Hi,
This is my first time here on this forum so I am not sure I am in the correct place.
I have a 2-car carport that I want to place a HO layout in.
Inspired by the Oregon Central in the Atlas King Size Plan Book, I decided that I wanted to run my PRR Bowser steamers on it. The Bowsers need a 22" minimum radius and the Oregon Central has 18" radius.
I first started by enlarging the design to fit the 22" minimum radius.
I always wanted to model PRR electrified territory with a flying junction (my interest comes from the 13 members of Mom's family working in Harrisburg for PRR) so I added a lower deck and put a large 4-track loop underneath the Oregon Central replacing its lower reverse loop.
At one point I have a six track section with two mainline, two on the flying junction and the other two mainline tracks. I have a short line through the center for the reverse loop.
This lower level is for railfanning and I can set it up so that four trains are running at once unattended.The double track flying junction is set up to connect to the old OC reversing loop. It climbs up to the second level. This is the electrified mainline.
The lower level track comes into OC's hump yard and old station area. The house track by the station will be an industry of some sort. On the OC, there is 4-track yard from the hump and a higher 5th track for a freight station.
I will be double tracking the upper track (for a small arrival-departure track and for passenger access to the station) and make the hump yard double ended. These tracks come together and enter a passenger station train shed. This is why I will be calling it Harrisburg - end of electrification.
The line into the mountains will be steam powered with 22" minimum radius and preferred 24”.
The OC's turntable area will be more mountain scenery. A new wye from the tunnel to the passenger station to allow steam trains into the passenger station will be next followed by the engine facilities. My other interest is D&RGW narrow gauge. I want the turntable and one track in the Harrisburg train shed dual gauge. There will be a small dual gauge freight area behind the trainshed.
The NG mainline will disappear between industrial buildings and then enter a helix to get to the third level which will be Colorado (behind and above the train shed).
The narrow gauge will have an 18” minimum radius.
I looked into the book just out about multi level layouts and found no information about supporting free-standing island layouts with multiple levels. I also found no information about loading - how much weight will such and such support.
I have designed and built a steel overhead crane for my live-steam and so I will have to study structure loadings. I may put a central wall in to the carport ceiling for support.
I am not sure what spacing between levels should be for railhead to railhead clearance.
My lowest level has a railhead of 26” above the floor. The main level is at about 42” and the narrow gauge tier is at 63”. The entire layout is 15' x 16' with an operators isle in the middle.
I have been looking at using 1”x2” steel channel in place of the “L”-girder on the lowest level for as much clearance as possible between the floor and the bottom of the first level.
The second level is 16” above the first (railhead to railhead). This might be too tight but only about half of the lower level is below the middle level.
The middle level mountainous region attains an altitude of about 50” with no levels above or below.
To provide more work room for the narrow gauge level, I used a clearance of 21”. The highest rail level on this third tier is about 68”.
I was thinking of a 12”-18” high platform for viewing this section.
I have done the track plan in 3rd Plan It. I would not mind sharing this in case you would like to help me figure out how to build it. I need some help seeing where I have overlooked something and how to build this monster.
Thanks for any help.
EC
Sounds like you know what you want. You are doing better than most in this department, including me. A couple things that I can think of, ... the climb from the lower level to the middle and then the top sounds like a major climb, with no level areas unless you have the whole run hidden. Without looking at the trackplan, you have a max of 62' of run (track on the perimeter) and with a 2% grade (24" rise in 100ft of run), it looks like you would need a continuous grade of better than 2% to get the 16" you are looking for. (I don't have my calculator handy or I'd tell you the grade). The loco might be able to run up the grade, but the number of cars pulled will be affected. Smaller steamers might not be able to pull more than a couple cars. The height of 16" between railheads might be disapointing as well when all is done. By the time you subtract for sub grade work ,benchwork and lighting you might be down to as little as 12" (if all items are kept minimal). Now put some buildings in there that are 4/5/6" tall and its going to start looking really cramped. That still doesn't take into consideration the depth of the layout either. 24 or 30" deep and you might struggle to be able to easily see the back areas. If you are set on a double/triple deck layout, you might try to put a helix in the center at one end to get a better grade and give you some flat areas to model in. It might be rough to do any switching operations when the car brakes keep failing and they roll away or chase the switcher. The height between levels is subjective as well, but I am planning on 24" between railheads (avg). I feel this gives some leeway for both scenery and buildings.
You might consider posting the plan. Someone might have some ideas that help you in the end. Thats a lot of work and expense to not be happy in the end.
