Question to doctorwayne....
I never really thought about this issue until it came up here, and was surprised to find that this area, into the corner... ...is a little over 60" deep, and at a height of about 40". As you can see, there's a turning wye in this corner, so, not being as stupid as I look, I made an access hatch (the stepped plywood beyond the tracks) which will eventually become a residential street. I've used the hatch to get in to add ballast and ground cover, but that's about it so far. The turnout, under the bridge, is the only motorised one on the layout, and that turnout the only one which has come apart. I could reach it just fine from the aisle, but the bridge made repairs somewhat "difficult". The upper level is at a height about 59" above the floor, great for viewing and most operations. Most of it is reachable from the step stool, so structures and scenery shouldn't be an issue. The upper level is equal to- or greater in depth than the lower level. This was done partially to allow room for a roundhouse and turntable, and also to allow better lighting for the layout on the lower level. However, the area at the end of the aisle, shown below... ...is about 39" deep, and about 49" from fascia to the back corners of the room. When adding the tracks there, I worked from a stepladder, leaning on the layout as necessary, and when it came time to paint the rails, I climbed up onto the upper level, using the stepladder, and painted them, both sides of both rails, while lying on the layout....talk about a topside creeper! Once the background scenery is in place (more high level work), there should be no need to reach in unless there's a derailment, easily do-able from the step stool. For me, the extra depth affords more scenic opportunities (plus the turning wye, which is vital on a point-to-point operation), and doesn't cause much hardship if thought out carefully. doctorwayne
...is a little over 60" deep, and at a height of about 40". As you can see, there's a turning wye in this corner, so, not being as stupid as I look, I made an access hatch (the stepped plywood beyond the tracks) which will eventually become a residential street. I've used the hatch to get in to add ballast and ground cover, but that's about it so far. The turnout, under the bridge, is the only motorised one on the layout, and that turnout the only one which has come apart. I could reach it just fine from the aisle, but the bridge made repairs somewhat "difficult".
The upper level is at a height about 59" above the floor, great for viewing and most operations. Most of it is reachable from the step stool, so structures and scenery shouldn't be an issue. The upper level is equal to- or greater in depth than the lower level. This was done partially to allow room for a roundhouse and turntable, and also to allow better lighting for the layout on the lower level.
However, the area at the end of the aisle, shown below...
...is about 39" deep, and about 49" from fascia to the back corners of the room. When adding the tracks there, I worked from a stepladder, leaning on the layout as necessary, and when it came time to paint the rails, I climbed up onto the upper level, using the stepladder, and painted them, both sides of both rails, while lying on the layout....talk about a topside creeper! Once the background scenery is in place (more high level work), there should be no need to reach in unless there's a derailment, easily do-able from the step stool.
For me, the extra depth affords more scenic opportunities (plus the turning wye, which is vital on a point-to-point operation), and doesn't cause much hardship if thought out carefully.
doctorwayne
Question about that second photo. Are the deck-flats 19" apart, but it appears closer due to the size (width) of the facia piece on the upper deck?
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
Brian, all of the lower level (and the area which has only a single level) has open grid framing at a height of about 36", but I used risers to vary the layout height from 36" to 44", necessary to split the amount of incline between what becomes the lower level and the one above it. The distance between the tops of the lower and upper decks varies from 20.5" to 23.5" only because the lower deck height varies - the upper deck is all at the same 59" height.
The overly deep fascia was used mainly to hide the fluorescent light fixtures mounted on the underside of the upper level, necessary to light the lower level. When operating on the lower level, I'm usually seated on a rolling-type office chair and the light fixtures and support brackets for the upper level are unseen. However, if I'm taking on-layout photos of the lower level, I'll occasionally get the bottom of one of the support brackets and/or some of the upper benchwork framing in the picture, as seen here...
I usually crop-out such distractions, but it is a drawback of having double decks.
Where this was once easy to do...
Another drawback is that the manually-operated turnouts on the lower level, especially those closer to the backdrop, are more difficult to reach. I have a bunch of BluePoint switch machines which I'll install (eventually) to allow for remote, manually control of those. Only a couple on the upper level will need that feature.
Wayne
The overly deep fascia was used mainly to hide the fluorescent light fixtures mounted on the underside of the upper level, necessary to light the lower level. When operating on the lower level, I'm usually seated on a rolling-type office chair and the light fixtures and support brackets for the upper level are unseen.
