# First newbie 4'x5' layout



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

My dad and grandpop had trains setup when I was real young and I remember playing with them but I never had my own trains/layout until now. This is nothing original but it allows me to have a portable lightweight setup.

The frame is kiln dried pine 1x4, 4' by 5' sq ft, with 2" formular 250 foam board secured with loctite all purpose. It is braced underneath every 16" via 1x4. I ended up staining the pine frame and I also painted the foamboard with Glidden Premium 0 voc latex paint.

The track is the Kato Master 1 (M1) with Variation 3 (V3). It was secured with clear DAP Alex Plus latex caulk plus silicone as you can probably notice in the photos as I perhaps went a little too heavy. It is paintable which is good.

I plan on adding landscaping with the leftover 12 sq ft of foamboard from the 4'x8'. I'm guessing I will need more. I am not sure about adding buildings etc as I have no experience with assembling models/miniatures/painting. I am thinking of just sticking to landscaping with the foamboard and covering it with a woodland scenics ground cover, bushes and trees.

The plan is to have the larger pieces to be not permanent and removable if it had to be moved or stored.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2018)

Very nice start on your layout. It looks really good.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Thanks! It's my first layout so I am not going for ultra realism as that would be setting myself up for disappointment /failure. Although I might talk my brother into maybe helping out with the detailed painting if needed. He has a degree from Tyler School for Art school(part of Temple) in fine painting. So he knows all about dry brushing and wash etc. But what I really need to do next is start watching some videos on creating landscapes out of foamboard. I will post updates as I progress. 

EDIT:
I definitely intend to pick up 8 more coal cars which would be 16 total. Seems like a decent length of freight for this size of track. I am also debating whether or not if I want to add an interior oval, Variation 5 (V5). I want to keep it simple and not too complex which is why I decided not to mess around with a crossover on my first layout.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*First layout*



G5891 said:


> Thanks! It's my first layout so I am not going for ultra realism as that would be setting myself up for disappointment /failure. Although I might talk my brother into maybe helping out with the detailed painting if needed. He has a degree from Tyler School for Art school(part of Temple) in fine painting. So he knows all about dry brushing and wash etc. But what I really need to do next is start watching some videos on creating landscapes out of foamboard. I will post updates as I progress.
> 
> EDIT:
> I definitely intend to pick up 8 more coal cars which would be 16 total. Seems like a decent length of freight for this size of track. I am also debating whether or not if I want to add an interior oval, Variation 5 (V5). I want to keep it simple and not too complex which is why I decided not to mess around with a crossover on my first layout.


G5891;

Good job on your first layout so far! :thumbsup:
Building scenery with foam board is not difficult at all. If you want to add a stream, road underpass, or any other below-track-level feature, it can simply be carved out of the foam base you have already installed. Just about any knife or saw will cut foam. I use an old serrated steak knife. 
To go up, for hills, just lay more foam on top of the foam base you have. When you are sure where you want it you can glue it in place with caulk. More layers of foam can be added like the layers of a cake. You can shape the rough blocks of foam with a "Sure-foam" tool (Looks like a short curved rasp. available @ Home Depot) Ordinary sand paper will smooth the surface of your hill. Then paint the foam with dirt-colored paint, as you did on the base. After that you can add the Woodland Scenics grass, trees, etc. as you wish.

I suggest building the hill/ridge down the middle of your layout to separate it into two possible future scenes. Leave room for a siding or two on each side, rather than a second oval. This is just a suggestion. It's your layout to build however you choose.

I think if you try building a structure kit you will find that it's fun, and easy. I wouldn't be so sure that you will fail and/or be disappointed by adding a bit of realism to your railroad. You have done a fine job so far, and as you get a little bit more experience, you will be able to go as far as you wish. Nothing has to be perfect on the first try, or the tenth try for that matter! Just do what you want, and don't be afraid to try new things.

Have fun!

