Just curious what’s the typical max grade used (HO scale).
Mine is 2.5%
One very short section of 2.4%. Other than that, my grades average about 2%.
Tom
The layout I’m currently building has a 3% grade which I didn’t want to do, but I only had so much room to make it to the bridge. I was told I may have problems with that grade.I’ll know in a few weeks when I start wiring.
True to my prototype, my maximum visible JNR mainline grade will be built to 25/1000 (2.5%). Grades in the netherworld (hidden staging and thoroughfare tracks) are held to 2%, except for one 2.5% grade operated downgrade only.
On my coal-originating connector, the maximum is 4%, while the worst is 3.5% on a 520 degree, 350mm radius helix. The scheme was to justify lots of motive power on rather short trains. Since the motive power is mainly in the form of 0-6-0Ts, almost any train requires one powered axle per (4 wheel, 17 ton capacity) car.
To put this in perspective, one prototype that I suggest, but don’t model in detail, climbs 8% grades, rounds 30 meter radius curves (screaming flanges, anyone?) and still needs a switchback to climb the worst of the canyon. The guilty 1:1 scale party is the Hakone Tozan Tetsudo.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - in 1:80 scale, aka HOj)
main line = 1.5 % yard lead and ladder = 0.75 % industrial district = 3 %
HO scale atlas and kato diesels seem to have no problems with these.
the only engines that are “challenged” seem to be some of the late chinese steam like p2k and bachman plus a couple of bli yard diesels that won’t pull a sick stripper out of bed unless they are mu’d.
seems like the better they look - the less they pull.
i do run some early brass steam on occasion but those have so much lead added they would stop gamma rays.
these grades were planned around 35 car trains using mu’d atlas geeps for road power and kato yard engines. experience from a former layout helped a lot. when determining what grade to use, you might want to consider what your favorite power can do and how much train you want it to pull. that also helps you determine things like staging, siding and yard track lengths.
if you are just now starting out, i would suggest an analytical approach something like this.
1-what prototype do i want to model?
2-what era do i want to model?
3-what locomotives are appropriate for that railroad at that time?
4-what is available to represent them?
5-how do they pull?
grizlump (grumpy german)
Most of my grades are 2.5% or less, although almost all of them are on curves, with many involving multiple curves. The longest travels about 45’, and involves two “horseshoe” curves and a fairly broad “S” bend. The steepest grade, though, is just under 5%, and is on hidden track. I added it to provide a continuous running capability for loco break-in running and for those occasions when a visitor just wants to “see a train run”. [;)]
Wayne
About 1.5%, maybe hits 2%.
I am in the same bind as willy6… as I have 3% grades throughout my elfin empire. I operate HO steamers that range from 4-8-2’s down to small Spectrum 4-6-0’s and 4-4-0’s, and I really don’t have a problem. (Just maintain a good track cleaning program…)
Bob
3% on mine. They are doable, but present a lot of work for all but the heaviest and most powerful engines when I ask them to pull reasonably long trains.
Here I show a Y6b shoving a coal drag on the 3% grade. The “standard” grade is supposed to be 2.2%, but there were steeper grades scattered throughout N. America and Europe.
-Crandell
Mine is 2.1% This is a workable number for me with 25" radius curves. Turns increase the effective grade, tight ones more so.
The old U&D which I loosely freelance had several grades in the low twos and one at 3.1%.
Remember that a light rail branch mountain line cannot use the large locos that a mainline would. I like to double head 4-6-0s and 4-4-0s or use a pusher.
Karl
I think the best I got was a B.
You’ve gotten some pretty interesting answers, so far. One question that I would put forth is: Do you plan on having your grades constant, or interrupted? Reason I ask, is that I’m modeling the Sierra Nevada mountains of California, that while geologically give the impression that they’re an uninterrupted constant rise from west to east, actually has some ‘resting’ room between altitude elevations.
