Added some more. Corner of concern now has access.
Thanks Dave! Good info.
Looks interesting so far!
One point to consider is the reach in distances from the fascia to the track. The rear right corner looks like you are a bit over three feet to the rear track. If you are planning on putting any switches back there you won't be able to reach them from the aisle. Even just a simple derailment on the curve will present a challenge.
There are several means of overcoming the problem so you don't have to change the track arrangement. For example, you can work an access hatch into the bench work, or you can get specially designed ladders that allow you to lean in over the layout without having to touch the layout itself.
If you want to be able to reach in directly then 30" is considered a stretch for most people, depending on how tall you are and how high the bench work is.
It should be noted that lots of great layouts have been built without regard to the reach in issue.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Thanks Dave! So, I rotated a portion of the elevation solution and added some more track along with an Altoon HairPin. Once the unit reaches top elevation there is a flat transition for about 6' and then it takes a dive and reaches 0.0 at the middle of the hairpin. The centersection will represent Emporium and have the roundhouse and other features (Undecided). The parallel track at the curve going out to the begining is the passenger station that was in Emporium. Nothing is etched in granite so feel free to show me my errors.
NickPPJR:
I like your elevation change solution a lot! Much more creative than a helix and pretty decent radii to boot, and it gets to be seen.
Roundhouse in Emporium. Gone now. Came to the ground in the 70's.
OK, listening and reading the expert commentary I have done a redesign of my Elevation process. I am below 2.5% so I think it should be good. Where 9a crosses over 2a, I have 5 -5/8" TOT to TOT. The intent is for this to be a valley and use a long bridge to do the overpass. Your continued thoughts are appreciated.
I have setteled in on an area of Pensylavania (Dad's old stomping grounds as a kid) Emporium, PA to Driftwood, PA. In contacting the Chamber of Commerece in Emporium, I found an old lost relative (Cousin) that works there (small world) and she has assisted me greatly.
Layout.
One thing about appearance of long cars and locos is that it being on the inside or outside of a curve makes a huge difference. Also ho wmuch of the curve is visible - ie, a bit 180 degree turn right there for all to see, or the same 180 degree curve that goes through sme cuts and/or tunnels, hiding portions of it.
There certainly are two parameters - curves big enough for reliable operation, and curves big enough to make it look good. Indeed most anything can get rhough a 30" radius curve without falling off the rails, but it may need 36" to actually look decent, depending on the viewing angle and how much of the curve is visible.
This was the subject of an article in one of the publications not too long ago, showing the view of different length cars from the inside of the curve, outside of the curve, and overhead. Just a few pictures fully makes the point.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
NickPPJR A 30" radius? Dang, that's a 5' circle. Will I need that much?
A 30" radius? Dang, that's a 5' circle. Will I need that much?
If you are running 85' brass pax cars, then yes, you will.
The truth is, you want all you can get.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Dannyboy6 Doug is building another version last I heard. A group of us from the NMRA Michiana Division were some of the last to operate his Conrail layout before it was torn down.It was a blast! Dan
Doug is building another version last I heard. A group of us from the NMRA Michiana Division were some of the last to operate his Conrail layout before it was torn down.It was a blast!
Dan
Version of what, I hope he is back to D&RGW again! I've heard he tore down the excellent D&RGW that was in MR some years ago and built something else since, or maybe a couple somethings!
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Nick, thanks! I did try to expand the chart but was having difficulty reading on my screen. I think with 30-inches you should be fine. Above 30-inches it's more about appearance if anything - I was running some 89' autoracks around a 36-inch curve on one of my past layouts and even that looked visually sharp underneath those cars. About the same time, I visited a train show in Louisville KY and there were some autoracks rounding a modular layout curve and they looked pretty nice - I asked the guy what the curve radii was in that situation - as I recall they were around 56-inches! So you have to get pretty broad before curves look pretty under long cars. I've built one "scenic" curve of 56-inches into my current small layout just for the visual effect!
After reading so many articles with 30-inch minimums back in the day, I'm pretty surprised with how many folks are still going with tiny 18 and 22 inch curves. I can only assume it's because the 4x8' plywood board and sectional track is still the gateway for many new modelers, so they feel constrained to those limitations. I'm here to preach the "gospel" of broader radii!
Do yourself a favor and get a copy of John Armstrongs "Track Planning for Realistic Operation". It's a little long in the tooth but still an excellent primer for folks who are building a layout. It has been updated since I got my copy back in the 1980's. One of the best parts is the chapter on Minimums.