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Hi traction fan. Thanks for the advice. I really like your idea of the hill/ridge in the middle of the layout. Such a great idea I think I am going to start there. I have a hard time visualizing an entire layout all at once. So once I see a physical visual of that center ridge/hill I think it will be easier to figure out what to do next. For me I think it would be best to "rough in" one piece at a time. I also need to figure out what I want but that is a "me" problem lol. Now that I think about it, I kind of do want a modern coal mine structure. But the ones I saw looked big and intimidating which is why I said I might hold off on the structures. I mean I have 8 coal cars and plan on adding 8 more making 16 total so a coal mine would make sense. The one that seemed not as overwhelming was the Walthers Eastern Coal Flood Loader. 

Was this the tool you were talking about?
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Stanley-Surform-Shaver-21-115/100654913

Looks like a rasp to me. On a side note I was going to use a keyhole saw or a coping saw to get a rough shape of the ridge/hill for each layer and then clean it up/taper it with that surform tool/sand paper.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Layout concepts*



G5891 said:


> Hi traction fan. Thanks for the advice. I really like your idea of the hill/ridge in the middle of the layout. Such a great idea I think I am going to start there. I have a hard time visualizing an entire layout all at once. So once I see a physical visual of that center ridge/hill I think it will be easier to figure out what to do next. For me I think it would be best to "rough in" one piece at a time. I also need to figure out what I want but that is a "me" problem lol. Now that I think about it, I kind of do want a modern coal mine structure. But the ones I saw looked big and intimidating which is why I said I might hold off on the structures. I mean I have 8 coal cars and plan on adding 8 more making 16 total so a coal mien would make sense. The one that seemed not as overwhelming was the Walthers Eastern Coal Flood Loader.
> 
> Was this the tool you were talking about?
> https://www.homedepot.com/p/Stanley-Surform-Shaver-21-115/100654913
> ...


G5891: 

Yes that is the tool I meant. Sorry about the misspelling, but that's been a me problem since grammar school! :smilie_auslachen:

The shaping process is very messy. Tip: use a shop vac with the slim "upholstery tool" attachment taped inside the surform tool just behind the blade. The shop vac will grab 90% of the little foam bits before they can get all over the room. 

The ridge down the middle is an old idea that's been around for many years. The advantage is that it breaks up the "round and round the little train goes" look of many layouts.

You indicated that you wanted to take things one small step at a time, which is quite wise. For future reference, I'm attaching some files I wrote for new modelers. Browse through them at your own pace, if you choose. They talk about the ridge divider, and many other things about layout design. Not detailed, specific, track plans, but more of a general concept approach. A lot of the info may be well beyond what you're doing now, but it may help you with a second layout someday. Don't be put off by the title, How to build a "BETTER" model railroad. I'm not knocking the nice layout you already have. I used "better" only in the sense of more satisfying in the long run, not to criticize anyone's work. 

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:

View attachment Where do I start (revised version).pdf


View attachment Model Railroad Terminology 2.2.pdf


View attachment How to better model railroad the first time. Part 1.pdf


View attachment How to build a better model railroad the first time Part 2.pdf


View attachment How to build a better model railroad Parts 3 & 4 benchwork and more track planning.pdf


View attachment How to build a better Model Railroad part 5.pdf


View attachment How to build a better model railroad the first time 6.pdf


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Haha don't worry about the misspelling, I was 99% sure that is what you were talking about. Yea it was messy when I used a keyhole saw to cut that 4' by 8' foamboard to 4' x 5'. I do all my projects in the garage (all my tools are in there) which has a cement slab and I do have several shop vacs varying in several sizes so I am not too worried about the mess. But I will have to try taping it to that shaving tool, I like the idea of saving time cleaning up.

I appreciate the references you provided which I am about to have a look at right now. I am sure I will learn a lot and get some great ideas from them. And don't worry, I understood what you meant by better. To better or bettering to me means improving and their is always room for that in every aspect of life. Anyways thanks again for all the help and references. I can't wait to get started and post the results of my progress.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

EDIT:
Most of the foam pieces are heavy enough it seems. The pieces that are lighter I might use toothpicks to hold them in place.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

I had some fun today. I used up all of the foamboard I had leftover. I also ordered my first structure and some glue.

https://www.walthers.com/western-flood-loader-kit-16-x-2-7-16-x-9-5-8-quot-42-5-x-6-1-x-24-4cm


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Close encounter?*



G5891 said:


> I had some fun today. I used up all of the foamboard I had leftover. I also ordered my first structure and some glue.
> 
> https://www.walthers.com/western-flood-loader-kit-16-x-2-7-16-x-9-5-8-quot-42-5-x-6-1-x-24-4cm


G5891;

It certainly looks like you had fun with that foam!  The center hill/mountain looks a little like an N-scale version of Devil's tower National monument. :laugh: Now all you need is a musical UFO and an N-scale Richard Dreyfus, to do a close encounters layout. 

