Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Im stuck guys!

2142 views
29 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Im stuck guys!
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Monday, October 12, 2020 7:27 PM

Hello everyone, i am at a point on a scene on my layout that i have found myself STUCK.....As you will see in the pictures, i am trying to model a kind of cut through a mountain with the front viewing portion being realatively low as opposed to a decent rise in the rear against the backdrop. You will see the single track portal where i plan to begin the tunnel. The tunnel will run around to the other side of the penninsula pretty much just like this side. My big problem is how to go about doing the fascia where the tunnel will begin and on around to where it ends. As you can see i have began mocking up some sheet styrofoam board at the begenning of the bridge and up to where i plan to install the portal. My big problem is how to do the fascia from where the tunnel begins and on around to the end of the tunnel????? I know usually you cut your fascia to match the profile of your terrain but thats where im drawing a blank....Can you guys give me some advice/suggestions and or pictures showing how you would go about this? Many thanks to you all!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: 4610 Metre's North of the Fortyninth on the left coast of Canada
  • 6,985 posts
Posted by BATMAN on Monday, October 12, 2020 8:01 PM

I would put the fascia up to the top of where the wood meets the foam and carve the foam so you had a cliff-like look below the track down to the top of the fascia.

Frontier Guide to the Fraser Canyon, 'Valley of Death'

I have one of those too!Laugh

Brent

It's not the age honey, it's the mileage.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Monday, October 12, 2020 8:06 PM

Trainzman2435
i am trying to model a kind of cut through a mountain with the front viewing portion being realatively low as opposed to a decent rise in the rear against the backdrop.

Hi Trainzman2435,

Here is my My 2 Cents worth.

If you want to have a tunnel then there has to be a reason for the tunnel, i.e. there has to be too much rock above the track to make a plain open cut through the mountainside reasonable. That suggests that your "low" front to the mountain will have to be fairly high, and that the back of the mountain at the backdrop will be very high if you want to make the mountain slope realistic.

Based on your pictures I would suggest that the front of the mountain/top of the fascia should be at least eight inches above the track. Twelve inches would be better. Sixteen inches would be impressive IMHO. That will make the actual fascia quite tall, but I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

 

I would continue to mock up the foam in the foreground until you have enough height to justify the tunnel. That will show you how tall the fascia will have to be and how big the mountain will be. I think you will know pretty quickly if that works for you or not. Personally, I think that a tall fascia with the mountain sloping up fairly steeply from the fascia to the backdrop would look great! It would add a whole lot of texture to your layout, and the size of the mountain relative to the size of the trains would be very convincing. It would look like a mountain!

Maybe doctorwayne or others can post some pictures of tall fascias.

Cheers!!

Dave

Edit:

Brent's rock cut example would work well too, and it would eliminate the need to make anything removable.

 

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: Canada, eh?
  • 11,016 posts
Posted by doctorwayne on Monday, October 12, 2020 9:55 PM

hon30critter
Maybe doctorwayne or others can post some pictures of tall fascias.

I'm not sure they'll be of much help, but there are some fascia photos in this thread.

Wayne

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Monday, October 12, 2020 10:57 PM

doctorwayne
I'm not sure they'll be of much help, but there are some fascia photos in this thread.

Thanks Wayne,

I appreciate you helping to illustrate my point. You offer excellent examples of tall fascia that make the various elevations look realistic.

Cheers!!

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 7:39 AM

Thanks everyone for the suggestions and photos. One last thing if i may.....Would it be recommended to put access holes in the fascia in order to get anything that may get derailed? How or where could i find info on how to do this while still having a tunnel liner? Thanks again guys!

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Milwaukee WI (Fox Point)
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dknelson on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 9:42 AM

Trainzman2435

Would it be recommended to put access holes in the fascia in order to get anything that may get derailed? How or where could i find info on how to do this while still having a tunnel liner?  

A friend of mine screwed his standard masonite fascia to the layout in the usual way, but for areas where he sensed (correctly as it turns out) that he was going to need access in the future, that portion of the fascia was attached with magnets, strong but easily pulled apart - the fascia was pulled away entirely and set aside when it needed to be.   But I have also seen guys who attach the fascia in such areas with hinges so it can be swung down.

