Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

My layout idea....whattdoyall think?

7399 views
42 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:46 PM
Git you some of this one!!!

http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/shay05.Html

The incline is so apparent in this photo that you can see The man standing is leaning with the lay of the land.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:42 PM
Thank you very much for the pictures. At least now I know I can run 4% safely, and probably more. All of you have been very helpful.


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
  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: US
  • 4,648 posts
Posted by jacon12 on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 9:42 PM
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
 HO Scale DCC Modeler of 1950, give or take 30 years.
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Colorful Colorado
  • 8,639 posts
Posted by Texas Zepher on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:05 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob
Are you saying I can model a Shay road at 5-7%? Isn't that a bunch?

Yes, it is a bunch but that is what shays are designed for. I've never modeled Shay's but the prototypes were designed for much steeper grades than that (up to 14%). Here is one with a load that the caption says is a 12% grade.
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/shay06.Html
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 627 posts
Posted by exPalaceDog on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:03 PM
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.


Dang Good suggestion!

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.


True. But be careful! Assuming you fini***he layout, will a logging line have enough operating potential to keep you interested? Hauling logs to the mill might get boring. On the other hand, logging lines have some very "funky" equipment. If you are a model builder rather then a "runner", such a layout might keep you busy for years.

Have fun

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 6:45 PM
Are you saying I can model a Shay road at 5-7%? Isn't that a bunch? Won't the locomotive have trouble with that? Like I said, it is going to be a Shay logging road. At least that part of it.

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.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 25, 2005 11:05 AM
It is going to be a Shay looging road. I wasn't going to have a plaeau between the 8' run and the 16' run. The 8' run will just be 90 degrees from the 16' run. I already know hands down what shape the layout will be. It's going to be a folded dogbone. I know some think it's boring, but it's simple, and I know I can't srew up too bad if I keep it simple. Thanks for being blunt. That's what I need. I have looked at, and downloaded the Westside Lumber Company layout. It is very similar to what I want. They have some under and over stuff in theirs that I don't want to use. Other than that, I think what I have in mind is REAL close.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Monday, July 25, 2005 10:45 AM
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.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 25, 2005 9:58 AM
I don't know if we'll model anything in particular. I might take some ideas from something. I'm not sure yet. I think I've asked this in another forum...but didn't get an answer. Isn't a 4% grade a bit much? You asked if I was going 4" or 8". Well, I want to go as high as possible. I had intended to start the grade on an 8' setion before the 16' run, go around the corner and begin the 16' run. That will give me 8 more feet to begin the grade.
  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Eastern Massachusetts
  • 1,681 posts
Posted by railroadyoshi on Monday, July 25, 2005 9:39 AM
how far up do you want to go on that grade?
if it is 4in it will be about a 2% grade
if it is 8 in, it will be about a 4% grade
2 ft shelves should be fine
in this case, you just model certain portions of a large industry
Yoshi "Grammar? Whom Cares?" http://yfcorp.googlepages.com-Railfanning
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 24, 2005 9:09 PM
No. I would rather go with a 2' shelf. My inexperience was just telling me two feet might not be enough. Do yall think it will? it's going to be a coal mine/logging operation. I was thinking of the coal mine on the loop after the 16' run, because I wanted to make a run up a mountain. Will 16' be enough room for a nice grade? I appreciate all of yall's help. this is a father son project, and we're very excited.
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Northern Michigan LP
  • 79 posts
Posted by dickiee on Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:45 PM
I agree! Absolutely do not go over 30 inches 0n the shelf unless you have 48 inch long arms!
Just love to watch the trains run.
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Corpus Christi, Texas
  • 2,377 posts
Posted by leighant on Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:35 PM
Sounds good. Do you really need to go 3' deep on shelf? 30" or 24" easier to reach into.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
My layout idea....whattdoyall think?
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:20 PM
I'm dealing with an L shaped space about 12' x 16' in HO. I want to use a dogbone style layout to go around the corner, having the lppos at the ends. The loops will be situated on probablt 4' x 5' areas, and in between the loops will be made up of 3' shelf. What do yall think? Anyone have or done one like this?

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!