Multiple level layouts

[docflhs]

I will be building a 7 level layout over the next few years and will obviously limit scenicking because the levels for the most part will be 12"-14" apart from floor to ceiling. Basically it depends on your interest. I am not into making everything look realistic. To do that means lots of scenery & buildings and few trains. I want to run all sorts of trains that I have been collecting for a long time and to do that means less realism. Also some levels will be automatic, while others can be run by one or more operators as well as automatically; that way I can enjoy as much as possible when friends are not available to share the layout.
docflhs

[Big_Boy_4005]

You got it Dave. This concept is very foreign to most of this crowd. Over on the MR forum this is more the norm. Here's another shot showing the levels.

[FJ and G]

Elliot,

you da man. It appears that your lowest level is for staging and the next one up will be scenick'd because the supports are L supports, not triangular supports which would severely get into the way of any scenic effects you are after.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Hey guys, I think we need a definition of multiple levels here. My understanding of what Dave is talking about is levels that are far enough apart to have seperate scenery. For O that means at least 12" of seperation, but really more like 18" or 24".

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

Jon,

A couple interesting sites:

Helix using "Cadrail" (see the pdf download)

http://bsulliva.oozy.ws/rr/georgetown_branch/layout/

Supposedly, this is a helix calculator, but the download didn't work in Mac

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/beautiful/819/HeliCal.htm

Here's a layout that purportedly IS a helix

http://www.bcsj.org/rr/bcsj2/

I believe that Armstrong's book: "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" may have helix's mentioned

I built, then dismantled a helix (don't have a picture). A helix IMO is a compromise between the diameter of the helix and the slope.

The greater the diameter, the less of a slope is needed, but that wastes space and materials, unless you have a lot of space.

Adding to the space waste is the notorious pilot swing of our locomotives. These swings can hit the supports if enough room is not built in.

Most helixes use wood upright support construction. However, the wood itself is a space waster and makes clearances from side to side even tighter. I used all-thread, basically a very long screw, to minimize side-to-side cleances.

There also are top to bottom clearances to consider when selecting materials for the roadbed. You might, for example, not want to add your cork roadbed because that eats into vertical space.

Hope this helps a little.

BTW, Elliot has in the past posted photos of his helix. Apparently, he has the space to go with wood upright supports

It really doesn't take that much space to use wood supports for the helix, at least not compared with the size of the helix itself. 5 1/2" for single track, 9 1/2" for double, normal track spacing is 4" between centers. Doing the math, that's just the thickness of 2 one by's, 1 1/2". The 4" track centers should be enough for any equipment, even large steamers. The key is to make sure that the curves aren't less than 054, but anyone running trains that large, probably has established that as a minimum anyway.



The original discussion was about multiple levels. The helix is just the means by which they are connected.



Dave, I think the answer to your original question is that most 3 railers don't play with their trains the way HO and N scale modelers do. Realistic operation is just catching on with the 3 rail crowd. Long mainlines are what those guys are after, and multiple levels give them the chance to double or more that length.

[highrailjon]

I'm a multi-level-kinda-guy, myself![:D]
(click to enlarge)

[rlplionel]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

Space is esp. at a premium for big O scale trains, and more than one level could effectively double your layout space.

And, why stop at 2 levels; why not 3?

Space was the primary reason that I added a second level. Found that I needed O72 curves when I acquired a couple of prewar streamliners. Rather than re-doing the whole layout, I elected to add an upper level. Has worked out well, as I've also added three bridges and a couple of larger prewar stations that couildn't fit on the lower level.

http://home.surewest.net/rlplionel/Layout.htm

I also made the upper level high enough so that I could add a level in-between using Lionel's trestle set. Though I haven't done this yet as I think the layout might look too cluttered.

[Anonymous]

I beleive multilevel layouts are more common that you might think. I operate on four levels myself. A two level HO Marklin shelf layout around my family room an a two level (1 level of subway, 2nd level a double track oval) 3rail O guage layout. A more or less semi-permanent Christmas layout. My next layout in planning will use several more.
A friend a local Marklin group operates on many more levels. Hi rail O, Semi scale O, 4 or 5 levels of G, S, Marklin HO. Of course many of these are on separate layouts and takes up his entire basement.

[FJ and G]

Jon,

A couple interesting sites:

Helix using "Cadrail" (see the pdf download)

http://bsulliva.oozy.ws/rr/georgetown_branch/layout/

Supposedly, this is a helix calculator, but the download didn't work in Mac

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/beautiful/819/HeliCal.htm

Here's a layout that purportedly IS a helix

http://www.bcsj.org/rr/bcsj2/

I believe that Armstrong's book: "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" may have helix's mentioned

I built, then dismantled a helix (don't have a picture). A helix IMO is a compromise between the diameter of the helix and the slope.

The greater the diameter, the less of a slope is needed, but that wastes space and materials, unless you have a lot of space.

Adding to the space waste is the notorious pilot swing of our locomotives. These swings can hit the supports if enough room is not built in.

Most helixes use wood upright support construction. However, the wood itself is a space waster and makes clearances from side to side even tighter. I used all-thread, basically a very long screw, to minimize side-to-side cleances.

There also are top to bottom clearances to consider when selecting materials for the roadbed. You might, for example, not want to add your cork roadbed because that eats into vertical space.

Hope this helps a little.

BTW, Elliot has in the past posted photos of his helix. Apparently, he has the space to go with wood upright supports

[jwse30]

On the far back wall of my layout, I have an elevated trolley line. It's about 8" higher than the rest of the layout. It doesn't connect to the main layout (well, the tracks don't anyway), so it's probably not what you have in mind. I elevated it so you could see the trolley most of the time.

The shelf is about a foot wide, enough for the track, and a bunch of Kline and Plasticville "downtown" buildings (a firehouse, 3 or 4 business "duplexes"), an automatic gateman, and two station platforms, one at each end. I tied it to the rest of the layout with cedar shake shingles. It's pretty much a cliff, as I didn't have room to do anything more gradual. It does fit in nicely with my very toylike layout though.

J White

[Anonymous]

I've done elevated and multi level layouts before, and to be honest they never come out right. Using the elevated trestles never looks even remotly realistic, and it's a lot harder to landscape and model elevated sections. The table work is more complex etc. I think that is probably why most of us avoid it. The high railers who like models, such as your very detailed layout, are more apt to work with it. But the toy train guys, or those like myself who have elements of both, have more fun running trains than modeling layouts.

At least that's my answer.

On the new layout I'm working on, I may have a grade or two, but nothing fancier than that.

[jonadel]

Agreed. My next build will have at least three levels above the bench work and one below as a subway. The 2nd level will not be that high, perhaps 2-4" above the main level and then the 3rd level won't have to be that much higher. David, can you recommend any resources for helix construction? It's a must for my next layout.

Jon

[FJ and G]

After reading MR and seeing all of the HO and N scale muliple-level layouts, it often puzzles me why 3-rail guys don't have more than 1 level.

Space is esp. at a premium for big O scale trains, and more than one level could effectively double your layout space.

Multi-level doesn't need to be just an around the wall shelf thing. An island table could also contain multiple levels via a central helix.

The lower level could be an entirely different (or similar) scene as the top level, or it could be used as a hidden staging area.

And, why stop at 2 levels; why not 3?