First Layout Look--and a question

[SpaceMouse]

Okay, I started from this schematic:


Now the layout plan differs from the schematic in three ways.

1)There is only one lumber siding and it leads to a logging camp. The logging camp has 3-4 track "yard" and climbs to a logging area.

2) The mining operations branches off from the Dos Rios siding as opposed to having its own.

3) The lower return loop goes from Union Lumber company to Willits.



Between the upper levels is a section of logging. All lower tracks will be in tunnels and the upper track will cross between upper platforms on the mountain. The grade between levels will start at the wall end of the Willits Yard and climbs at a 2% grade under the logging area, on a bluff above the ship loading area, above the water heater, behind the heater, around a loop back behind heater and above water heater to Dos Rios area.

The staging on the right passes under electrical box and connects to Willits Yard. It would be better if it connected to Fort Stewart, but I haven't figured how to get around that electrical box.

The lower staging connects to the logging end of Willits--like in the prototype.



Any comments would be appreciated. Next will be the actual track work.

Now for the question. Right now I have the lower deck at 48" and the upper at 62"

Eye level in our family varies from my son at 44" to me at 67".

A major purpose of is to get my son involved. However, I see this railroad being operated by 4-6 people. What height would you set the two levels?

BTW: the vertical distance at 14" seems pretty small.

[rrinker]

I think the seperation is going to be too small. I'd start lower - I was going to use 36" and 54" for my levels - this is why I gave up on the double deck idea. It's all compromise. To get adequate seperation between the decks, either one level will be just right and the other way too high or low, or they both will be non-ideal. I don't have the room to do a mushroom, which avoids most of the deck height issues
Rememebr that the levels are your track height. Subract out the hight of the uper level benchwork and any lighting you might have to install under the top deck and then see how much space you have above the lower level's track. Even trying to build 'thin', my 18" railhead to railhead distance rapdily shrunk to 12-14" clearance above the lower track. Rather tight if you ask me.

--Randy

[howmus]

Hey Mouse!

Whatever you do, be absolutely sure that there is room to access and remove the water heater. It will sooner or later need to be replaced and it would not be good to have to rip up half of the layout to get it out and a new one brought in......... [:O]

[cuyama]

Many two-deck layouts I have seen, operated on, and designed set the lower deck at something like 38-42". This allows for more separation from the upper deck without climbing too high.

Regards,

Byron
Custom Layout Design and Operations Planning

[jwar]

I second Howmus about the water heater, a easy fix if you make removable sections.
Sounds like your going under the electrical box with one track and want another on a higher level accross the front of the Elect box, if so how about a swing up, easy to build and could even be two tracks if you wish.

I built my lower at 37 in and the upper at 56. Mainley for my granddaughters and also so that my my two swing ups on the upper level could clear the cieling when lifted up.
If you lower area track is to be tunnels, have you thought about cleaning or repairing track, derails ect. How about a steep cliff with a sieries of short short tunnels or somthing or someway of getting to the track without it being a problem.
Looks like you have a good area to work with, go for it. Take care...John

[dtbowyer]

Chip,

Looks good. Same problem with layout height - my son is about 44"-45", too. Since one of my objectives is to share the hobby with him, it kind of forced me to use about a 40" height (about the top of his shoulders). This will allow him to enjoy it, too. Ideal for me? No, but better for him, which I guess makes it close to ideal for me! As you know, I plan to have an upper loop that will end up about 6"-8" higher, so a little better for me. Mine is also going to be free-standing on legs against the walls, so I can probably raise the level down the road when he gets taller. (Makes it a little easier to build, too!)

Maybe lower the lower some to work better for your son, which gives you more separation to solve benchwork and lighting issues, like Randy points out.

Anyway, looks like a great concept - I can't wait to see the actual trackplan. I certainly agree with Ray regarding access to the water heater!

David

[SpaceMouse]

Thanks for the heads up about the water heater. It should be fine as is, the "heater" is layed out based upon the concrete base so there's a couple inches clearance on both sides. I think a hand truck with the heater will clear.

However, I had planned to put a small freezer chest in between the two heaters. I'll have to make sure it can get out of the way or re-think it.

I've been working on the trackwork. I ended-up lopping off the ship-loading section. The Union Lumber Yard was too congested and the main reason for modeling the shiploading was to get a really cool tressel bridge that ran along the beach.

It also allows me a little flexibilty time-wise as the beach branch was completed in 1917 and the Northwestern Pacific was completed in 1914. So I could back-date the layout until 1914 (the CW got its three 2-6-2's in 1914 so I don't want to go back further than that anyway,)

[SpaceMouse]

Okay, I am redesigning the layout with the bottom level being at 38 inches and the top level being at 58 inches. It solves the problem of my son viewing the bottom level and solves the problem of putting a staging yard off the end of the Northwestern. It becomes Eureka.

It creates a problem with the water heater. Not longer can I go over the top, I must go in front. This means a semi-permenant removeable section of transition track.

[Adelie]

That sounds like a good compromise, Chip. I'm in my basement, looking at the construction zone that is the Bunter Ridge right now. The staging level on mine is 41", the highest elevation of the track is 56.5", and both are in place. If my entire layout was 41", I'd not like it. I'm not sure I'd like the entire layout at 56.5" either (I'm 5'-11" tall). But, if it were two levels with scenery, it would probably be a good compromise and a contrast. Looking down on the lower level and at a comfortable viewing level on the upper. Especially given your son's height right now.

I've got about 11" clearance between the staging and the visible level above. Good enough for easy access (the fascia will be open to allow 1:1 hands and arms), but not nearly enough to create any scenes. Even the 15" between the staging and highest level would be a bit tight for that. I think the extra 4" you are planning is a wise move.