# Ideal layout height?



## haphall

This has probably been addressed here before, but I haven't come across it yet. Now that I'm getting closer to actually swinging a hammer on my M&NA HO layout, I need to figure how high.
I recently saw an old John Armstrong interview and he suggests 54"-56". That feels like lying on the floor watching my Tyco run 50 years ago, ie, at track level. Not the perspective I had in mind.
I'm leaning toward 48" to accomodate the 'reach factor.' I'll probably end up with one of those little round rollaround stools like libraries have to help with the reach.
What are your thoughts?


----------



## sstlaure

Answer is - it all depends. 

I'm going to have a few layers on my layout from a bottom staging level set at 24", to a main level set somewhere around 36-40" and an upper layer somewhere between 50-54". 

Another factor is if kids will be using it. I plan on making some stools that my kids can use to get up high enough to comfortably see the layout running.

If the layout is higher - reachover is more difficult, but you get more of a straight on look at the layout (eye-level) rather than the bird's eye approach. This allows you to use techniques like forced perspective (using N-scale models on an HO layout but set towards the back edge) to get a feeling of distance in a small space. It also allows you to create site blocks to frame different scenes.

You want it high enough that you can comfortably work on the bottom side (wiring, turnout motors, etc.) yet not so high that it's uncomfortable to play.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I'm looking at 36-40" for mine as well, and I want to have a lower level yard about 8" below that to stage a few trains.


----------



## haphall

Thanks for the replies. I considered a lower level staging area (and it would have solved a few issues we had on the design too). Problem was, this is my first layout in 50 years and I thought adding a helix with my limited layout building experience might have been a deal breaker. The layout plan is on Layout and Design (19' x 17' HO layout that Dawg started a week or so ago.)
I really like the N scale forced perspective idea though too.
Otherwise, no kids so that isn't an issue. Old lone wolf bachelor here...and 6' tall.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, I've only done flat layouts, and I'm looking at a multi-level layout with a dual-track helix to a dual-track ceiling track.

Think big, where's the fun in being cautious?


----------



## sstlaure

Go big or go home  I really like the multi level shelf layout deal as you have a ton of dead space with a single level. Helix's aren't really that difficult and don't have to be terribly complex.

Here's a basic one that would serve well to just access staging tracks. The threaded rod makes it easy to adjust the grade to keep it even and is very stable.











FWIW - I love that layout the cabledawg has been working on for you. Where do you think you'd have the tracks coming up from staging if you did a separate staging level?


----------



## novice

That's a great looking helix - did you do that to get a decent incline up to/down from the main layout?


----------



## haphall

Scott~ I probably shouldn't be cross posting here, but since you're familiar with Dawg's efforts on the 19'x17' HO Layout thread, we ended up with post#26 as a 'final' plan, but way back on post#1 on that thread, I had a reversing loop (peninsula) going to Berryville. We later removed that whole part because it made for a lot of aisles (and walking). My original sketches had that loop against the top wall and that staging area on a lower area feeding a helix in the corner. The exit from the helix was a tunnel feeding a wye to Berryville. (I removed the helix approach before I shared with Dawg.) I also underestimated the space required for a wye so I'm not sure that approach would have been any better. I did like that wye and loop to Berryville though (and it IS what the prototype used).
What radius track did you use on that helix. Looks like a LOT of track to climb, 18" or so.
Hap


----------



## tjcruiser

Quite a bit of prior discussion on layout height here:

http://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=4280

TJ


----------



## haphall

Thanks TJ. I missed that thread earlier or probably wouldn't have started this one. It has lots of thoughts but none get me much farther along. Maybe I'll ask Dawg to give the M&NA another look with a helix as part of the picture, but, as is, I'm settling in on 48". Like I said, no kids. That would also give lots of underneath room for wiring and storage. Carpeted of course.


----------



## sstlaure

That's not my helix - it's on one of my father's friends layouts. 24" radius minimum on his whole layout. He uses Code 100 flextrack so that anyones rolling stock works reliably on it. I've posted a few other pics on here about it. Search Andy Keeney Nashville Road and you'll find the others. You can also do a search on youtube and see a few. (I've spotted my Dad in the background of a few of the videos.) He's not exactly concerned about using a ton of track. His is a point to point layout spread across 4 levels in continuous grade around his whole basement. The mainline run is about 1000 ft 1 way.....that's 16.5 scale miles. It takes about 30 minutes for a train to run the full length of the layout without stops. It's the most absurd yet cool layout I've ever had the joy of viewing. The helix above is the only one he used on the whole thing because he had plenty of horizontal run to work with and still keep manageable grades.

You can just barely see the helix in the 4th picture down in the first post.

http://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=4938&highlight=nashville+road


----------



## norgale

haphall said:


> Thanks for the replies. I considered a lower level staging area (and it would have solved a few issues we had on the design too). Problem was, this is my first layout in 50 years and I thought adding a helix with my limited layout building experience might have been a deal breaker. The layout plan is on Layout and Design (19' x 17' HO layout that Dawg started a week or so ago.)
> I really like the N scale forced perspective idea though too.
> Otherwise, no kids so that isn't an issue. Old lone wolf bachelor here...and 6' tall.


Hap make your table 40"-42". It will be just right for you. I made mine at 48 and although I can work it ok I do wish it wasn't quite so high. Pete


----------



## haphall

Thanks Pete. I'm sort of leaning to that height myself. After foam and cork, it's going to be an inch+ higher anyway, and 40-42 gives me LOTS of room for some mountains and TALL trees as well as a deep river cut or two going below. Still adequate room for the occasional shelf and such.


----------



## norgale

Hap at 48" my layout is great to watch and people think they are right there with the train. I can walk all around the table so I can reach just about anything if I have to. However even at 6'2" I had to get a little step ladder to get to some of the scenery. Not very comfortable. If and when I have to move this layout I'll cut 8" off each leg and that should make it just right.
I can reach all the stuff around the edges but doing the track and sceniking the middle is really a pain in the back. Hard to do. Pete


----------



## Gansett

The correct height is the one you feel comfortable with. The height of a work bench has been discussed to death over on a woodworking forum.

My layout will be at the height that I can see and operate from the comfort of my chair. Don't have a clue if it'll be 32 or 36 inches, maybe it'll be more. We'll see as we progress. My 2 ¢


----------



## Dave Sams

Mine is 20" from the floor.

It makes it easy to reach way into the middle, but tough to work on the wiring.


It was built for the little ones, they can sit on their little chairs and watch away.


----------

