I'm planning a double decker in a 10'x12' room. I'm in HO scale, using code 83 track (primarily Atlas). I'm planning on a hidden staging yard under the lower level. I'm planning on using a "no-lix" to acces the upper level, tentatively planned for 16" of vertical separation (maybe). My issue is this: how little room can a compound yard ladder take? I'm thinking of using the #4 (yeah, I know, more like a 4.5), with mostly 4 axle power and 40 foot cars. With 24" wide benchwork, I'm thinking of maybe 10, possibly 11 tracks wide using the edges for 1x6 lumber to support the yard from the sides, maybe using 1x2's to support the staging yard. Thus, the staging yard would be, for lack of a better description, laid out in a "channel". I would use 1x4's laid flat and build the lower lever using a modified open grid method. I played around with RTS, and got a design using #4's down to about 38" +/-, then curving the staging tracks around to the 12 foot section, then back down to one track, but then would need to rise 4-6" in the course of 8-10 feet before needing to merge into the main for a lift out bridge. I'll tinker some more and see what I come up with.
Any plans for a short compound ladder for staging would be greatly helpful and appreciated. TIA!
Brad
EMD - Every Model Different
ALCO - Always Leaking Coolant and Oil
CSX - Coal Spilling eXperts
Lets think about this a minute.
A 10x12 room, 2 ft wide benchwork, lets assume the main track is down the middle of the benchwork on average, that means the mainline runs on each side are 8 ft and 10 ft respectively.
8+8+10+10=36 ft of run on a lap of the room.
36x12= 432 in of lap around the room.
16 in rise between decks/432 in of run between decks = 3.7 % grade to get between decks. That means that if you stop a train anywhere and uncouple the engines to switch an industry, the cars are gone, they have rolled away. If you leave any cars in mainline sidings they will roll away. You can only have single ended yards on that portions because all the cars in a double ended yard will roll away.
If you put a staging yard in a "Channel" you will make access extremely difficult. If anything goes wrong you won't be able to get access to work on track, rerail cars or rearrange cars in a track. If you don't have vertical clearnace where you can reach into the furthest back track and lift a car off the tracks and carry it over the rest of the staging yard filled with cars, you will be a asking for trouble.
I would suggest buying a right and left hand switch in the sizes you want, photocopying them and then use the photocopies to layout the ladders on a table or on the benchwork. Cheap, quick and you know exactly what you will end up with.
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Spacemouse, where are you? You're the staging expert!
I was thinking more along the line of having something like a "lower loop" (fairly level), using a no-lix very close to the walls for upper level access (no spurs, maybe no sidings, probably single track bottom to top), and another loop for the top. Access to the center (as it is an around-the-walls arrangement) would be via either swing gate or removeable bridge of some sort (NO DUCKUNDERS!) although a nod-under may be acceptable for the upper level. If it weren't for my 2 kids wanting to watch trains, I would be willing to accept no continuous running for the lower level, and set up the bottom for point-to-point, and the top for a loop. But my son wouldn't be able to see Thomas very well 50-60" from the floor, so we compromise there. I have a rough sketch for the staging using RTS, I had trouble uploading it until now, so here it is:
It's still proposed and needs a bit of refining and/or fine tuning, but it's a start. Yes, I know there are likely to be some S-curves, and I also realize longer 6 axle diesels, and longer cars and steamers may not like the #4's, but I primarily run 4 axle power and 40 foot cars, and plan to keep any 50' cars either "on layout" or use the straight line route to help prevent problems. I still haven't worked out how to get back up to visible running without too steep of a grade, I may re-think this yet. I suppose I could use a no-lix and drop down staging say 8-10" from "lower level", to give access in case of problems and for maintenance, and not have such a problem with a steep grade.
I have a couple Atlas #4's, but I find using RTS much easier, quicker, and more accurate, well, somewhat. It takes a bit more to do a fudge factor than free hand method. Still, it's helpfull to see what would work conceptually, and then do some adjustments when it comes time to actually lay the track.
Having given it some more thought, I might use a half turn of a helix to help get the track some elevation so the grade won't be so steep. I'd like to stay under 3% if I can. Figuring as follows: 8'+12'+11'6"+7' = 38'6" or 462" Mind you, these are "useable" measurements, as the blue oulined benchwork shows. Having a 12" rise would equal roughly 2.6%. A 14" rise would be a hair over 3%. A 16" rise would be about 3.46%, a bit more than I would like. Of course, these are using wall measurements, I will have less after setback (off the wall), and curving around the corners. If I could get maybe 3-4" of rise before entering the no-lix, I should be able to get my 3% grade.