I considered a helix to go from the lower level to the middle level and found I did nt need it and could keep a 2-2.5% grade.
I am using a 4.25 turn helix on the narrow gauge using 3.5-4% grade to get to the upper level.
If someone can tell me how, I'd be glad to post my 3pi file and/or a PDF file of the three levels with elevations.
Thanks for the comments.
Edgar, You are definitely in the right place--welcome! To display images on the forums, you will need an account (free) at a photo hosting site such as Flickr or Photobucket (I use the latter). You can then upload your images over there and link to them in your posts over here. Photobucket even has a nice little feature where they give you the IMG tag to include in a forum post so the image will display correctly. Let me know if you have any trouble and I can send you some detailed info. Jamie
CLICK HERE FOR THE CSX DIXIE LINE BLOG
This image shows the Penn Dixie layout track plan. It looks like there is too much track. However this also shows hidden tracks and the tracks of all levels.
This image shows just the lower level. The 4-track storage yard and the four track upper loop will be in a tunnel to allow the climb from the lower level to the middle level to be center stage.
The four track turn in the upper right will be open and disappearing into a deep cut or tunnel as it makes the turn. This allows Thorn to be seen will. I think the single track portion of the reverse loop and the turnout will also be hidden so it will appear to be a double track tunnel.
This is the middle level track plan. It is basically the Atlas Oregon Pacific layout. The major changes include the upper level hidden siding, moving the turntable , and adding the lower left for the passenger station train shed.
I have a Walthers Cornerstone series round house, turntable, transfer table, diesel shop and car shop. I am not sure that it will all go in, but the transfer table and the electric service shop may end up on the other side of the yard.
After the 4-track train shed, there is a small dual gauge flat switch yard. the blue line just to the right of the dual gauge yard will be building flats and/or backdrop and may be moved some.
Finally this is the upper level track plan for my narrow gauge. There is a helix on the hidden area to climb up from the dual gauge yard. The NG area will be cantilevered over the middle level train shed and dual gauge yard.
I will post this and follow it with the 3-D views of the layout.
Thanks
This view of the lower level shows the concept better than the plan view from the previous post.
Although it is like a helix to gain elevation, the two loops on the double track to the main level are not over one another - hopefully this will make access easier.
This lower angle view of the lower level shows the transition from lower level to middle level much better.
This view shows the narrow gauge helix very well. It also showes the upper level and the main yards on the middle level.
This final view shows the engine terminal area and the upper and trainshed areas of the middle level quite well.
Thanks for helping me show the plans and views to you.
Wow that is some serious trackage! One question before I look further: what is going to be hidden and what will be visible? Without some scenery, it is hard for me to tell what track on the lowest levels will be visible and what (if any) will be hidden by other trackage that winds its way to the uper level. Jamie
Thats alot of tracks to try and digest. I see you are aware of the steep grades. Is the layout accesable from the outside? As for the benchwork, is the carport climate controlled or will you suffer from humidity swings? I'm thinking that you need super thin benchwork, What kind of elevation changes are you hoping to achieve around the track area? (ditches, rivers, and the likes).
this is the probable visable trackage on the lower level.
this is the probable visible on the main level
This is the probable visible trackage on the uuper NG level.
One problem I have with 3rd Plan It is that I am a Civil Engineer and a contour line is a line of uniform elevation. 3PI defines it as a line that can have multiple elevations.
3PI is set up to put a mesh over the entire layout table area and then you pull and push to get it to connect to track and other items. I can not connect a mech to two topo lines and have it form a slope so I do not usually do scenery on 3PI.
However, It would be darned helpful if I could do it.
The 3PI does not seem to be able to do benchwork design easily either. Maybe it is just me, The track design is good but the benchwork and scenery design leave something to be desired. The first large layout I designed was based on the D&RGW narrow gauge and took up about 2/3-3/4 of a 2300 square foot unfinished basement.I did it with pencil and paper - pocket calculators had not yet been invented!
I have a copy of Sandia Software's Cadrail (I think that is the correct name) but have never had the time to learn it.
As far as the track switches I have, I never got rid of my HO scale track when I left HO for Live Steam in 1987-8. I have about 85-90% of the turnouts I need and about 45% of the flex track I need for the Penn Dixie (I always liked this name even though it is the rightful name of a concrete supplier).
I believe that I will be hand laying the dual gauge yard but I also have enough Shinohara track in HOn3 to do most of the NG section and have most of the dual gauge turnouts I need.
If you have questions or comments about the Penn Dixie, please let me know.