While we are on the topic, and I do not know if this would work for your situation, but I have also seen very effective layouts where near a mountain/tunnel the fascia is omitted and the mountain scenery runs down to roughly where the bottom edge of the fascia would be.  Not scenery all the way to the floor as in John Allen's Gorre & Daphetid, but still very effective.  On John Armstrong's famous O scale layout he made that scenery out of flexible material because it was also a pinch point in his aisleway.  There is a line of scenic foam rubber that would seem perfect for that situation.  Cripplebush is the name I think.  Perhaps it too could be mounted on magnets so it could be pulled away when needed.

Dave Nelson

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 22,268 posts
Posted by selector on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 1:00 PM

I make my fascia follow contours.  I also feel that the fascia has the same job as a backdrop; fill a hole or an irritation, improve the overall appeal and finish, and then sit still...and silent.

I agree with the suggestion that the fascia should naturally curve up to meet the height of the scenery closest to the edge of the benchwork.  Means some carving with a jigsaw or something similar, some sanding, and of course a wise choice of paint, but once you mount all the panels in place, the effect, as we can all appreciate, is rather good.

In the OP's case, he must finish his contouring, and I would continue with the scenery flocking/shrubs, trees, etc, to ensure what it ends up as is going to be satisfactory, and THEN measure, cut, and apply panels to cover up the rough edges.

 

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 1:55 PM

selector

I make my fascia follow contours.  I also feel that the fascia has the same job as a backdrop; fill a hole or an irritation, improve the overall appeal and finish, and then sit still...and silent.

I agree with the suggestion that the fascia should naturally curve up to meet the height of the scenery closest to the edge of the benchwork.  Means some carving with a jigsaw or something similar, some sanding, and of course a wise choice of paint, but once you mount all the panels in place, the effect, as we can all appreciate, is rather good.

In the OP's case, he must finish his contouring, and I would continue with the scenery flocking/shrubs, trees, etc, to ensure what it ends up as is going to be satisfactory, and THEN measure, cut, and apply panels to cover up the rough edges.

 

 

 

Thanks again for the ideas and suggestions....I am going to go ahead and continue with the scenery until im happy and then do the fascia.....

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Tuesday, October 13, 2020 9:17 PM

Hi Trainzman2435,

Another option to making the fascia removable would be to make the whole mountain, or at least a portion of it, removable. I built two large(ish) mountains out of foam for my old club and they were easy to lift up. You will need to choose a place for the joints. Perhaps the bottom could be at track level and the left end right at the portal. The top and the right side could simply sit against the wall.

Note that making the mountain removable doesn't preclude extending the fascia above track level. The masonite can be glued to the foam with a horizontal seam at track level. I don't think the joint would be too unsightly.

The mountains are made from 2" foam spaced roughly 2" apart with Woodland Scenics Shaper Sheets over top. I'm not sure I would recommend this method because there will be problems with trees not standing up straight if they are inserted into the gaps between the foam ribs. I would go with solid foam if I were doing it again.

Please ignore the green area of the scenery. That is not my work!HmmIck!

Just a suggestion.

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: US
  • 2,371 posts
Posted by wp8thsub on Wednesday, October 14, 2020 10:29 PM

I have a few places with taller fascia around tunnels, including on the end of a peninsula.

Lakeview Scene 2

by wp8thsub, on Flickr

Here a cut gets deeper as it nears the tunnel portal.  The fascia rises along with it.

Junipers 2

by wp8thsub, on Flickr

The fascia here keeps getting higher toward the backdrop.  Access to the track is from underneath, so the fascia does not require removable sections.

Milton Scene 1

by wp8thsub, on Flickr

The tunnel here starts off straight, but the fascia tratment is similar.  Again, access is from below.

Rob Spangler

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, October 18, 2020 12:55 PM

Those mountains look awesome guys, i just wish i had the talent to create something like those....Thanks also for the suggestions!

  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: Canada, eh?
  • 11,016 posts
Posted by doctorwayne on Sunday, October 18, 2020 10:50 PM

Trainzman2435

Thanks everyone for the suggestions and photos. One last thing if i may.....Would it be recommended to put access holes in the fascia in order to get anything that may get derailed? How or where could i find info on how to do this while still having a tunnel liner? Thanks again guys!

