Howard Zane...I did have a low stool with casters for folks to use while negotiating duck-unders, but somehow that evening it was not used...
Are you sure that your portly guest didn't sit on it and unwittingly take it home, wedged where the sun hadn't shone for years?
Wayne
This is my duck under and it has a river, three curved arch bridges (exiting a tunnel on the upper level) on it and it is about 28" deep. I couldn' t see any way to do this other than the duck under.
-Bob
Life is what happens while you are making other plans!
Howard ZaneFor an around the walls pike that would require such an duck-under arrangement, then build a swinging section..... a bit more work, but as you age, you'll be happy you built it...and then some!
And above all add a automatic stop in case the "bridge" is in the open or raise position.
Yes,I've seen several lift/swing section designed as a bridge. A sweet touch on one layout was working signals red the "bridge" was up or not completely locked in place and green if it was down and locked.. If the red signal was ran the train automatically stop after passing the signal.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
The aisle for duck-under was actually too narrow....26" and lined with Masonite. Not only was the vistor extemely overweight, but tall as well. I had built it for me, as I never at the time even dreamed I'd have so many visitors. I did have a low stool with casters for folks to use while negotiating duck-unders, but somehow that evening it was not used.
After taking the whole section down, I completely redesigned it by moving water heater and furnace to the side creating a separate maintenace room. Please don't construe the next statement as a plug...but for those who have my book, it shows the original pike with duck-unders. Allen Keller's last video on my layout (number 58) shows layout with new section without duck-unders.
While in the redesign phase, I then realized that any layout design can be accomplished without using a duck-under. For an around the walls pike that would require such a duck-under arrangement, build a swinging section or lift-up instead..... a bit more work, but as you age, you'll be happy you built it...and then some!
HZ
Howard ZaneThen in 2006, a visitor with......well let's say a bit overweight (450 lbs+) became wedged in after going to ramming speed. We had two pulling and two pushing on the caboose...to no avail. After a brief period, his back was hurting badly, so I grabbed the saws-all and cut him out thus eliminating a section of the layout.
Howard, doesen't this imply that the isle was too narrow, not to low? I have a duck under on my layout that is 48" high and I added a handrail on each side so when I go under I just grab the rails and 'slide' through. Now I just need a sign to remind me of when to stand up (after I pass the end of the duck under!). BTW I am 75 now and have had many, many visits to my chiropractor! My layout varies from 49" to 55" and I like the 'view' that it gives.
davidmurrayGroup operations, a few adualts, with multple trains, each adult in an office chair, would be likely to present a greater ability to get in each others way.
And I suspect a few sideswipes and rear end collisions as well-got wheels? Roll about.
Chairs has been prove to work during operation like those old timey "block operator" layouts (remember those?) where a operator is assigned to operate a certain section of layout that may included planing meets.
Of course some old timey clubs used a "engineer's crow nest" where the person operating the train could view the layout from above.
If I may..The two types of layouts I mention was considered state of the art back in the day..With advances in layout design and control we gain "walk around" and today we have wireless DCC.
Who would have thought that possible 60 years ago when the above layouts was popular?
Another consideration to think of is how you are going to run your trains. A single operator, with one or two grandkids watching/helping can easily move around in a chair. Group operations, a few adualts, with multple trains, each adult in an office chair, would be likely to present a greater ability to get in each others way.
As I was going for 3 cab, cab control, I used a fifty inch height for walk around.
At age 68, in a few years, this may cause problems, but one can hope not.
Dave
hon30critter Interesting discussion. I'm going to have to operate my layout from a seated position. My back simply won't allow me to stand for very long. I haven't figured out exactly what height yet. Dave
Interesting discussion.
I'm going to have to operate my layout from a seated position. My back simply won't allow me to stand for very long.
I haven't figured out exactly what height yet.
Howard Zane Then in 2006, a visitor with......well let's say a bit overweight (450 lbs+) became wedged in after going to ramming speed. We had two pulling and two pushing on the caboose...to no avail. After a brief period, his back was hurting badly, so I grabbed the saws-all and cut him out thus eliminating a section of the layout. HZ
Then in 2006, a visitor with......well let's say a bit overweight (450 lbs+) became wedged in after going to ramming speed. We had two pulling and two pushing on the caboose...to no avail. After a brief period, his back was hurting badly, so I grabbed the saws-all and cut him out thus eliminating a section of the layout.
