Very nice layout the only thing I might change is add a second Main line along with your first. The yard looks to be very well designed and this should bring you hours of fun my 1 question :

This the 1st level is it the lower or the upper? not that it matters just wondering as I have been told by many that build the multi deck railroads. You should finish the top level before you finish the lower levels do to gravity pulls drips of paint and plaster and water down onto the lower levels and if you finish those below levels first your constantly doing touch up.

Dan

Dan this is the lower level yes, I was going to attempt to do 3 levels with the bottom being purely for my son, the middle being purely staging and grade track to the top level.  My initial thoughts where to rough scenic my son's bottom layout, no scenic on the staging, and the full box & dice on the top level.  

However I have to use underneath the lowest level as storage in the shed, so as a compromise I have incorporated my initial bottom 2 levels into one.  I will rough scenic it only until my son gets older, then it will have full scenery like the top.

Heights at this stage will be lower deck 1400mm (55.11in) top deck at 1700mm (66.92in) this will allow storage underneath the whole layout.  The lower level will be perfect height for either walkaround or computer chairs on coasters.  The top deck is set for my height 188cm (6'2").  Lighting for the lower deck will be LED strings as reviewed in MR.

Good point Dan regarding the lower level and finishing the top first, as the lower level will not have scenery (being the level for my son) in the early stages it won't be an issue...

Cheers and thankyou for your comments and ideas so far!

Jason...

The only question I have about it is that I'm wondering why the saw mill and that peninsula on the lower level?  I was under the impression that the lower level was for staging and a place for your son to run trains "Christmas tree style."  Did you intend to operate between both levels beyond just bringing trains out of staging, or is the lumber mill a place for your son to try his hand at switching?  Please understand that this is a question aiming at getting to understand you planning ideas, not a criticism of the design.  With regard to Dan's advice above, your son may want to run trains before you finish the upper level.  I think I would build the lower level first as a "plywood central" allowing your son a place to run his trains.  Then build the upper level and scenic it before putting a lot of time and effort into scenery on the lower level.  Also get a plastic drop cloth thaqt you can cover the part of the lower deck that is directly below the part of the upper deck that you are doing messy scenery work on.

The sawmill is for Lachlan (my son who is 2 1/2) once he graduates and to add some interest for him, it will also allow more flexibility for operations/switching for myself and other work colleagues (who also have model railroads) and for Lachlan and I as well.  It's an afterthought that really won't alter to much in construction, but will in the end benefit the layout (I hope!), and allow us to operate between both levels.  

I will be able to place industry on the top level that requires raw timber from the lower level, and perhaps vice versa although I haven't got that far yet, way to many ideas bouncing around in the old melon at the moment...

I will build the lower level main track, grade branch, and staging on the level first so that we both have something to entertain us.  Then I will complete the upper/top level fully (scenery, structures, detail), which by that stage Lachlan should be about 5. This will hopefully be a stage that he will be ready to operate with some scenery, structures and all trackwork.

Thanks for the advice Russ, yourself and Dan have been fantastic, as well as all the other contributions so far.

I will over the next couple of days start a Blog for the J&L Railway and start documenting my progress...

Thanks again,

Jason...

You might want to not have the yard ladder also be the main track leading to the upper deck. I'd recommend making the yard independent of this track (you've got it labeled as staging but at some future time you might want to use it as a small classifiaction yard). Perhaps moving the track to the upper deck clockwise so it leaves the lower deck mainline in the lower left corner to the left of the turnout for the arrival track (it would arrive at the upper deck in the upper right corner).

This would also let you get rid of one of the double slip switches.

Try moving the caboose tracks. Where they are you'll need to get what ever is on the top yard body track to get at a caboose.  Two places you might consider: Off the orange track (another arrival track?) or add another track or two parallel to the yard ladder.

How far apart are you planning on making the decks?  The connecting track in your plans is 32' long. At a 4% grade that would make the upper end of this track 16" above the lower deck which is a decent deck separation. But 4% is a pretty steep grade. At 2% you'll only gain about 8" by the end of this track. Are these numbers about what you're considering? Or perhaps you are not showing all the track between decks?

The industrial area on the peninsula looks good. Not having a dedicated run around will make it more interesting two switch there.

Overall, not at all bad for a first effort!

Regards,

Charlie

Firstly thanks for the positive and encouraging words!  You are spot on with the grade branch and the staging/yard and yes I would be breaking one of the "ten commandments of yard design" (though shall not foul the yard lead) too.  I actually picked it up in the early hours of this morning whilst looking at the plan over a coffee.  And you are spot on I was also thinking later on of using this as classification yard (would love to have twin staging yards north & south under this level, so that this could be either classification yard or division point!). 

I also noted that I have made the entry to the staging/yard all trailing point leads instead of making them facing point.  I think I may with your idea Charlie (moving the grade branch clockwise) flip the staging/yard to the middle thus making all yard lead all facing point turnouts.  Then shift the rip tracks and machine shop to where the caboose tracks are.  This with some little adjustments should allow me to change the yard from a stub end, to a double end and possibly increase the length of the staging, and also get the stub end out of the corner (reach was ok, but not perfect to the very back tracks).

