Advertise Here - SUPPORT TMF

Author Topic: Shadowlands and Tellynott  (Read 31279 times)

postalkarl

  • T-Shirt - FORUM SPONSOR
  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 6931
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #390 on: November 23, 2021, 05:47:41 PM »
Hey Mark:

You are quite welcome. Can't wait to see more of the finished product.

Karl

S&S RR

  • T-Shirt - FORUM SPONSOR
  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 23456
  • Karma: +1/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #391 on: November 25, 2021, 11:12:51 AM »
Mark


I enjoyed running trains in my head through your drawings.  Are you designing to a minimum track radius? I found this to be the most challenging design criteria. Especially, moving from paper to the layout. I'm looking forward to watching the plan come together.
John Siekirk
Superior & Seattle Railroad

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #392 on: November 25, 2021, 04:34:10 PM »
Hi guys.

Quote
I enjoyed running trains in my head through your drawings.  Are you designing to a minimum track radius? I found this to be the most challenging design criteria. Especially, moving from paper to the layout. I'm looking forward to watching the plan come together.

Thanks again for following along, John.

I've debated track for some time.  I own a fair amount of Peco code 100 rail.  I have seen a layout almost completed which used peco code 100 rail, ballasted and heavily weathered.  I was on the tour with a group of 'fine scale' modellers.  I quietly confirmed with the owner that the track was indeed code 100.  After we left the layout I asked my friends what code the track was.  They were all adamant that it must have been code 70.  This was a nice little experiment.  I took particular notice as it was an issue I had been toying with.  If ballasted and heavily weathered the code of track seems to shrink.

Another thing to consider is that peco code 100 track produces setrack, with four different radii curved tracks.  They do not do this in code 75 (more is the shame).  I love the way these snap together so easily and there are no problems with 'kinks' where the ends meet.  The rails are ridgid, and so they keep their shape if you need to cut them shorter.  So with this and the far smaller cost of not having to replace all the code 100 track I currently own (there are many sets of points in Tellynott - including a double slip and two three way turnouts), I'm leaning towards this plan of attack.  If we come into a heap of cash soon, that may change.

Peco track is used by most New Zealand 'S' scalers, along with many who work in OO and HO.  As such, there are several importers and if you know where to shop, the price is pretty reasonable.

I have drawn my plans using the #2 radius as my smallest radius, which is 438mm (17 1/4").  The #3 is 505mm (20") and the #4 is 572mm (22 1/2").  Their #4 turnouts have a radius of 610mm (24").

I recently discovered several Australian model companies manufacturing high quality RTR models for the Australian market.  These models appear to be of very high quality and there are many 4 wheels wagons which are in keeping with the type of rolling stock used in New Zealand.  As Australia uses broad gauge, these models are in HO scale.  Before that I had been looking at using British OO scale models, but was not happy with the scale difference.  New Zealand manufactures are mainly aimed at S scale, as NZ runs on 3'6" track.  My fictional locale decided to run broad gauge.  I'm a bit of an odd ball in New Zealand - modelling NZ in HO scale - but this was done to give me access to the many structure models that I love to 'bash'.  These Australian models give me a plausible 'in scale' option.

I decided to buy a few wagons to have a look at, and my first package arrived yesterday.

Below are some photos.

Photo 1 and 2 - show the new 'Austrains" wagons, an MV meat van and a LV louvred van

Photos 3-5 - show the comparison between a OO scale Bachmann branch line fruit van and one of the HO scale Austrains vans.

My wife thinks the difference is barely noticeable, I think it is huge!

More soon, cheers, Mark.

S&S RR

  • T-Shirt - FORUM SPONSOR
  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 23456
  • Karma: +1/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #393 on: November 26, 2021, 09:38:19 AM »
Hi guys.

Quote
I enjoyed running trains in my head through your drawings.  Are you designing to a minimum track radius? I found this to be the most challenging design criteria. Especially, moving from paper to the layout. I'm looking forward to watching the plan come together.

Thanks again for following along, John.

