Option 2

Here's Option 2 with just Ft. Worth and Midland.

Upper deck

OK here's the upper deck.

The bottom left is the helix up from the lower deck. On the lower section is a few industries in Ft. Worth on the KATY line. On the lower side of the island is the stock yards and Swift packing. I know the KATY didn't actualy service that area but I wanted to include it since it's part of Ft Worth History. The rest of the way around will be open country until you get to Wichita Falls on the upper section. Again I've included a reverse loop around the roundhouse instead of a helix back to the lower level. So what do you think?

Any comments? Good? Bad?

Anyone got a comment?

Look, the train turned around and is coming back!

The reverse loop introduces "twice through a scene". Babies won't die because of it however many strive for a "once through a scene" plan.

Ya, I'm struggling with that.

It was either a second Helix on that end or a reverse loop. Not sure what to do about it.

With a reverse loop, I can run the train for a longer period before it's made one complete loop vice going up a second helix and halveing the time.

But like you said, it was going east/West and now it's going West/East.

Twice Through Scene

Instead of having the reverse loop, have it drop under the layout and run over to the helix.  (See what I did with the N.C.O. track plan in last month's issue.)  It would also give you a place to put a staging yard that is " off the layout" to generate traffic to and from distant points.

Is the roundhouse with the turntable tucked in the corner a good idea?  It looks like it may be a stretch to get to it for maintenance. 

Overall a big improvement from the first draft.  Keep refining it and you will have a great layout.

Don

Upper deck

There are no passing sidings on the top deck peninsula.  Makes it reaaaaaaally hard to dispatch.

I would also spread out the industries, having two double sidings 6" from each other and then nothing for 20 feet will look funny.

The line to Witchita Falls was a low volume dead end branch, so a balloon loop is more or less prototypical.  Anything the MKT ran out there would (with the exception of a few interchange cars) come back at some point.  It would be more unprototypical to helix it down to the lower level.

Now if he were modeling the line to Denison and KC, then yes, a helix would be better.  But for his chosen prototype, a balloon loop works.

Lower deck

Still have a single ended tracks in a run through passenger terminal.  

Sill have a freight yard that won't be useable for switching.

Still have no place for the TP freight or passenger trains to go at Ft Worth.

I would suggest putting a small helix down in each blob to a TP staging yard under the layout along the left wall.

At the Ft Worth blob have all the passenger tracks funnel down to a track along the wall that goes behind the existing helix to go down.  Then have a connection that comes off the TP main and goes to the front edge of the helix for the MKT.  Put a dummy MKT main from that connection across the TP main on a diamond and that gives you Tower 55.

Tower 55

Here is my idea for the Tower 55 area

Thanks for the inputs.

Don, I'll take a look at an under deck yard or return loop but I would like to try and stay away from that as this is a sectional layout and will need to be taken down at times. I think it's going to be hard enough as a double deck sectional but I'll look at it. Maybe a return run behind the back drop may be more doable? I'll see if that may fit in instead. As I said, this is a free standing sectional layout so I'll have access to the back if need be to work on the turntable/roundhouse. Or I can always take that section out to work on it.

Dave, I really do appreiciate your inputs as you seem to be very familiar with this area. One thing of note though is I think you and I are in different era's. Remember, I'm doing the 30's. At that time, from the pictures I have and sanborn maps, all but one line stubended into the station like I have drawn. There was no Hwy 30 going thru town then. Main street still crossed the tracks and did not go under it. Lancaster was called Front street and the mix master was not there. Also the Post Office had not been built yet between the station and freight warehouse. In 1930, they had just started to build the new station and were building the T&P freight warehouse.There was actually 6 stub ended tracks into the station that came from the North and were the KATY. There was a single T&P line that ran E/W and was a thru line. I've tried to depict most of this.

I did not even notice that there was no passing siding on the upper level. I'll put one in. With the 20' between towns, are you talking of the upper deck or rev 2 of the lower deck? I can spread the towns out some to put more room between sidings/industries but I was trying add in some open scenery bewteen the towns. Or should I stick with rev one of the lower deck and maybe see if I can spread out Wichita Falls or put in another town between them on the upper deck?

Thanks for the drawing, that really helps explain it a lot. I'll see what I can do with it. I'd still like to try and stay away from a thrid deck under the layout. As for the T&P yard, can you point me in a direction to see how a yard is layed out? I'm not familiar as to how the yard operates and the sanborn maps I have are fague in that area as far as track layout is concerned as there were no buildings around there so no maps. I don't really understand the run around track etc.

Thanks everyone for your inputs.

Passing Sidings

If I am not mistaken, the number of passing sidings effectively sets the maximum number of trains that can be in operation at any given time assuming they are not all going in the same direction. Your trains should be short so the sidings would not need to be very long.

I'm presuming that this layout will still be sectional.

