Moved from HO

Swing up section

100_0092.jpg

Here are some pics of my lift up section.
100_0096.jpg


I had it made of sheet metal because of rigidity and expansion control. If you look closely I have offset the hinge pins from center. This causes the track to lift straight up before swing action starts. That gives room for tight clearance

100_0093.jpg


Close up of hinge up and down.

100_0092.jpg


Notice the wires with plenty of length to allow for movement.

100_0095.jpg


On the other end I have guides for it to lay in and micro switches to turn off power to 2 feet of track when raised. The sheet rock screws are for adjusting the height of each corner when lowered

100_0094.jpg


I hope this is helpful. This has been in for about 7 years now and 2 months ago I had first problem. The screws came loose in one hinge allowing it to move out of line.
 
I hope you plan on staying for a while. Might be a bit of a problem to get it out of there:)

I agree that you don't want a duckunder.

I have been working for a while on my layout and understand trying to make things fit in a space. Just a quick look at the outline you could fit with 3" track to edge and 18" walkthrough (24" track to track) I get this:
sq.gif

Is this enough space for what you want? (22" radius) Second loop could cross the walkthrough with a lift bridge or run around inside with a 19.75" radius.
 
How about doing a little flipping of the main up around "Square Mountain". I played with it a little and it looks like you could squeeze in some extra walking room if the track crossed over itself and get to use 24-26" curves to boot. You could make the crossing "at grade",but it wouldn't make much sense operational wise.

BTW, I didn't use sectional track in my program. This is assuming the layout is to be built with flextrack and easements.
 

Attachments

  • insinu8_layout3.jpg
    insinu8_layout3.jpg
    35.9 KB · Views: 107
I don't know how to do drawings on my computer so I will just make suggestions. How about a multilevel layout. I like them because it maximizes floor area. You can do 2 districts with a track connecting them. Also I am a firm believer in having a yard and don't see one in the drawings.
Les
 
I agree with the yards. I was just suggesting options for a continuous run walk-in design, nothing more. This is a tight room and I like the idea of two levels, but that's not for me to decide. It does open up more possibilities.
 
lester perry said:
I don't know how to do drawings on my computer so I will just make suggestions. How about a multilevel layout. I like them because it maximizes floor area. You can do 2 districts with a track connecting them. Also I am a firm believer in having a yard and don't see one in the drawings.
Les
Click to expand...

Les,

A yard would be wonderful (and something I'd like), but I can't seem to figure out how to fit it anywhere. I think I'll need to either lose one of the industries I want (disappointing) to gain some extra space.

OR

A multi-level layout is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how to model it, but that might solve some of the space issues. How does something like that work? Shelving at different heights that go around? I thought about that idea but couldn't wrap my brain around it.

So, as a quick idea on the multi-level approach, I could have a yard running along the south wall @ 4'6" (or so) and have on industry (or two) running along the east wall and have ramps up/down to the main run and docks for the intermodal @ 4'?

Chris
 
BigJim said:
I hope you plan on staying for a while. Might be a bit of a problem to get it out of there:)

I agree that you don't want a duckunder.

I have been working for a while on my layout and understand trying to make things fit in a space. Just a quick look at the outline you could fit with 3" track to edge and 18" walkthrough (24" track to track) I get this:
sq.gif

Is this enough space for what you want? (22" radius) Second loop could cross the walkthrough with a lift bridge or run around inside with a 19.75" radius.
Click to expand...

BigJim,
I've been here for 7 years now and have no plans for an exodus any time soon, barring marriage and the follow-up demand for buying a house or something crazy like that. But she likes trains too, so I'm good in any case :)

I came up with something similar last night, but I still can't get the hang of resizing the pictures so they can post here. They're always either too big dimensionally or too big kb-wise.

Chris
 
zedob said:
How about doing a little flipping of the main up around "Square Mountain". I played with it a little and it looks like you could squeeze in some extra walking room if the track crossed over itself and get to use 24-26" curves to boot. You could make the crossing "at grade",but it wouldn't make much sense operational wise.

BTW, I didn't use sectional track in my program. This is assuming the layout is to be built with flextrack and easements.
Click to expand...

