riogrande5761 I'm not sure but on the Moffat Route, grades are more like 2.2% but someone will have to correct me since it's been a while since I've looked at the grade profiles.
I'm not sure but on the Moffat Route, grades are more like 2.2% but someone will have to correct me since it's been a while since I've looked at the grade profiles.
The steepest grades were 4 percent on either side of Corona. Once the Moffat Tunnel was completed, the maximum grade was reduced to 2 percent on either side and partway in the tunnel. There was also a 2% grade north of Osrestod on the line toward Craig as well as some 1.8% north of Toponas.
My 4% grade is fine but it is short maybe 5 feet long but it is on a 18" radius curve. My Athearn can pull all my cars up the grade which is about 15 cars.
Justin
Chitty,
It would be great only if you are using geared locomotives such as a Shay, Climax or Heissler on say a logging railroad. Otherwise, that is probably too steep.
Craig North Carolina
"The prototype Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railway (ex Rio Grande) tackles four percent grades from Chama, NM to the top of Cumbres Pass. An excursion train needs three 2-8-2s to do it."
Maybe pushing snow they need three, but the last time I rode the train from Chama to Antonito, we made it just fine with a single Mike, in late August.
fwright There are plenty of examples of 4% grades in the prototype - just not very many on Class 1 main lines (there was a 4% in North Carolina on a Class 1 main) in North America. 4% was pretty normal on the climbs to the mountain passes for the D&RG narrow gauge. And 4% was on the low end for many Northwestern logging lines.
There are plenty of examples of 4% grades in the prototype - just not very many on Class 1 main lines (there was a 4% in North Carolina on a Class 1 main) in North America. 4% was pretty normal on the climbs to the mountain passes for the D&RG narrow gauge. And 4% was on the low end for many Northwestern logging lines.
Agree'd 4% grades can be prototypical on narrow gauge layouts and lets face it, it is easier to get away with short trains on narrow gauge although they actually could be pretty long too according to Rio Grande Odyssey DVD. So if you run short trains you can get them up steeper grades but its a good idea to do some testing to make sure what you plan will work.
2.4% was the standard maximum for the main lines of the land grant railroads - it was a condition to get the federal land grants, which would be used to finance construction of the railroad. Many western states had similar land grant programs. Fred W
Fred W
On the D&RGW mainline thru the Rockies, the Royal Gorge Route has 3% grades on one side of Tennesee Pass and while the D&RGW ran some big trains over that grade, it took copious ammounts of road power to get them up, and there have been a few big wrecks as late as the late 1980's and early 1990's.
Like Fred said, in the modeling world things are a bit different so test. One layout I build I used 2.4% grades after doing some careful consideration and that layout had capacity to run, pass and stange 15 car HO freight trains. I think I remember running 20 a twenty car train and two Atlas GP7's could just pull it up the 2.4% grade, but they would slip a little.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
robkoz Doesn't realistic inclines depend on the amount of space you have for a layout? I only have a 5' x 11' space in my garage.
Doesn't realistic inclines depend on the amount of space you have for a layout? I only have a 5' x 11' space in my garage.
Not sure what you mean here. Practical, maybe? Realistic, as used here, refers to how much it looks like a prototypical situation, and, while there are grades in excess of 4% in real life, they're extremely rare on anything but specialized (e.g., cog roads) and logging roads.
Now, if you're going to go around the outside of that 5 x 11 space, a one-foot vertical separation at 2% would require 50' (600") of linear distance, or a little more than one and a half laps around. That can be done, but it would be a creative challenge to hide the loop.
Personally, I would not mess with grades if that's all the space you have to work with. Anything you do will look too steep, and therefore toy-like.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
hobo9941 Not to mention 4% grades don't look very realistic.
Not to mention 4% grades don't look very realistic.
2.4% was the standard maximum for the main lines of the land grant railroads - it was a condition to get the federal land grants, which would be used to finance construction of the railroad. Many western states had similar land grant programs.
Whether 4% is realistic or not has little to do with looks, and a lot to do with conditions and era under which a railroad was built.
The real problem with 4% grades in the model world is that few of our modern model engines can pull like their prototype counterparts could. Plastic instead of cast metal shells, nickel silver instead of brass or sintered or steel wheels, detailed "lacy" instead of cast bar frames, and electronics and speakers instead of lead weight have led to a decrease in model engine tractive effort. Pulling prototype length trains up 4% grades isn't as common as it was back in the '60s.
I can remember when stock brass locomotives were considered unnecessarily light and poor pullers - in comparison to die-cast counterparts. Now brass models are considered heavy weights beside today's plastic/die cast production.