You said originally that you intended to be able to to take down and store the sections to give garage access.  Have you figured out how to take down and put up double deck, portable sections?  The helix will be a permanent structure, won't it?  Having quite a bit of experience putting up and taking down modular layouts, a double deck seems unwieldy, and difficult to handle, take down, or put up.  I think it will become a permanent layout where ever you build it.  If it has to be portable to allow full use of the garage when not in operation, I would suggest building bench work for 4 sections, 2 lower deck and 2 upper deck and put them together and take them down to see how practical it is before you go too far.  Also don't build the helix until after you have determined that the double deck design is practical for what you want to do.

Short Trains?

Alan, I'm looking at lash ups in the 3' range so I'll need at least that much for a passing siding. I've still got to look at where I want to put them.

Russ, You are correct, I'll need to be able to take the layout down at times. My thought is removable legs for the mottom deck and pockets on the out side of each corner of that deck for removable legs for the top deck. But your right, I need to do a test design first and make sure it works. Once it's all set up and bolted together, it should be very stable. Biggest part is assembling it and that is why I am using a slight of weight materials as I can. Steel studs and foam make up the modules. Wood or PVC legs. and am looking at removable structures so it will have easy storage. I'll build a permanant foundation and work the scenery around that but have the buildings so that they sit on the foundation.

The helix will probably be the hardest to design and make workable. But I'm sure between myself and some of the smart people on here, we'll come up with something. Once I start to do the actual building of the layout, I'll be sure to document and take plenty of pictures for others to follow if they wish, IF it all works. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

I have an idea that might work for the double high sections.

Make the legs separate from the bench work.  Use 2x2 lumber for the legs long enough that the upper section rests on the legs by gravity with a pocket in each corner to locate the legs into the top bench section.  The upper sections would be a full size.  The lower bench sections would be the same size as the upper except that four 1 1/2" inside corners would be framed in to each section, and they would be bolted in place at the proper height.  I think your helix would need to be a permanent piece mounted against the wall on one side of the garage.   

Thanks Russ.

You just gave me an Idea. Basically what you said but use 1X2 and I can bolt a cross brace front/back on the legs and sit the modules on that. Then just bolt the module to the leg and to each other. Bolt in a diagonal cross brace to the legs end to end and all sholud be stable. What you think?

As for the helix, I'll have to work on that. One idea is a freestanding helix, put in some pockets on the lower level and put some extra long supports on the helix that will fit in the pockets. Use a straight 5" peice of track, or longer,  to connect it at the top and bottom.

New Idea

OK, Thanks to Alan and Dave, I just came up with a new idea. On the lower deck upper right hand corner, instead of a reverse loop on the layout or a helix, I can have the track turn around and go behind the layout and run just off the layout, behind the back drop, back around to the helix. 

At the helix, I can incorporiate what Dave posted and have it enter back into the layout as the green line coming up by T55. 

On the upper deck, I can do the same thing, but I'll have it enter in either below the stockyards or just past the industries before the helix. This will accomplish two things, travel to off the layout towns, and reverse the direction of the trains.

I know it would not be as correct for the Wichita Falls area as a run around would be, but hey, what's a guy supposed to do? I guess the other opiton on top would be to add in Denton or Denision in between Ft. Worth and Wichita Falls and have it leave the layout there some way. Or just dump Wichita all together. I'll have to do some more drawing but you guys have given me some good ideas.

Height thoughts?

OK, I did a little playing around in the garage last night and set up a few mocups to see if I could figure out a height and how some of the track would lay out etc.

I'm 5'9" and the Boss is an even 5'. I'd like her to be able to see the upper deck so that she can enjoy the trains with me at times. So here's what I came up with and seems to work for us.

Upper deck will be at 54". Lower deck set at 35". I'm going to change the layout depth from 12" to 14" as I need a little extra room for track and not have it look too crowded. Viewing area of the lower deck will be 14". That's the distance between the lower deck and the bottom of the upper module with the deck heights I have set. With a 14" depth layout, I will have a 32" wide isle.

When standing in the isle and viewing the lower deck, I can not see all of the back drop. With a 2" deep building set against the back drop, I can see about 8" of height. So does this all seem about right? I can easily reach the back of the upper deck with this height and even on the 24" deep end modules, I don't think it's going to be a problem.

Similar Results

I am 5'10". My mock-up resulted in nearly the same measurements as yours.

Thanks Alan. I remember

Thanks Alan. I remember seeing that drawing but had forgotten about it until now. So the 32" height of the lower level dosen't seem too low to you? I had one set up at that height but the wife and I thought it a bit low.

If I did go with a 32" height, then I could open up the viewing area back to 16" which is where your at. My modules are just shy of 5" thick with the 2" foam and 3" steel studs.

Same but Different

My double deck is unconventional in design in that the lower deck is not operations oriented like yours and most others. My lower deck is really just an alternative to hidden track.

Double deck designs are by nature a compromise in heights. A mushroom design negates this fact to a large degree but requires tall ceiling and platforms. I don't have the ceiling height to properly do a mushroom. My Druthers called for a single deck and I didn't want miles of hidden track. So, I took a different approach...