 
Rather than holes in the fascia, why not stack the styrofoam only where it will be visible.  There's no need for it where it will be hidden by the fascia.
 
Instead, leave access from below the layout to deal with in-tunnel derailments.
 
I have a tunnel on my layout, but the ground contours over it were done using plaster over aluminum window screen. Here's the eastern portal...

 
Here's a photo taken under the layout...
 
 
...and the western portal...
 

I used some leftover Masonite from the layout's fascia to prevent detailed trains from heading for the concrete floor.  Also note that there's no tunnel liner, other than an arch of black construction paper at each portal, as the rest of the tunnel's interior is not readily viewable from the aisleway.  This is a case of less is more.
 
Access is easy, and no distracting holes in the fascia.  When building mountains, regardless of the material used, the main aim is to make it look like one, but in most cases, not as solid as a real one.
This is the same as making "water" on your layout...it doesn't need to be equal in scale depth as a real one, but merely look like it's deep....

 
Wayne
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, October 20, 2020 7:46 PM

  Just a little update where i currently am on my mountain/tunnel section.....I went ahead and filled in the areas with foam board and glued it with liquid nails projects. Then i rough shaped it with a razor knife to get an idea of what i really wanted. After that i began using several different styles of cheese graters to smooth and form everything into one scene which is where i currently am....Its amazing how much of a difference these 3 different graters make in shaping the foam, only wish i had known about them years ago lol. Anywyas, as usual your comments and suggestions are welcome....Thanks!

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • From: Southern Florida Gulf Coast
  • 9,618 posts
Posted by SeeYou190 on Tuesday, October 20, 2020 8:00 PM

Are you going to use Sculptamold or something similar to cover the foam and work in the final landscape form?

-Kevin

Wink Happily modeling my STRATTON & GILLETTE RAILROAD. A Class A line located in a personal fantasy world of semi-plausible nonsense on Tuesday, August 3rd, 1954.

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, October 20, 2020 8:58 PM

SeeYou190

Are you going to use Sculptamold or something similar to cover the foam and work in the final landscape form?

-Kevin

 

 

Kevin, yes sir i am or at least thats my plan....Or would you recommend some other way? Sculptamold first and then cover it with plaster cloth or?????

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Tuesday, October 20, 2020 10:32 PM

Hi Trainzman2435,

Can I make a suggestion? You have created a very smooth, even slope in the foreground of the first two pictures. If you were to add some high spots and low spots along that even slope, your mountain would have a lot more character and 'depth' imho. I'm suggesting adding one or possibly two ridges several inches high running at approximately 90 degrees to the track. The top of the ridge(s) would be sloped similar to the slope on the mountain side. You could also create a valley (or two) that would require the track to have a short bridge or a retaining wall. If you are doing more than one valley or ridge I would make them noticably different in depth/height.

There was a brief article on this in MR years ago with a nice illustration, but I haven't a clue when it was run. 

Here is a very rough illustration of what I am suggesting. Blue represents the higher ridges, gray represents the valleys and brown represents bridges or retaining walls:

My 2 Cents

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 5:11 AM

hon30critter

Hi Trainzman2435,

Can I make a suggestion? You have created a very smooth, even slope in the foreground of the first two pictures. If you were to add some high spots and low spots along that even slope, your mountain would have a lot more character and 'depth' imho. I'm suggesting adding one or possibly two ridges several inches high running at approximately 90 degrees to the track. The top of the ridge(s) would be sloped similar to the slope on the mountain side. You could also create a valley (or two) that would require the track to have a short bridge or a retaining wall. If you are doing more than one valley or ridge I would make them noticably different in depth/height.

There was a brief article on this in MR years ago with a nice illustration, but I haven't a clue when it was run. 

Here is a very rough illustration of what I am suggesting. Blue represents the higher ridges, gray represents the valleys and brown represents bridges or retaining walls:

My 2 Cents

Dave

 

Dave, thanks for the suggestion...I will give it a try and see what it looks like sir!

  • Member since
    October 2020
  • 118 posts
Posted by NorthBrit on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 5:40 AM

A very good suggestion by Dave.   Nature isn't 'smooth or flat'.   

One way to see what the land looks like either side of a cutting etc. is to take a look at the real thing.   If a railroad is not nearby   take a good look and see how a road cuts through the landscape.    It is amazing how different things actually are compared to what we think.