Jamie, Since you are in Lilburn, I thought I'd mention that the Roswell RR Section house will be saved by the Dunwoody Chamber of Commerce to be used as a combination information center and railroad museum. It was built in 1881 and it will be open November 23 for the Christmas "Light Up Dunwoody" event. The Chamber is trying to talk me into running the visitors center and RR museum and will allow me to run my business from there. The want me to sell my railroad books there. In case you are interested, give a shout.
just looking at the the different levels is difficult, and I think I've figured out why. The trackwork in the upper right corner in the lower and middle level are in the same quadrant ( no big deal) , but I cannot picture it without the scenery. Do these two areas occupy the same plane, as in is the lower level in the valley and the middle on a hilltop and bridges, or is there a physical barrier between them (benchwork)?. I can see what issues you face with benchwork in general. You have some lengthy spans over some large distances. I would think that wood on metal would be the safe bet to avoid any sagging over time. Maybe try two metal studs bonded and riveted together to form a box. I have seen it done like this on a bookshelf layout, but nowhere near the size of your layout. The good thing is they are relitively inexpensive, you can get then in varying lengths, cut them to size with tinsnips to make tabs to connect perimeter and cross-frame members. It would only be 1.5" thick, and with some planning be able to place plywood in between the metal. On the major bearing members the center of the box can be filled with expanding foam to make it more rigid. I see no reason why you couldn't span 8 feet doing this so long as you dont use mortar for groundcover (joke).
I can understand your issues with contour lines. I have always seen and expected them at designated elevation, defined in incremental heights.
Edgar,
First off, welcome !
I have a question about your layout plans... Is it accessible from one or both sides ? Some of your layout seems to be a lot more than 30" deep and, therefore, not easily accessible from just one side. If this is true, you'll need to have access from both sides, or have "pop-up" access within the layout. The average person can only safely reach 24-30" (24" is better as it reduces the risk of damage to objects (structures, etc.) on your layout).
You do have a very large and ambitious plan. I wish I had the space to build such a large layout. Don't hesitate to post comments or questions here. There is bound to be at least one person who can help.
Good luck and keep us posted as you progress.
That's a lot of track! I would consider scaling things down a bit to leave some room for scenery and wider curves, especially if you want to run steam!
Regardless, Linn Wescott's book "How to Build Model Railroad Benchwork, 2nd ed." has a diagram using a pilasters in the middle of an island that support the second level. In the diagram the second level is smaller then the first level. Its on page 67. Personally, I would use some additional bracing where the pilaster is at the same location as the island legs. Take a look if you can find the volume at a hobby store.
All of the layouts I have visited that are two levels have been around the walls designs, one with a false wall down the middle as the support for a peninsula. I take it you cannot frame the car port?
As for weight.. more of an issue is rigidity. You need to make sure the upper level does not flex. The diagram in the book shows cantilevered bracing from the pilaster which seems sufficient if the upper deck is not to big.
Chris
The car port has yard tools and several other items hanging on the walls. Additionally, I was thinking about allowing visitors to walk around the layout on its outside while I can operate it from the inside.
The narrow gauge section has a 3'x7' area next to the operator pit that can have four legs all the way up.Then the 1.5-2.0 foot overhang over the passenger train shed and dual gauge area.
The main problem with the upper right is the closeness of the lower and main level. I am not sure quite how to go about it there.
Over on the Yahoo 3rd Plan It group, someone answered my question about scenery meshes. I'll give that a try and see if I can get a general idea about the scenery.
I'll need to see about finding th eWescott book. It sounds like it has a nugget I need.
Thanks.
If I recall correctly, I have no section of the layout table more than 5' wide. To get under the lower section, I will use a car mechanic's board on wheels. I can then slide under the 2' section fairly easily.
I plan on building a steel roller platform that I can climb up on and laydown in my chest. It will allow me to move the platform over the layout and I can then climb up onto it and reach down to the layout's interior. This might not work so I am considering pop-up hatches for access.
Edgar CornyI plan on building a steel roller platform that I can climb up on and laydown in my chest. It will allow me to move the platform over the layout and I can then climb up onto it and reach down to the layout's interior.
This should work as long as you have room to maneuver the platform in the aisles. I believe MicroMark even has one in their catalog, but it is fairly pricey if I remember correctly.
Regards,
John
"You are what you eat," said a wise old man. Oh Lord, if it's true, I'm a garbage can.
I finally found out how to do contour lines over at the 3d Plan It web site. As soon as I get the scenery in, I'll be back.
Thanks for all the help.