This is a great topic. Good info since my son and I are building our first layout. Thanx
Having used 4% with no problems (WS stuff) and now my current layout has close to 5% and again I do not have any problems it makes me wonder what am I doing that allows me to use such steep inclines and not have any problems? I tried my layout last night with 12 cars being pulled by my Kato SD40-2 (newer model) and while it did slow down from being on level it maintained traction and went right up the incline. The 12 cars were cars from Atlas, Athearn and Walthers bought in the last 6 years or so. I have taken my truck tool to a couple of the Athearn cars but not the others. All my equipment weighs slightly over the NMRA specs. My GP 38-2s have not been tested with all 12 cars but I have used them to pull 5 or 6 up the hill at a time and no issues there again.
Massey
A Veteran, whether active duty, retired, national guard, or reserve, is someone who, at one point in his or her life, wrote a blank check made payable to "The United States of America" for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Chitty Chitty,
I built a layout with Woodland Scenics{WS} 4% inclines and risers. I never tested it first, and had to tear it down. It was too much for my HO scale locos to pull cars effectively.
Then I re-adapted my layout to accomodate WS 3% inclines and risers. AGAIN, I did NOT test it first! AGAIN, I tore it down.
I finally built a totally radical {to what I HAD planned} layout and use only WS 2% or 1% grade. I ddin't get the "over & under" effect I wnated, but I came up with a plan that WORKS FOR MY LOCOS. ANd I will STICK to 2% or less forever and a day now!!!!
{Any body want some used 3 & 4 % inclines???}
Bang Bang
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
The OP probably already realizes this, but remember to look at your passing sidings car capacities. That too will limit the length of your trains. I your sidings can only handle 3 cars (for an example) then a grade that'll allow only 3 cars would be ok IF they can get up the hill. If at all possible I wouldn't go over 3% grades BEFORE curves. The transiition is essential or nothing will stay together going up or down.
If your passing siding can handle much longer trains, you will likely be disappointed with only being able to run only a few cars.
There are SOME locos/engines that'll pull miraculously on steep grades but they are very far and few between and vary even among the same model and brand.
The nice thing about plywood ribbon sub roadbed is that the transition curve is automatically built in wneh the non-fastened end is raised to your desired grade... just in case you wanna switch construction materials/methods ;-)
Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
About 20 years ago, I built a bi-level switching layout on an 18" X 7' plank from a plan in MR. The switchback climbed at about a 4.5 to 5% grade. An old Mantua 0-6-0-T could pull a maximum of 3 40' cars up to the upper level. Mo old Mantua Booster 0-4-0T could sometimes manage 2 cars if I hit the throttle hard. An old International 0-8-0 from one of their screwdriver kits could pull about 6. I never tried it with any of my diesels.
I once counted an SW-1200 pull 90 empty gondolas out of a local steel plant into the nearby NS interchange yard. I also saw a card on line that showed that the SW-1200 should only be able to pull something like 70 cars on 0%, loosing about 20-25% of the train size for every 0.5% grade.
Just for grins, let's look at some prototype grades:
USA:
Japan: Usui Pass, 6.8%! Operated as a rack railway until the early 1960s, then adhesion until abandonment in 1994 with the completion of the Nagano Shinkansen line. 250 tons of low-geared electric locomotives could move 200 tons of train upgrade. I rode a four car EMU set that took two huge Co-Co motors as rolling brakes downgrade. Without them, the light MU cars would have become a steel toboggan.
The one basic fact about all of these operations is that they required special arrangements - even special locomotives specifically designed for their conditions. They weren't simply a place where ordinary trains could slow down, dig in and climb.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with prototypically steep grades)
Hi!
I have not read the other replies to your post so as to assure I give you my unadulterated opinion........
My current and previous 11x15 HO layouts have had 2 percent grades. In my experience, that is as steep as I would venture for a mainline railroad.
Obviously, there are exceptions - a logging railroad, a mining railroad, or pretty much any narrow gauge railroad. And with those, I would say 4 percent is the maximum grade.
Yes, there have been (and I believe a few still exist) examples of mainline RRs with 3 percent or even higher grades, but those are exceptions and existed for the purpose of crossing the Rockies or the mountains of West Virginia, etc.
Just my opinion................and keep in mind it is YOUR railroad, so whatever you do, ENJOY!
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
So where's Chitty? (With Waldo?!)
I know it's been pretty much a "don't do it" parade, but have we caused you to change your mind, or are you playing the "to heck with all of you, I'm doing it MY way!" card? Which is your right, but don't say we didn't warn you.
Although, from the title of your thread, I think you already suspected what the answer would be.
I am in the process of rebuilding a couple of sections to remove some 3% and 4% grades.
I have never had an engine bog down, but it doesn't take much load for it to sit there and spin the wheels. If you do use them, a transition of lesser grades is a must. A sudden change to or from a steep grade causes some cars to uncouple, and a change from 4% up to level will cause many engines to bottom out and hang.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
No matter the capability of our model trains, I think that the ruling grade should be a grade that does not look toy-like or unrealistic.