Even in my 30+ year old copy of the book, John Armstrong classified HO curves as: sharp = 18", conventional = 24" and broad = 30". That was the mind set of a an engineer and professional model layout designer of the 1970's. Personally I'd update that list for the 21 century and re-classify as: extremely sharp = 18", sharp = 24", conventional = 30" and broad = 36" for HO model railroad curves. Club layouts, of course, frequently us 42 or 48 inch mainline minimums.
I have gone with 32-inch minimum curves but in reality - I'm told the #8 curved turnouts inner radii while labeled by the manufacturer as 32-inches is really more like 28-inches, but all my flex track is laid out on 32-inch minimum center lines. I've got only a small 10x18' room so I'm going around the wall with a small twice around layout - will have to do for now.
Think of model curve radii like a flat screen TV. People will usually tell you whatever flat screen TV you think will be big enough, you'll usually wish you got a bigger one after you've started watching it in your living room! It's like that with trains too, if you think 24 inches is big enough, you'll wish you went with 30 inches later! Of course I know we all don't have air craft hangers to build layouts in but the truism still holds, bigger is always better for model train curves!
Looks like you are off to a good start!
Take a look at the chart, up at the top it indicates 30" Radius (not etched in granit). The grade rise at each point is in the chart too. Sorry about the resolution. for waht ever reason my adobe 11 decided it was too big to do a jpg so I had to do some odd stuff just to get it to print. I wish these sites would just take a download from the computer; life would be far better.
Thanks Jim!
Nick,
I can't make out the minimum radii or the maximum grades in your picture. Can you list that info?
gandydancer19OK, someone mentioned 89 foot freight cars. Sorry, but not in the 60's. I believe the normal or average length for freight cars in the 1960's was 50 foot. Passenger cars are 80 foot as a general rule.
Incorrect. To start off with, the 89' flat cars were introduced in 1961 so there were indeed, 89' long cars in that time period.
http://www.ttx.com/corporate-information/history.aspx
From ttx.com website:
1958: 85’ flat cars equipped with trailer hitches became the state of the art in piggyback service. Without the trailer hitch, the securement of trailers was a labor-intensive and time-consuming task. 1961: First 89-ft cars entered service.
1961: First 89-ft cars entered service.
In addition, most passenger cars were 85', not 80'. Bottom line is, if you want to operate mainline freight trains in the 1960's, you'd be including some 85' cars and very likely a few 89' TOFC flat cars unless you just don't want to "go there" and want to avoid them all-together. While you can shoe-horn many 85' passenger cars around 22-inch radii, it ain't pretty. Many modern manufactured 85' passenger cars recommend minimum 24-inch curves - but just like a computer, you really really don't want to operate at the minimums recommened. Windows 7 - 64 bit works much better on 4 GB of RAM and 85' BLI passenger cars work much better on 30 inch curves. ;-)
Everyone always wants to tell you to go with large radius curves.
It's very good advise to not skimp on curve radii - why put yourself in a straight jacket if you have easily enough space to include 30-inch minimum curves as the OP does? "Need" is a matter of perspective, but based on the earlier discussion - the need of a reasonable minimum of 30-inches is well justified. As an aside, I've noticed from reading many MR magazine articles since the 1970's, that 30-inch radius had become a standard minimum for most modest sized layouts - and for all kinds of good reasons.
As the OP calculate a no-lix will get him up 18 inches, which IMO is a workable separation for a 2nd level with decent access, certainly more than adequate for a staging yard!
Cheers, Jim
Well, I have been digesting all of the great information provided and feel like I may have come up with the beginning of somethin. I took a lot of the suggestions regarding bench height and other item and developed this mostly exposed feature to obtain a transition from 0.00 to an acceptable height I think.
Don't hesitate to rip it if you see an issue. There is 9 1/2" TOT to TOT at the X. I can build all sorts of openings to allow access but right now, I'm more concerned with the transition from entry to exit. AutoCad time is cheap compaired to any oops or gosh darns.
Again, many thanks in advance,
Nick
OK, someone mentioned 89 foot freight cars. Sorry, but not in the 60's. I believe the normal or average length for freight cars in the 1960's was 50 foot. Passenger cars are 80 foot as a general rule. Everyone always wants to tell you to go with large radius curves. However, it depends on what you want to do. My era and year for my layout is 1965. I run mostly four axle diesels, and 40 & 50 foot freight cars. I run 60 foot passenger cars. My minimum mainline radius is 18 inches. I have no problems, none, zilch, zip. I am not saying that is right for you, but I am also telling you that you don't NEED 30 inch radius curves. Maybe 20 or 22 will work for you.
