Extreme Grade Question

Hi.  First, I have heard that it is incumbent upon all users of public and commercially supplied layout plans to verifiy all dimensions, and that applies to grades.  I agree with you, it is much steeper than a mere 6%.

Secondly, only specialized engines could haul useful loads up grades exceeding 5%, or they had to be doubled and/or have shovers at the rear. Tank engines, Climaxes, Heislers, and the famous Shay locomotives were, believe it or not, good on rather crude track and on grades approaching 12% in some cases.   If you'd rather not buy more engines, you will have to rely on your proof that any one of what you have can do the job.  That usually means making a temporary mock-up closely simulating what you are contemplating, and try what you intend to use on that mock-up.  If they work up to a maximum grade, that is about all you can expect on your layout, and then only if you are meticulous about duplicating what you used for your proof.

Set up a test grade and run it. That is what I do. A piece of flex-track or two on a board, elevated to the grade in the plan.  That way you will know what you can do with it. I also do not weight my cars according to the NMRA. IMO that is too heavy. I believe they are just fine as they come from the manufacturer. I use Athern cars as a basis for car weight and try to get all cars to weigh about the same.

 You don't say what scale you are working in - and that does make a difference.  In O scale, there is usually room to add enough weight to pull a couple of cars up a very steep grade.  In N scale, space for weight is at a premium, especially models of small prototypes - the kinds of prototype locomotives that would be seen on actual grades like this.  In HO, model locomotives with metal superstructures will usually do better, all else being equal.

The best mass production loco for grade climbing that I have seen in HO was the Roundhouse boxcab diesel/Climax.  I have seen several unmodified models have consistently climbed 8% grades with 2 or 3 cars without slipping at shows.  But they are noisy.  Most HO locomotives will not come close to this performance.  The Keystone Shay (a difficult kit) is reported to also do very well due to metal superstructure.

The other issue is performance downhill on steep grades with a load behind.  In O scale/gauge, worm gear drives are not necessarily used.  If a locomotive rolls freely enough (even some with worm gears), it can free wheel on a steep grade with a load behind.  That means even if the throttle is cut to zero, the train is going to continue downhill (don't ask how I know this).  At the opposite extreme, worm gear drives with slop in the worm or motor shaft will "buck" with any kind of load going down a steep grade.  Not very pretty to watch.  For decent performance without the "pogo effect" the slop has to be taken out, and rheostat control should be avoided.  Transistor throttles or DCC with back emf do help in this situation.

As others have said, when pushing normal limits in both curves and grades, testing is your friend.  Not all models will be successful, and the further you deviate from accepted norms, the more failures you can expect in your testing. 

my thoughts, your choices

Fred W

Sounds like you are looking at "The Third Street Industrial District". I've always felt that layout was more than a little contrived just to get that over-under. Along with the unrealistic (and unecessary) switchback industry tracks, these are some of the elements that make that layout work less well than it looks (in my opinion). I just posted this in another thread, but in the same space, this minor modification of Jonathan Jones' plan from the May 2001 Model Railroader might be more interesting.

Subscribers can see the original plan here:
http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=1447

If you really have your heart set on the Third Street layout, having the "main line" rise a bit toward that over-under would allow you to split the difference in grade between the two, reducing the effective grade a bit. But I'm just not sure that it's worth that compromise for that small bit of interest. And I'd look at reworking some of the switchback tracks that might require you to remove most or all the cars from one industry to switch another. Worst of all, the Thrid Street plan as drawn is set up so you can only switch the major industrial complex one or two cars at a time because of the way the switchback tracks are arranged (probably to try to accommodate that grade). Might be challenging once, tedious thereafter ... and not realistic.

Overall, there are better choices in HO in 2X10 feet, IMHO.

Byron
Model RR Blog

Industrial type layouts and switching layouts usually just handle two or three cars at a time. Steep grades are the norm for these types of pikes. If you work up a 10 to 12 car train on then, the train is almost as long as the layout and are impractical.

I have a 5% grade on a nolix to an upper level on my current layout under construction. A single GP-9 will haul 8 cars up it from a standing start. Also, you DO NOT have to bring your cars up to the SUGGESTED NMRA weight. If you build good track work, the manufacturers weight will be fine.  So that will help. Also, if you do a tune-up on your cars and make sure they roll freely, that will help as well.

Really, Gandydancer?...aGP9?  That is exceptional in my experience.  Does your Geep have rubber tires?  What make is it?

I have a 4% grade and all cars weighted properly to standard.  I also have 96 locos.  None of them will take 10 properly weighted cars up 4%.  Some Kato and P2K SD45s and SD60s will spin their way up, but that is not doing it properly.  Oh, but I also have to enter my grade from a curve.   But you say from a standing start?

I'm going to go load up my hill again and do some testing.

