John Busby wrote: Hi NECRfanWell if you don't have room for a helix is a zig zag a viable alternative don't know what you call them in the US.regards John Busby
Hi NECRfan
Well if you don't have room for a helix is a zig zag a viable alternative don't know what you call them in the US.
regards John Busby
John, In North America what you are talking about is a switchback. Switchbacks were and are still used on logging and mining railroads. However the original Great Northern mainline over the Cascade Moutains used switchbacks until a long tunnel was built. As I recall the Canadian Pacific used the same approach in tackling the Rockies in British Columbia.
Rob
Basicaly its Z shaped formation that works the train backwards and forwards up the hill at each reversal the engine changes ends of the train from memory the prefered operating procedure was that the loco was always on the down hill side of the train.
So it could iether add operational interest or be a pain you know where depending how you view it.
By the time diesle locos came along most had fallen out of favour and been bypassed in some way so this could a reality problem.
Thats about the only thought I have
I will be building my newest layout in my new home, and unlike the other layouts where I've had room to spare, now I must plan to build on more than one level. I want to keep it simple, with the top level scenicked and the lower level as staging, along one shelf. I'm thinking dog-bone style.
My question is: what is the best way to build a two level layout, keeping the top level as thin as possible so I don't need to build a helix?
Get the Garden Railways newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month