QUOTE: Originally posted by selector Without a concrete idea of what your layout will be 'about', you are flailing around in the dark...if I may be so blunt, Rob. Please consider developing a notion of what theme and capabilities you want in your layout. From there, devising a workable track plan should be a matter of trial and error..lots of graph paper and a sharp pencil. Yes, 4% is a bit much. It will look toy-like, and I believe that you will eventually come to regret your choice if you actually build it into your track plan. I could say go ahead with 3%, but no more...unless your idea is to build a mountainous logging road with Cimaxes or Shays, or even tank engines. In that case, you could model grades around 5-7% and still have it look great. If I read correctly, you are currently envisioning a long grade of 8', a plateau, and then another grade to rise up to a higher bench on your layout. Okay, but try really hard to draw what it will look like when finished, and then see if it is going to look 'right'. A clear picture in your mind will go a long way towards generating the actual track plan. This is an important first step.
QUOTE: Without a concrete idea of what your layout will be 'about', you are flailing around in the dark...if I may be so blunt, Rob. Please consider developing a notion of what theme and capabilities you want in your layout. From there, devising a workable track plan should be a matter of trial and error..lots of graph paper and a sharp pencil.
QUOTE: Yes, 4% is a bit much. It will look toy-like, and I believe that you will eventually come to regret your choice if you actually build it into your track plan. I could say go ahead with 3%, but no more...unless your idea is to build a mountainous logging road with Cimaxes or Shays, or even tank engines. In that case, you could model grades around 5-7% and still have it look great.
QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob Are you saying I can model a Shay road at 5-7%? Isn't that a bunch?
QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12 Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you're thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide 'shelf' running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture.. and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture.. and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little 'hill' beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum. I agree with Expalacedog in that you're eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space... i.e. turnouts, business', yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT... I've come to a halt with mine and I'm rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I'll probably go ahead with it in the end. I'm in no hurry.. :) I've been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn't uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines.. well... theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you're going to do the hills and valleys that run beside the track also. Personally, I think it is an interesting aspect of railroading. I've seen it done by experts in On3 and it was a thing of beauty. But, as most of the guys here can tell you.. I'm no expert and I'm just getting started in the hobby. So take their advice and try to develop a plan to go by. It'll save you a lot of grief down the road. Jarrell
QUOTE: Originally posted by selector Rob, I rode on a 2-8-2 Tank engine a month ago. It was designed for heavy grades hauling. A plaque beside the water glass on the backhead said to not let the water level fall below a line near the top of the glass on grades of 9 degrees. That is NINE degrees. Having people you don't know telling you to have a sober second look at your pet plan is disconcerting, I'm sure, but we sure don't want to see you building 'neat' things into your layout that won't be so neat after a few hours of running it. Better to bite the bullet now and make the changes that will make your layout a real pride and joy....with the little bonus of not being boring. [:D]
QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob There have been a few comments like "assuming you'll fini***he layout", and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can't tell me how to do this, but it's important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don't include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12 QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob There have been a few comments like "assuming you'll fini***he layout", and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can't tell me how to do this, but it's important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don't include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated. Rob, because I'm inexperienced myself I can't help you with the layout very much. I'm still struggling to get mine going, but the rest of these people can. Thanks for the link to the old Shay photos, they make nice wall art when redone on the computer. Rob, I understand the "assuming you finish..." comments. I've started over on the same layout several times. I'm busily building along and I see a MUCH BETTER IDEA for benchwork, or tracklaying, or whatever in one of the magazines or on one of these forums, etc. and I back up and start over and usually learn something new in the process. Currently I'm unhappy with a curve I "eyeballed" instead of doing it right. Redoing it is going to require redoing some benchwork (not much but some) as well so I haven't done it yet. But until I do I don't want to work on scenery in the area that will be affected so.......well, you get the idea. If you don't mind/ aren't afraid to redo stuff then forge ahead. The things you learn along the way are the justification. Cheers, Ed Jarrell P.S. so you're from around Gray, eh? [;)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by exPalaceDog Who needs engines? Years ago, MR did an article on modeling an logging railway incline. The cars are pulled up or let down the grade with a cable hooked to a special car. That approach would allow almost any grade, maybe even 50%. Have fun
QUOTE: Originally posted by oleirish QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12 Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you're thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide 'shelf' running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture.. and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture.. and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little 'hill' beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum. I agree with Expalacedog in that you're eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space... i.e. turnouts, business', yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT... I've come to a halt with mine and I'm rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I'll probably go ahead with it in the end. I'm in no hurry.. :) I've been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn't uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines.. well... theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you're going to do the hills and valleys that run beside the track also. Personally, I think it is an interesting aspect of railroading. I've seen it done by experts in On3 and it was a thing of beauty. But, as most of the guys here can tell you.. I'm no expert and I'm just getting started in the hobby. So take their advice and try to develop a plan to go by. It'll save you a lot of grief down the road. Jarrell Well hello Jarrell[:D] Nice pictures,when are we going to see more of your lay out,the grade looks good!! my rule of the thumb is rase 2.5 inches in six feet , or just higher than your tallest peace of rolling stock.[^][2c] JIM
QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob As much as I do AND don't want to, mine is probably going to end up with two larger tables at the loop ends than I started out with. I got my Spectrum Shay and the Digitrax Zephyr today. I put the decoder in the locomotive in about 30 minutes. This thing sounds so real it ain't funny.