It is best to think of my layout as a single deck layout that just happens to have a "visible hidden" track below it to facilitate continuous running, provide an interchange that feeds traffic to the west end of Brittain Yard, and staging. Only occasionally will one have to bend down while "operating" on the lower deck - working Akron interchange. Otherwise, the lower deck is "watching the trains roll" and staging.

Some may say constructing an entire lower deck without using it for traditional full scenic layout run length extension is a waste of space and materials. In most cases they are right. In my particular case it is not a waste because the solution fits my problem very well. And if I wish, think of how much staging I can convert to if the need should arise in the future!

32" deck height is very low for a traditional application.

Thoughts and ideas.

Crusty,

I do have one of those N scale helix kits completed with double track.  These are the ones offered on eBay.  This one is 15 inches tall.  I did run an Athearn steam loco up it pulling 4 Overland passenger cars successfully.  The 5th car caused a lot of slippage.  However, these cars are running the stock wheels and axles which are known to have a lot of drag.  I will give you some pics and measurements of how much space this helix takes up if you want. It will fit on a module or a lobe.

Somehow I don't see a double deck modular layout getting moved much unless you employ the method M.C. Fujiwara's used on his Free-mo modules.  That might be the only way to make it work.  The whole thing will be awkward to move about.  You will have to use lightweight materials anywhere you can.

How to do this with the least amount of parts being moved all the time?  Each module needs to contain its parts,  including bracing and brackets.  The drawing you posted employs shelf mounts.  What about using those slotted bookcase/shelving vertical stringers on the walls?  The horizontal shelving brackets could be mounted directly into your modular design.

Look at the drawing you posted on the height issue.  Do you see the E shape?  Perhaps you can test a construction method.  Using a thin luan plywood material you could design and cut E sides for framing your decks.  Use at a minimum 2 inch foam table top between the E on both levels.  You might have to use some Ash wood 1x2 stringers for bracing and good foam/wood glue.  Any corner piece would have at a minimum 4 Es in the design.  The middle two coming together at the mid point of the corner.  The other two at the far ends of the corner module.

Once you have one of these modules together you could weigh it too see how heavy it would be and if you feel comfortable man-handling it yourself.  Or would you need a second pair of hands to move a module?

In the peninsula you could have the Es back to back. Another thought about the peninsula is setting it on casters.  You said the goal was to get the motorcycle in there.  If the peninsula were on casters and could be disconnected from the rest of the layout, could it be pushed to one side?  Would there be room for the motorcycle?

Building the double deck E modules do have some advantages.  You will find you can make a small valance for all three levels of the Es to hide wires and lighting.  If built right it can be very strong.  Another advantage to it is you now have a place on top to store a drop cloth designed to cover the front of the layout when not in use.  It could be held in place with Velcro which you roll up and lay on top of the Es.  When you are done for the day you can unroll the cloth or plastic to keep the dust out.  I think you mentioned you sometimes use the garage for wood shop too.  This would be a good way to protect you model work.

Den

1900-1930s N scale California Mountain Railroading

Hey Den

I'd like to see those pictures. You can email them to me if you don't mine.  blown63chevy@hotmail.com

I've still got a helix that I built from scratch so building one is not new to me. But seeing different ways to build one is always good and may give me new ideas.

As for the drawing you mention, that is not mine but is Alan's as he was showing me his height which is similar to mine. As for the shelve brackets, that may work and be a better solution. I'll be keeping it in mind when I get to that stage.

I'd like to say thanks to everyone for their inputs. You have given me some great ideas and got me to thinking more. Now that I have those ideas and a little different plan, it's back to the drawing board. I'll post up the revised plan when I finish it.

Basic changes are incorporiate the T55 at the lower helix similar to what was posted. Run a return loop behind the scene from Odessa back to the helix so it's only a once thru the scene set up. Add in a passing section where needed. Move the stock yards closer to Fort Worth. Add in Denton or Denision between Ft Worth and Wichita. Leave the reverse loop in Wichita. Add in a section between Wichita and the new Denton/Denision that will allow the main to split and go behind the scene/ headed north/back to the helix, while a branch line goes to Wichita. Add in a backdrop to hide the helix.

Wichita Falls

Wichita Falls in the time frame you are modeling had a rather complicated track layout around its union station with the MKT yard north of the station area. I moved to the area almost two years and I still can't get a feel for how the tracks were arranged back when all the branches, shortlines, FW&D, and MKT tracks all coming together in one spot. Information for this area has been real lacking in my search on the internet and there is just not a lot of railroad related photos of the area. I think the time frame you are looking at for that area would make a neat model railroad on its own, with the oil boom going on.

I think if you decide to Wichita Falls on the top deck, you might be able to add FW&D to your layout also with the MKT. Another advantage of that would be the two railroads paralleled each other between Henrietta and Wichita Falls, which you could use as a double track main line or a longer passing siding depending on you wanted it to look. It would add another dimension of operation to your layout. even if just a passenger operation. I'll be interested to see how your upper deck takes shape once you get the lower deck squared away.

Go to your local library.