I figured that was part of your solution. So in that second photo I sited before, what sort of dimension is that between the lower edge of the upper fascia and bottom deck? What is that 'slot' you get to look into??
The viewing window on the left side is about 9.5" high, and seated, I can see everything there except the top inch-or-so of the smokestack on this structure...
On the right side of the aisle, the viewing window is about 12" high, and since there are no overly-tall structures, everything is visible when seated.
I built the layout with operation by one person in mind, and while the aisle here is wide enough to accommodate operators for both upper and lower areas at the same time, that aspect of the hobby isn't of interest to me. That's not to say that friends aren't welcome in the train room, and they can run trains if they wish, too. However, my idea of operations is one train making its way from town-to-town, switching loads and empties as required, a typical (but varied every trip) day's work. The modelled "day" however, might take an actual week (or longer) to be completed. I eventually hope to include timetable operations, too, but they'll happen sequentially, with these town-to-town operations simply pulling out of the way of superior trains or that of their town-to-town counterparts moving in the opposing direction. I have a long way to go before that can happen in earnest, though.
Thanks.I'm a single operater as well, but I have a 'bit smaller' space to build in than you did....ha...ha.
And I have never been into the details of switching, etc, BUT I do need to consider some of those attributes for my new track plan, ....in consideration of future operations.
I like to run trains, and as big a variety of them as possible. That's why I am presently planning to have at least 6+6+2=14 full length staging tracks with different trains ready to run, and possible 3 running simultaneously on dble mainlines. I need to find a way to have some 'passing sidings' along with these dbl-mainlines on relatively narrow shelfs. But as you have done with broader upper shelfs I see this as more possible.
railandsailI need to find a way to have some 'passing sidings' along with these dbl-mainlines on relatively narrow shelfs. But as you have done with broader upper shelfs I see this as more possible.
I have/had a large layout with a full double track mainline And I do not have any passing sidings.........I use My ten crossovers to act as passing sidings. That way I can make them as long as I want, where I want and they serve the same purpose, without taking up extra space. It will take some planning on Your part to figure out where to put them. I run My mainlines East to West so there are five sets of crossovers going East bound and five going West bound on a 40ft stretch. I have though since made the layout smaller and took sections out for the Grandkids layout. It was just too big for one person to take care of. I had made the layout in 10ft and 6ft sections starting in 1980 so it was easy to do. I run DC with 2 cab control, One section was started with 3 cab control, But those sections I gave to the Grandkids. I'm just getting too old to mess with something that size and while I still have the energy, am getting their Layout set up.
But give the crossover idea some thought...it worked great for Me!
Take Care!
Frank
Here is my approach.
First, I tried the double deck thing and was unhappy. Could not even bring myself to really complete it.
I thought I would like the seated/standing thing and lots of seperate isolated scenes. But as it got farther along I liked it less.
Like Frank I run a double track main in DC, with both CTC and local towers for control. I have radio wireless throttles, so I walk with my trains just like DCC - or I can run them from the CTC "tower".
Staging, we have lots of that here. When the new version is complete it will stage about 30 trains, typical length 25', or about 40 cars and necessary locos each.
The mainline is one big double track loop, but it has a series of cutoffs that allow display running on four seperate loops and/or bypassing the staging areas.
I like switching but prefer it to be off the mainline, like in real big cities, industries along a belt line connected to a yard. Only a few industries are switched from the mainline.
Sheldon
One more thought about multi levels.
I have considered the idea of reversing the typical multi level thinking.
Most multi level layouts are built one of two ways:
Both decks same depth, relatively shallow, spaced as far as practical.
or:
Lower deck deeper, upper deck set back some.
But what if you built a fairly "conventional" layout, just a little on the high side, say 54", or maybe even only 50", about 30" to 36" deep.
Then made the lower level like a shadow box below it. Only 14" to 18" deep, with a narrow viewing window, 12" to 14" high, with a base elevation of say 36"?
A helix could then be hidden under a 6' to 7' peninsula with virtually no wasted space or lost scenic depth.
The lower level would simply be a run thru, for scenic railfan viewing and a long mainline run. Just like a number of layouts where the upper deck is mostly a "run thru". And it could have conncections for continious operation on that level alone for display running.
When I move my layout to the retirement house, I may give it a try......
