Just

that a foot is very little between decks, when you consider the thickness of the decks themselves, room for the odd building and industry without touching the upper deck, not to mention your reach in when something derails or you are just working on the layout.  

However, your double deck idea with two different scales is something I have thought of several times, too, and really like the idea of it.

Switch decks

From my perspective, I would switch the O scale to the lower deck. The lower deck needs to be a bit wider to accommodate the larger equipment. I would also make the decks separate by more than 12 inches. 18 inches works very well on my layout (HO scale). If I had to do it over again, I think I would have modeled in O scale as I like the heft of the larger models.

Mike

Back track visibility

I had an S scale layout for many years at 58".  The height was great for viewing.  But I could only really see the first train.  Any train/cars behind the first one could not be seen easily - usually just part of the tops and not even that when it was a hopper/flat car/gondola behind a boxcar.  Any kind of switching/uncoupling was more difficult because of the limited view.

My current layout is 50" and I like that a lot better.  Still a nice viewing angle, but I can easily see/uncouple the trains/cars behind the first one.

Paul

two scales, one room?

   I think this is gonna take some planning :> ) It's hard enough to fit one O scale or one HO layout in a room so you are in for some work.  I can see a couple ways to approach it . The first would be the bigger risk but might give the most reward and it would be to model both scales on one ideal height deck with the O scale close to the aisle and the HO scale set back toward the rear to create proper perspective. Since they could not interchange equipment it might work best if they represent  two different railroads running a parallel route.   The bench work would need to be wider and the scenery well thought out to create the transition from 1:48 to 1:87 but it seems like an interesting project.  The second method would be to assign each scale to it's own level and the problem then becomes which scale gets the best height and which the worst and I'd base that on which scale I expected to operate the most and which would get the most developed scenery. One way to make the heights easier to deal with would be to make the lower level benchwork at counter height and sit in a rolling desk chair when working or operating it to avoid looking and bending down all the time. In that case I'd probably go with O on the bottom at 36 inch height and HO on top at about 56 inch height for good separation. Of course the 3rd option would be to just choose one scale and simplify the whole process, I've never been very good at choosing one scale but I've got enough rooms to keep them separate :> ) ...DaveB

Two scales in one room

I had my On30 on the upper deck at about 52" high and my O scale 2 rail was about 28" from the floor. and it was great.

NEVER put H0/0, always

NEVER put ^H0/₀, always ⁰/_H0.

Everyone knows division by 0 is undefined...

Footstool

Is it fair to assume that only one layout will be operated at a time?  If so, then put them both at the perfect height.  One would be right when you're standing on the floor, the other when you're standing on a footstool.  you could even go as far as building a series of flip-up steps which are attached to the wall (or layout legs) and which provide a continuous raised platform for working the upper deck.

Agree with DKRickman

I have my Fn3 on the lower deck (34") and HOn3 on the upper deck (53" base and higher). I like the height of the HOn3 layout as it really gives a trackside view. I put the Fn3 on the lower deck as I not only liked the look of seeing all the detail from that angle but the weight of the locomotives dictated sturdier benchwork that could also support the upper deck. I could have inverted them but the HOn3 has a significant grade that would have caused issues with the upper deck. The Fn3 benchwork is flat.

Two scales in one room

  Just remember to build the lower level and get the track up and running first. My friend built a two level N scale layout and built both levels at the same time. There is about 18"  between decks, but laying track was a pain in the a** especially in the rear of teh layout.   Joe

Operate Sitting Down

I have a basement filled with a Lionel layout at desktop level - 30 inches. I sit in roll-around chair to operate it. HO layout above is at 48 inches and higher. Stand to operate this one, and the control panels for the lower layout fold down out of the aisles.

Works pretty well.

Force Perspective Idea

I like DaveB's idea for putting the HO in the back and O in the front on the same layout.

Art

Great Comments!

I reviewed the buildings on the O scale layout and decided that the O scale would be better on the lower level.

(barr_ceo: Looks like we will consider HO as a non zero member of the set of complex numbers )

Thanks for all the comments...  definitely helped.

My (now lower level) O scale track plan will be the following:

Eugene

Pass around track

Oops my plan was spammed....

I will repost.

Great comments and I have decided to place the O scale plan on the lower level.

An actual pass around track exists, but is a distance from this location and I don't believe the OPR pushed the cars to this location.

However, a video showed the OPR pulling the cars onto the McBrod Ave siding, setting the hand brakes and cutting the engine from the cars. The engine was set off the siding at the first switch.The hand brakes were released and gravity from the 6% grade, took the cars past the engine along the McBrod Ave siding. I might try to simulate this or just use two engines which the OPR could also do...not sure yet.

Eugene

Unspammed

Unspammed

Lionel? Now you're talkin'!

Dr. Jol;

if you're a Lionel fan; you're talkin' my language!

Three Rails is where it's at; and Hi-Rail is a fact!

Kerry Freeman