I've debated track for some time.  I own a fair amount of Peco code 100 rail.  I have seen a layout almost completed which used peco code 100 rail, ballasted and heavily weathered.  I was on the tour with a group of 'fine scale' modellers.  I quietly confirmed with the owner that the track was indeed code 100.  After we left the layout I asked my friends what code the track was.  They were all adamant that it must have been code 70.  This was a nice little experiment.  I took particular notice as it was an issue I had been toying with.  If ballasted and heavily weathered the code of track seems to shrink.

Another thing to consider is that peco code 100 track produces setrack, with four different radii curved tracks.  They do not do this in code 75 (more is the shame).  I love the way these snap together so easily and there are no problems with 'kinks' where the ends meet.  The rails are ridgid, and so they keep their shape if you need to cut them shorter.  So with this and the far smaller cost of not having to replace all the code 100 track I currently own (there are many sets of points in Tellynott - including a double slip and two three way turnouts), I'm leaning towards this plan of attack.  If we come into a heap of cash soon, that may change.

Peco track is used by most New Zealand 'S' scalers, along with many who work in OO and HO.  As such, there are several importers and if you know where to shop, the price is pretty reasonable.

I have drawn my plans using the #2 radius as my smallest radius, which is 438mm (17 1/4").  The #3 is 505mm (20") and the #4 is 572mm (22 1/2").  Their #4 turnouts have a radius of 610mm (24").

I recently discovered several Australian model companies manufacturing high quality RTR models for the Australian market.  These models appear to be of very high quality and there are many 4 wheels wagons which are in keeping with the type of rolling stock used in New Zealand.  As Australia uses broad gauge, these models are in HO scale.  Before that I had been looking at using British OO scale models, but was not happy with the scale difference.  New Zealand manufactures are mainly aimed at S scale, as NZ runs on 3'6" track.  My fictional locale decided to run broad gauge.  I'm a bit of an odd ball in New Zealand - modelling NZ in HO scale - but this was done to give me access to the many structure models that I love to 'bash'.  These Australian models give me a plausible 'in scale' option.

I decided to buy a few wagons to have a look at, and my first package arrived yesterday.

Below are some photos.

Photo 1 and 2 - show the new 'Austrains" wagons, an MV meat van and a LV louvred van

Photos 3-5 - show the comparison between a OO scale Bachmann branch line fruit van and one of the HO scale Austrains vans.

My wife thinks the difference is barely noticeable, I think it is huge!

More soon, cheers, Mark.


Mark


I used all of my code 100 Peco track for the track that was in the back of the layout or in tunnels. For the areas that are close to the viewer I used code 83 Peco or code 70 Micro Engineering flex track. I agree with your comments about seeing the difference in gauge viewing the layout. I notice the difference in photographs, especially when you have figures in the photograph.  Changing from one gauge to another is very easy with couplers that take up the difference in height to align the top of the track.  Peco turnouts are available in code 83 here in the US. Micro Engineering track and turnouts are made in the US.
John Siekirk
Superior & Seattle Railroad

ACL1504

  • T-Shirt - FORUM SPONSOR
  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 20852
  • Karma: +6/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #394 on: November 26, 2021, 09:50:44 AM »
Mark, Cheers,

I've been following along but haven't posted in some time now. I'm really impressed with your patience and due diligence in the planning/mock up stages. I don't have the patience for doing it. My entire layout was "plan as you go with what looks like you want it to look". So far, I've had little to no changes with the exception of adding a turnout here and there.

My three previous layouts have been all code 100 but this one is all code 83.

I'm looking forward to your next few updates. Love it all my friend.

Tom  ;D
"If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
Thomas Jefferson

Tom Langford
telsr1@aol.com

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #395 on: November 26, 2021, 04:42:28 PM »
Quote
I used all of my code 100 Peco track for the track that was in the back of the layout or in tunnels. For the areas that are close to the viewer I used code 83 Peco or code 70 Micro Engineering flex track. I agree with your comments about seeing the difference in gauge viewing the layout. I notice the difference in photographs, especially when you have figures in the photograph.  Changing from one gauge to another is very easy with couplers that take up the difference in height to align the top of the track.  Peco turnouts are available in code 83 here in the US. Micro Engineering track and turnouts are made in the US.

Thanks, John.

Peco have code 70 turnouts and flextrack readily available here in NZ.  I'll check out Micro engineering.  Of course, New Zealand is on the USPS temporary postal suspension at the moment.  Who knows how long that will last...