Charlie the graded section is 3% over 10.14m - (33.26ft) which will give a rise just over 300mm (12.04in or 1ft) as this will not be my primary deck for operations I'm not overly concerned about the height.  I could go to 4% and have considered it (could add mid/rear train helpers to add some operational interest between the two levels) or actually gradually raise the base level by a couple of inches and decrease the graded section (not sure which way at this stage?).

The attached trackplan grids are 300mm square (12in), and was designed on Anyrail 4, I was in two minds about the run around on the logging branch too, but then liked the idea of having a bit more complexity in the switching (almost like a time saver).  If you where going to put a run around in Charlie, where would you put it, and what length?

Cheers,

Jason...

Hi all,

Have been doing a little revision on my initial layout design of the lower deck.  Have made changes to the staging/yard and the on grade branch line, I have increased the distance of the graded section and reduced the slope from 3% down to 2.24% (or I can increase the height from 12" to 16" and maintain the 3% grade).  I think these changes work alot better and should make operations flow better and add more realism, I have incorporated another industry along the mainline for further interest.

Thanks to Dan, Russ, Charlie and others for their valuable advice and ideas.  This website is worth it's weight in gold!

The new plan is located in the initial post under the first one, let me know what you think...  I have also attached a Trainplayer file of the layout if anyone wants to run a train or two over it...  (Sorry won't let me upload it!)

Cheers,

Jason...

The new plan looks like an improvement to me.

Questions:

a) What is the light gray colored part of the benchwork on the right wall?  A lift out section?

b) Before you dismiss the deck separation you should either visit a number of multi-deck layouts and measure deck heights and separations or get some cardboard and mock up your multideck setup.  DON'T forget to allow for deck thickness!  A minimum realistic deck thickness is 4". You might be able to go to 2" BUT that implies nothing but track power wires underneath - no Tortoises, no lighting for a lower deck.  Despite the stiffer grade going for the 3% with a 16" railhead to railhead clearance might be better for visibility than the 12" separation.  When you mock up the decks be sure to have them at the same heights they'll be at when constructed for real. And be sure to have the upper deck's depth and thickness what they will be. This will let you see what kind of visibility you'll have for the lower deck. If the lower deck will be quite low you might want to consider a roll around office chair for the operator(s) down there.

c) What kind of scenery will be on the upper deck?  If it's pancake flat fine. But if you want it to 'roll' a bit (rolling hills or a shallow river valley) you'll need to allow some extra deck thickness to accomodate that (at least where the river valley is located)

d) To get between decks you might consider a trick - embed the track leading upward in a 'tunnel' for the last 10 or 15 feet (but leave it against the back wall.  This however, will complicate upper deck construction more than slightly - how will you support the portions of the upper deck closer to the aisle than this 'tunnel' track?

e) I'd recomment getting rid of the switch back to the industry in the upper right corner. Switchbacks suck, real RRs wouldn't use one unless it was necessary due to limited real estate...  You have more capacity on the spur tracks there, than in the switch back. This implies the need to go back and forth between the nearby siding and the switchback track.  If the spur to the industry (mine?) comes from the siding area just left of it, you'll find it easier to deal with.  You might also consider putting the siding on the 'top' side of the mainline.

f) Unless you're trying for your NMRA Achievement certificate for track work are going to scratch build it, I'd suggest dropping the dbl slip switch in the right hand yard ladder that connects to the caboose tracks and flipping the turnout leading into the yard (picture of quick, hack job trackwork follows as a possibility)

Best regards,

Charlie

 Hi Charlie,

The grey section is going to be a roll out bench, this is the main access to the shed (which is a roller door) hence the reason for the limited track work on it.  I am actually going to lower this level down to a point that with scenery installed it will roll underneath (with legs removed) under one section of the deck work.  All electrical connections on this section will be push together connections for ease of removal.

I'm actually tending to agree with you regarding the deck height, I think I will keep the 3% grade and increase the deck height to 406mm (16"), this will allow me to have some decent scenery in the back drop around the graded branch.  At this stage I will not be installing switch motors (will be all manual for the time being) but I will take your advice with the deck thickness and keep it at 100mm, which I hadn't considered!

The scenery on the upper deck will mainly be industry and city scape, their might be a very small portion of urban/rural interface.  I will try and keep most of it flat but will add a couple of split levels to add some variance in the layout for visual pleasure and operational variety .

I like the idea about the graded track on the back wall, I was actually considering making this a double track, so that it could be up and down, the upper deck is going to take some interesting engineering to support, however I have one advantage with the construction of the shed.  The shed is a portal frame construction, so I will be able to have the main support coming off these and then build off them.  This will leave the entire underneath deck free of supports and framework.

I will make alterations to the grain/ethanol branch in the upper right corner and get rid of the switchback, wasn't sure about what to do in this corner, I was trying to have some storage for empty hoppers, and create a small switching ability with the branch.  I will also have a look at the passing siding and flipping it around.

I am not going to scratch build or hand lay any of the trackwork, as this is my first layout everything will be flextrack and commercial turnouts (recommendations accepted, am considering Peco & Atlas), I actually would like to have a dbl slip switch somewhere on the layout.

I like your idea of flipping the turnout off the main and converting the caboose track, should make it visually and operationally better, and think it is more prototypical than what I had placed.

I will revise the plan again and re-post, I am planning on dropping it in the layout critique section as well.

Thanks,

Jason...

Jason,

I wouldn't double track the upper/lower deck connection. But a passing siding might be useful in there...

Charlie