A no-lix is a track that gets to the upper level of a lyout by going around the walls of the room. My layout uses a no-lix, and you can see what one is in the two photos below.
What I do for layout design (have done so far) is define my area and bench work first. Next I decide on a theme. (Mainline running, with a branch line(?) or other special interests.) Then I put in a mainline. I am fond of single track mainlines that run twice around the room types, divided by scenery and grades.
Since I have gotten into operations, I also have a staging area of some sort, whether it is a lay-over for entire trains, or a yard that simulates an interchange yard. One track in staging can be a through track for continuous running. If I put cars on it, the layout becomes point to point for operations.
Next I try and determine how many small towns I can have, and possibility one city with a yard and loco facilities, without them crowding one another. Usually small yards and facilities, unless I have the room for larger ones. I will try to fit in a way-side industry or two just for variation as long as it won't crowd things.
Then I go looking at plans for switching layouts and small modular railroads. I look for ones that would make good towns or cities because their track plans are usually fairly compact, and most of the way they will be switched is already determined with a good track plan themselves.
Because I freelance, I don't worry about town and city names etc., but if you want to model a specific prototype, you can name the towns as the railroad you are modeling would, and build or plan you scenery to suite the area you want to model. Also, you can model some of the industries that may be recognizable in a town that you choose to name from a real one. These may have to be scratch built or otherwise implied to achieve the "feeling" of the real town.
When the actual layout building starts, I try and get all of the bench work built first. Then plan where the towns will go and install the mainline to get some trains running. Then I work on one of the yards so I can store stuff when not running. Then I plug along on the other track work and scenery design and continue from there.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
NickPPJRThanks Jim. I have no problem with multiple decks/levels at all. Speaking of them, I see so many layouts and notice either oval or circular transitions built to gain access to the next level. What's the radius on those things? With wanting to mix freight and passenger would it be prudent to allow for the longest cars? I hate having to go out and purchase items just to determine clearance and radius, is there some charts or data banks that contain mins and max?
Sometimes the room and or the table dictate the radius of the helix. LION built the helix of him on a 5' wide table, so a notional 30" radius which is not bad, until you relize that this helix carries the four track mane lion of the layout.
30", 28", 26", 24" ... it is a good thing that this is a subway layout with 50' mu cars.
The grade is also dictated by your geometry. The helix is made of 1/2" OSB board salvaged from a shipping crate. You need a good 2.5" minimum just for the train, add the 1/2" for the deck and you have a 3" minimum rise (railhead to railhead).
C= Pie x dia... 60" diameter = 188.4 inch run to raise 3" (1.59% incline)
C= Pie x dia... 48" diameter = 150.72 inch run to raise 3" (1.99% incline)
Thank you for the information, Tom.
Nick ---
Now you're talking about hidden staging. Hidden staging yards have been successfully built and operated at extremely low levels, but the exposed areas where switching and coupling/uncoupling are done, really ought to be at more convenient levels.
Frankly, I think you might be a bit too anxious to jump into this thing. I think you need more exposure to the factors that influence the design of a big layout. So here are my recommendations for a slower approach:
First, start building a railroad yard and a circle of track. The track can circle your entire room, or it can be much smaller. This will give you some practical experience. That yard can eventually become part of your future layout. If you don't use it as a yard module, you may be able to use it as a hidden staging yard.
While you are doing this,
1. Visit as many large layouts as possible. Clubs have open houses. Meet other modelers at your LHS and visit their layouts.
2. Join the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA) and get involved in the Layout Design Special Interest Group (SIG).
3. Try to obtain as many issues as possible of Kalmbach Publishing's Model Railroad Planning Magazine, and study the track plans of large layouts in Model Railroader.
4. Study the railroads and geographical areas that you want to model. You have mentioned the Joint Line in Colorado and you have mentioned north central Pennsylvania. I inferred that there may be other candidates as well. If you know where you plan to go with this project, it will be easier to plan the journey.
5. Get the help of a professional layout designer. These guys know what they are doing, and they know the mistakes to avoid and how to avoid them.
I wish you well with the project.
Tom
Tom I used 3' only as an exercise to determine what might be required and to visualize the idea. I had given thought to a lower area where transitions (unseen) might be able to take place. I like to maximize the space available. I could have this helix on a lower lever just to move a train into a different location or park it out of sight if need be. I can spend days in AutoCad developing ideas that cost me nothing but time - a great cold weather placation devise.
