When building a three level layout how high should each level by and how wide should they be. Thanks Larry
First I’d say it depends on how tall you are. The upper level should be viewable to you, maybe shoulder height, unless you plan to have some sort of riser to step up onto to view the upper level.
The seperation between levels will depend on the percent grade you are planning, size of layout room and are you planning a helex? The lowest I’ve seen talked about is around 30", but you want to be able to see it under the level above it.
Your upper level should be narrower as you won’t be able to reach as far at that height, you might plan on using a stool to work on that level, even if you don’t use it during operations. Set up a skeleton, framework at various heights and see how far you can reach over comfortably and how much you can see below.
Good luck,
Scale and depth make a difference. N scale on 12’ deep shelves could easily be just a foot apart. HO on 2’ deep you probably want at least 18" between. I suggest you do a mockup and try several arrangements.
Enjoy
Paul
Greetings, o lurker of forums! (5 posts in 6 months - I hope you’ve visited more often than that.)
Actually, your question is something like, “How many rooms should I have in my house?” It all depends:
- What scale are you modeling in? N can get away with a lower height before decapitating trees, steeples and grain elevators. It can also get more on a narrow shelf.
- How tall are you and your potential visitors/boomer operators? Verne Troyer and Michael Jordan will have very different height solutions, each valid for him but not the other.
- What, exactly, would you like to model on each level? The access requirement for a major yard or engine terminal is far greater than that for a single track wending its way through pretty scenery. OTOH, access can be provided by making it possible for the shelf to pull out clear of whatever is above it.
- How do you intend to transition from one level to another? Sustained visible grade (aka nolix,) helix, train elevator - or some combination of the three? Or are each of the levels going to be independent little stand-alone empires?
As you can see, before you can get an answer to the basic question, you will have to ask - and answer - several other questions.
SO - how about a horror scenario.
- Bottom level - nine single ended yard tracks switched off two leads parallel to the thoroughfare track. Add two switcher pockets and a car-ferry slip…
- Next level - double track main that makes a flying junction with a single track branchline.
- One more - passing siding on a single track line that feeds a major industry.
- Top level - a fully developed coal mining community, including mine suppy warehouse, company store and a freight house and team tracks that service the off-track
Here is some more information to help you all give some more input. The layout is HO, the room is 40 x 10 and the folks operating are about 5’10" tall. The grade to go from level to level is 2%. I am modeling the 30-40’s of the CB&Q. I had a two level layout in California that was 24x24 but am living in AL and cannot have as big a room. I am somewhat on the heavy side. Therefore I was just wanted some input for level hights for three levels and the depth of each level. Does that help any? Thanks again for your input. Larry
I think that 3 visible levels is pushing it a bit, not so much for access - you can squeeze your hand into a pretty tight space - but you’ll be very limited for your scenery choices - no tall buildings or trees. My layout is designed to be partially double-decked, with the lowest part, at 36" high, operated from roll-around office chairs, and the upper level at around 61". I could have made the upper level about 70", for eye-level viewing, but I prefer to be able to see the entire scene while operating. Separation between the lower level and the underside of the upper will be about 19" or 20". I’m building both levels mostly at a width of 30", although there’ll be one area, with mostly scenery (and no track out of reach) that will be about 40" deep. There’ll be fluorescent fixtures attached to the underside of the upper level - something you need to consider, as any overhanging upper levels will severely limit the light that falls on the lower ones. The other factor which influenced the height of the decks is the length of the grade needed to get from one to the other: with the separation as stated, the grade is about 45’ long, utilising two horseshoe curves and using a lot of real estate.
In the photos below, the breaks in the backdrop are for the eventual installation of the second level:
You can see how little room there really is for installation of the lighting. As it is, any pictures taken in these areas have to be very carefully composed to avoid showing the support areas for the upper level, such as this:
I am currently starting a 3-level N-scale layout. This is an “around the walls” shelf-style layout, and the shelves are narrow at only 12". Here are my level heights:
- lower level (visible) - 43"
- middle level (visible) - 58"
- upper level (staging, invisible above layout) - 68"
I settled on these heights after doing some mockups with shelf brackets and foam “shelves”. I am 5’-8" tall and these heights eemed to look good in the mockup. The level separations were also influenced by the fact that I will have a helix that raises elevation 2.5" per turn, so the difference from the lower to the middle level is 15" or 6 turns of the helix, and the difference from the middle level to the upper level is 10" or 4 turns of the helix.
Hope this helps! Jamie
OK, I will give this a shot too.
I would make the bottom level staging only. That way you won’t have to put any scenery in and it can be closer to the second level. For the second level, I would put the top at 42 inches above the floor. That makes the lower level at about 12 to 16 inches lower than the bottom of the middle levels facia. I would also make the width of the lower level 18 inches, and the width of the middle level 24 inches. That way you can sit on a stool for switching if you want to, and have some room for your legs under level 2.
The top of the upper level I would put at eye level, and make some pull-out or hinge-down steps or portable platforms.
Three levels? Oh, brave soul, good luck, I admire the Rambo spirit in you!
A simple link to my blog and the fate of my attempt to build a two level. (Be sure of what you wish for and really desire.)
http://wwwjoe-daddy.blogspot.com/2007/08/ll-pox-on-hidden-staging.html
Just my two cents, I hope your efforts turn out exactly like you want and you have a load of fun building then operating your railroad.