ATLANTIC CENTRAL One more thought about multi levels. I have considered the idea of reversing the typical multi level thinking. But what if you built a fairly "conventional" layout, just a little on the high side, say 54", or maybe even only 50", about 30" to 36" deep. Then made the lower level like a shadow box below it. Only 14" to 18" deep, with a narrow viewing window, 12" to 14" high, with a base elevation of say 36"? A helix could then be hidden under a 6' to 7' peninsula with virtually no wasted space or lost scenic depth. The lower level would simply be a run thru, for scenic railfan viewing and a long mainline run. Just like a number of layouts where the upper deck is mostly a "run thru". And it could have conncections for continious operation on that level alone for display running. When I move my layout to the retirement house, I may give it a try...... Sheldon
Sheldon, that's exactly what I was considering on my new layout. My switching layout might have too much of a commerical suburban feel to it because of the local industries I plan to model, but I want some rural running. My thought was to have a long spur/branch, about 18 feet long, serving a woodchip operation. The scene would have a lot of trees and only a few conveyors and and a loader bin to identify the industry.
I think I can pull it off by having the scene only about 12 inches tall, with 1x3 spine supporting the subroadbed of the main part of the layout serving as the roof of the shadowbox. At a 53 inch layout height, the bottom of the shadow box might be 39 inches off the floor.
At 18 feet long, I will need to find a way to support the layout as to not interfere with the long shadowbox. I'll probably pull the backdrop of the shadowbox up towards the front edge of the benchwork, the scene not needing to be as deep since its basically a bunch of trees. The brackets holding the layout would be behind the backdrop of the shadowbox.
I wouldn't want to do an entire layout that way, but one scene along one long wall might be a nice highlight.
I need to work out the details, but I'm with you as far as general concept.
- Douglas
doctorwayne I built the layout with operation by one person in mind, and while the aisle here is wide enough to accommodate operators for both upper and lower areas at the same time, that aspect of the hobby isn't of interest to me. That's not to say that friends aren't welcome in the train room, and they can run trains if they wish, too. However, my idea of operations is one train making its way from town-to-town, switching loads and empties as required, a typical (but varied every trip) day's work. The modelled "day" however, might take an actual week (or longer) to be completed. I eventually hope to include timetable operations, too, but they'll happen sequentially, with these town-to-town operations simply pulling out of the way of superior trains or that of their town-to-town counterparts moving in the opposing direction. I have a long way to go before that can happen in earnest, though. Wayne
Ditto. A perfect description of my operating interests. Except my layouts are smaller and I have less space between switching areas.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL But what if you built a fairly "conventional" layout, just a little on the high side, say 54", or maybe even only 50", about 30" to 36" deep. Then made the lower level like a shadow box below it. Only 14" to 18" deep, with a narrow viewing window, 12" to 14" high, with a base elevation of say 36"?
I took a very similar approach: upper deck 52" high and 30" deep, lower deck 34" high and 18" deep.
Here's a sketch of the construction details (notice I considered sight lines):
I chose this approach for several reasons. First, I wanted the upper deck to cantilever over the lower deck so that there would be no obstructions, either visual or reach-in. Second, I had a stash of eight 18" hollow-core bifold doors I got from demolition of a long closet in the (former) garage. (Bonus - bifold doors mean that there is no knob hole in them.)
Here's a photo taken fairly early on in construction. The area is a lot more finished these days, but . . . one problem with multi-level layouts is that it is far too tempting to use the as-yet unfinished lower level as a workbench.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
Yes Robert that is the same idea.
I have decided, maybe because of my roots in this hobby from back in the day, I'm not really happy with the "narrow shelf" idea when it comes to scenery. My new layout will be 3' to 4' deep virtually everywhere, with most all visable trackage located in the front 24" to 32".
The space behind will be scenery, much of which will be over top of staging yards. In the current location those yards will be reached through combination of access from below and lift out scenery sections.
Some staging will be behind the backdrop along sloped attic walls.
In the future retirement house location, I hope to have room to simply leave a "service isle" behind the layout, much like my very first layout, which had staging tracks hidden in a mountain all the way across the back of the layout. That was 1967......
At the retirement house, I can make the layout any height I want and consider the shadow box lower level.
BUT, if the new basement/layout space is big enough, I can just expand the layout on the current level, it is being built in modules for the future move.