For any of you that have been faithfully following the layout design forum, you will know I have been flogging "nolix's" for a while now. A nolix was a term coined by John Armstrong in jest when he designed a layout for a client. This client didn't want a helix and so insisted on something else. I have always maintained that a nolix area is a far more significant modeling tool than a helix, with more interest, and greater visibility of trains. I believe this especially to be true in N scale, the scale I am modeling. Well loe and behold, follow this link, and scroll down to the area that says "No Helix" and you will find an excellent example of a "nolix." http://home.att.net/~kntower/layout.htm Also http://home.att.net/~kntower/tour4.htm [ 02. September 2002, 20:13: Message edited by: rsn48 ]
I just got an idea for a double deck continuosly running layout. It would probably be a pain to design and to build, but I thought about having the "ends" of the mainline on both levels having some kind of reverse loops above each other inside the "nolix mountain" and of course have the mountain itself as being the "nolix" to go from the upper and lower levels. The reverse loops could also be used as some kind of a crude staging yard also since it will be hidden. It would "kill two birds with one stone" to maximize the use of the layout in a limited area. The biggest problem with this design would be cleaning and rerailing the trains inside the mountain unless you'd make an access hole through the botton of it, maybe even install a light fixture in it. [ 02. September 2002, 14:59: Message edited by: dave f ]
Imagine taking a camping tent and slicing it in two, right down the middle. Well, you can buy something like that for the beaches, a half a tent designed to offer some light wind protection and help offer some shade. Why do I mention this, because that is how I am going to design by two mountains. Only half a mountain, with the face visible to all, and the back open so I can get in and service the track at the back. Don't know if this will help or not. The L shaped nolix area I am planning is against the wall. So the half tent concept will provide better access, and more importantly better ventilation (it can get real sweaty in a helix, when working in there). Maybe some how you can incorporate a half a tent design in your layout.
Great link - really shows how the whole thing goes together. helix/nolix - there is a trade off either way - with the nolix the trains go through the same scene several times (this rarely happens in real life) but with a helix the train is hidden for a very long time - I've visited layouts where the helix was longer than the visable run - that's just downright boring. A friend of mine is designing a double deck layout at the moment - he is modeling a prarie railroad and, well the nolix mountain would just be out of place. He has lots of space for a long run and thinks of a helix as a necissary evil - the upper and lower decks will be mostly level. Sometimes a helix is better - sometimes not so much...
In HO a nolix would be suited more for a peninsula, much as Armstrong designed it. I agree that the design parameters really determine which is better. The major reason I flog a nolix is that it isn't something that most people know about when designing their layout. But, most have heard of a helix (baring newbies to the hobby) so it doesn't require as much "press."
NOW I see what you've been going on about! It kinda reminds me of Allen McLelland's Virginian & Ohio, where the line looped & turned up to gain "altitude". BTW, that layout looks great! Should I ever get more room to build a larger layout, I'll use this very tactic.