Joe Daddy
In N I think you could do three scenicked levels with little trouble, but in HO I think you’d only really be able to do two. I’ve seen a three-level HO layout where the upper two were scenicked and the lower one (which was only about 16-18" from the floor) was for staging. A few layouts have had high-level staging I guess, I’d prefer it on the lower one myself.
I’m in the process of building a three level layout right now.
The top layer is at 160 cm high, the second at 110 cm and the lowest one, which is pure staging is at 80 cm.
I think it works fine. But I wouldn’t try three scenicked. The lowest one would be invisible anyways. I tried a mock up and let met tell you I didn’t like it. One thing to keep in mind is to keep the deck thickness down. Plan for this and it will work out.
Magnus
Jack Burgess’ Yosemite Valley RR is a beautiful multi-deck layout with up to 4 levels, and another favourite of mine is Andreas Keller’s 3-deck CN Fergus Subdivision.
Both layouts are H0 scale, and the websites have lots of info and great pics.
Svein
Svein,
Jacks layout is really a double deck layout with a few twists. Most of the room is double deck with the exception of the entry way where he he does some unusual stuff. His room steps down a lttle ways in and so he has some interesting intersections with his decks in that area (Things aren’t what they seem). Beautiful layout, great website. Jack has written a great book about the YV in addition to producing lots of CDs with scale drawings of nearly everything along the line.
I would agree with those who suggest two decks with staging on a third underneath. That is my current design and it works very well.
Guy
Guy
Well, this may help me realistically model the bankruptcy aspect of the prototype [:)]
Sorry one important bit of info I did not mention when describing my 3 deck approach was that I placed the staging on top because placing it lower would have interfered with the entrance to the room (already have one swing out section as it is). Initial version of the track plan can be found here:
http://csxclinchfielddivision.blogspot.com/2008/06/track-plan.html
Jamie
Before I begin let me state that to be perfectly honest - and I have projected this before - multi-level layouts just don’t work for me and I don’t really understand why anyone would want to build one particularly a three-level one; nevertheless I will own up that I have recently been giving serious thought to a two-level design for my new N-Scale layout. I have not really discarded the idea as of yet although I have still not become completely comfortable with it.
Here’s what I have come up with so far: I want to restrict my in-helix grade to 2% and that is going to require 32 inch minimum radius for the outside (upgrade) track; the inside (downgrade) track will be on a 30 inch minimum radius which computes to a 2.12% grade. Level separation withing the helix will be 4 inches and the roadbed/subroadbed width will be about 6 inches - I don’t want any trains stringing themselves onto the floor.
Now, as far as the separation between platform levels I don’t want to be climbing onto and off of stools so I have set an upper deck heighth of 54 inches at track level. My lower platform I want at 30 inch heighth. That gives me a 24 inch separation between platforms; allowing seven inches for benchwork, subroadbed, roadbed and below track level scenery of seven inches gives me a 17 inch track level to underside of benchwork separation. I can live with that but it is going to allow only about a 21 inch depth of platform on my lower level; depth of platform on my upper level will probably be 27 inches.
Now, what about you? Assuming that you reside in the good ol’ ooh ess of aah then your ceiling is going to be 96 inches. Making another assumption that you might want to leave at least 24 inches upper level to ceiling and 30 inches lower level to floor then the math is 96 inches minus 24 inches minus 30 inches divided by two gives you deck to deck separations of 21 inches. If that is too tight then you can lower the river or
I would like to add my two cents on this subject. I also have a three-level layout with staging on the lower level. I will admit that in the beginning I was afraid that I might not be happy with the results. Now that carpentry, wiring and track work is 100% complete, I can say that the end results far exceeded my expectations. In fact, I am so pleased with the multi-deck presentation that if I were to have three times the space, I would go with a triple deck design in it as well. The resulting shadowbox effect has a very finished and museum-like quality. Here are my most recent results as shown on my website.
Having said that, I’m not sure I could pull off three scenicked levels and still be happy. I’m not saying it can’t be done. But I would have to sacrifice staging for 32 trains which I would not be willing to do. To answer your original question, my spacing is 30" staging, 40" middle level and 58" upper level. Most of the benchwork is 24" wide. I’m 5’10".
I will say that if I were to build a single deck layout, it would be at least 55" high. The eye-level perspective of HO equipment is amazing.
I hope this helps!
Cliff, It is actually your layout that convinced me that my double track helix solution is feasable. I am hoping I can pull it off with similar success as you do. Thanks for the inspiration! Jamie
Cliff,
Do you feel the upper deck interferes with viewing of the lower deck at all? It would seem that being 24" wide it really cuts off the lower deck view. I am only a couple inches taller than you and I feel I would have to stoop to get a good view of the lower deck. But I guess that would depend on how close you stand to the layout. So that means, how close do you stand when operating the layout?
With that said I LOV
Either the first (lowest) or third (highest) levels should be dedicated to staging. The two other levels should be at the best compromise in height so visibility and accessibility is optimized for train operations.
Mark
I think the key to a multiple level layout is to make the upper level seem like it is the valance for the level under it. So the facia needs to be finished and not draw attention to itself. There also needs to be some type of lighting installed on the bottom of the upper level, so there are no shadows on it, or for that matter, any level that is scenic’ed. Cliff’s layout & pictures show this very well. Nice work Cliff.