Happy modeling.

David 

 

To the world you are someone.    To someone you are the world

I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 5:54 AM

NorthBrit

A very good suggestion by Dave.   Nature isn't 'smooth or flat'.   

One way to see what the land looks like either side of a cutting etc. is to take a look at the real thing.   If a railroad is not nearby   take a good look and see how a road cuts through the landscape.    It is amazing how different things actually are compared to what we think.

Happy modeling.

David 

 

 

David, can you or anyone recommend a good source for pictures to show me what your speaking about sir? Thanks!

  • Member since
    October 2020
  • 118 posts
Posted by NorthBrit on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 6:47 AM

Here are a couple of pictures UK style.   Either side of a cutting is uneven.

[/url]

 

 

One of the best  ways to see how the landscene falls  down a hillside is look at any hillside.  It is uneven, rocky in places, clumps of grass etc.  fifty shades of green.

David

To the world you are someone.    To someone you are the world

I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 13,485 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 7:23 AM

That is a very nasty slip in the first picture -- I'd argue in fact a major failure in maintenance attention if not in original design or construction.  Whatever drainage or intrusion issue causes it should be fully remediated, and the compromised earth fully dug out and 'structure' put back to give proper integrity.

That doesn't detract from your wider point that a great many erosion and time effects make the 'perfect' (or ignored!) symmetry of original cuttings different over time -- including the cumulative history of maintenance or repair efforts.

I find I do not know if there is a comparable use of groundcover for stabilization in American railroad practice as there is for Interstare highway construction.  That would be interesting to consider here as proactive, rather than accidental (or lazy) tolerance of vegetation...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

interesting to adapt 

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 11:07 AM

doctorwayne
Rather than holes in the fascia, why not stack the styrofoam only where it will be visible. There's no need for it where it will be hidden by the fascia.

Wayne, thats a good idea sir..Thank you very much and "Beautiful" layout you have there sir!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, October 21, 2020 5:27 PM

Here is a couple updated pictures of my attempt to add some profile to my mountains...Also, you will see the retaining walls i purchased in the pictures, where might they look good? I have looked and cant find where or how the best location for them may be....Maybe some actual proto pictures of them might help....Anyways, as usual all comments and suggestions are appreciated!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Thursday, October 22, 2020 2:22 AM

Hi Trainzman2435,

That looks a lot better!

You could enhance one of the ridges by gluing a three or four inches of foam on top of the ridge and then shaping it to suit. The taller ridge could then be carried to the other side of the track and right up to the wall, leaving a cut out where the track is.

It might be easier to flatten the ridge that you want to augment first so you have a smooth surface to glue the extra foam to.

You could also cut the valleys deeper where they meet the track so that there is an obvious need for the retaining walls.

The bottom line is that you have enhanced the 'texture' of the scene hugely, but you still have the option of making one or two of the ridges taller and the valleys deeper where they meet the track to add to the effect if you choose.

Cheers!!

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, October 22, 2020 9:02 AM

hon30critter

Hi Trainzman2435,

That looks a lot better!

You could enhance one of the ridges by gluing a three or four inches of foam on top of the ridge and then shaping it to suit. The taller ridge could then be carried to the other side of the track and right up to the wall, leaving a cut out where the track is.

It might be easier to flatten the ridge that you want to augment first so you have a smooth surface to glue the extra foam to.

You could also cut the valleys deeper where they meet the track so that there is an obvious need for the retaining walls.

The bottom line is that you have enhanced the 'texture' of the scene hugely, but you still have the option of making one or two of the ridges taller and the valleys deeper where they meet the track to add to the effect if you choose.

Cheers!!

Dave

 

Dave, thank you for your input....Any chance you might be able to photo shop a rough example of what you mean sir?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Saturday, October 24, 2020 11:51 PM

Trainzman2435
Any chance you might be able to photo shop a rough example of what you mean sir?

Hi again,

You asked for 'rough', you are getting 'rough'!Smile, Wink & GrinLaughLaugh

Blue is the mountain surface, both in front of the track (toward the fascia) and behind the track. I am suggesting adding three or four inches to the existing ridge in front of the track so that it is well above the track where the slope meets the track. It should be significantly sloped towards the fascia. Don't round it off at the top.

