Duck-unders and Lift-outs

[RR_Mel]

I built a hinged lift up as a teen that worked out very good.  Because it only had a single track it was only 8” wide and used a single door hinge.  I used two single flexible wires under the hinge side for track power.

 

I also interlocked the approach to the lift up as it was a 3’ drop to concrete.  I’ve never been known for paying full attention to details like making sure the section was down and in place, probably saved several locomotives from disaster.

 

 

Mel

 

 

My Model Railroad   

http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/

 

Bakersfield, California

 

I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.

 

[Overmod]

Some of the detail design of lift-outs can mirror 'best practices' of module construction.

I recommend that you have a ROBUST set of feeders with appropriate plug-in on either end, and then feeders up to tee track rather than try getting continuity at the rail joints as well as precise running alignment.  

i recommend you have some form of positive lockdown that actually snugs down to full correct alignment.  And have four full contact points as close to the 'corners' as you can and make them fully and easily adjustable no matter how stiff you think your benchwork is.  Do that once and keeping the joints lined and surfaced over time, and perhaps weather changes, is likely to be easy thereafter...

[Water Level Route]

MisterBeasley

I built a lift-off section.  The Central Valley bridge was in the middle, crossing a waterway, but I could have done as well without the bridge and water.  It just looked nice.  This could have been a duck-under, and frequently was, but I built it as a lift-off so that I would have that capability when needed.

This is exactly how I've done mine, only with the shorter Walthers bridge.  The liftout is actually a U shaped piece made of 1x4s, so they provide a base for the scenery and protection for the bridge should it get left in place like a duck-under and bumped into.

[MisterBeasley]

I built a lift-off section.  The Central Valley bridge was in the middle, crossing a waterway, but I could have done as well without the bridge and water.  It just looked nice.  This could have been a duck-under, and frequently was, but I built it as a lift-off so that I would have that capability when needed.

This was between my main layout and an extension, so unfortunately it had to carry power.  I built wiring into the lift-off structure, with plugs at either end.  It worked fine, but was kind of a nuisance.  That's why I still used this as a duck-under most of the time.

I too would go with a fold-down or fold-up if I had it to do again.  Make the whole thing rock solid so it will be used as intended and not more easily cheated.

This is a picture of the lift-off under construction.  I built this from pink foam, layered, and surrounded with hardboard for protection.  The superstructure of the bridge is not on yet, but you can see where the river will be.  This is in HO scale, about a foot wide.

In the next picture, you can see the hardboard side and the superstructure.  On these bridges, the superstructure is just for show.  It looks nice, but bears no weight, and is easy to remove.

With the landscaping and water done, I think this came out pretty well.

 

[UNCLEBUTCH]

 I had a duckunder [54 inches above floor, 36in long and 6in wide] for about 2 weeks. It then became a lift out. Its one thing to just duck down, and scoot forward. Now try it with both hands full. Gets old real fast.

It takes but a few seconds to remove or replace. But I found myself leaving it out and running a point to point most times

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

I once belonged to a club that has a duck under bridge, that layout is still going strong after 50 plus years. They did replace the original plastic bridge with a brass scratch built one. The bridge lifts up/out, so if you bump it, generally it just lifts up.

I am starting a new layout soon, in a large space, but still have decided in favor of a lift out. I prefer track plans where the viewer always has east to his right and west to his left relatitive to train movement, so I want to be "inside the giant circle".

I would never build a fixed duck under. Even if most people choose to duck, you still need to be able to open those pathways.

My lift out will bridge a 36" long opening and be wide enough to carry 5 tracks, or about 1' wide.

I have not made a final decision about lift vs swinging.

Hope this helps,

Sheldon

[snjroy]

What is the size of your room? I have a lift out section, but only because my space was limited (7x11 for HO). It does work well, but I built it nice and sturdy. Think of it as a door... and I'm pretty much a lone wolf. A plastic bridge would take quite a beating... If you are using DCC, reverse loops are easy to install and seemless in operation. So IMHO, avoid a duck under or overbuild a hinched liftout. You won't regret it.

Simon

[gregc]

a higher layout will also make it much easier to work on using a chair with wheels.    And of course, you can use the chair to slide under any duck under regardless of width.

[mbinsewi]

I think the height of your layout will determine if you need a duck-under or a lift-out.

Some use a hinged section, you don't have to duck under, or lift out, just lift up one end.

I don't have either, I have an "L" shaped layout, with loops on each end.

Mike.

[The Milwaukee Road Warrior]

My initial layout benchwork plans had me ducking under a thinner section of the board for access to an operating "pit" in the interior.  I've done some reading on this and I know it is not ideal, especially for a permanent layout.  My back and knees will rebel after a while.  

So I've also spent some time trying to figure out if I can fit two large turning circles (not really peninsulas) on the ends (dog bone) to allow direct walk-in access.  I think I've managed to sketch out an idea or two that will work, but I keep coming back to wanting the ability to run "thru" continuous mains rather than looping on the ends - so much so that I'm considering incorporating a 200' Central Valley Model Works double track pratt truss bridge between the two peninsula ends of the "bone" to allow continuous running.  

I realize I'm kind of fighting with myself here by doing this, and defeating the purpose of making the benchwork change in the first place. But on the other hand, it seems like it would be easier to only have to get under a 6 inch wide bridge than an 18 inch wide section of benchwork with 2x4 framing underneath.  In my mind I'm rationalizing that the bridge is a better scenario if I have to have something to duck under.

Question: what am I not thinking about in this scenario?  

The only concern that comes to my mind is that people accessing the interior could do a lot more damage to a model bridge if they hit it than would be done to actual benchwork framing.  (My "people" are little people right now, but they will grow bigger and bigger.)  But there are plenty of layout pictures out there of similar type set ups, so I know that people do, in fact, build layouts with this kind of access.  Anyone build a duck under with benchwork or a bridge and regret it?

Question 2: I know people also build lift-out sections where needed.  I'm just trying to evaluate if a lift-out with the above mentioned bridge is even possible and what modelers here think of that.  I'm sure some of you have lift-out sections.  Looking back, are they worth the hassle?