I am building a layout w/a dogbone involved which is connected to a rather large yard. I have little experience with grades/inclines, so defaulted to a 3% which accomodated my design quite nicely.
BUT now that I have run many trains I may face a dilemma. Using a SINGLE engine (usually a very stout F7A Intermountain) hauling 12+ cars, toward the top of the grade the train does slow & I can tell the wheels are slipping a bit, but it always makes it.
1. Am I safer in the long run stripping the track & starting over with a %2?
2. OR am I dealing with a standard grade situation? That is, how much will dropping to a 2% aid the situation? How many more cars might a 2% allow before I get slipping loco wheels?
I am experimenting now with doing tandem locos, as I have little experience with tackling N scale grades & loco power. I guess thats the other 'fix'. Plus I do love the look of tandem locos which is very prototypical for the road I model/what I saw a LOT growing up (Southern Line around Asheville NC & foothills).
Thanks everybody!
Lee
The best solution of all is indeed reducing the incline,but it may be quite difficult to redo it as it may mean a major if not total redesign of your layout.Then you have two other options...one is to add more tractive power or pull smaller trains.This is what railroads do when they are faced with the same problem you have.My opinion...if you like your layout design and have the extra horses available,then it is your solution.
Well also something to consider is how you run trains, are you into point to point or continous running ie roundy round? i will say that my layout has a slightly over 2% grade on one of the lines, and i have found that most of my steam locos will barely make it up this grade, now most all of my diesels are fine, and i run either MU'ed or single, but also run rather short trains and mostly 40 or 36 foot cars on that line, and about 6-8 of those plus caboose so.... hope this helps you out.
Chuck.
I regularly pulled sixteen 40-foot N scale boxcars up the 2% grade on my former layout -- motive power was a Kato Mikado. I could pull ten full length passenger cars [both Kato and Rivarossi] behind my Challenger. This grade involved a complete over/under loop at one end and a long straightaway at the other end.
If you have a small layout, you'll have a hard time avoiding the steeper grade. However, this is mitigated by the fact that a small layout can't handle terribly long trains.
I have one fairly steep climb where trains rise up out of staging via a single turn helix. The run is about 8', with about half of that being in a 32" diameter curve.
The first 5.5' rise at 2%, then the track straightens out, but the grade increases to 3% where the track crosses the aisle on a drop leaf bridge.
You can see the back of the train is still on the steepest part of the grade between the tunnel portal and roughly the tower on the left. The track levels out as it passes under the bridge.
I typically run trains of 15-20 cars, pulled by 2-3 diesels. This ratio works out just fine. Of course, this is not part of the "regular" main line run, but every train that runs in and out of staging has to negotiate this hill. After about 6 or 8 cars, a single unit won't cut it, with the exception of my "lead sleds", Lifelike BL-2's and FA-2's...
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
If you can, I'd step it down to a 2% grade.
If not, then perhaps it's time to invest in an Intermountain F7B unit? (assuming your road name used them)
I'd agree with the others in that it would be best to reduce the grade. The other options mentioned were more motive power and shorter trains. All of those will work, but the one option that I didn't see mentioned that the prototype would do sometimes is to split the grade.
Splitting the grade requires a siding at the top and bottom of the grade that will hold half the trains overall length. You leave half the train at the bottom and haul the rest up to the siding on the top. Then you deadhead back down and get the rest of the train. When you get to the top you hook up to the cars waiting and you're on your way.
This is a prototypical solution that adds some extra steps to your journey, and on a layout it has the benefit of effectively lengthening the run time without adding a lot of track.
THANK YOU everybody, this has helped me make my decision.
Decision: Going to stick with the 3%, turns out this dogbone module (1/2 the layout) isnt large enough to accomodate a 2%, BUT on the mainline (havent begun other half) I have room to do a full %2, since when I run continuous circuits when operating (love the sound of a train running while I operate) I primarily operate east to west because of how I have my yards established. that means I will mostly climb the 2, decend on the 3 (located on back of dogbone module). That leaves the option to run single loco trains, but I'm sure I will often do MU's with long trains, or just for the fun/look of it. I do enjoy operating complexity.
I did a good job track planning, researched a lot & copied the best pieces of several trackplans, so I DO have design for 'splitting the grade' on that dogbone without interfering with the mainline run.