I've been scribbling up some plans, and researching curvature and gradients around the Chasm Creek area. While I was able to find a small number of curvature and gradient diagrams of the line, the figures for the curves (measured in chains, radius) were indistinguishable.
To overcome this, I set out to find some high quality satellite imagery of the area. Unsuccessful again.
As a last resort I reverted back to Google Earth, and screenshotted the area that I plan to model (41°32'42"S, 171°58'40"E). Using Paint, I shaded important features like the side of the road and ballast shoulders, and the position of the two bridges.
The ruler tool on Google Earth indicated that the length of my selected area had a map distance of 134.14 meters. To scale the plans to full size (134.14 meters, divided by my scale- 64 times smaller than real life= 2.09 meters), I used the image resize tool on Photoshop to scale the image to a size of 2.09 meters. I increased the contrast of the image to make the black lines more visible, and reduced the images opacity to save on ink when printing.
As my printer can only print a maximum size of A4, I had to print the image out in many sections. To simplify this, I decided to put a grid over the image and use a grid referencing or numbering system. Google images helped me out with this, I found a transparent math grid paper image and also numbering in a grid format. I decided putting this grid over would be easier than a grid referencing system.
I printed it out in sections. After printing two rows I placed these on the floor to see the size of the whole thing. 2.09 meters sounds reasonable, but it's actually pretty massive when you see it in frount of you. Not sure if it's too big actually, I'll ponder for a bit before printing the rest... I'm just imagining how expensive it will be to cover in scenic material, water, foliage and brass ferns...
Your thoughts?