Good heavens Howard that is an amazing story. I have seen such "slightly overweight" visitors walk into tight dead-end aisles and then need to ask for some help in backing their way out. MR's Jim Hediger has referred to some layout visitors who "Exceed Plate C."
I guess the lesson is that those with duck unders and tight aisles who open their layouts to tours should always keep a can of Crisco handy just in case ....
Dave Nelson
Hi all
Well my layout is nothing like the rediculouse recomended height's
I prefer to be able to reach my layout for work and play in comfort.
Without resorting to the use of ladders or other inconvieneces.
Must get a suitable chair shame I can't perminantly borrow a Loco chair
regards John
DAVID FORTNEYI also use a bar stool with a back so I can run trains when I'm tired and sore. Being older (70) is not for the young.
I used a bar stool with a back for years now,I'm 68 I prefer a nice comfy office chair.
Be nice if I could find one with "EMD" on the back.
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
My layout is 52" high and is perfect for my 6'3" height. It's great for rail fanning my layout.
I also use a bar stool with a back so I can run trains when I'm tired and sore. Being older (70) is not for the young.
Howard ZaneIn my previous post, I had forgot to mention about "duck unders". These are fine if you happen to be a duck. A layout with a 42" or lower bench is not kind to folks using duck unders. I can almost guarantee that in the planning stage of a pike, duck unders can be avoided.....and they should be avoided at all cost. As the builder gets older, the duck under always get lower and then some.
Young flexible modelers can use those duck unders with ease.Its when old age and Uncle Arty moves in those duck unders become problematic. Of course layouts no longer last a life time so the young can enjoy those pit style layouts.
IMHO the best style for us antique modelers is around the walls or if they insist a pit style with lift. For the more robust modelers they should stick with a round the walls layout.
In my previous post, I had forgot to mention about "duck unders". These are fine if you happen to be a duck. A layout with a 42" or lower bench is not kind to folks using duck unders. I can almost guarantee that in the planning stage of a pike, duck unders can be avoided.....and they should be avoided at all cost. As the builder gets older, the duck under always get lower and then some.
My original Piermont Division layout had two duck unders as I had 48" to bottom of bench work and I was 43 when I began this thing. After 10 years, and several visits to the chiropractor, I found that I was not spending as much time with the trains. Then in 2006, a visitor with......well let's say a bit overweight (450 lbs+) became wedged in after going to ramming speed. We had two pulling and two pushing on the caboose...to no avail. After a brief period, his back was hurting badly, so I grabbed the saws-all and cut him out thus eliminating a section of the layout. The next evening three model railroad buddies came over with pick-ups and more saws and section One became history.
Of course this is the extreme, but it sort of makes a point.
I like my ISLs 48" since that is around 12-14" below seated eye level or near "boots on the ground" viewing for me. Throwing a switch is no problem nor uncoupling cars since I use KD magnets.
My last layout was chest height for me. I loved the way it looked and operated, I deliberately built it with no inaccessible points, operations is the reason d'etre for my railroad, it made the "duck under" a lot easier, and I'll put my next layout at that height too.And yeah, this getting older s*** ain't for sissies.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
dknelson I built my layout tall, to suit me (I am 6'8", or at least I was when I started the darn thing). I recognize that many shorter visitors will not be able to see deep into some scenes due to that height. I might add that my prototype is fairly flat/Midwestern. A mountain layout might well work lower with the viewer looking down at the trains but straight at (or up at) the mountain peaks. I find it agony to visit or operate on double deck layouts because the lower decks are just too low. Don't even get me started about "duck unders." I hear Mel's point about age and backs however, and should I ever need to sit to operate then my layout will have to be cut down. It will be way too tall to sit at. I will say that the ideal height for someone who lays flex track might be different than the ideal height for someone who hand-lays their track. I certainly know that soldering feeds to the outside of the far rails is a challenge at the height I chose (roughly armpit height). Dave Nelson
I built my layout tall, to suit me (I am 6'8", or at least I was when I started the darn thing). I recognize that many shorter visitors will not be able to see deep into some scenes due to that height. I might add that my prototype is fairly flat/Midwestern. A mountain layout might well work lower with the viewer looking down at the trains but straight at (or up at) the mountain peaks.
I find it agony to visit or operate on double deck layouts because the lower decks are just too low. Don't even get me started about "duck unders." I hear Mel's point about age and backs however, and should I ever need to sit to operate then my layout will have to be cut down. It will be way too tall to sit at.