Keep on having fun;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

LOL! That's funny traction fan. I think tomorrow I am going to pick up a can of "Great Stuff" spray foam to touch up a few spots so each tier doesn't look so vertical. Yea I can see the resemblance to the Devil's Tower haha. I am not modeling anything in particular which is what I meant when I said I wasn't going for ultra realism earlier. I just winged it, didn't look at any photos. Wish I had a few more sq ft of foamboard for the upper "cake levels" as you can see they should have been a little wider to make the slopes more gradual. But I wasn't going to buy another 4'x8' sheet of foamboard. That $3 can of Great Stuff should work out well.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*"Not so great" stuff.*



G5891 said:


> LOL! That's funny traction fan. I think tomorrow I am going to pick up a can of "Great Stuff" spray foam to touch up a few spots so each tier doesn't look so vertical. Yea I can see the resemblance to the Devil's Tower haha. I am not modeling anything in particular which is what I meant when I said I wasn't going for ultra realism earlier. I just winged it, didn't look at any photos. Wish I had a few more sq ft of foamboard for the upper "cake levels" as you can see they should have been a little wider to make the slopes more gradual. But I wasn't going to buy another 4'x8' sheet of foamboard. That $3 can of Great Stuff should work out well.


G5891;

There is nothing wrong in "winging it." That's one way of learning, which is what you are trying to do right now.

I don't know if you have ever used great stuff, or not. Long ago, I tried using it for scenery, and didn't like the results, or even the stuff itself.
Great stuff is designed to be used to fill small cracks, as home insulation. Key word; SMALL. If that's all you do, adding small, thin, bits to fill in spots between pieces of foam, it may work out for you.
However, in the thicker bulk required to build even a small hill, the center of the uncontrollable blob that squirts out doesn't cure. It remains semi-liquid, and very sticky. Key words; VERY and STICKY. The stuff is an extremely strong, and instant bonding adhesive, like crazy glue with attitude. Key word; CRAZY It sticks PERMANENTLY to everything that touches it, including the human body. I had to remove it from my skin with sandpaper!
At one time a giant dispenser of this stuff was tried, experimentally, as a non-lethal weapon by law enforcement. 
While it worked somewhat OK at immobilizing a suspect, it took so many hours of painful effort to remove, that the idea was abandoned.
If you choose to use it, be very careful! The directions say to wear disposable gloves, and eye-protecting googles. I also suggest long sleeves on an old shirt you don't care about keeping. This stuff is very aggressive!

Some variant of "Great stuff" is sold commercially as a model railroad scenery material under various trade names including "Mountains in Minutes." I believe those versions come in two parts, like epoxy, (Not in a spray can, like "Great Stuff". the spray, once started, is not easy to shut off, or to accurately control where it goes.)
I have never tried the "Mountains in Minutes" product, due to its high cost.

The final straw/flaw regarding "Great Stuff", for me anyway, was that it cured into a very soft, not rigid at all, foam. Ordinary & cheap, Styrofoam bead board is more rigid than great stuff. Which is not even close to the rigidity of the extruded foam board you have used so far. Though it produces a cloud of fiendishly mobile mess, consisting of loose beads, I'd recommend even Styrofoam over :hah: "great" stuff. 

I'm not sure what your plan was for the thin strips of foam you put along the edges of your layout. Perhaps they are intended to keep trains from falling off the table?
As scenery, I think they are too narrow, and too vertical, to serve as reasonably natural looking land forms. You might consider using them to add to your center hill. To form an effective view-blocking ridge, it needs to be longer.
If/ when you make the decision to add more track to your layout, I recommend adding a double-ended passing siding along each long side of the layout. The next addition would be industry spurs on the back side, the one opposite from where you have your yard. This is the purpose behind the center ridge idea. You visually divide the layout into two separate scenes. (towns?, a coal mine on one side, and a coal-fired power plant on the other, whatever you choose) The train can then seem to be traveling from one location to another, picking up, and delivering, its coal, rather than hauling it around in circles.
But, I may be getting way ahead of where you want to go, or in a wrong direction for that matter. :smilie_auslachen:
It's your railroad, not mine, so you decide.