Behind the track (against the wall) I am suggesting that you continue the same slope until it meets the wall. Imagine the slope before the rail line was cut through it. That will make the mountain about 8" to 10" tall where it touches the wall (you can make it taller if you want but eventually it will stretch credibility). That will create a cut out where the mountain has been removed to lay the track. The far side of the cut out will be higher than the near side. 

The brown represents the far side of the actual cut out. It would be a fairly rough surface. Don't make it too smooth unless you are modelling very recent times.

The light grey shows approximately where the peak of the ridge would be. I would not round the peak off as you did when you created the first ridges and valleys. It would be better to have some 'jaggedness' to the terrain IMHO. Of course, you can always add that after with plaster rock castings.

Here it is:

I hope that demonstrates my thoughts.

Cheers!!

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    October 2020
  • 118 posts
Posted by NorthBrit on Sunday, October 25, 2020 8:17 AM

hon30critter

 

 
Trainzman2435
Any chance you might be able to photo shop a rough example of what you mean sir?

 

Hi again,

You asked for 'rough', you are getting 'rough'!Smile, Wink & GrinLaughLaugh

Blue is the mountain surface, both in front of the track (toward the fascia) and behind the track. I am suggesting adding three or four inches to the existing ridge in front of the track so that it is well above the track where the slope meets the track. It should be significantly sloped towards the fascia. Don't round it off at the top.

Behind the track (against the wall) I am suggesting that you continue the same slope until it meets the wall. Imagine the slope before the rail line was cut through it. That will make the mountain about 8" to 10" tall where it touches the wall (you can make it taller if you want but eventually it will stretch credibility). That will create a cut out where the mountain has been removed to lay the track. The far side of the cut out will be higher than the near side. 

The brown represents the far side of the actual cut out. It would be a fairly rough surface. Don't make it too smooth unless you are modelling very recent times.

The light grey shows approximately where the peak of the ridge would be. I would not round the peak off as you did when you created the first ridges and valleys. It would be better to have some 'jaggedness' to the terrain IMHO. Of course, you can always add that after with plaster rock castings.

Here it is:

I hope that demonstrates my thoughts.

Cheers!!

Dave

 

 

A good explanation, Dave.

Real railroad builders try to take the asiest route from A to B.  Tunnels were really a last resort.  Cuttings in the landscape were also 'forced upon'.    

For some reason modelers here in the UK  love to have  cuttings and tunnels then struggle to achieve the desired effect.   If the modelers looked to see how the real builders built the railroads  modelers should just follow their principle.

Happy modeling.

David

To the world you are someone.    To someone you are the world

I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 218 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, October 25, 2020 10:10 PM

hon30critter

 

 
Trainzman2435
Any chance you might be able to photo shop a rough example of what you mean sir?

 

Hi again,

You asked for 'rough', you are getting 'rough'!Smile, Wink & GrinLaughLaugh

Blue is the mountain surface, both in front of the track (toward the fascia) and behind the track. I am suggesting adding three or four inches to the existing ridge in front of the track so that it is well above the track where the slope meets the track. It should be significantly sloped towards the fascia. Don't round it off at the top.

Behind the track (against the wall) I am suggesting that you continue the same slope until it meets the wall. Imagine the slope before the rail line was cut through it. That will make the mountain about 8" to 10" tall where it touches the wall (you can make it taller if you want but eventually it will stretch credibility). That will create a cut out where the mountain has been removed to lay the track. The far side of the cut out will be higher than the near side. 

The brown represents the far side of the actual cut out. It would be a fairly rough surface. Don't make it too smooth unless you are modelling very recent times.

The light grey shows approximately where the peak of the ridge would be. I would not round the peak off as you did when you created the first ridges and valleys. It would be better to have some 'jaggedness' to the terrain IMHO. Of course, you can always add that after with plaster rock castings.

Here it is:

I hope that demonstrates my thoughts.

Cheers!!

Dave

 

Dave, many thanks sir for the explanation and picture....I will give it a try and see how it goes!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 12,121 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Monday, October 26, 2020 11:51 PM

Trainzman2435
Dave, many thanks sir for the explanation and picture....I will give it a try and see how it goes!

I eagerly await your results! (If it doesn't work out, you can blame me!)

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!