Haggerleases Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Hello all. Having recently browsed many old model railway constructor magazines, it seems there were quite a few layouts in the 70s and 80s and perhaps before, that did not use ballast. To me, I hardly notice it's not there. The general atmosphere of the railway environment more than makes up for it. It seems that sometimes only the most general impression of ballast is required. I've even seen railways without ballast, and 3 rails! But somehow, somehow...it still has that atmosphere. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndon Posted March 6, 2021 Share Posted March 6, 2021 (edited) I guess it is the difference between atmospheric and realistic. I've seen layouts over the years that have loads of atmosphere but weren't very realistic and a number that were very realistic but had no atmosphere at all... Edited March 8, 2021 by johndon 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 7, 2021 Author Share Posted March 7, 2021 (edited) It's something that is difficult to put your finger on. A recent good example I saw in a book was an NBR layout called 'Dean Bridge' in 7mm scale. Probably long since defunct. The chap used black roofing felt as ballast, but it was full of atmosphere, and the lack of realism in that there was no obvious gravel didnt seem to matter. It was the impression that came through from the picture that made the difference. Edited March 7, 2021 by Haggerleases Spelling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelE Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 I generally use ballast. There are sections of my layout that have no ballast though as I'm waiting until after catenary installation. I have installed catenary after ballasting and I'd rather not do that again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 55 minutes ago, MichaelE said: I generally use ballast. There are sections of my layout that have no ballast though as I'm waiting until after catenary installation. I have installed catenary after ballasting and I'd rather not do that again. I am intrigued by that. Why did you find installing catenary after ballast undesirable? I had catenary on a previous layout (& will add it to the modernised version of my current one). I found cleaning track under the wires was quite awkward & expect ballasting would be even more so. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelE Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 3 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said: I am intrigued by that. Why did you find installing catenary after ballast undesirable? I had catenary on a previous layout (& will add it to the modernised version of my current one). I found cleaning track under the wires was quite awkward & expect ballasting would be even more so. Just the masts. After mast installation I will ballast and then install the catenary wire. If the area is ballasted I then have to clear away the gravel to mount the mast and that has ended up in a mess and also ruins the continuity of the already-laid ballast. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 (edited) Scenic railway modelling was still very much an emerging art form in the 70s, although more refined in the 80s. Scenic modelling as we understand it now really entered the mainstream with Barry Norman's Petherick' in the late 80s. A lot of the pioneer layouts most of us were taking inspiriation from didn't have ballast - Madder Valley, David Jenkinson's various 'Long Drag' layouts for example, and although others like Buckingham GC did, track and infrastructure was very much the poor relation, largely I suspect through lack of readily available information. I remember 'finishing' my 8x6 layout around 1980 by lifting all the track (Hornby System 6 pinned down), glueing a layer of ballast onto the bare chipboard, and nailing the track back on top - 14 yr old me thought it looked so cool with 'proper' ballast ! Even the scenic bits were invariably flock, brickpaper and rubberised lichen. 'Realistic' for us meant sticking flock on the rubberised lichen to look like leaves. Realistic ballast with the sleepers in it rather than on it was more common from the 80s onwards, but the first layout I remember seeing with the lineside done properly - actual point rodding, signal wires, detectors, compensators etc - was Steve Hall's Halifax King Cross in MRJ in 1997. Edited March 7, 2021 by Wheatley Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekl Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 It occurs to me that looking at a photograph differs from looking at the actuality. It may be that the lack of ballast isn't readily apparent when looking at a photo, but is more so when seeing it "live", as it were. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 (edited) On 05/03/2021 at 22:39, Haggerleases said: I've even seen railways without ballast, and 3 rails! But somehow, somehow...it still has that atmosphere. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. I think it’s a good idea - look at my thread to see! seriously: some people were ballasting their layouts in 1910; and some people weren’t in 1980. Over that period the balance tipped from a few doing it, to nearly everyone doing it. The ‘scenic revolution’ started around WW2, with 00 ahead of 0 in that respect. Since I’m trying to recreate the early-1950s look in 0, I don’t. But, for any future changes, I will use this idea stolen from PaulRhB of RMWeb, ‘stone’ paint, which I think is a nice compromise. Edited March 7, 2021 by Nearholmer 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 7, 2021 Author Share Posted March 7, 2021 Nice one Nearholmer. I've been reading a lot about Crewchester and Lutton. Inspiring stuff. What beautiful engines you have there. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithHC Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 Two current layouts to have a look atmosphere and minimal ballast at the moment. Liverpool central and Leeds City. I know they are both in the being completed for ballast but both have looked great without ballast. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 8, 2021 Author Share Posted March 8, 2021 Does anyone know what they used to colour the sleepers and track bed on Leeds City? It's a big thread to dig around looking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 8, 2021 Author Share Posted March 8, 2021 BTW thanks for the replies so far. I really appreciate your help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithHC Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 1 hour ago, Haggerleases said: Does anyone know what they used to colour the sleepers and track bed on Leeds City? It's a big thread to dig around looking. I don’t recall exactly but on other threads I have seen either rail grime colour or mid to dark grey. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 13, 2021 Author Share Posted March 13, 2021 Having had my planned trip to Pendon ruined by covid, does anyone know what Mr Ahern used for his track base? It looks like cork? Also the baseboard doesn't look like bare board, but painted with a gritty texture, anyone know what this is? H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted March 17, 2021 Share Posted March 17, 2021 On 13/03/2021 at 10:16, Haggerleases said: Having had my planned trip to Pendon ruined by covid, does anyone know what Mr Ahern used for his track base? It looks like cork? Also the baseboard doesn't look like bare board, but painted with a gritty texture, anyone know what this is? H. According to an (excellent) article about John Ahern and the MVR in MRJ no.75 (Christmas 1994) by David Kitchiner- who was responsible for setting up the Madder Valley at Pendon- "the two-rail track is based on a grey blotting-paper-like carpet underlay with card sleepers and the rail soldered to GEM baseplates." GEM supplied Pendon with enough baseplates for the short stretch of new track that David Kitchiner and his team needed to turn the MVR from a U to an L that could be displayed to the public from the right side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggerleases Posted March 18, 2021 Author Share Posted March 18, 2021 Ah, thank you. I did wonder. It looks wrong, but so right! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now