Rob, you make eye candy! Best of all is the setting, west desert, and WP, connecting road to the DRGW and an old roommate in college came from a WP RR family! I'm biased.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Thanks for the kind words. I'm just glad to help.
Rob Spangler
BATMANRobs layout is magnificent (as always).
I agree!
Wayne
doctorwayne BATMAN ....Grizzly bear poop everywhere! (you think I'm kidding?).... Brent, I think that if I were to come across a pooping grizzly, it wouldn't be the only one performing that operation. I do admire your tool kit, though. I'm guessing that the small can with the horn-like attachment is a bear-caller, and I take it that the velcro is to restrain the bear while you attach the bell(s). The larger can, with the picture of the smiling bear, is a particularly nice touch, too: parfum d'ours - even if they're pooping, they'll still smell great! Wayne
BATMAN ....Grizzly bear poop everywhere! (you think I'm kidding?)....
Brent, I think that if I were to come across a pooping grizzly, it wouldn't be the only one performing that operation.
I do admire your tool kit, though. I'm guessing that the small can with the horn-like attachment is a bear-caller, and I take it that the velcro is to restrain the bear while you attach the bell(s). The larger can, with the picture of the smiling bear, is a particularly nice touch, too: parfum d'ours - even if they're pooping, they'll still smell great!
There is an old joke that goes; What's the difference between Black Bear poop and Grizzly Bear poop? Black Bear poop has berries, leaves, roots, and grubs in it. Grizzly Bear poop has Bear bells in it. The bear bells are just to help my family find ( what's left of me ) if I don't return.
Canadian Pacific spends a lot of money every year vacuuming mostly spilled grain off the tracks to help keep the wildlife off the tracks and has developed a warning system that seems to be quite successful.
I was riding my Mtn bike along a service road up in the Rockies. The tracks were on one side and the Illecillewaet was on the other. I looked down at the river and there was a huge Grizzly having a drink about 25 metres away as I went by. I kept going and spent a good couple of hours watching the trains go by before I had to go back the way I came. Singing loudly the whole way back I didn't see him again. Of course, my singing empties a room pretty quickly and that beats Bear bells any day of the week.
Robs layout is magnificent (as always).
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
wp8thsub Ballast treatment will vary based on location and era. Even if you aren't modeling a specific prototype, paying attention to photos will yield a more visually convincing result. Sometimes the photos will tell you to blend edges and avoid a manicured look, other times they won't.
Ballast treatment will vary based on location and era. Even if you aren't modeling a specific prototype, paying attention to photos will yield a more visually convincing result. Sometimes the photos will tell you to blend edges and avoid a manicured look, other times they won't.
Rich
Alton Junction
Interesting perspectives. For the record, I am not criticizing nor was there any intent to criticize anyone's ballast work. It does seem, especially from Robt Sylvester's and Rob's comments, and from Batman's most recent comment that you have to pay as much attention to making a section of ballast look worn and used as you do to make it look perfect. It is also a matter of picking your spots on the layout.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
I try to receate what I see in photos from the Penn Central era. Ballast, what's Ballast? Ha ha. No really some ballast looks fairly nice, some a mix of color with occasional trash, a stove laying here a refigerator there, by gosh there is even a shopping cart and automobile tires. People will throw anything along the ROW. I do use N scale ballast and in some places a finer grinding, the smaller size looks right to me for HO. Some ties are not visible in industry trackage. I want to try a siding using ''planted'' tuffs of grass between the ties and on the outsides of the rail. I'm not sure static grass will work good in this application.
bearmanI am not hung up the way some folks are on a prototype and the details that come along with it. But, I guess I have a question, are we too hung up on our ballasting to make it picture perfect?
Making ballast perfect often means not following the prototype, but it's all a matter of what you'e trying to represent. Sloppiness tends not to scale down, so replicating the imperfection of the real thing can still involve some careful work so the result isn't a mess.
DSC00466 by wp8thsub, on Flickr
DSC00466
DSC00444 by wp8thsub, on Flickr
DSC00444
West Wall Ballast 1 by wp8thsub, on Flickr
West Wall Ballast 1
Lakeview Desert 1 by wp8thsub, on Flickr
Lakeview Desert 1
DSC02366 by wp8thsub, on Flickr
DSC02366
I try to keep mine logical based on typical practice. Some areas are neater than others as a result.
BATMAN....Grizzly bear poop everywhere! (you think I'm kidding?)....
Ah yes, this almost looks like a model railroad.
A little further along. Holy weed fest! Ballast covering ties completely.
Grizzly bear poop everywhere! (you think I'm kidding?)
Adding ballast does give the layout a more realistic look. Some don't care about realism, so they are content just having a train run. I like depicting reality, so ballasting a layout and having different sidings are a must on my layout. Whatever works for you!