Cheers, Mark.

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #396 on: November 26, 2021, 04:50:02 PM »
Quote
I've been following along but haven't posted in some time now. I'm really impressed with your patience and due diligence in the planning/mock up stages. I don't have the patience for doing it. My entire layout was "plan as you go with what looks like you want it to look". So far, I've had little to no changes with the exception of adding a turnout here and there.

My three previous layouts have been all code 100 but this one is all code 83.

I'm looking forward to your next few updates. Love it all my friend.

Great to hear from you, Tom!  And to know you are following my progress - even if I don't hear from you.

I'm pretty good at visualizing in 3-D - but the scenes I'm wanting to create with all the different heights of track and borrowed scenery behind are well above my abilities to recreate in my head from a 2-D plan.  The model of the layout has already got me redesigning one area.  I'm sure there will be another iteration or two before we are through! 

I thought I might get myself a couple of lengths of code 70 flextrack and try spiking a nice tight curve to see how it goes.

Hoping to get a bit more done today.

Cheers, Mark.

deemery

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 3694
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #397 on: November 26, 2021, 07:35:18 PM »
ME Code 70 Flex is kinda tough to bend.  I remember reading somewhere some tips on how to do it, maybe someone can comment.  I muddled through on the trackwork, but I'm not the right person to tell anyone else how to do it.  One of the things I found really useful was a RibbonRail or FastTracks "between the rails" track gauge in my minimum radius.

Two things I did on my (1890s era) layout to ME flextrack were (a) randomly clipping the ends of ties so they weren't all the exact same length and (b) cutting the connectors underneath the rail, so I could skew the ties and make the spacing more random.  That was A Lot of work, but I think the results are worth it.

dave
Modeling the Northeast in the 1890s - because the little voices told me to

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #398 on: November 26, 2021, 08:14:37 PM »
Thanks for your input, Dave.

Quote
ME Code 70 Flex is kinda tough to bend.  I remember reading somewhere some tips on how to do it, maybe someone can comment.  I muddled through on the trackwork, but I'm not the right person to tell anyone else how to do it.  One of the things I found really useful was a RibbonRail or FastTracks "between the rails" track gauge in my minimum radius.

I'm pretty sure I will go with Peco.   Its really just whether I go with code 100 where I can use the ridged setrack at the various tight radii, or whether I opt for the code 70 with the finer more prototypical sized track.

Quote
Two things I did on my (1890s era) layout to ME flextrack were (a) randomly clipping the ends of ties so they weren't all the exact same length and (b) cutting the connectors underneath the rail, so I could skew the ties and make the spacing more random.  That was A Lot of work, but I think the results are worth it.

I'll keep these two ideas in mind.  I can see how they would add a great deal of realism.

Cheers, Mark.

S&S RR

  • T-Shirt - FORUM SPONSOR
  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 23456
  • Karma: +1/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #399 on: November 26, 2021, 08:17:19 PM »
Quote
I've been following along but haven't posted in some time now. I'm really impressed with your patience and due diligence in the planning/mock up stages. I don't have the patience for doing it. My entire layout was "plan as you go with what looks like you want it to look". So far, I've had little to no changes with the exception of adding a turnout here and there.

My three previous layouts have been all code 100 but this one is all code 83.

I'm looking forward to your next few updates. Love it all my friend.

Great to hear from you, Tom!  And to know you are following my progress - even if I don't hear from you.

I'm pretty good at visualizing in 3-D - but the scenes I'm wanting to create with all the different heights of track and borrowed scenery behind are well above my abilities to recreate in my head from a 2-D plan.  The model of the layout has already got me redesigning one area.  I'm sure there will be another iteration or two before we are through! 

I thought I might get myself a couple of lengths of code 70 flextrack and try spiking a nice tight curve to see how it goes.

Hoping to get a bit more done today.

Cheers, Mark.




Mark


One of my lessons learned about putting flex track down is "don't use spikes or nails of any kind". I recommend you get a couple lengths of code 70 or 83 Peco track and get it where you want by gluing it and holding it down with weights.  I use white glue so if I ever want to adjust it I just have to get it wet. I always bend it with it laying flat on the roadbed. The is especially important with Micro Engineering track because it does bend into shape a little harder than Peco (as Dave mentioned above). I posted many pictures of the process on my build thread when I was building the Superior Yard a couple years ago if you want to reference it.