Zedob,
I'm planning to use a mix of sectional and flex track because of the easement problems I've faced so far. Do you mean the crossing would be an under & over?

Chris
 
For what it is worth may I suggest using all flex track. Also I would also like to suggest not cutting the long rail when using flex track but sliding the rail on next piece to accommodate the length. This will stagger the joints making for smother curves. Also this is more prototypical. I will give some thought on the multilevel.
Les
 
lester perry said:
For what it is worth may I suggest using all flex track. Also I would also like to suggest not cutting the long rail when using flex track but sliding the rail on next piece to accommodate the length. This will stagger the joints making for smother curves. Also this is more prototypical. I will give some thought on the multilevel.
Les
Click to expand...

Les,

That's a great idea about using the whole length of flex track to stagger the curve joints. I've got this symmetry fixation so that would never have occurred to me!

Chris
 
insinu8 said:
Zedob,
I'm planning to use a mix of sectional and flex track because of the easement problems I've faced so far. Do you mean the crossing would be an under & over?

Chris
Click to expand...

Go with the flex. Once you use it, you'll never go back. AS for the crossing, yes, an over and under would work, but if you are considering two levels I'd wait and see what method of assention will be used. That will play a big part as to determining how the rest of the layout is laid out. A helix using 26" radius (I don't know if I'd go any sharper) will eat up alot of room. A single track running around the walls at a steady grade could make it up from a lower level to one 16" above with a 3.5% grade without requiring too much realestate. You can even go with an elevator. Sounds crazy, but they have them.

I prefer the around the room grade because a good portion of the track can be incorporated into the layout's scenery and operated like a mountain division where helper locomotives would be needed.

my $.02
 
I recommend the around the wall Idea for 2 levels. I have had helix's before and didn't care for them very much. If you use the entire length of the wall to make the climb it wouldn't be too bad. Also there was an article in MRR magazine recently about a continuous helix that went around a room many times. I believe it was a point to point not a continuous loop. They started at a given height from the floor and began going up hill around the room several times. If this is used a staging yard could be on each end with several classification yards between. Just a thought.
Les
 
ocalicreek said:
Is point-to-point and option?

Galen
Click to expand...

Galen,

I'm open to options. I'd like to have one route or another running a loop, but anything else can be point to point like coal/gravel/intermodal -> dock or wherever.

I've been trying to work out an 18" radius loop for the coal and gravel and a 22" radius loop for the intermodal stuff, with a common connection to run the coal & gravel on the larger radius, but I'm having problems doing them in layers.

I like the idea of using the walls as a helix, but because of the northwest corner and doorway, I can't go all the way around...or can I?

Chris
 
18" is a little tight. What if you went around the wall with a lift out at door just after lift out put a switch going out side and start going up incorporating it into your scenery as far as possible then go into a tunnel or behind a mountain then bring it out onto next level using as much leanier (spelling?)space as possible possibly putting a yard at each end of incline. You could possibly do this twice to have 3 levels.
Les
 
lester perry said:
18" is a little tight. What if you went around the wall with a lift out at door just after lift out put a switch going out side and start going up incorporating it into your scenery as far as possible then go into a tunnel or behind a mountain then bring it out onto next level using as much leanier (spelling?)space as possible possibly putting a yard at each end of incline. You could possibly do this twice to have 3 levels.
Les
Click to expand...

Les,

I've tried to model using 22" curves and I can get all the way around the room. I have to figure out what the elevation change will be around that distance. I'd be pretty happy if I could keep it to 2% grade, and that shouldn't be a problem. A yard at either end with some industries on the different levels would be pretty spectacular! I like the idea of having the trains go into a tunnel at one level and coming out on the next one whether up or down. Would it be hard to have a dual track so I can have trains going in both directions? Modeling this is going to be a problem though...

Chris
 
Dump the 18" and 22" radius curves! They're a pain to deal with, because they're very sharp! you cannot realistically run anything over 50' or a 4 axle diesel. It's no fun worrying about "will it make the curve?" I'd take Zedob's advice and use 24"-30" radiuses, it'll make everything better in the long run, and you'll enjoy your layout now that you can run your double stacks and ES44Ac in STYLE!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom