Shadowlands and Tellynott

[postalkarl]

Hey Mark:

All looks just great so far. Can't wait to see more.

Karl

[Mark Dalrymple]

Hi guys.

Thanks, Karl.  I'm pleased you are following along.

The modeling weekend once again proved very fruitful and a lot of fun. As always I come away super motivated!

Photo 1 - The model of the model nearing completion of stage 1.

Photo 2 - After I had finished gluing my track plan to my flat headed nails I added walls to the model. These are the back boards of the layout modules, and the height is the ceiling height of these modules - the same height as I have built in Tellynott. The module ceilings are about 8 inches thick, and the top of these just fits under the bottom of the beam between the two rooms. This is so the modules can be unbolted and rolled out (in a very specific order) from the layout rooms if need should arise. I have carefully considered this process in my planning. I'm not sure what the floor height is yet. I just added some height to the track to allow for river valleys. I'll work this out moving forwards. The layout will not go all the way to the floor, but it will go quite low in places.

Photo 3 - I included this photo as it shows pretty well how big the area of Shadowlands is. If you were to square off the area to the bottom right - that is the entire Tellynott area. I haven't worked out the square feet yet, but a glance says Shadowlands takes up about twice the area of Tellynott!

Photo 4 - Ooops! I tried to go gently with the expanding foam, but it just kept growing!

Photo 5 - I had already thought I would need to cut the model into sections so I could view different areas like I was standing in the layout room. The 'oops' meant I just did this step a bit sooner. It will now be far easier to trim and sculpt the foam. You can see I have started this process. Experience whit using this medium has taught me never to try to clean up foam 'oopses' before the foam has cured.

More soon, cheers, Mark.

[S&S RR]

Mark


I have never tried using foam for landform mockups.  How easy is it to carve to the shape you want?  I have been using modeling clay for my mockups in the past. I'm very interested in your process - lots of details please.

[vinceg]

Mark,

Incredible discipline to plan with this level of rigor. Truly inspiring.

[postalkarl]

Hey Mark:

You are quite welcome. Thanks for the new photos. Have fun.

Karl

[Lynnb]

Love where you're going with your layout.

[Mark Dalrymple]

Hi guys.

Love where you're going with your layout

Thanks very much, Lynn.  I'm quite excited myself.

I got a little more done on the model of a model.  I printed off another set of plans and cut out the layout edges.  I held these plans over the expanded foam and marked with a marker (you can still see some of the blue marker in the photos).  I then used a retractable knife blade (without the knife holder) to cut the layout edge into the foam.  I kind of worked a little at a time, cutting pieces away.  I lost my vertical in a few places and will have to amend.  I then started finding the track and carving in the shapes of the landform.  This foam seemed to have a lot of large air bubbles in it.  Its the first time I have used a disposable 'one off' can of this stuff and it was more difficult to control and seemed to have more air bubbles than the proper gun.  The problem with the proper gun is it is quite expensive and no matter how well you clean it between uses it seems to get clogged up within a few uses - and impossible to then clear.

Below are three photos showing progress.  I'm thinking some thinner width retractable blades would be good for carving out the sharp curves.

I'm thinking that after I have finished carving out my landforms I will use sculptamold to cover the foam.  This should cover any bubble holes and give a good surface for painting.

John - the expanding foam is very easy to carve - once dry - and a sharp knife is all you need.

More soon, cheers, Mark.

[postalkarl]

Hey Mark:

Well done so far. Can't wait to see more.

Kark

[Mark Dalrymple]

Hi guys.

Well done so far. Can't wait to see more.

Thanks, Karl.

Here are a few more photos as this project slowly develops. It is a subtraction method - as you have to cut away material rather than add it to create the landscape.

The photos below illustrate how scale kind of disappears. I find it quite easy to see this as a finished layout, or even a 1:1 scale scene.
By removing one of the pieces of the model you can get right down to eye level.  If you then make a square box with your fingers to view through you really feel like you are in the scene.  This is the real beauty of this model of a model method. It also shows much more clearly how you might need to address benchwork, and what other problems (like track accessibility) you might have to solve. I'm rehashing the peninsula at present, as I have found my view through under the bridge(s) will not be possible with the current configuration. This will likely result only in some tweaking. I find my A3 LED light box amazingly useful for this. I can easily and quickly put a piece of paper on top of my plan and trace out the basics, and then make changes to see if they will work. Of course I can do this multiple times and compare results - all without altering my original plan at all.  I'm pretty old school in this way, and the idea of using a computer and software to work through this process really doesn't appeal.

I was disappointed with how many air bubbles I got, but I can always add more foam. Still a long way to go...

More soon, cheers, Mark.

[S&S RR]

Mark


Great visualization tool. Is the backdrop going to be sky only or are the mountains and scenery going to continue on to the walls?  You sure do have a lot of caves in those mountains.    I would fill the air bubbles with modeling clay.

[Mark Dalrymple]

Great visualization tool. Is the backdrop going to be sky only or are the mountains and scenery going to continue on to the walls?  You sure do have a lot of caves in those mountains.    I would fill the air bubbles with modeling clay.

Hi John.

You may remember me mentioning Jonathan White - a New Zealand artist famous for his wonderful landscape paintings - many in South Westland?  Well I hope to try my hand at something (obviously nowhere near his quality!!!) similar.  Below is a link to remind you.  If you scroll through you should find plenty of paintings similar to shadowlands.

https://www.jonathanwhite.co.nz/landscapes1.htm

I intend to put some black card or paper around as fascia - that should hide a few of the 'caves'.  I've been busy playing with anagrams during my coffee breaks today - rearranging letters in NZ places of influence of locations on which Shadowlands is based.  Your question has brought up the name Jonathan White, and as he is a major influence I should give him an anagram on Shadowlands.  I've come up with a few I am quite happy with.  I'm cheating a little with letters if needed - but trying not to.