I don't understand why you think you need 3 feet between levels. Assuming you're 6 feet tall, that means your upper level is at 5 feet elevation and your lower level is an impractical 2 feet. A more practical dimension is about 30-34" lower level and about 48-54" upper level. A no-lix means there would be places where the actual dimensions would be different. Most double deck layouts have the two levels separated by about 18 - 24 inches.
Nick:
Your math on the 'No-lix' is fairly close, so if you do want a three foot separation between levels it won't work unless you can go around all four walls at a constant grade, or a distance similar to that if you use peninsulas. Even then you will only basically have one visible level for most of the layout, so forget about the No-lix.
As for the extended helix, if my math is correct (don't count on it!), your extended helix would require three full loops @ 2.5% grade to climb roughly 3 feet (33.8" actually). It would also give you about 11.25 inches between levels of the helix which is plenty. Alternately, you could go with 4 loops @ 2% to get 36" elevation with 9" between the levels. I'm basing those numbers on a calculation of a total of 451" per loop in the helix (40" radius x 2 = 80" dia. x 3.14 = 251" circumference for the curves + 9' 4" + 7' 4" for the straights = 451"). Somebody please correct me if my math is out to lunch!
Bottom side is that the extended helix will take up a lot of space, but since you aren't exactly short of space, that might be acceptable. Also, with your very generous radii you could easily double track it and maybe even install a third (and fourth) track for hidden staging.
hon30critter Hi Nick: An oval 'helix' allows you to reduce the grade a bit so you can get away with somewhat smaller radii, but not much. You can get away with 26" in HO if you are only running 40' or 50' cars , but if you are going to run 89' cars 26" is way too small. The most important point is that the helix has to work properly. No options. A couple of other points to keep in mind: You cannot do a 30" radius 180 degree curve in 5' (60"). "30"" refers to the track center, not the outside radius of the bench work. To do an actual 30" radius track curve you need at least 63", plus whatever space is taken up by the helix support structure and the space required to clear the overhang on longer cars and locomotives as they go around the curve. There is also the concept of a 'no-lix'. Instead of having a dedicated helix to go from one level to another, the track rises more or less continuously as it goes around the layout. You start out at the bottom level and by the time you have reached the other end of that 'level' you have climbed to the starting point for the next level. If you want continuous running you will still need reverse loops but building a loop at each end of the layout is still easier that building a helix, and you can put a scene in the middle of the loop. Are you familiar with the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA)? They offer a wealth of free information about how to design a model railroad so you can avoid mistakes. One of the charts they offer relates to minimum track clearances. You can use that information to figure out how much space you have to allow from the track center to an obstacle, be it another train or structure or whatever. Just take the recommended distance between track centers and divide by two. Here is a link: http://www.nmra.org/index-nmra-standards-and-recommended-practices Scroll down to 'Clearances'. I will congratulate you on your decision to not go buying things willy nilly to see if they will fit, or just because you like them. Lots of those who are new to the hobby buy too much stuff on a whim only to discover later that the items don't fit into their plans. Looking forward to watching your progress. Dave
Hi Nick:
An oval 'helix' allows you to reduce the grade a bit so you can get away with somewhat smaller radii, but not much. You can get away with 26" in HO if you are only running 40' or 50' cars , but if you are going to run 89' cars 26" is way too small. The most important point is that the helix has to work properly. No options.
A couple of other points to keep in mind:
You cannot do a 30" radius 180 degree curve in 5' (60"). "30"" refers to the track center, not the outside radius of the bench work. To do an actual 30" radius track curve you need at least 63", plus whatever space is taken up by the helix support structure and the space required to clear the overhang on longer cars and locomotives as they go around the curve.
There is also the concept of a 'no-lix'. Instead of having a dedicated helix to go from one level to another, the track rises more or less continuously as it goes around the layout. You start out at the bottom level and by the time you have reached the other end of that 'level' you have climbed to the starting point for the next level. If you want continuous running you will still need reverse loops but building a loop at each end of the layout is still easier that building a helix, and you can put a scene in the middle of the loop.
Are you familiar with the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA)? They offer a wealth of free information about how to design a model railroad so you can avoid mistakes. One of the charts they offer relates to minimum track clearances. You can use that information to figure out how much space you have to allow from the track center to an obstacle, be it another train or structure or whatever. Just take the recommended distance between track centers and divide by two.
