Re: Please post your multi-level layout pictures!!

[Anonymous]

To anyone with a muti-level layout, please post the pics on the forum so we can see 'em!! Thanks!!

[orsonroy]

Sorry; I'm too cheap & lazy to buy or find online space to post pics. But...if you want to see my old three level, just eail me offlist, and I'll email you a few shots.

[ClinchValleySD40]

Multi level or multi deck or does it matter. Some are posted on my webshots album listed below.

[dgwinup]

QUOTE: Originally posted by orsonroy

Sorry; I'm too cheap & lazy to buy or find online space to post pics. But...if you want to see my old three level, just eail me offlist, and I'll email you a few shots.

orsonroy,

photobucket.com offers FREE (but limited) storage on-line. Very easy to upload your pictures, and even easier to post pictures on this forum.

Photobucket displays your pictures with three different URL's listed below each picture. The third line is in a format for posting to this site. To include a picture on a post, simply copy the URL from photobucket and paste it into your post. Very fast, very simple!

And FREE!!

You can't be any lazier than ME! And I like photobucket because it's so easy to use!

Darrell, pictured as quiet...for now

[NZRMac]

QUOTE: Originally posted by clinchvalley

Multi level or multi deck or does it matter. Some are posted on my webshots album listed below.

Larry, cool layout, You may have seen I have a new room soon 13' X 25' . What dimensions is yours. Height between levels etc?

Thanks Ken.

[ClinchValleySD40]

Ken,

I like the track plan you have posted, would be fun to operate.

My layout is 60'x30'. I settled on heights of 60", 40" for the mainline and there is a 24" (operate seated) branchlines. The layout is designed from the start for ops.

Larry

[NZRMac]

QUOTE: Originally posted by clinchvalley

Ken,

I like the track plan you have posted, would be fun to operate.

My layout is 60'x30'. I settled on heights of 60", 40" for the mainline and there is a 24" (operate seated) branchlines. The layout is designed from the start for ops.

Larry

Thanks for the info, about the same height as I was planning.
I'm redesigning alittle.[:D]


Ken.

[ericboone]

Larry,

How does the 24" lower level work for operations when sitting? I am designing a layout and was thinking about going with a third deck to greatly increase my mainline run and spread out the towns, but I abandoned the idea because the lower deck was going to be just too low. My lowest deck is mostly switching as is.

Eric

[ClinchValleySD40]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericboone

Larry,

How does the 24" lower level work for operations when sitting? I am designing a layout and was thinking about going with a third deck to greatly increase my mainline run and spread out the towns, but I abandoned the idea because the lower deck was going to be just too low. My lowest deck is mostly switching as is.

Eric

Eric,

It works great. I actually got the idea after operating on Bruce Chubb's layout. I've got a couple of inexpensive roll around stools. The crew enjoys working the lower level jobs so I guess it works.

Larry

[ericboone]

Really. I don't remember Bruce's layout being that low. (I've been there once as I used to live in Grand Rapids, MI.)
I've got a no-lix layout plan that currently has two operating levels (with two staging levels). I was thinking about putting a deck in the middle to double my mainline run between a big classification yard and a second yard servicing a large switching area. One yard is at 58" and the other is at 34.5" To add another deck, I would need to add 14 inches or so to that spacing. The upper yard could be moved up to 62" and the lower down to 24.5". Then, instead of about 9 feet per prototype mile, I would have about 18 feet per prototype mile and could then use actual timetables with a 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 fast clock. Hmmm. Tempting.

http://www.peremarquette.net/track-plan.pdf

[SteelMonsters]

On the subject of Bruce Chubb's layout, his lower stagging isn't bad at all. It's open as to help out if there is a derailment. Scenery is not of much interest below waist level, so there isn't much.

The problem I have with his layout is the isle next to Lake Yard and Upper stagging is too narrow. There is simply too much going on there for that little operator space. Sometimes it can be like a switching puzzle just to move operators around that area. The rest of the layout is ok.

Here are a few pictures to refresh your memory...
http://members.tripod.com/mr_layouts/sunset_valley.htm

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteelMonsters

On the subject of Bruce Chubb's layout, his lower stagging isn't bad at all. It's open as to help out if there is a derailment. Scenery is not of much interest below waist level, so there isn't much.

The problem I have with his layout is the isle next to Lake Yard and Upper stagging is too narrow. There is simply too much going on there for that little operator space. Sometimes it can be like a switching puzzle just to move operators around that area. The rest of the layout is ok.

Here are a few pictures to refresh your memory...
http://members.tripod.com/mr_layouts/sunset_valley.htm

That is some layout! I especially like the backdrops, they almost look like photographs. How were they made?
Jarrell

[FastTracks]

Hi,

Here is a shot (old) of my double deck Port Kelsey Railway....



and a more current one, albeit a bit messy.



In my opinion building a double deck layout gives you best of both worlds as far as viewing height is concerned. I put scenes on the upper deck that are best viewed at eye level, and the others on the lower deck. You can get away with a few things at eye level that you can't otherwise, like sharper radii. Of course this is a trade off as your reach into the layout is limited, so the trackwork needs to be kept near the front of the layout.

In the middle of the layout is the helix, hidden behind the backdrop. This is a 6 turn double track helix going from 39" to 59". I'm surprised how many people ask me where the helix is, even though it is in the middle of the room.



Lighting a double deck layout is always tricky. Its a double edged sword, in that you have the advantage of light close to the lower deck, and in a place that eliminates shadows from operators standing in front of the layout, but also the difficulty of fitting into the bottom of the upper deck.

I did mine using 24" fluorescent tubes, which I was able to fit into the structure of the top deck. This was a bit of a pain to install and get working properly, but when done gives a nice effect. Fluorescent light casts little shadow, runs cool and are nice and bright. The down side is 24" lights are expensive, so I had to do the lighting in phases over a year or so.



On my weblog there are many more images available....

http://handlaidtrack.com/port-kelsey/

[SteelMonsters]

They were made with some paint, paint brushes, lots of time, plenty of photographs, and done by people who have done backdrops as well as other art for many years.

His layout was made with many tens of thousands of man hours, possibly over 100,000.

[bikersanta]

I am new to this and building an unconventual layout e mail me at [e-mail] and I will E mail some pictures