I'm trying to figure out the various grades and have been told that even 4% is extreme. I found this video on youtube where the guy claims his grades are 6%. Is this what a 6% grade looks like? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDOOH64l2kQ
Wow, that's a little nuts. Notice how the little six-car train slows to a crawl going up that grade. As far as prototypes are concerned, the Roaring Camp Big Trees Railroad in Felton, CA hosts the steepest conventional grade still in use at 9.5%. Their shays have to take a running (if a shay can "run") start and lay down sand just to get a short tourist train up that grade. In general, 2% is as steep as you would want to go and 3% is about maximum. In modeling, if you've got powerful locomotives and short trains, you can eek out 4%, but it's not recommended. You can go steeper over short stretches, where the whole train won't be on the grade at the same time, but the more you increase the grade, the less effective your locomotives will be. The length of a train that a given locomotive can pull decreases dramatically as the grades get steeper.
I think he'll come to regret that. Anything over 3% is extreme and should be avoided like the plague on mainlines just as the real railroads did.
That has to be at least 6% if not more. If you scale it off, he is rising about 2.5" over 3'. I have a 4% grade on my new layout for an industry spur. I will likely never pull more than 5 or 6 cars up it, but I am definitely a little concerned about it. I can't imagine going any steeper.
Here's the milepost-by-milepost blow of Cass Scenic, with 8.5% and 9% grades (all previously logging railroad, and operated with Shays). I'm not sure who actually gets the ultimate prize. I think Cass was always boasting they were the steepest standard gauge, see if anybody wants to challenge that. http://www.cassrailroad.com/CASS%20TRACK%20GUIDE.pdf RC&BT was built as a tourist operation, not as a logging railroad - Cass was. And the RC&BT switchback was a 'fix' after the original loop trestle burned. So I'm not sure how closely related that is to a real railroad situation. Cass however, is just plain nuts steep and was operated as a logging railroad where it is today. Even 3.5% LOOKS steep if you're in a locomotive cab. At about 6% you'll start sliding off a seat and above that you're hanging on. And Cass also runs at about 5mph and uses handbrakes and lots of brakemen for a safe descent.
Yeah there's spots at Cass where you have to lean to balnce when standing. It's a bit nuts but a beautiful ride. That guy's layout also has a lot of track out of reach in tunnels and behind that grade, too. But if he's happy, it's his layout.
Cass gets the prize for the steepest standard gauge. For a Class 1 road the Southern with its Saluda grade, at one point a 5.1%, gets the prize. There were a number of logging roads that did compare to Cass but they used cable inclines and other means to get up the hill. Saluda is now permanently out of service. Only my logging stuff will have anything approaching this and then pretty much everything will be doubleheaded up the hill. And if on the new layout I have to compromise for space then I have plans to do a series of switchbacks that will keep grades at or under 4%. Mainline will be waterlevel. And for the new folks onboard here there are a couple of handy tools to keep the grades in line. One takes all the quess work out and is easy to use. Thats the gauge in the rear. Plus it has a magnet strong enough to pull fillings out of teeth. Good for finding those Atlas trip pins, and it has a handy chart on the back. The one in front is set for 6%.
What is in real life is in real life. What we have on a model railroad is something that should not bite you on the rear in years to come. It all depends what you want for your railroad. On a 1:1, there is different equipment. We have models with motors and not engines, locomotives and tenders that need constant electrical contact to run and, if you have a longish train going up the slope, a siding at the top and at the bottom for the "helper" locomotive to either push or pull up the grade. There also may be a problem with vertical kinks in the track at the top and bottom of the grade, not to mention the problem at the beginning of the grade with a longer train of the tender lifting up off the tracks just a tiny bit which will be enough to break contact. All I am saying is - be careful before you commit. You may wind up very frustrated and need to rip up and rethink.
What was the grade on Saluda? I thought it was over 5%. Which is VERY steep especially for a class 1 RR.
IMG_8542 If you really need a steep grade, try a cable railway! 72.7% on the Incline Railway in Chattanooga.
That is only a 2.5" rise? Due to space contraints, I will also be using 4% for my industry spur. And on another track, hopefully I will have enough room for a 3% grade for a bridge to cross over another track.
Give or take. It has to be at least 2.5" to get over the tracks going under. Even 2.5" over 3' is 7%... Nearly akin to a rollercoaster.
Saluda was 5.1%. It isn't anymore because the last report had the rails cut though still in place and out of service.
Which is why the retirement layout design is staying with the SP&S. Water level grades. The logging branches are a different story but even there I'm doing some serious thinking on grades. And for power I've adopted the philosphy of the double header thus I have 2 Shays and 2 Class A Climax type plus a pair of kitbashed Tenwheelers that will pull the walls down. The Ten Wheelers are from a 4-4-0 bash and have extra weight and all traction tired with tender drive. If I can't manage a nice not over 4% on the logging because of space then I'm doing what the 1 to 1s did. Go to switchbacks to get up the hill and stay at or under 4%. I looked at the video and the first thing I saw is that it is a small layout. No room to stretch out that grade. The 2nd thing is notice the number of cars. Thats about the max. and probably add one more and wheel slip creeps in. Also I have the feeling that the locos are probably fairly heavy, can't tell what they are, but with todays steam or even smaller diesels I doubt that they could make that grade without dropping a car or two. Maybe the old Atlas RS3 could. Small layout, probably heavy loco, short train, so it will work.
This sparked a good, on going discussion. These small layouts with the steep grades can be fun to operate but leave much to be desired when it comes to realistic operations. I prefer to build within the parameters of 2% to 2.5% grades with wide radius curves. Wide radius curves start at anything greater then an 11" radius. All of this according to Rick's rules of order. Grin! It's your model railroad and you make the rules, quoting Jim 157.
That's why for the small layout I am building now I decided no changes in elevation at all. There's simply not enough space for 1.5% grade to go up and back down without looking like Spaghetti.