I will say that the ideal height for someone who lays flex track might be different than the ideal height for someone who hand-lays their track. I certainly know that soldering feeds to the outside of the far rails is a challenge at the height I chose (roughly armpit height).
Mel, you and I are within days of the same age - and looking at things around similar problems.
The lowest track level on my double garage filler is 38 inches off the floor. Tomikawa, the main station on the JNR was planned to be 42" (my prototype's track gauge) but came in at 44" because I didn't allow for the slope in the garage floor. All of the netherworld is between those two levels, as is the rest of the visible JNR.
Everything else goes up, up and awaaay! (but not nearly as fast as Superman.) The coal hauler stations will end up at 52 inches, 56 inches and 58 inches (after a one-turn downgrade helix - it was actually coming in at 64 inches.) As things get higher, the reach-in distance for anything except scenery shortens.
If I ever build out any significant part of the two 762mm gauge feeders the tracks will be on a shelf with a rail height of >60"> along the south wall of the garage. To get there the logger will wrap itself around a mountain, 3 turns worth. The other line will use a slant-running elevator to connect levels. (The prototype's is inside a mountain. I'll keep mine visible.)
Some of our perceptions may come from how we first observed trains. A lot of my early railfanning was done while sitting on a mountainside, or inside a tall building, looking down. So was a lot of later trainwatching. So I'm comfortable with the Blimp's eye view (not a helicopter. No annoying wump-wump-wump...) On the other hand, I explored the mines, the Kurobe Gorge and Kiso country at ground level, so having them well elevated works out for me.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Howard Zane I enjoy telling my wife, Sandy..."excercise? I just walked 23 miles with the choo choo. HZ
I enjoy telling my wife, Sandy..."excercise? I just walked 23 miles with the choo choo.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me!
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
Layout height is a matter of what works best for builder. There are really no standards. My pike has a base level of 54' and benchwork is at 48" which allows ample room for negative scenery (desends below track level). This height of 54" and in areas up to 66" in mining areas allows trains and structures to be viewed at almost eye level. Then it is considerably easier to work under bench, and also leaves a shorter distance in background to scenic. At lower track levels, a distance of 4 feet and sometimes greater from layout base to ceiling can be difficult to effectively scenic.
I have seen several pikes with heights of 36" to 42" and viewing often is like looking out of helicopter window....which again some folks prefer. My goal is realism and close to eye level viewing offers this for me. Sitting? A simple bar stool works perfectly with this level. I do prefer standing and walking with train. My mainline is over 23 scale miles (over 1400'). I enjoy telling my wife, Sandy..."excercise? I just walked 23 miles with the choo choo.
My layout (partially unassembled currently) is/was set at 54" high. Reason? I can clear the 48" high book cases and storage units underneath it, and have a few inches to play with for scenery "below grade" where needed.
My height? I am a short 5'7" tall. So, yes, it is/was a stretch to work on, but that is what a step stool is for.
But, HO scale trains do look a better when near/just below eye level, compared with the "birds-eye view" of some other layouts.
Some of the display tracks are considerably higher, needing a step stool just to reach, but they do not operate. (And the tallest holds items rarely operated, for a variety of reasons, therefore do not need reached that often.)
It all comes down to "builder's choice", and that goes along with the old saying...."different strokes for different folks".
Having had layouts from about 30 inches to 42 inches, I can attest that each had their plus/minus attributes. My current layout's main level is 41 inches, with the lower level staging at about 20 or so inches. If I had only one level, I would likely go for 38-40 or so inches. But that is just me, a 5' 9 1/2" 225 lbs old guy.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Because the SIW is only 24" deep and benchwork is designed around short file cabinets reach is not an issue as I roll around inmy layou chair.
Joe Staten Island West
My partially double-decked layout varies in height, from 36" to 59". The lower level (the portion below the upper level) is meant to be operated from rolling office-type chairs, while most of the transition between levels can be operated either from the same chairs or while standing. The upper level is operated while standing, while stepstools are available when needed, especially when doing layout work on the upper level.
RR_Mel Yea, typo Im 78 until the end of teh month, I feel 88. Mel
Yea, typo Im 78 until the end of teh month, I feel 88.
Mel
BTW, my layout height is 36" height. I think that is a good height for sitting and viewing and operating.
Rich
Alton Junction