks good to you. This is so easy and cheap to mock up that a carboard mock-up should be your first step. I’ve seen all manner of deck-to-deck spacing and IMHO, small separations can work well if they are offset horizontally and a small strip of fascia and/or “sky” backdrop is used to signal to the viewer that this is a “different place”.
I would hope that you can avoid the 4% grade. Even on an industrial branch (especially if there are steeply graded curves to get there), you’ll likely find that this constrains the operating enjoyment.
12" would work for N scale if the shelves are pretty shallow. I model N scale and I went with 18" seperation for my decks. The bottom deck is about the right height for a roll around office chair and the upper deck is about mid-chest on me (I’m 5’11"). Here’s a pic or two that will give you an idea of what that looks like…
I too had the same issue with my HO layout and came up with a window of 12" to 14" between deck levels. This figure was determined with the following factors:
Visual appearances for both levels and between the two levels for myself and my family based on our heights and eye levels.
To maintain a maximum track grade of 3% between the two levels with a max distance of 14" requires a mainline run of 39’ (468") to traverse from the lower to the upper deck.
Any figure lower than 12" between decks was too close for HO because I wanted to have some structures on the lower deck and for reachability on the back sections which can be up to 4’ from the benchwork edge.
Any figure higher than 14" between decks and the spread was too great due to the lower deck being too low and the upper deck being too high for viewing and reachability issues.
Now, take those same factors into consideration when you look at your train room and layout plan and it might help you to determine what your best values will turn up!
I’ll definitely do the cardboard box mock-up, that’s a simple and excellent idea. It will give me a good sense of the space. I think I can get up to the 14 inch mark with a continued 3% grade, albeit one that wraps around a corner. It should be ok, and interesting from an operating standpoint.
Philip, thanks for the photos. An 18 inch separation would be ideal, though I doubt my run can make it that high. And in N scale for you, that’s a great spacing. I’m in HO, so the space is tighter. Yet another point of envy about the space available for the wee scale! [:D]
As long as the levels are no wider then a foot or so you should be fine. Deeper scenes require either a larger seperation or they need to be more at eye level. For instance, the pic where you’d be surrounded on three sides ( http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j319/pcarrell/Autumns%20Ridge/7-22-075.jpg ), on the left upper deck the scene will be a city and dock scene thats 2 1/2 feet deep. It works because it’s almost at eye level. Now look at the lower level on both sides in that same pic. The left is about 8 or 9 inches wide and the right is about 14 inches. With slim lighting, and a slightly dropped valance to hide that lighting, the back of the scene is not hidden by the valance hanging off of the top deck when you view it. It also helps that I’m lazy and will probably view the scene from my roll around office chair anyways. [;)]
Lots of good information/suggestions here, thank you. I am in the initial planning stages of my new layout and I have the same type of concerns. How far to space my two levels?
I am planning an around-the-walls type layout with lower level being the staging area. I was looking at having the levels about 24 inches apart. I was thinking of doing an around-the-walls type helix to give me the longest run possible. I figure 2 loops around the room will at a 2% grade will give the 24" I’m looking for. I am thinking the lower level to be 36" wide with four run-through tracks and the remainder consisting of staging tracks. NO scenery is planned for the lower level.
So, my question/concern is, are my initial plans okay? Is the 24" spacing enough or too much? The only thing I can foresee me needing access to the lower level (as of right now) is for uncoupling purposes, and with a run-through yard, I’m not sure how much I’ll actually be doing that.
Any and all thoughts welcome and appreciated. Thanks!!
To me, the thing about having the levels 24 inches apart is not so much the spacing, but the position that leave the two levels in. If we assume that there is an ‘optimum’ level (for you), and you want two levels, one or both is going to move to a less than ‘optimum’ position. Rereading your post, I’m seeing the lower level is for staging, so everything I was thinking is kind of moot. In that case, I think you need to drawn out the side vies, and maybe make a mock up. Thirty six inch reach under a sceniked level is going to be a challenge, at least, so you might want to think about that part of the plan.