Here is a link:
http://www.nmra.org/index-nmra-standards-and-recommended-practices
Scroll down to 'Clearances'.
I will congratulate you on your decision to not go buying things willy nilly to see if they will fit, or just because you like them. Lots of those who are new to the hobby buy too much stuff on a whim only to discover later that the items don't fit into their plans.
Looking forward to watching your progress.
So, taking your infoormation, for the layout to climb 3', a helix would be something along these lines (Sketch) or am I missing the boat?
Looking at the No-lix, using what I see (2 to 2.5% grade) as the max grade in the length of the room I am only able to get up about 1'-6" and that's no turns.
Aparently I'm clueless on the No-Lix. Jump in here guys - LOST!
TIA,
I'm another one who is looking forward to following your progress. I'm an Eastern guy, so I lean towards a PRR layout based on Williamsport/Emporium/Keating Summit/Olean, NY. Of course, that whole area won't fit into your space. You would have to do some editing. There is a lot of information available, but it will take persistence to find all you need. Of course, that is true for any line you might want to represent, no matter where it's located. There is also a lot of appropriate PRR equipment available.
Whether you choose that area or not, the idea of a "no-lix", mentioned above, is something you should consider. You have said you would be willing to consider a multilevel layout. The no-lix is basically a layout in which the whole layout is a helix. Instead of having one space-eating helix, the track would follow a gradual upgrade that wraps around the room until it comes back to the original point, but the track has risen high enough to justify a second level. This is how the well-known layouts of Tony Koester, Bill Darnaby, and others are designed.
I think I would set up a workbench in the lower left corner near the cabinets that can't be moved. For the rest of the room, I would use as much wall space as possible, with peninsulas jutting into the center of the room. Those Pennsylvania mountains dictated a lot of curves. Keep your aisles as wide as practical. Try for 36" wide aisles throughout. You might be forced to make some aisles narrower, but try to avoid that if you can. Your longest straight wall might be the best place to put your major yard. I assume that would be Emporium.
As for curves, on a layout this big, it is probably best to stick with curves of at least 30" radius. You should have enough space to do that. Wider if possible. Your 1950-s-1960's era means most freight cars will be in the 40 to 50 foot length range, although some longer freight cars were in service before the end of the 1960's. There was regular passenger service in that time period, and full-length passenger cars will perform best on curves of at least 28" radius. I rode the Baltimore Day Express over the line in the mid 1960's, and I remember the train's consist being a pair of E units, one or two baggage cars, and two old P70 heavyweight coaches.
Good luck!
riogrande5761 If you like 50's and 60's D&RGW, the Joint Line would be less on scenery although there is a Front Range mountain backdrop but more variety as the Santa Fe, CB&Q and D&RGW, and MoPac and Rock Island was around too. Some industry in Denver for switching and Pueblo, Colorado Springs. Jim
If you like 50's and 60's D&RGW, the Joint Line would be less on scenery although there is a Front Range mountain backdrop but more variety as the Santa Fe, CB&Q and D&RGW, and MoPac and Rock Island was around too. Some industry in Denver for switching and Pueblo, Colorado Springs.
Jim
DAVE!!! Wow! I'll be reading for a month now. This is so cool. Good stuff!
Thanks!
NickPPJR Thanks Jim. I have no problem with multiple decks/levels at all. Speaking of them, I see so many layouts and notice either oval or circular transitions built to gain access to the next level. What's the radius on those things? With wanting to mix freight and passenger would it be prudent to allow for the longest cars? I hate having to go out and purchase items just to determine clearance and radius, is there some charts or data banks that contain mins and max? TIA, Nick
Thanks Jim. I have no problem with multiple decks/levels at all. Speaking of them, I see so many layouts and notice either oval or circular transitions built to gain access to the next level. What's the radius on those things? With wanting to mix freight and passenger would it be prudent to allow for the longest cars? I hate having to go out and purchase items just to determine clearance and radius, is there some charts or data banks that contain mins and max?
If you are talking about a helix, those would have radii mostly in the range of 28-36 inches. Of course the larger radii is giong to be a major space eater but too little radii places a lot of drag and also increases the grade. It's all about compromise but probably a good happy medium would be some where around 30 or 32 inches.
It would be prudent to design your track plan with the longest cars in mind, and that usually means 85 or 89' freight cars. Most people these days go with a minimum radius of about 30 inches or a bit more - in my case my minimum is 32-inches and even on those radii the long cars make the curves look sharp, but they will operate well on anything north 28-inches.