Wenlock's Blog

Nice plan! Two things spring to mind, one practical, one visual; bearing in mind the overall desirable length you've quoted, and the scale couplings on your models, it's worth ensuring that you are able to reach everywhere you need to as the layout is quite wide compared to its length. Worth also checking clearances in the loop too. Second thing is you might want to consider some kind of view block where the private siding disappears off stage. The curved nature of the backscene/proscenium arch helps enormously, but a small building or a tree will draw the eye of a viewer standing front centre away from the visible hole in the sky.

 

And yes to installing a trap protecting the main line from the loop and two front sidings.

 

BTW, you know how long those lovely locos of yours took to build, line and paint? That's how long it'll take to build a weeping willow to the same standard. It'll be worth it though!

Nice plan & the 'wrap-around' backscene will concentrate the audience's viewpoint.

 

Buckjumper has a good point about 'reach' - at exhibitions I would

a. Consider operating the layout from the front (good for audience participation) and

b. in any case consider some form of autocoupling.

 

Regs

 

Ian

Given that superb standard of the stock which has graced your journal.... that you intend to hand build your track... that the plan is not too large.... and that this layout is intended to have radii moving towards the "scale" end of the spectrum.... seems to me that this ought to be an adventure in S7. Anything else does not do justice to the engines and carriages.

 

Polite drooooolll...

Nice plan! Two things spring to mind, one practical, one visual; bearing in mind the overall desirable length you've quoted, and the scale couplings on your models, it's worth ensuring that you are able to reach everywhere you need to as the layout is quite wide compared to its length. Worth also checking clearances in the loop too. Second thing is you might want to consider some kind of view block where the private siding disappears off stage. The curved nature of the backscene/proscenium arch helps enormously, but a small building or a tree will draw the eye of a viewer standing front centre away from the visible hole in the sky.

 

And yes to installing a trap protecting the main line from the loop and two front sidings.

 

BTW, you know how long those lovely locos of yours took to build, line and paint? That's how long it'll take to build a weeping willow to the same standard. It'll be worth it though!

Hi Buckjumper, thanks for your thoughts, all advice very welcome! Although my locos have scale couplings, I'm planning on using one of the auto couling systems for the stock. I'm leaning towards Spratt & Winkles, which I used in my 4mm days, though Dinghams might be a possible. If I go down the S & W route I'll just put a 3 sided "loop" of wire on the loco buffer beams and retain the scale couplings.

 

I like your idea of some kind of view blocker to hide the private siding entrance/exit, I'll definitely be giving that some thought!

 

Do you think the GWR would have used a double slip to overcome the trap problem? It appears to me to be a solution, and I quite fancy having a go building one, but I'd like it to be a prototypical solution!

 

Your comment about the weeping willow made me smile, its probably why I've never seen a 7mm model of one!

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

Nice plan & the 'wrap-around' backscene will concentrate the audience's viewpoint.

 

Buckjumper has a good point about 'reach' - at exhibitions I would

a. Consider operating the layout from the front (good for audience participation) and

b. in any case consider some form of autocoupling.

 

Regs

 

Ian

Thanks for your interest Ian, Auto couplings are on the list of "issues to resolve", probably going to be Spratt & Winkles though.

 

I'm going to try to make the layout operable from the front or back, as you say its good to be able to chat sometimes.

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

Given that superb standard of the stock which has graced your journal.... that you intend to hand build your track... that the plan is not too large.... and that this layout is intended to have radii moving towards the "scale" end of the spectrum.... seems to me that this ought to be an adventure in S7. Anything else does not do justice to the engines and carriages.

 

Polite drooooolll...

Hi Western, I did think long and hard about going S7 when I moved up from 4mm EM. I think a number of things put me off at the time, these were:-

 

Although I don't mind, in fact quite enjoy compensating or springing loco chassis, I didn't want to have to do the same to all my stock.

 

I like the idea of being able to run my stock on other peoples layouts and the majority are all using 32 mm track.

 

I really struggled when was trying to sell my 4mm EM stuff, everyone was saying "I wish it was 00" It kind of put me off working in more minority interest guages!

 

 

I totaly agree that S7 looks better and just hope I won't live to regret the decision. To this end I've been considering building my points in 31mm gauge to try and get better looking flangeways.

 

Thanks for you interest.

 

Dave

I totaly agree that S7 looks better and just hope I won't live to regret the decision. To this end I've been considering building my points in 31mm gauge to try and get better looking flangeways.