I get that ballsting might be boring or challenging. The difficulty in preventing small pebbles from hampering a turnout's operations is too much worry for some. Again, do whatever works!
Ah yes, just what is the correct way to ballast HO or any other guage track. You see all of these railroad pikes in magazines and many are as neat as a pin, I mean everything from the roads to the grass is absolutely perfect; and the ballast, well let me tell you it is just squared off perfectly right down to the ballast line. Some railroads look like a painting and I sometimes wonder, "How'd he do that?"
Mine is an "inbetweener", and since I can go right down the street and stand at the edge of a real railroad I can truly get a sense as to how it should look.
Several years ago I exchanged Pics with Andy Sperandeo as we complimented each other on our ballast work. Andy's was more complete and manicured but he mentioned that mine had that worn and well used look like you would see standing on the side of a main line passing through the neighborhood.
Two different view points but both a reflection of what we wanted to express. He liked my worn look as I admired his more finished look; two railroads representing our love of this hobby. Andy was a professional hobbyist, it was his job, I on the other hand dabble in the hobby but on a regular basis. I just ballested a repaired section of the railroad, it looks good but I wish Andy were here to give me advise and then he would say, "it looks good."
I love these forums and I think all of our railroads 'look good'.
Robert Sylvester
Newberry and Columbia Line
"I think too many modelers are far too anal when it comes to most scenery". I have read this phrase many a time about how some people model. Most of the time it is used out of context. Being anal is usually an over the top attention to detail to make everything look as perfect as possible. If you were anal about your modeling it would not look neat and tidy, it would be messy, inconsistent a look of something constantly in flux.
Railroading is a dirty messy business.
I have explored the C.P. mainline through the Rockies a lot over the years and have seen where they have thrown in a new prefab turnout, dumped a couple of dump truck loads of ballast on top of it, spread it around and get the heck out of there before the next train comes along. The turnout looks like it is sitting on an irregular shaped island of ballast going off in all directions much farther away from the repair than needed. Time is money and they aren't going to spend money to make it look like it should be in "Better Homes And Gardens".
In the Rockies, I have driven and biked along hundreds of miles of service roads that are right at the track edge. On these roads, there are many low soft, mucky spots where they have tipped a load of riprap and/or ballast so the road is passable in monsoon and snow season. It ain't pretty and looks like a spill that was never cleaned up.
In the middle of nowhere, there are huge piles of ties, spikes, bolts, nuts, washers, plates of all sizes. They have been there for years.
When I use to fly, I would follow the track from the West Coast up into the mountains and it was a real patchwork of colour along the way as far as ties and ballast were concerned. So consistency is just wrong in my opinion.
From my experience on this forum, about 75% of the poster's and maybe 90% of the pictures model Class 1 railroads, most with multiple long trains running.
The area you saw on Google was probably not that type of action.
Google earth the UP mainline around Kearney/Gibbon Nebraska and you'll probably find an immaculately maintained ROW, that probably holds 30 trains a day. That type of railroading tends to be what is modeled on this forum, so that is the type of trackwork you see.
I was thinking about ROW for my next layout. I model class 111 shortlines. Along a ROW I recently saw, were brown shrubs encroaching the rails, along the sides of the roadbed. Brown, not green. Weed killer was applied all along the ROW. Also, trees had multiple limbs sheard straight upwards, eliminating their encroachment on the trains. About one third of the entire tree was sheared off, but the tree was not removed completely.
I suspect busy class Is would not have any type of weeds encroaching their mainlines, and they probably even go through the expense of removing swaths of entire trees.
Its just a difference. Pictures of layouts on the net tend to be of the well maintained type of ROWs. Busy ROWs.
- Douglas
BRAKIE riogrande5761 We ballast track on model RR's because we are trying to imitate real life, plain and simple. Jim,There lays the rub..A industrial siding should never look like the main line nor should a industrial lead yet,modelers that claim to be modeling prototypically falls flat on their caboose in modeling "perfect" track regardless if its a main line,yard,industrial siding or industrial lead and yes,track is a model too.. Attention to track modeling is a important facet if the hobby..
riogrande5761 We ballast track on model RR's because we are trying to imitate real life, plain and simple.
Jim,There lays the rub..A industrial siding should never look like the main line nor should a industrial lead yet,modelers that claim to be modeling prototypically falls flat on their caboose in modeling "perfect" track regardless if its a main line,yard,industrial siding or industrial lead and yes,track is a model too..
Attention to track modeling is a important facet if the hobby..
Sure, I agree. But not everyone is an artist like Rob, who paints wonderfully realistic back drops and blends them almost seemlessly into the 3D foreground. Some end up with cartoonish back drops.