Stafford river = Fastford river
Smoothwater point = Sawtooth point

Interestingly, this exercise, which I rather enjoy, has thrown up a few landform ideas - especially Sawtooth point!  Although Fastford river definitely screams out to have a ford through some rapids somewhere!

I'm trying to place these names in the order in which they come on my plotted fictional railroad line on a geographical map of the locale.  I've decided to have the fiddle yard/ return loop as an unmodeled town, which in my fictional history has sprung up at the head of a river valley beside a small lake.  The lake is called Lake Hamer, but my fictional town will be Armhe (Army), built on the shores of Armhe lake.  In this way I will be able to move more goods around Shadowlands and create better operating possibilities.

Cheers, Mark.

[cuse]

Great work Mark...That's pretty amazing to help REALLY visualize the layout "experience". I've spent many many hours working on scale track plans (or, really, layout plans as track is the least important part for me) and never ever followed one to a great extent once I got in motion and better felt the spacing and scenic possibilities for real...I have done some sketches from a viewer's perspective that were very helpful...I think you're really onto something...and a fun little project on its own!


John

[Mark Dalrymple]

Great work Mark...That's pretty amazing to help REALLY visualize the layout "experience". I've spent many many hours working on scale track plans (or, really, layout plans as track is the least important part for me) and never ever followed one to a great extent once I got in motion and better felt the spacing and scenic possibilities for real...I have done some sketches from a viewer's perspective that were very helpful...I think you're really onto something...and a fun little project on its own!

Thanks, John.

I remember building the framework and track bed for a switchback layout from 101 track plans decades ago.  By the time I got to that stage I could see that the track was ridiculously close, and it would be impossible to make things look even slightly plausible, along with there being no room for scenery.  What looks good as lines on paper...I have made models of my layout plans ever since.

I, too, am far more interested in the scenery than the trains.  At present I am trying some new 'tweaks' to my paper plan to try to create the views I want deep into the layout, after my mock-up was showing that these wouldn't be possible.  I may have to remake one of the sections of the mock-up - but this will be far less work(!!!) than getting to the framework and trackbed stage in 1:1 scale before discovering the problem.

Cheers, Mark.

[S&S RR]

Great work Mark...That's pretty amazing to help REALLY visualize the layout "experience". I've spent many many hours working on scale track plans (or, really, layout plans as track is the least important part for me) and never ever followed one to a great extent once I got in motion and better felt the spacing and scenic possibilities for real...I have done some sketches from a viewer's perspective that were very helpful...I think you're really onto something...and a fun little project on its own!

Thanks, John.

I remember building the framework and track bed for a switchback layout from 101 track plans decades ago.  By the time I got to that stage I could see that the track was ridiculously close, and it would be impossible to make things look even slightly plausible, along with there being no room for scenery.  What looks good as lines on paper...I have made models of my layout plans ever since.

I, too, am far more interested in the scenery than the trains.  At present I am trying some new 'tweaks' to my paper plan to try to create the views I want deep into the layout, after my mock-up was showing that these wouldn't be possible.  I may have to remake one of the sections of the mock-up - but this will be far less work(!!!) than getting to the framework and trackbed stage in 1:1 scale before discovering the problem.

Cheers, Mark.

Mark


Mock-ups have saved many hours of tear outs and start overs on the S&S RR.  In many areas I built the mountains and scenery I wanted and then added the track.  Just like the prototype railroads had to do. Tunnels into mountains are easy, and bridges and fills are easy. Moving mountains and track work to make room for mountains is very difficult. Keep working with your mockups until you are sure you have what you want.

[Mark Dalrymple]

Hi guys.

Thanks for following along, John.

In many areas I built the mountains and scenery I wanted and then added the track.

This is the approach I have always used with roads and structures.

OK - some plan tweaks.

Attached are the two slightly different alternatives to try, along with the original track plan for reference. 

Firstly, you can see in the first plan I have made alterations to the area in the bottom left.  The small town(?) now comes off the main line just past the loop while the original point to this area now feeds a mine.  I think this works much better, and even though there is no less track, it simplifies things.  It shouldn't be too difficult to make these changes to the model.  I have removed the spur at the top left of the original plan, which was to be a mine, and this one will replace it.

The other area I needed to work on  was the view under the two high bridges  on the top track.  As I discovered while doing the model, this view was too narrow.  On the first image below, I have put slightly more kink in the curved track between the two bridges, widening the view to the arrows as shown.  This will make viewing of the area along the back wall deep into the alcove behind Tellynott possible, but only a limited view of the mountains on the back side of the Tellynott backdrop will be available.  In the second plan there has been a bit of shuffling of the track work on the lower levels, and the kink on both sides of the longer bridge has been exaggerated to bring the two bridges closer to parallel  As show by the arrows, this gives a wider view encompassing both sides of the alcove completely.  I like this view better, but on paper the track configuration seems more contrived and less aesthetically pleasing.

On both plans I have moved the position of the river through the second gorge and viewing area (approximately central on the peninsula) shown by the second set of arrows, a few inches closer to the track.  I have also put the mine on the other side of the track to where I had originally planned.  I think this will make a nice little 'snap shot' view in the gorge, a nice little surprise.  I'm picturing the FSM rock bunker in here.  I have also added another bridge - this time a curved trestle - which will make a lovely scene at the end of the peninsula.  as you can see, I am trying to create a combination of long views with borrowed scenery and some isolated cameo shots.

I hope you get something out of me trying to go through a bit of the nitty, gritty development of the track plan.  Its not pretty, but in my world I find during this process a lot of new ideas and tangents arise as I work.  Some of these, I find, end up being the best and most unique ideas.

More soon, cheers, Mark.