I almost forgot the why no spikes - First, they look very non prototypical - especially in videos shot from rolling stock running on the layout.  Second, they will cause kinks in your track work before you get it glued down with ballast. As the rail expands and contracts it is held at points spikes rather than continuously with glue. It will expand and contract and kink between the spikes. Since my layout is in a temperature and humidity controlled house it wasn't a problem until I decided to go Arizona for a month in the winter for some sun. We let the house get down to 45 degrees F and I returned to 3 places on the layout where the track work had kinked. They were all on curves inside the mountains where I never added ballast and glue. I'm sure you will have temperature variations in your layout room since it is in a building that you are not heating and or air conditioning all the time.  Third, once you see how easy track goes down using the gluing and weights you will never want to use spikes again.


John Siekirk
Superior & Seattle Railroad

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #400 on: November 28, 2021, 12:00:57 AM »
Thanks for that info, John.

Much appreciated.

Cheers, Mark.

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #401 on: November 28, 2021, 12:06:32 AM »
Hi guys.

Well - a bit of progress so I will upload a few more photos. I wish I could photograph this better. Some of the views look great in reality, but are quite hard to see in the photos.

Photo 1 - shows the back wall of the room in which Tellynott is. This is a scene loosely based on Squawbottom river on the G&D. Sometimes those blobs of expanding foam lead to some interesting ideas. The big rock overhanging the middle track (logging branchline) was one such blob. I have put a short tunnel through it to break up the shape of things. I tried putting the river through a cave here, too, but took that out. I may revisit that idea when I get to building things. There is 680mm (26 3/4") between the top track and the bottom track (passing siding) here.

Next we have some views of the remade peninsula.

Photo 2 - here is a close up looking under the two high bridges. These are the ones I brought closer to parallel and further into the peninsula in order to be able to see the view over, under and through them. I have made some quick mock-up bridges to help with the imagination. The big bridge in the background is over 1100mm long. I have plans for a large kitbashing project here using a faller bridge. It is a double track bridge which I intend to bash into a single track. It looks like a lot of work! The middle lower bridge will be a curved trestle.

Photo 3 - and here is the same view from a little further back. You can see how this technique helps you to design with an eye for viewing different scenes within the layout. Here I was very conscious about leaving the cliff faces in the gorge back far enough to be able to see the curving track following the river. There are two lower tracks near the front of this scene that will be hidden under the riverbed. The river will fall in a serious of rapids/ waterfalls to negotiate the tracks below. as the scenery does not go all the way to the floor, there will still be access to these tracks for maintenance and emergencies.

Photo 4 - and here is the same scene from further back again, showing more of the overall view.

More in a sec, cheers, Mark.

Mark Dalrymple

  • Modeler's Hero 500+ Posts
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Shadowlands and Tellynott
« Reply #402 on: November 28, 2021, 12:11:12 AM »
Part 2.

Photo 1 - Here we are on the other side of the gorge. I turned my kitbashed bridge around for you. You can more clearly see where the curved trestle will go in this shot. Maybe I need to mock that up... You also get the feeling for what a train snaking along on the bottom track with the gorge behind will look like.

Photo 2 - And here we have a shot of the whole peninsula. This shows the second gorge with the spur to the mine. It also shows the tall curved trestle at the end of the peninsula. You can see I am trying to create cameo shots to help the layout seem more plausible, but framing them with the terrain and visually blocking them from competing with other scenes.

Photo 3 - An eagle's eye view. Although there is still a lot of track, I have hidden quite a lot under the scene and visually separated more with the steep mountains. This shot clearly shows the spur to the mine, and the flat area to the left of the spur where the mine will be situated.

Photo 4 - This shot shows the Fastford River area with the peninsula behind. You can see the depth of the view. Very exciting!

Photo 5 - And another eagle's eye view, this time showing more of the big picture. You can see a few foam blobs in the background. Sorry about that - in a rush to share...

More soon, cheers, Mark.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal