Lester Perry Wrote:I did some more measuring and calculating. The best I can hope for is 4%. I guess I need to do some more thinking.

As discussed already is 2% the "standard" grade "standard" trains should master. 4% is not impossible. Many layouts have somewhere such a steep grade but the risk to fail is likely.
You need to do testing. Get some flex tracks on a long support, put your trains on it (light engines and poor running cars) and raise one end until the engine stalls. If you plan to have a curve on the grade put it on the test track too, it is important.

Les, Saluda is 4.7% reaching over 5% in places. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saluda_Grade">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saluda_Grade</a><!-- m -->
Charlie

I think most of us run into this problem if we want elevation changes in our layouts. "Prototypical" grades take an awful amount of track for any kind of reasonable change in elevation. So we compromise....
I'm using a 5.5% grade to get from my lower main level to the "El Diablo" mine. My solution...?? Use a "dedicated" engine for this run - my trusty Mantua 2-8-2, which, as they say, will pull nails out of plywood....

Dedicated power is not an option, helper is acceptable. This will have heavy coal traffic if I do it (this is the C&O). Empties up loads down

I will have to check my references, but I believe there was a 6% grade on the Uintah Railway. That, if memory serves, was stated in a Uintah RY video, featuring the newly acquired 2-6-6-2 T's which later became the Sumpter Valley 2-6-6-2's #'s 250, and 251. It wasn't a particularly long grade, but it was a steep one!, that needed the tractive effort of the articulated locos.
yeah that's the Sumpter Valley Railway # 250 in my avatar.

Someone asked for photos,how about videos?

Well I have about decided to do it. I was looking at it this evening while running some trains and I believe it is doable. There will be some steep grades but I think I can make it work. When the time comes I will keep everyone updated on the progress.

Dividing 10" by 180"(15') gives you an 8.33% grade. So that is a very steep grade. But the narrow gauge Uinta Ry had 7.5% grades w/ 85 degree curves & ran 2-6-6-2s thru that! So it depends on your prototype. Santa Fe's Cajon pass has a 3% grade on one track but mostly runs trains down grade.

As most here know I model the Chesapeake & Ohio. That railroad goes up and down a lot getting through West Virginia. I doubt if it exceeds 2% anywhere except maybe getting to a mine off the main. I have accepted the fact I will have to have some steep grades. As I am writing this I thought of something. To have a 2% grade reaching 10" I would need about 35 feet of track. what if, What if I raised it 1" in the first foot go level for 3' then rise 1" in next foot, 3' level again then 1" in 1'. Continue until I reach desired elevation. I know sounds stupid but that way in a 30 car train I would have only4-8 cars on a grade at any given time. :?:

1" in 12" is your 8.33%. What kills you here is the transition -- you can't put an pure angle in of that type and I think a transition of 12" (6" in the grade bit and 6" in the flat) is a bit sharp.
I feel that it would make your grade look lumpy and awkward and in engineering awkward looking things often don't work right.

Like I said, it just came to mind as I was sitting here. It was 36" level with 12" grade

lajry Wrote:Dividing 10" by 180"(15') gives you an 8.33% grade. So that is a very steep grade. But the narrow gauge Uinta Ry had 7.5% grades w/ 85 degree curves & ran 2-6-6-2s thru that! So it depends on your prototype. Santa Fe's Cajon pass has a 3% grade on one track but mostly runs trains down grade.

OK The grade I quoted as 6% is probably the same one ( 7.5% ), and I did forget about the tight curves !!
The angular size ( degree ) of a curve is the angle formed by two lines drawn from the center of the curve, to the points where where a 100' chord, intersects the curve center-line.
An HO scale 18" radius curve, is a scale 45 degree curve.
An 85 Degree curve would have an approximate radius of 75' !!. In HO scale that would be 10-3/8"

My N scale 2-8-0 can operate down to about a 9" radius comfortably, My HOn3 Brass 2-8-2, "complains" about an 18" radius curve, My HOn3 2-6-6-2 T's ( SVRY 251, and 250 ) might handle a 15" radius curve, but they would also be "complaining" about it. In HO scale 15" rad. = a 66 Degree curve.

If I do this 24" would be my minimum that has been my rule of thumb since 96 when I started this layout. Now my J&M short line and businesses have tighter turns. I started with 30" minimum but one place I couldn't do it so I had to change my minimum.

Lester Perry Wrote:Dedicated power is not an option, helper is acceptable. This will have heavy coal traffic if I do it (this is the C&O). Empties up loads down

Les,loaded coal could move both ways if you include "tide" coal.

Brakie Wrote:Les,loaded coal could move both ways if you include "tide" coal.

If I decide to do this, I am having doubts again. I would be trying to represent Peach Creek which put out more than 24 loaded trains a day. I believe it was average 28. with empties coming in.