gregcThe cost is width.
And visual separation.
But multi-pass/multi-tier schematics are definitely worth considering for many builders.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
SeeYou190I prefer tiered layouts to multidecked layouts.
i believe they are much more doable because the height between tiers is much less and more attainable with practical grades in a shorter distance available on smaller layouts. The cost is width.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
I prefer tiered layouts to multidecked layouts.
I have heard many complaints about too much track, spaghetti bowls, and how it is silly to have the same train run through the same scene multiple times.
Still, for me, they just seem like the better application.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Random_Idea_Poster_6263Is there such a term or example of this?
If you're going to have a "high line" around the walls above the base track level, why not have that on a grade all around the room, and then you won;t need a helix. Depending on your room size, a lap around while climbing will get you enough clearance to hit the second deck without the space eating helix.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
That's sometimes referred to as a "multi-pass" or "multi-tier" layout and the tracks at two different heights are often called "tiers" (to distinguish from a true "multi-deck").
But just describing it is probably as clear and doesn't require jargon.
I think the term, for some, is 'spaghetti bowl'. Having scads for track running around and around, no matter if at different levels, and generally commanding much or all of the surface, is busy and convoluted, and lacks charm...like a bowl of spaghetti.
I hope that doesn't come of as negative. I don't mean it to be, only to report that it's a surprisingly widespread feeling when people post track-heavy, and track-concentric, plans.
...unless I have misunderstood the description entirely.
Many of us have multiple layers of track, but it's just "my layout."
I had a subway that ran directly below my freight tracks, with a very small level separation that only worked because the subways were such low profile. I could only pull my CMX car to clean my subway tracks with the powered subway motors, because no other engines would fit there.
Above ground, I only had a stub siding with a coal trestle, and everything else was kept level to allow decent length trains without too much motive power.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
In my many years in the hobby, I've never heard of a "multipack" layout. That's a new one on me.
As for mulitple track levels on a single deck, perhaps the word "tiered track layout" is what you are looking for?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
I am currenly experimenting with designing ideas for model railroad layouts. Am ambiton of mine is to build a three level deck layout that has mukltipule track levels on it.An idea I have is I am designing a deck with a large trestle that is close to the wall, but below it is a mainline/yard. The helix would be able to connect to the two levels on the one deck, allowing trains to come on and off it, and in any direction as it would have a wye connecting.Is there such a term or example of this? I will be sure to post a trackplana of what I am working on to show better what I am explaining.