I await input on the staging as proposed, and will work on the "lower level" as I get time.
TIA!
OK, after fiddling with connecting the staging up 8" to the lower level, and adding the no-lix up 16" to the upper level, I have the following. Run for the no-lix is approximately 555", according to RTS. That equates to approximately 2.88% grade, under my 3% maximum. Of course, this can have a little fudge factor during construction. Run from staging up to lower level is approximately 260", with a rise of 8", which is just a hair over 3%. I will have to begin the grade at the clearance points on the yard tracks, so all the turnouts on one end will be on grade. I don't foresee a problem with this, as all the turnouts will be on the same (slightly angled) plane. The only other potential problem will be that the two (staging, downhill, and no-lix, uphill) come together on one turnout, meaning the straight leg of the turnout will go down hill, and the curved leg will go up. I will have to be very careful to properly install that part of the trackage, and also ensure to properly ease the grades (I'll use the cookie cutter method, and let the 1/2" plywood help form the transitions). Needless to say, the plywood under the turnout WILL be very well braced and secured to prevent problems.
I still haven't decided on layout heights yet, I'm still comtemplating deck separation of 16" (railhead-to-railhead). I'll use the open grid method. Upper level will probably be framed with 1x3 on the front, and 1x4 or heavier on the back. For support, the benchwork will be screwed to the walls everywhere, no need for legs or brackets. Whole thing screwed to the walls, including the staging yard, which will also have drawers underneath. I'm thinking about 32" height for staging, 40" for lower level and 56" for upper level. I have my 4'x8' on 42" legs now; I'm 6'1", so 56" is probably about chest height for me. A small step stool or 2-step ladder (kitchen variety) would be greatly helpful for construction and viewing for shorter folks (kids).
I'm probably several months from actual construction, the room is still bare concrete floor and walls, and exposed studs on other walls. Oh well, the 4x8 is good enough for now!
As always, any input or helpful insight is appreciated. Also clue me in if I need to clarify or further explain. I'll try to upload some more plans, IF Photobucket cooperates. I haven't tried to even lay a loop of track on either the upper or lower level (in RTS, that is),I figure if the access for staging or no-lix won't work, then my effort on the other is for nothing.
OK, let's give a visual. The first is the proposed staging yard, as shown previously.
And here's the proposal to connect that to the lower level, and the no-lix to the upper level.
It's marked on the pic, but the red track goes down to staging, and the other green is the no-lix up to the second level. Where the "meet" again for the first time there is (calculated) 3.8" of elevation difference, less once you take into account thickness of track, roadbed, plywood, etc. This elevation difference increases as you go around. I might be able to re-adjust to fix or work around this. I'll still have to allow for my 3rd (as yet, not drawn) complication, the main line for this level. Looking at the end of the green line (that IS drawn, and is supposed to be 16" above the lower level), running the main there would be 3.1" under the nolix track, and 3.4" above the staging track (calculated, of course). I have the heights calculated on RTS, but I didn't want them on the pic, as they might be hard to read. I could scenically have the nolix line cross the main on a bridge, and the staging line would be hidden. Access to it would be via reaching from underneath (maybe).
Let me know if there's anything I've missed, or if you think of a better way of doing this (or if I'm way off base). TIA!
I like that you are thinking outside the box.
But before you go too much further, I'd like you to try an experiment. In order for your yards and industrial tracks to work they need to be level. See how many level places you can get with your design then compare it to a single level. I think you'll find you get more action out of a single well-designed level than a "no-lix"
For half the cost.
The staging you have looks good. Now you have to get to it. The helix seems the obvious solution. And if you have a helix...
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Brad, the plan shows a 2 ft deep deck for staging and 2 ft deep for the middle layer. If I understand the middle and upper levels will be sceniced and have operations with the lower as staging.
What depth are you thinking for the upper level ?
I ask because I originally planned a two level with the lower as staging only. It seemed such a waste of space, track, turnouts etc. to just have it as staging. I started to scenic it and figured the upper level some 14 to 16 inches above that would be just fine. So, my experience here might be your middle and upper levels.
Staging - 9 tracks
Note the upper deck in the picture below is the same size as the lower in the prior picture. The deck at the farthest support by the garage door is about 3 ft deep and then narrowing down to 2 ft at the second support in this picture.
Having both decks the same depth proved to be overpowering for me. One has to be standing a pretty good distance from the facia to see everthing properly. I had to bend to really see the lower properly.
I'm in the garage with a 16 x 19 footprint for the benchwork.