That said, the best thing to do is look at photo's of what you are trying to copy and follow them best you can. Of course people can claim this or that but if they post a photo on a train forum, then they need to be ready for comment or criticism (constructive or otherwise) and there are some who just get praised and stoked because they are so "good".
In the end, all you can do is your best; not everyone can build a contest winning layout. As the "professor" at another forum (which shall not be named) preaches in his siggy ... "aim to improve".
riogrande5761We ballast track on model RR's because we are trying to imitate real life, plain and simple.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
bearman Riogrande, I think you are missing my point. I am not saying do not ballast. I understand why we ballast and I undersatnd that a model RR has no utility other than we enjoy working on them and palying with them. It is a recreational outlet. What I am trying to point out is that maybe some tie ends that have disappeared under ballast is ok. Maybe a few crooked ties or a missing tie here and there in a yard or spur is ok.
Riogrande, I think you are missing my point. I am not saying do not ballast. I understand why we ballast and I undersatnd that a model RR has no utility other than we enjoy working on them and palying with them. It is a recreational outlet. What I am trying to point out is that maybe some tie ends that have disappeared under ballast is ok. Maybe a few crooked ties or a missing tie here and there in a yard or spur is ok.
Maybe, but words mean things so I was responding to what I quoted.
Anway, I haven't read any comments criticizing anyones ballast work that I can remember so it's still a non-issue as far as I can tell.
bearman But, I guess I have a question, are we too hung up on our ballasting to make it picture perfect?
But, I guess I have a question, are we too hung up on our ballasting to make it picture perfect?
We each have varying levels of interest in modeling real railroads. The greater the interest, the more we want realism.
If the trackage we are modeling really is picture perfect, then our models should be, too.
If it is not, ours should also not be. And in the same way.
Thus, it is possible to have, on the same layout, beautiful two track mains, and barely there industrial sidings.
To the extent that we don't achieve that, it shows either ignorance or a lack of caring. And, since model railroading is a hobby, and not a profession, that is totally just fine.
Ed
bearmanare we too hung up on our ballasting to make it picture perfect?
I don't think so. Do you get the sense that people are hung up on it?
I mean, ballast on a model railroad provides nothing more than looks. For the most part, it has no utility for drainage or for keeping the rails in gauge.
We ballast track on model RR's because we are trying to imitate real life, plain and simple.
If you want to take your question to it's logical extreme using the drainage example, model railroads don't have any "utility" either. They are there to entertain us. It's all for looks isn't it and fun?
That's why some are happy with a choo choo going in a circle and thats great for them; others are going into great detail such as our good doctor and others, my personal favorite being Rob Spanglers lovely wp8thsub which is a piece of art, or certainly turns the hobby into and art form - especially the almost photo realistic backdrops blending in with the 3D scene in front. Not having ballast would jar you loose from that sense of a complete RR scene.
Of course if you don't think ballast serves any utility, leave it off. You have only yourself to please.
Time and place make a difference.
Generally, mainlines are much better maintained than little used sidetracks. Freight yards may not see new ballast for decades, and may look to just have dirt between the ties.
In the steam era, railroads prided themselves on how smooth and well maintained their mainlines were, showing crisp demarcation lines between the ballast and the underlying cinder layer. By the time Amtrak started, railroads usually had greatly cut back on track maintenance, and found that keeping the track up well enough to run their 50 MPH freight trains was easier and cheaper than when they had to run their 90 MPH passenger trains. That's part of the reason why it often takes longer to get from point A to point B on Amtrak today than it did 75 years ago via the private passenger trains.
There are two photographs in the layout building forum each in a separate thread regarding ballast. One photo is of the SP/UP mainline near Crockett CA. There are three sets of tracks with the one on the right looking like it has not been maintained in some time and in fact may be abandoned. The other photo is on the other thread and is a pic of DocWayne's handiwork, and very nicely done I might add.
So, it struck me that we all spend lots of time ballasting. No matter the material, rock or walnut shells or kitty litter, we all groom and adhere the ballast based on our own methods. And we look at our layouts and see nice straight edges, nary an errant piece on top of a tie, all ballast up to the top of the tie, no disappearing tie ends. And, we have all seen pictures of layouts and visited layouts where the ballast work represents the same kind of attention.
Then I went to google earth and checked out the aerial view of a BNSF yard a couple of miles from my house. That yard has been there since dirt, is huge and, sure enough, there are a couple of tracks that look almost like the abandoned track in the pic I described above. And, sure enough, those tracks are being used. There is some rolling stock on them.
I am not hung up the way some folks are on a prototype and the details that come along with it. But, I guess I have a question, are we too hung up on our ballasting to make it picture perfect? I mean, ballast on a model railroad provides nothing more than looks. For the most part, it has no utility for drainage or for keeping the rails in gauge.