N Scale exhibition layout, Alpine valley, advice please

[Montafon]

Hello there

 

I would be grateful to receive some advice from those who have made before an exhibition layout.

 

I am planning in N scale layout set in an Alpine mountain valley, in Austria. I have seen many layouts that present an along-side view to the viewer, but it is not always possible to see the real railway from these angles without a helicopter, expecially in the mountains! Therefore I am experimenting with the idea of placing the viewer at the bottom end of a valley, looking up it, with the railway running in an inverted U shape from the perspective of viewer. The railway is gaining altitude slowly to cross some Alpine pass, and so is looping round the sides of the valley to make a small gradient.

 

I hope this can provide a novel arrangement to entertain the viewers. The layout is made with Peco track, DCC, is electrified and possibly will be double-track instead of single so that there are plenty of trains in motion. A helix returns the trains to their starting height. To make the radius of the main curve larger, part of the curvature is provided by hidden tight-curved Peco set track. The viewer can see the train from the front as it passes along the sides of the lake and then watch it sweep round the curve in the distance.

 

I will elevate the layout high enough so that the viewer looks over the surface of the lake and into the scene, requiring some long legs! While my idea for the layout is secure, I'm not sure how to design it for exhibition use, to make it portable and also how to divide it up into modules given the lake which is probably a big piece of resin? Each square is 50cm, so the layout is 1.5m by 1.5m overall, the size being determined by the valley width and the minimum room for the tracks to turnback under the mountains towards the storage yard.

 

This will be my second layout after a large fixed one, so my first exhibition one. Can anyone with experience say if this is a viable concept for exhibitons, or probably a frustrating elephant? All comments and suggestions and advice warmly welcomed!

 

Kind regards

Montafon

 

 

[Kris]

It's a lovely idea, but I feel that to make it viable for an exhibition you might need to make it wider so that more people can view it at a time. At the moment you have a very restricted view letting 1 maybe 2 people see the layout as you intend. It might work better if the layout were more triangular.

[PaulRhB]

Super idea and nice to see a deep scenic design, I got 3ft or 900mm depth on Rhatia and it really helps with mountainous scenery.

Well I would split it Into three slices, keeping your design exactly as it is, but rather than the three slices being rectangles I would have them interlock like a simple jigsaw. Imagine the middle board as being just wider than the lake so it's all one piece. The split lines would be even better if they aren't dead straight but run parallel to the side at first where the hidden tracks cross. Then as the lake curves in use another staright line angled to follow the lake side and then the last 300mm parallel to the side again. This would make it approx 300mm wide at the back and 500mm wide at the front, the lake board would be narrow at the front and wide at the back.

These split lines will be easier to hide than dead straight ones amongst the scenery. I would also recommend rock moulds and air drying clay like DAS for the rocks as they dry very light and take stains and washes well for alpine scenery.

[PaulRhB]

I think 5 ft wide is ok as long as the mountains at the front slope back to allow say three people abreast. It's tricky because making it wider to accommodate more viewers means it will nearly double in width and lose the tight Alpine valley that this has the potential to replicate.

[Flying Pig]

Your idea sounds similar in some ways to the "Stealth Bomber", a layout built by members of the Hull MRS: original thread on old forum.

[Dave777]

Yes, the stealth bomber came to my mind too!

 

 

The only other comment I would make is that, with barriers adding another 1.5 to 2 feet at the front, the viewers will be around 7 feet from the train at the back, which is a fair old distance, particularly with N gauge. However, I did notice that having added all that impressive scenery at the sides you've got the line at the back fairly hard up against the backscene - why not move the line across the back nearer to the front, and include some more impressive scenery sloping across the back too (so it's more like a bay than a valley). That will look better than the backscene, and also bring the line nearer to the viewers...?

[Flying Pig]

It might work better if the layout were more triangular.

I agree. The tight horseshoe shape of the visible line means that much of the track actually faces away from the viewer and the steep mountainsides will tend to hide it from most angles. A more V-shaped arrangement in a triangular setting would give easier viewing. You could still use curves and rock outcrops to hide small sections and divide the scene up.

[Montafon]

Thanks for all the comments and the link to the triangular layout which looks very helpful, it is a shape I had not considered. I agree that it would be better to continue the valley further behind the main curve and I'll examine again the angles for more viewers. Thanks also for the baseboard suggestions, I think my wood working skill is sufficient for it!