So my 2% is NOT constant. There are places where the grade either eases or disappears to ‘level’ for entire stretches, as the railroad works from elevation to elevation. Frankly, this gives my locos a chance to handle longer trains than they might were the grade uninterrupted. I add helpers more for ‘show’ and operating interest than I actually do to handle the trains. I’ve found that most of my steam locos can start at 0" elevations and take an assigned train to my highest (18") elevation without any helpers, simply because of a couple of relatively long 0% stretches between the grades themselves.
So if you feel you have the space, you might consider ‘interrupting’ your grades by either reducing the percentage or allowing a level stretch between rises.
Tom [:)]
This is probably not the kind of operation you are envisioning. My maximum grade is on the section from the cliff behind the doghole port down to the pier. On my switchbacks, I have to rise 2" in a 40" run (5% average grade). But the vertical transitions are each 14" long, which leaves about a 12" length of peak grade at 8%. Train length is 20", which is three 28-32ft cars plus my tiny Keystone/NWSL Shay. Note the entire train is not on the 8% at any given time.
The Keystone Shay is made from lead alloy, which gives it very good tractive effort for its size. Both the Roundhouse boxcab diesel/Climax (share the same chassis) and the Varney/Bowser Docksider are capable of similar feats, but the Shay is much prettier for my tastes and more suited for my operations, region, and era.
I would not use more than a 3% grade without some serious advance planning and testing. In my experience, a 4% grade on a curve cuts train length by about 75-80%, compared to level track. Can you live with trains that short? Adequate vertical transitions are critical to preventing derailments, ensuring all locomotive drivers are making full contact with the rail (for pulling power), and preventing accidental uncouplings from coupler over- and under-ride.
If you are using very steep grades or curves that are sharper than normal for your rolling stock, actual testing and mocking up with locomotives and rolling stock you intend to use is highly advised before building in those grades or curves in a permanent layout. In this day of plastic locomotives, pulling power up grades isn’t what it used to be. Scale size coupler heads give less margin for inadequate transitions, especially on longer cars.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
…modeling foggy coastal Oregon, where it’s always 1900…
While the grade may average 2.6 percent from Skagway to White Pass, the maximum grade is 3.9 percent. The railroad passes through the trees below. The scar on the far side is a road. The railroad is on the east (left) side of the canyon, the road is on the west (right) side of the canyon. The photo was taken from the train, looking south toward Skagway, probably on the steepest portion of the line.
Mark
??? … The grade is the same regardless of scale. (Scale doesn’t change angle.) However, scales smaller than HO will have less-steep grades (and the opposite compared to larger scales), everything else being the same, as when the same layout plan and size is used. For example, an N-scale layout might need less than two inches of climb to cross over a track, an HO-scale layout may need 3.5 inches. So, if traveling the same distance, an N-scale layout doesn’t need as steep of grade since it climbs only 2 inches while the HO layout would need to climb 3.5 inches.
My steepest grade is .90%. Most every other grade is .75% or less. Long trains don’t like steep grades.
Good points. Another scale-related factor at work here is locomotive size and weight. An HO engine has more space inside to add weight, and thus make it a better puller. (Of course, the trend today is to remove weight to make room for speakers and baffles - oh well.)
My grades, short as they are, are around 5%. However, these only go between the surface and the underground subway lines, so they are restricted to 4-car P2K subways and trolleys. They handle this easily.
I have a couple of 3% and 4% grades. I would not do it again.
One lesson learned is that steep grades require a transition or else cars will uncouple occasionally at the top and bottom.
hi
My previous layout had a 4,5% grade. A little Athearn switcher didn’t seem to notice the grade at all. With 20 cars in tow it had more trouble going down. But the grade was short, just over 7 foot including space for vertical easements. Even stopping and starting up again was no problem. Some other engines had more trouble, even with a normal consist between 6 and 10 cars.
Fiddling a bit with overhead space made it possible to get a 3,5% grade in the end. Only in the staging area i had 3" vertical clearance; part of the lead was covered and had just over 2" clearance. Only after I was happy with the grade I started building the little terminal above the staging tracks. Never had a derailment underground, that… switch, just up front; it took me over a month to get it right.
Paul