I reconsidered and tossed out the upper deck. In my space, a single level proved more than enough as SM is alluding to.
It would be great if you could mock up (sheets of foam or cardboard) your planned decking footprint before committing.
Anyway, FWIW, that's my experience. My design was not thought out properly for a two decker.
Regards,
Tom
Have you worked out an operating scheme yet? It appears looking at what you've drawn so far there are simply too many staging tracks. Yes I have heard the adage "you can't have too much staging" but based on the size of the benchwork, you could probably put two trains of a 'looks good on the layout" size on each of those tracks, so with 11 tracks that's as many as 22 trains. 22 trains per day over a stretch of railroad is a very busy main line.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Gah! too much yard!
Half the layout in a franken-yard wrapping around the corner. aaaaa....!
You will spend all of your effort getting a train out and be back in it by the time you settle down on the main.
My thinking is not right tonight, I will re-visit this in the morning.
I guess I should have mentioned, I have a TON of rolling stock, much more than the staging yard could possibly hold. I have thought about accessing the other end of the yard, no room for a helix, otherwise I won't have easy access to the room. Can't use the corner for a helix, must have lower portion of wall accessible (well, somewhat, I'm not crawling under more than 2' width of layout). I've thought about using a vertical turnout concept, using the "bent board" method to either have the board raised (for the main) or lowered (for staging). The access track on that end would be on a matching grade, and ease back into level at the clearance points on the staging yard. At least, I think it might work, it may prove to be too steep of a grade.
As for having 22 trains on the staging yard, well, that may be slightly exaggerated, but probably not far from the truth. I currently have 70+ engines, probably 200+ cars (inventory not complete, yet). Even at 44 engines in the yard, that's still 26+ somewhere else. Undoubtedly, some will end up on a display shelf, probably on a rotating basis. I was thinking along the lines of not 22 trains per day, but maybe 22 per week, say 4 per operating session (each representing one weekday), with 2 on Saturdays (every 6th op. session). Or, more likely, if/when a group meets, we would run a "weekday", and if running solo, I'd run "Saturday".
Chip, were you thinking along the lines of building a regular helix to connect upper and lower levels, as well as staging? I was not thinking of building a helix, per se, but really just a big loop (as per the drawing) to connect the staging yard. I suppose I could build a helix there, as I've already taken the room, but my question is how do you scenic one? A no-lix could be hidden behind scenery or a backdrop (removable for maintenance or derailment clean-up).
I was thinking about 16" width for the upper level, someone, somewhere on this forum suggested not having an upper level being any wider than the vertical separation. That is, with 16" between decks, the upper should be no wider than 16" as well.
My idea for an operating scheme was to have the lower level represent Savannah, GA, and the upper represent Athens, GA. The 2 weren't directly connected, a train would have to go (almost) to Macon, then run up on a branchline to Athens. An extended run via a helix or no-lix would represent this. I've posted this idea elsewhere on this forum, and have had some positive feedback (and constructive comments). Savannah probably saw more than 4 trains a day, but I'm not modeling the whole 24-hour period. Athens probably only saw, maybe 2 trains daily. Mind you, I'm modeling Southern; SAL (or was it ACL) ran through there with their main line; that traffic I'm not modeling. I'm primarily going to serve industries in Athens, which will make it more or less a "turn". I may (undecided) have interchange traffic in Athens. Interchange traffic in Savannah was (and is) pretty heavy, since it is a port city and all that. That's where staging comes in. I'll probably have a small-medium size classification yard, and tap into the industry base for some local switching. Intermodal didn't exist there (as we know it) in 1957, but there was some port traffic.
More to come...later
Consider the prototype. You are building a layout with grades steeper than a line going over the Rocky Mountains and modeling a relatively flat part of the country. Will it look right to be running the SAL through the "Sierra Nevada"s?
What about switching, with the "no-lix" any place you stop the train, if you uncouple the engines to do switching or leave cars in a double ended siding, the grade will be enought to roll the cars away. Bummer.
If you go to a helix you will need at least a 24" radius, that's footprint over 4 ft wide or almost 1/2 your space in width or 1/3 your space in length. And that's just to get up, you have to buld a helix or double track the first one to get down too.
A helix is sceniced not at all or with facia on the exposed edge.
I think what everyone is hinting at but no one is saying is that you seem to have more ideas than space. It is a problem everyone has to one extent or another. Start by designing one really good level. Then try to get a track of two of staging. A really nice display case costs a lot less than a deck of railorad.
