Railway embankments

[MDP78]

First attempt at making some embankments.  

 

Whilst I have got a reasonably regular profile for the slope, there is a degree of lateral undulation - not sure how apparent that is from the pictures.  The embankments are built using Woodland scenic foam sheets, with a larger of papier mache then plaster cloth over.  With hindsight the gaps between the foam may have been a little too big or my packing efforts not good enough as the undulation is a result of a degree of sag from the papier mache and plaster cloth layers.

 

Not sure if I should rip it out and start again, or whether a degree of undulation isn't something I should worry overly about and just get on with getting some grass down.    Grateful for any suggestions?

 

 

Edited November 14, 2018 by MDP78

[gismorail]

Looks like a good effort for your first scenic embankments excellent. What I would suggest you now do is to give the whole area a coat of PVA glue and allow to dry out for a couple of days then get some ready mixed tile adhesive and brush into the surface and you'll find that you can smooth out any undulations that your not happy with, and don't be afraid to give it a second coat if required. I have used this method on my Chumley End layout if you have a look you can see the results. 

Once all the tile adhesive has dried out give the whole a coat of green / brown emulsion paint in readiness for static grass treatment and you will have some very find embankments. 

Good luck keep up the good work ....but don't rip up what you have done so far it;s looking good 

[Dungrange]

Being pedantic, these aren't railway embankments - they are cuttings.  An embankment is created using imported-material to raise the railway above the surrounding / existing ground level.  Where the existing ground is excavated to allow the railway to pass, as you are modelling, is referred to as a cutting.

 

As a man-made slope, I'd expect it to be fairly uniform, but of course, over time, some material could slip, in which case I wouldn't worry too much.  If you are going to add vegetation, then I don't think any undulation would be noticeable.  From your photograph it looks as though the toe of the slope (ie the bottom) is rather close to the ballast shoulder - I'd expect a wider 'cess', which is where any drainage would be located.  There would probably be a filter drain at the toe of the slope to 'catch' water from the cut slope to stop it reaching the formation on which the ballast is laid.

[kandc_au]

Some pics I have seen would make that last statement debatable.
khris

[MDP78]

Thanks for the replies.  Also sorry for the embankment cutting faux pas!!  I was posting after a long day.  I do know the difference....honest.

 

The toe of the left hand slope is probably a bit closer to the edge of the ballast, it was the first section of scenery I'd constructed, ever.  However there is a reasonable gap, it just isn't quite apparent from the picture and can be made good when I get on to adding some grass/vegetation. 

 

I would also add that the left hand embankment is adjacent to a spur/headshunt which simply allows a locomotive to move forward from a passing loop on an otherwise single track running line in order to set back into a pair of parallel exchange sidings when picking up/dropping off wagons.  My station is also a junction station (although the junction itself isn't actually modelled, it will be more implied by the actual operation of the layout) on a rural route someone in Shropshire/the Welsh borders, with on branch route being of slightly more importance than the other.  The station doesn't have any bay or island platform for the lesser branch passenger train (typically an auto train) to terminate at or leave from.  Instead it will use the up platform to arrive before drawing forward and setting back into the down platform.  If one or both of those platforms is timetabled to receive a train on the 'main' line it would draw into the spur until the down platform became available or utilise a refuge siding located in the goods yard which lies to the right and behind the photographs shown. 

 

I had worked on the assumption (using photographs from various local routes, now long closed) that the super would be maintained to a similar standard to the sidings, hence the use of a cinder coloured ballast mixed with some fresher coloured ballast for the spur - which actually only runs for a short distance (probably no more than a the length of a pair of wagons) beyond the over bridge.  The layout is set in the late 1950's early 1960's and I have seen enough photographs of lines in my local area that my layout is loosely based on, maintenance standards were already being relaxed here and there even before Beeching - so I am also not overly worried about the toe of the left hand slope and its proximity to the edge of the ballast because I think I can just about get away with it being authentic once some vegetation is in place.  

[MDP78]

By way of an excuse or justification, this is my first attempt at modelling since I had a relatively simply double track oval layout set up in my dad's garage when I was a teenager (I am now just over a month away from 40!).  I have wanted to build a permanent layout for a long time and am now close to having one that can be declared operational.  In hindsight I wish Id used Code 75 rather than Code 100, but the decision seemed sensible at the time and when I review the photos I have, what I have done doesn't look too bad for a first attempt. 

 

The aim with this project is to get someone that is passable and recognisable as a late 50's early 60's former Cambrian/GWR rural route that I can then enjoy operating.  Along the way, via research conducted online, books and from tips and pointers posters on here have provided me and much trial and error, it has been a learning experience of various.  In fact if I was to reflect on what I have done, having a go, even if it doesn't work out quite as planned, seems to be key to railway modelling.  Particularly as there is usually a way to rescue a mistake or to adapt what you had planned initially to work around it.  That said, a phrase book of swear words is also useful.  

[Oldddudders]

Actually, while you may see imperfections in your result - I’m not sure I do - the fact remains that you have already got further with scenic effects than many modellers ever do. By all means take the advice offered above, all of which will simply improve things further, but also feel good at having got this far.

[hucknall byron]

When you have grassed the slope, all imperfections (that you perceive are there at the moment) will disappear. 

[Mike Storey]

If the embankment has been in situ for more than a few decades, there will be natural undulations both from settlement and from water run-offs (depending on the local geology), so your landscaping looks perfectly realistic to me!

 

As said, if you are not happy personally, a bit of greenery, especially static grass, will soon disguise anything you want it to.

[Jongudmund]

Ground naturally undulates so I wouldn't worry about it. Cover it with bushes and stuff and no one will notice.

[Sir TophamHatt]

Can you give details of your bridge?

What parts you've used and such?

[MartynJPearson]

I guess the OP can confirm, but it looks like the Wills kits - SS64 abutments and SS57 Vari Girder.

[MDP78]

The abutments used parts from a Wills SS64 kit, however the retaining wall sections parallel to the overbridge/road were a bit too short for what I had in mind, so I made my own.  As it turns out they were still probably 1cm short either side but I think I can hide that with some vegetation.  Also yes, the overbridge is a Wills SS57.  I think I used Humbrol Gun Metal Grey for the finish, which looks about right for some of the bridges near me.  

[MDP78]

The bridge at the opposite end of the layout is entirely scratchbuilt, although I did use leftover spare brick pillars from a Wills SS64 for the wall enclosing the road.  Dimensions of the abutments are similar to the first bridge otherwise.