Helix vs. hidden ramp

[FJ and G]

A lot has been written about the Helix, but IMO, it is a big space eater. Anyone use a hidden ramp to raise/lower your trains from one level to the other? The big advantage would be ease of construction and saving space. Of course you would need a long enough run to get the elevation you need--I happen to have about 50 feet to run up. Just wondering if anyone else has tried this.

[nfmisso]

Why hide it ??

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nfmisso

Why hide it ??

This is a concept promoted by some called the "No-lix" - your whole layout (or at least the "ramp" between levels) becomes one whole long, very gradual grade that is scenicked. On the order of less than 1%, you will need a lot of space, but you don't have to spend all that money on track for a helix, and you don't have to hide it...

Andrew

[ndbprr]

Tony Koester is building his new Nickel Plate RR using a slight westbound grade for three levels. It mirrors the prototype and keeps everything in the open. I once had a 6'x20' area for modeling and built a multilevel railroad using ramps and 30" radius curves. I think the drag on ramps is less than a helix and it allowed all trains to go in the same direction on each level. The downside is the lowest level was 18" off the ground and contained a reversing loop and a series of stroage tracks that required backing in to. being 6' 5" it was not pleasent trying to back a train into a track 18" off the ground. Personally I am starting to think smaller is better. There is only so much time for maintenance and construction. I have now planned a PRR railroad based on a section of Philadelphia that allows four track corridor running diagonally accross a basement and pretty much duplicates the original in almost full scale. This means real time operating rather than fast clock. The point of the triangle behind the layout will be the staging yard area. yet to be decided is if I should make the staging yards on loops or continuous running. I will probably do loops with a pair of tracks to allow continuous running but I have really scaled back from the multi-level idea and the amount of railroad I intend to model. I don't want to be building for the next ten years.

[Anonymous]

Pros and cons of design concepts do abound in this hobby and to each his/her own. Having tried both the helix and nolix, I prefer the concentrated grade of a helix with level trackwork on the layout portion. For me, it avoided turnouts on grades, made switching and staging rolling stock easier at passing sidings or industries along the incline/main, and level trackwork with undulating benchwork and scenery seems more aestetically appealing, at least to my eye. Good luck with whatever you chose.

[FJ and G]

Thx guys, you've given me some ideas. Why make it hidden? Excellent point! Also, the point made that the ramp track (or "no-lix--I love that term) can be straight and therefore will not add to drag friction like the helix that must by definition go round and round.

BTW, I feel awkward admitting this but I model 3-rail (hi rail).

I enjoy this "scale" forum better than the 3-rail ones because I find more useful information here on scenery, scratchbuilding and other stuff. I hope I am welcomed here. Had my layout published in Sept Classic Toy Trains, btw.