Second level height?

I have a VL GG-1 and an Acela so to be safe my second level is 6 3/4" above the Fastrack rails. Pantographs clear easily. Also, my grandson's viewing and operating perch he prefers is the corner of the elevated section  he can easily see under and over the platform.  

Thanks, here is what I want to go over with the second level. This layout has been built as I go along and can, so it has no real plan, just every new idea can make a change. The idea is a reverse loop along the back wall ( on the left of the first picture) with a loop on each end.

All suggestions are welcome.

Thanks,

6.25"  plus the height of the catenary and support structure so say 7" 

Which do you want more...another line for train or command operations?

I see having to tie on to the mountain top in the first photo. The r-loop will mess up the amusement park. Next will be the coaling tower and support scene and the beacon tower.

I would use a pylon style support between the tracks on the way to the next corner. Then, a tower there will need a new home.

Finally, the corner on the transformer table near the wall looks like easy pickin's.

Command operations will necessitate the addition of a Lionel-Lock-on Building for each track or a PSX-AC for fast action circuit protection for the electronics. I suppose that you could get a ZW-C or ZW-L.

It's not just the #990, but the power and control upgrades that will add to the cost.

I would go for the additional line and save command for another layout.

The balloon reverse looks like it takes up too much space. I wanted to see if it would work. (see attached)

I made mine 8" to allow some 'hand space" under my upper deck.  I want 6" above the height of the lower rails.  Only problem that creates is the amount of space needed to allow a decent grade of 2% or so.  2 inches of rise per 100 inches means 400 inches of length for 8" of rise or 33 and 1/3 feet.  Good luck.

Art

Carl, Thanks, great drawing!!!! The table not including the control shelf measurements you picked were very close. On the far end you were right on. 16' down the left wall with 12' on the back and 8' on the right with a 2x5' walk in.

 The near table with the tunnel was an addition and is separated by a 24" bridge and that table is 6' wide X 10' off the wall. So it is 2' shorter in with and depth than it's counter part on the other end. I do have TVSs on the lockons and 10 amp breakers on the ZW already.

This loop will all be elevated so no grade consideration will be needed. I am up for suggestions as for what track to use as well because I will need to buy what I will will need. Was thinking maybe regular O in 72" curves and no less than 54" so at a later date it could go into a control system loop.??

I could save by using O27 profile track because I do have a pair of new O42 switches and lots of track but nothing is not cut in stone at this point.

I'd go with the Second Level over a Legacy upgrade in a heartbeat.

Six inches, give or take, is what I would consider the minimum height....but there is some wiggle room in that. 

And remember, you're measuring from the top of the bottom rail to the low point of the upper shelf/table/plywood.....not table top to table bottom, if that makes any sense.  You need to account for/pick up the height of your bottom track and any roadbed.

Best of luck.

KRM,

yeah, it's tough with photos sometimes to find a reference for sizing. I used Lionel O27. O54 curves. A loop would takes less space than the balloon. O72 may take over the end tables. Take a tape measure and add 3 1/4" to the diameter of the curve, although the O27 uses the outside rail and the O the center rail. See what it hides.

I just tried to get a shape to see how it would fit. I noticed the space with the bridge...Just didn't put it in for a mock-up

I see it as mostly on elevated trestles or sub-roadbed and under girder looking detail.

I wouldn't hide what you have with a full deck. maybe along the walls with small land mass in the corners and trestles for 1/4-1/3 of the r-loop.

Look at photos and see what you like. The more open look is more work, but well worth it in my opinion.

The 10amp breakers are too big and slow for command engine electronics. (in my opinion) The PW#91 are nice, but hard to find. They are 6 amp magnetic, adjustable to less.

Yes, plan on just an elevated platform at this point leaving as much of the bottom open as I can. No plans on a upper deck.

I'm in the same boat and still trying to decide. My 4'x8'x10' "L" layout will be a winter display for my wife's Bedford Falls collection of buildings and will have 4 levels with 3 very simple runs for trains. The 1st design would have most of the lower level covered and buildings, etc., on the other levels. The 2nd design would have more of the lower level visible with buildings behind the pylons that support the upper levels. I don't like the Chicago "L" look, so I am leaning toward the 1st design with 3 areas and the shelf for her collection. I probably won't make my decision until after the lower level is built later this year.

In your case, you already have things done that affect the height for another level. If you add level with full decking, you'll cover a lot of your accessories. If you go too low with it, you'll have to redesign your mountain and relocate other items. If you follow Carl's advice you can work around those obstacles with a run on pylons lie the Chicago "L". There are folks who raise the 2nd level high enough so you can still enjoy what's underneath and have a full 2nd level all to itself. 

That is the way I am thinking, pylons like the Chicago "L". Maybe even weave it around and past a few things for effect. I also thought of a small elevated passenger platform above the lower passenger platform with stairs going down to the lower level.  So the upper level would be kind of like what I did to bridge from table to table but on pylons elevated.

BTW, Thanks for all of the positive reinforcement.

I think that's a great idea given what you already have.

Moonman posted:

Which do you want more...another line for train or command operations?

I see having to tie on to the mountain top in the first photo. The r-loop will mess up the amusement park. Next will be the coaling tower and support scene and the beacon tower.

I would use a pylon style support between the tracks on the way to the next corner. Then, a tower there will need a new home.

Finally, the corner on the transformer table near the wall looks like easy pickin's.

Command operations will necessitate the addition of a Lionel-Lock-on Building for each track or a PSX-AC for fast action circuit protection for the electronics. I suppose that you could get a ZW-C or ZW-L.

It's not just the #990, but the power and control upgrades that will add to the cost.

I would go for the additional line and save command for another layout.

The balloon reverse looks like it takes up too much space. I wanted to see if it would work. (see attached)

 

Carl, What did you use to make the drawing?

 I would like to see more options with the track I have.

I Ordered up a post war 332 arch under bridge for a fit-up idea I am working on for the elevated line long straight section and it looks like I may get my other truss and girder bridges I gave away back because they ended up never getting used. I like the prewar 332 because it used bolts to hold it together and not plastic clips. That will help because I will be removing the ends so it can be driven through underneath.

Tks, Kev.