Now I am reading some more and getting confused. Are we really talking about three levels, here? Two visible, and then staging? The loops around the room have to go somewhere…
There isnt any exact level height definitioning, if your able to looks below and run trains and look up to a narrow shelf, seems ok to me. Just if your doing switching you have a clear view for coupling and check turnout positionings, IE have switch stand indicators…
My shelf layout plans look for maybe 1 foot or 18 inches difference, still playing with height differences because I will be doing trackage up and down amongst all the nuttiness.
I am planning on having two levels…the upper level at about chest height for scenery, mainline runs, etc. The lower level will be the yard/staging area. With my room size, if I attempt to maintain a 2% grade, my around-the-walls helix will need to make two full loops around the room in order to rise (or decend) the 24" between levels. It’ll basicly be a huge radius 2-turn helix that runs along the walls leaving the upper level, hugging walls around the room, eventually reaching the lower level. If the upper level is chest high, then the lower level will be roughly at waist high. My computer desk is waist high, and if I duck down and reach toward the wall, I can easily reach back about 32". With a run through staging area, uncoupling (thus reaching the entire width of the lower level) may not be an everyday occurance. I hope this gives you a better understanding of my plans. Again, any and all suggestins welcomed.
OK, I see the plan in my head now. The upper level spirals around the room and becomes the lower level. So, if I am picturing this right, if you start out at say, 55 inches, you are going to go past that spot again at 43, and then again at 31. Am I picturing this right?
So, can you get the 32 inch reach with another level only 12 inches above? A level you don’t want to knock into? An manipulate a car?
At the same time, I don’t think you can afford much moer spacing than that, both due to grade, and the lower level would be too low, or the upper too high. So perhaps you implement your plan, but put the staging tracks that you expect to need to deal with in front, and try not to have any farther back than 24 inches or so. Maybe even have some open space at the back for reaching a hand over, but there might not be room for that. Remember, trouble will happen where you can least reach it, dereailment, turnout trouble, track kink, whatever. And you’ll need to clean the track, etc, as well.
The other thing to think about is whether you want your whole railroad to be on a grade. You’d want to level your yard(s), sidings, etc., or put in brakes, or you get rolling cars. Food for thought, think about it and see what happens.
I’m just getting started with a multi-level layout myself and am planning on 14 to 15 inches between the tops of the rails. I am also working hard to keep the thickness of each level to no more than 3 inches, leaving 11 to 12 inches of clearance between levels.
My middle level is narrower (~20 inches) than the lower level (~24 inches) to make it easier to view the lower level. (I do have an upper level that is as wide as the lower level, but it requires a step up to view it and thus doesn’t interfere with viewing the middle level.)
Basically, the narrower your levels, the less vertical clearance you need for easy viewing. Of course, your minimum level difference will be driven by the height of the structures and trees you will have on the lower levels. Also, the width of your aisles make a difference. If you can stand further back, you’ll be able to see the back of the lower level easier.
To mock-up my layout height levels, I actually used some tall adjustable height book shelfs and placed cardboard on them to get the proper depth. I then made sure I could view the back of the lower level easily without standing back any more than my aisle width allowed.
Thanks again for the response. Your close…the upper level will be flat with tracks running around the room in a sort-of circle. Then, a set of tracks will diverge from the mainlines and begin their trek down the around-the-walls helix to the lower level staging which will also be flat. The 24 inch spacing I am looking at obtaining is between the two main levels. The shelf that the tracks run down through the helix will be about 12 inches wide. If I make the lower level 36 inches deep, that will leave me with 24 inches of yard space. I am planning a run-through yard, so uncoulping may not be an issue. Trians will pull in, stop, park, pull back out when called upon again. So, if that makes any more sense to you, will a spacing of 24 inches bewteen levels be enough or too much for my needs? If you would like, e-mail me and I will send you a crude drawing of my propsed idea and we can go from there. I am thinking that I am going to have to make up a cardboard mock up just to be sure.
I see now. That should work fine. Twenty four inches is plenty, maybe even too much. I’m wodering if the lower level is going to be getting whacked while you do things on the upper level. Being a little closer might protect it. A quick mock up and/or drawing should tell you.