   Thanks everybody, I am modeling in HO scale. The Third Street Industrial District is exactly what I was looking at. My layout is 10 feet long on the right side and 12 feet long on the left side with an 8 foot connector. All tables are 2 feet wide. I was thinking of having a main line across the connector with an interchange track. The two sides would be towns that you switch the interchange cars in and out of. I have virtually no experience with switching, so it is difficult to know what works well. I am definately not into complicated. I just want something that will be fun to operate. The main reason the Third Street Industial District caught my eye was, I thought the different elevations would be more "scenery" appealing. It was already complicating things because of the grade issues. The 2x10 that you have illustrated looks interesting and I could simplify it, or add industries because I won't have to have a main line through the town. Again, Thanks for your input. 

 While our models may be significantly underpowered when scaled down from their 1:1 counterparts, in the real world a grade of >5% is handled on a weekly basis. In fact, the same grade I mention is the one that brought the Acela cars to their final finishing point before being put into service.

The line that goes to the now defunct Bombardier facility had grades approaching 8%. The general rule was that no more then two of the coaches would be handled at any time. 

Gerome

Really, Gandydancer?...aGP9?  That is exceptional in my experience.  Does your Geep have rubber tires?  What make is it?

It is one of the Walthers ones that came out a few years ago.  It was packaged with a caboose.  No rubber or traction tires on it.  8 wheel drive and 8 wheel pick-up.  It was not DCC ready, so I had to wire it up myself.

My calculator makes it 7.29 yadda yadda percent too.  I had a 4% grade on my last layout.  An old diecast (heavy) 4-6-0 steamer could get three or four cars up it.  It was really too *** steep.  I'd expect even worse trouble with anything steeper.   Speaking for myself, I wouldn't ever do another 4% grade.

Thanks everybody for the feedback. I have decided that the best course of action is to strive for a  grade of around 2%, and if there isn't enough room for it, do something that stays level. I have always thought that the best choice is to keep things as simple as possible.

The best thing to do is to test YOUR engines with YOUR cars on the grade you are considering running.  The easiest way I have found to do this is with Kato Unitrack and Woodland Scenics inclines.  The inclines come in 2%, 3%, and 4% grades.  You can combine them to get 5%, 6%, 7%....  One thing to note about them, for each 1% they are advertised as, it is actually closer to 1.042%(1/4" in rise in 24" length).  Out of curiosity, I tested a Life-Like SW-9 with out-of-the-box Micro-Trains cars on a 6% incline.  It would pull 3 cars fairly easily, 4 with a lot a slipping, and sit and spin  with 5.

On the plan you are talking about, I think they made a mistake and calculated the grade starting at the turnout instead of the crossing.  If you really like this plan, you could have the mainline on a slight grade to reduce the grade of the other track, but if you park any cars on the inclined part, you would have to have some way to block them from rolling.

For those who do not have the book, you can see the track plan here: 48 Top Notch Track Plans Preview

 Hmmm - third street industrial district. Forum regular Wolfgang Dudler built an area of his H0 scale layout based on Bill Baumann's "Third Street Industrial District".

 Wolfgang's track plan here: http://www.westportterminal.de/room.html

  He has posted some excellent videos on youtube showing operations in his Third Street Industrial District. Here is his list of videos: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=westportterminal

 Here is a 9 minute (!) video of switching at the third street industrial district:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Geob8ivh7U

 The descent of a switcher with a single car down the incline is about 4:34 into the video. It is quite a sight.

 Of course - what Wolfgang did was to the original plan was to to allow a lot more space for the incline down towards the underpass area.

 Smile,
 Stein

Just for additional information, I had a spur on my 12" gauge live steam railroad that was 6% with a short 7% section.  With locomotive #2001, a four-wheel industrial switch engine, I could easily pull 3 empty cars upgrade on dry rail.  This spur was used for hauling gravel and lumber in (downgrade), so I became well aquainted with what the locomotive would handle.  On wet rail, the same locomotive would only haul me on a riding car upgrade.  With wet leaves on the rail, it did not go up the 6% grade at all.  Again, experiment with the locomotive you intend to use to see what it is capable of.  However, I suspect that two or three cars is a perfectly reasonable train for an 8 wheel locomotive.  But, there is a fine line between a challenge and a headache, so I have finally built a new line with a 2% grade and abandoned the old 6% spur.  Now if I can just shave a percent off the 3.5% mainline climb up to the wye...

 - James

I have a 4% "Nolex" in N scale, and an Atlas Trainmaster will haul 10 cars up that grade without slipping.

My Atlas Alco C628's & C630's will do 8 cars.

My Atlas 4-wheel GP's will generally do 5 or 6.

  Thanks Stein, After watching the video, the concept builds into a scene that is every bit as cool as I originally thought it would be. So, now I just have to figure out a way to make it work. I think I can lengthen the down hill grade, and have the uper line going uphill enough that it may work. I will have to do some serious experimenting. Again, thanks for the inspiration.

Hi JWARNELL,

Is your question a prototypical question, or MR question?

We have a 6% grade up to our logging camp.  We have a MDC 2-truck shay that will push 7 loaded sketeton cars and disconnects.  However, it has a NWSL regear kit.  Our Bachmann 3-truck shay will take a boxcar and a caboose up to the landing without slipping.

Sue