In other words, to my taste, the eyeball test is usually more important than the operational test, although, of course, there are times when you might want to run a thirty-car train and you will likely then have operational grade restrictions....maybe....in my large-scale, it's amazing how powerful and what good traction our model locomotives have---far exceeding the eyeball test!
The St. Francis Consolidated Railroad of the Colorado Rockies
Denver, Colorado
ndbprr With all that has been said it will be very important to allow sufficient room to transition from level to the grade and vice versa. An additional 18-24" at both ends would not be an unreasonable amount of space
With all that has been said it will be very important to allow sufficient room to transition from level to the grade and vice versa. An additional 18-24" at both ends would not be an unreasonable amount of space
Maybe the most important advice here is in the shortest post. IIRC, the WS incline starters do not have built in transitions, but just start you off right at 4%. This abrupt transition can cause all sorts of problems, from closely-coupled cars (and loco / tender combos) banging together to unwanted uncouplings, even derailments of longer equipment.
You can build a transition using extruded foam and shaping it to gradually equal the slope of your risers over a distance of a foot or so, but it's something else to consider. All in all, if you can afford the space, I'd use a lower grade. I had a 3% grade on an earlier layout and was not happy with it.
This is a 4% grade around a 22 and 18" curve. My Kato engines could pull about 10 cars up the incline just fine. Yes the engine would slow a little and yes you could hear the engine work a little harder but nothing ever got hot.
This incline is not ising the WS system, and it is about 5%. My engines climb it with 6-8 cars no problem. On this layout I used mainly GP38-2 (P2K) and GP35 (kato), I also use a BLI SD40-2 and a Kato SD40-2 all with no issues.
It might be instructive here to define "ruling grade". It isn't the steepest grade on a given district or division, although it could be. To clarify, the definition of a ruling grade is the steepest grade a typical timetabled train can manage with a single locomotive with the maximum trailing tonnage. For a light 2-8-2 pulling 1000 tons, it might be able to manage that tonnage and keep to the timetable going over the second steepest grade in the division, but not the steepest. If the railroad decides that it will use helpers on the steepest grade, then the ruling grade becomes the one the Mikado can manage by itself, that being the second steepest. However, if the railroad wants the Mike to be able to manage the entire division with the maximum tonnage it can haul over every high point in that division by itself, the steepest grade becomes the ruling grade.
That aside, the railroads that contended with grades over 2.2% knew they had their work cut out for them. Although several N. American railroads had mainline grades quite a bit steeper, they were almost without exception in designated helper districts. Not only is there the lifting, but the descending safely as well. Braking had to be a consideration. Sometimes a single locomotive can't hold back on a given grade with a given tonnage.
Crandell
4% ruling grade - standard for the (English translation) Richstream Valley Iron Road.
HOWEVER, The Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo was designed from the beginning to be a home for short trains of short (4-wheel) cars pulled (and pushed) by diminutive teakettle tank locos. A typical mixed train consists of two four wheel freight cars and an elderly, diminutive passenger coach, with an 0-6-0T on each end. Adding another car means adding another locomotive, at which point the passing sidings are maxed out. The coal unit (four articulated hoppers and a pair of hopper-brakes) is too long for the sidings - and gets a 2-6-6-2 for motive power.
If you will be satisfied running short, light trains, four percent is workable. If you want to run long trains of modern cars, expect to need lots of power.
The prototype Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railway (ex Rio Grande) tackles four percent grades from Chama, NM to the top of Cumbres Pass. An excursion train needs three 2-8-2s to do it.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
4% is OK only if you're willing to put up with the permanent operational restriction it will impose on operations over that length of track. The laws of physics are pretty immutable.
So, yes, some logging and some mainline RR grades were as steep or steeper, but they were nonetheless forced to live within the limitations of gravity and adhesion.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
A 22" radius curve adds the equivalent of about 1.5% to the nominal grade. So your 4% grade would be effectively about 5.5%. Hard to make work reliably except perhaps hauling a very few cars a time.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I suggest you lay some track on an 8' board, raise one end 4 inches and see how well your engines and cars do.
Good luck
Paul
My guess is the woodland scenecs incline system is more for the folks who are transitioning from a 4x8 to something a little more advanced. But 4% grades are acceptable for small layouts running short trains of fewer than 10 cars long. If you want to run a larger layout with longer trains, I suggest you keep it down to 2 or 2.5% at the most. I did 2.5% on a garage layout and two engines could pull a 20 car train, barely, up the grade, but 15 cars is more realistic.
I have 2% grade on my layout that makes a loop and it is neat to see a train cross its tail BUT even at 2% it looks steep. 4% would be hard to pull off. Several folks on here have told tales of trying to do more than 2% only to undo their work