 

Dave

 

I understand what you mean about the flangeways through the crossing.. Building a turnout to 31.x mm gauge, using 0-FS templates will give an improved appearance although not that which is available with either a S7 turnout or a turnout built to a 7 * 31.x / * 33 mm scale.

Hi Dave

 

This is all going to work very nicely, because you do have the knack of planning the overall picture as well as the details.  So now having studied the plan & mockup, I'm naturally curious about what you intend to do with the backscene, which is perfectly configured into the design of this diorama style layout.  

 

Have you decided what approaches to take yet, for instance, will it be removable or integral to the boards? do you see it as a photoshop image, or are you considering painting a panoramic landscape yourself?

With the way this is designed, there are no obstacles to using a few progressive layers to help suggest the background distance.

 

I see a couple of things that might be useful in the planning stage which you have probably also considered. 

 

The lane leading into the station approach could be easily persuaded to visually 'disappear' behind the raised wooded area to the right, thus making a T junction. A continuation here helps in justifying the position of the road bridge as well.

 

It would be good to maximise any clearance between the rear parapets of the bridge and embankment fencing and the backscene.  Even a small extra gap here will help to create an effective distance layer ( I can see it might be a bit tight at this point, but it is an effective trick )

 

Allowing as much room as space will permit behind any of the structures & features at the planning stage really will pay big dividends later, because it permits a few visual layers to be included, particularly those elements seen along the gentle curve along the back. like the lane, cattle pens & siding etc.

 

PM me if you think I can help anywhere with this one, It's a cracker!........Paul

Hi Paul, I'm glad you like the plan and mock up. I'm planning on making the backscene an integral part of the layout, how well this works out remains to be seen! I've bought an 8 foot x 4 foot sheet of "bendy MDF, the type with the groves routed out of the back of the sheet. This has been cut into three 15 inch high strips, which I'll attach to the base boards with soft wood blocks.

 

I've got no experience of painting a backscene, but its something I'd like to have a go at. Any tips that you can give me will be very gratefully received! I'm hoping to get a subtle suggestion of hills, I don't want the backscene to dominate the 3d model in any way. I'm intrigued by the concept of "progressive layers", this is a technique I've not heard of and would like to know more!

 

I really like your idea of extending the lane to the right behind the trees, it does as you say make more sense of the bridge.

 

I think there should be room to bring the bridge and the lane away from the backscene, now the boards are built it actually looks bigger than I thought!

 

Thanks for the offer of help, If I can get close to the standards you've achieved in your recent projects, I'll be a very happy chap!

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

Great stuff Dave

 

Modelling as you are, within a diorama, and against a fixed backscene allows you to blend the far distance & horizon into the 3D modelling by using progressively smaller scaled layers, so rather than painting a backscene, and then trying to disguise a 2D to 3D join, instead you can model a semi relief layer at say 5 or 6mm 'scale' as part of the scenic background, then another layer behind at 3 to 4mm 'scale', then another at 2mm & so on using finer textures, muted colours & smaller gaps between until you reach the horizon.  It doesn't have to dominate, it can be as understated as necessary by de saturating the colours (airbrushing the separate layers in grey before positioning.  The big advantage is that you replicate the look of a landscape as you see it naturally (without a join in it !)  Adding appropriately scaled elements into this type of semi relief works quite well, all manner of features can be included into the background as they would appear.  Give it a go as a mockup & my bet is you'll take to it no problem, why not, after all you can do everything else alright!....Paul

Hi again Paul, this layering technique sounds really interesting. Was the fabulous backscene that you did for Bucks Hill achieved using this method?

 

I'd also be very interested in any books or examples of this technique that you could recommend?

 

Dave

Hi Dave

 

Personally, I do think it might suit the layout, it's more like modelling a receding landscape than painting one.

 

Bucks Hill was all done in layers, and it worked OK.

 

I can't seem to find out how to post images into blog comments so I've done a sketch of how Bucks Hill was basically arranged .

 

Give me a day or two to get the sketch scanned, & I"ll do a blog entry to show one way of constructing it, along with some finished work. 

 

You could enter the 2014 challenge with it!

 

Paul  

Hi Paul, I think a blog entry is a great idea! I'm sure there are loads of modellers besides me who would be really interested in finding out more about this.

 

Looking forward to finding out more!

 

Best wishes

 

Dave