OK, for now, I've decided to put the upper deck on hold, until I see what I come up with for the lower level. The staging is a must-have, though the design isn't "set in stone", so to speak. It could end up as a stub ended staging yard, especially since I haven't figured out how to join the lower side with the main. I'll play around with the lower deck over the next few days and see what I come up with. I'd like to have at least one small to medium size classification yard (say, 6 tracks or so), a small engine service facility (primarily diesel), and some local industry to service. I figure I can have that on one wall, maybe 2, and the rest would be open country. A mine could fit in another corner; it would be a rather small affair.
I'll dig this thread up when I have a few more ideas to show. Thanks for the input so far.
Boy, I'm glad that I'm doing N scale. My 11' X 8' gets me more space then I know what to do with. i will soon be starting on my 4th track plan for the bench work I have constructed.
Ken L
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.
Lake wrote:To much space, to little to fill it with.
Alas, I have the opposite problem!
A suggestion I might invoke is to stick with one primary level, and use the lower level as strictly an unscenicked staging area, representing Savannah. This lower staging level may only have 8 to 10 inches of clearance to eliminate the steep grade. But that should not matter if you use #6 turnouts (for better reliability) and decrease your shelf width somewhat. \
The track which leads from the lower level will "appear" from behind some factory buildings for instace. The other end of the line could be Augusta with a terminating yard and small engine servicing area. The yard could be used for reclassification and interchange.
Best of luck.
Mike
twcenterprises wrote: OK, for now, I've decided to put the upper deck on hold, until I see what I come up with for the lower level. The staging is a must-have, though the design isn't "set in stone", so to speak. It could end up as a stub ended staging yard, especially since I haven't figured out how to join the lower side with the main. I'll play around with the lower deck over the next few days and see what I come up with. I'd like to have at least one small to medium size classification yard (say, 6 tracks or so), a small engine service facility (primarily diesel), and some local industry to service. I figure I can have that on one wall, maybe 2, and the rest would be open country. A mine could fit in another corner; it would be a rather small affair.Brad
How long is your normal longest train? 8ft seems like the largest practical maximum train length you can fit, and you may need to drop to 7ft or even 6ft to give room for turnouts. An 8ft train in HO is a road diesel and 14 40ft cars, fewer if your cars are longer. Take off 2 40ft cars for every foot less than 8ft in train length.
For an 8ft train to work, your staging tracks need to be 8ft long after clearing turnout ladders. At least 2 (preferably 3) 8ft passing tracks are needed. The yard arrival/departure track has to be 8ft after turnouts as well. A 24" radius curve needs to start at least 26" prior to reaching the wall. How are you going to even come close to fitting all this in?
Take a look at http://www.layoutdesignservice.com/lds/samples/betterbeginnerlayout.htm. While it is a smaller space, it's not that much so. If you add another foot of depth to the outside of each side, that will take up all but one foot of your space. The extra depth will allow you to have a twice-around schematic, with perhaps the back half of one side semi-hidden to serve as a 3 track staging yard. You are still not going to be able to expand much beyond 9 car trains, but this will give you a good idea of the most you can practically fit in your space.
Hope this helps
Fred W
fwright wrote:BradHow long is your normal longest train? 8ft seems like the largest practical maximum train length you can fit, and you may need to drop to 7ft or even 6ft to give room for turnouts. An 8ft train in HO is a road diesel and 14 40ft cars, fewer if your cars are longer. Take off 2 40ft cars for every foot less than 8ft in train length.
I was figuring 8-10 car trains, plus engine and caboose. Using 40' cars that would come out to about 6-7 feet total, including engine and caboose.
For an 8ft train to work, your staging tracks need to be 8ft long after clearing turnout ladders. At least 2 (preferably 3) 8ft passing tracks are needed. The yard arrival/departure track has to be 8ft after turnouts as well. A 24" radius curve needs to start at least 26" prior to reaching the wall.
I think my shortest staging track was something like 100", just over 8 feet, at the clearance points on both ends. As for passing tracks, you must be referring to a classification yard, I can't see why one would need passing tracks in staging. Same for A/D tracks. You refer to 24" radius, but I was thinking 22" mains up top, and a minimum of 18" in staging. Of course, more is better, and that may happen yet, but at this point, I'm still trying to get the staging sorted out.
That "better beginner layout" is a nice track plan, I may borrow some ideas from it.
How are you going to even come close to fitting all this in?
Very carefully. I'm not sure it will work, but I'm going to try (on paper/on computer).
twcenterprises wrote: I guess I should have mentioned, I have a TON of rolling stock, much more than the staging yard could possibly hold.
I guess I should have mentioned, I have a TON of rolling stock, much more than the staging yard could possibly hold.