Keep having fun. That's all that really matters.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Wasn't my idea but it looks a million times better now lol. $6 Low loft quilt batting and a $4 can of Great stuff.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Yea those thin pieces of foam we're scrap pieces that I just laid in place just to see what it would look like as I have a hard time visualizing. Yea I was thinking about the double sidings like you mentioned. I like the idea of having 2 destinations.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Here it is with the base trimmed/cleaned up. With some paint and ground cover it just might be passable for a mountain lol.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

I added a 2" layer that I need to work into the shape I want. I'm thinking of tapering the front into a gradual slope(low grade) but leaving the back vertical. Also considering a tunnel!


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Progress!*

G5891;

You're right. It does look better than before. In my opinion, it still has that "Devils Tower, very vertical, not much horizontal," look to it though. If you want, you could lop off the very top peak a bit and then use some of your leftover foam bits, under the quilt batting, to lengthen it into a ridge and change the slope to a gentler one. Then, with ground cover applied, you will end up with a very nice looking ridge.

I like your idea of adding another layer of foam and then shaping it to meet the mountain. If you decide to add a tunnel, here's two pieces of free (and greatly overpriced at that! :laugh advice. First, and most important, Make sure you have plenty of easy, track level access to the track inside your tunnel.
The second point has to do with reasonably realistic appearance. I know you are not too concerned about that right now, so feel free to ignore this.:hah:

Real railroads only go to the enormous expense of drilling a tunnel when there is no alternative. Whatever they are going to tunnel under is either very high (like a mountain) or very wide (like a river, or a whole bunch of city streets.) Often, in the case of mountains, it's both high and wide. So what you think? My point is that faced with the situation shown in your photo with the track passing between two pieces of foam, they would leave it like you have it now, open at the top. (with some shaping to get it less vertical.) Called a "cut", it's much cheaper to both build, and maintain, than a tunnel. Model railroad tunnels usually have tops that are way too thin to justify a tunnel, instead of a cut. To look necessary your tunnel would need four or five more layers of foam on top. 
Whether you even care about any of this advice or not, is strictly up to you, since it's your railroad. Build the kind of tunnel, or cut, that you want. You are the only one it needs to satisfy.

Keep having fun!

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Hey thanks for your advice traction. I put another layer over the mountain like you suggested. I think i'll hold off on the tunnel too. I'm waiting for that coal flood loader to arrive before I do any shaping of that new layer of foam I added. Thanks again for all your suggestions!

EDIT:
I think it looks closer to this now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round_Top_Mountain


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*The problems with modeling mountains*

G5891;

Mountains are tough to model on any layout, and particularly on a small one like yours. The improved version of your mountain does resemble the shape of some real mountain peaks, as seen from a very long distance. The problem is model railroads don't have that kind of distance available. 

Actually, we modelers, even in the smaller scales, can not have anything like a scale model of a mountain. Real mountains are simply too huge to fit, reduced to scale, on any layout that doesn't fill an entire sports stadium. The local mountains near the San Diego/Los Angeles area are about 4000' high. reduced to N-scale that would mean a model mountain twenty-five real feet high! Folks in the Rock Mountain states would probably laugh at the idea of calling a 4000' hill a "mountain." at all. The average height of the rocky mountains is just under 11,000'. Also mountains are typically many times wider than they are tall. (Like a lot of us Americans!  )

So we have to either "fake it" ,with regard to mountains, or settle for models of small hills, or ridges. Some modeler's tricks can help to convey the idea of mountainous territory without actually attempting a whole mountain. The photo below shows one such attempt on my own layout. The two "distant" mountains are painted on a backdrop, and the foreground scenery implies that we are "in the mountains" without anything even remotely resembling a scale model of a mountain.

On your layout, I suggest (and its only a suggestion) keeping your mountain as is for height, but lengthening it a lot to represent not mountains, but a line of low hills. It only needs to be high enough to block the view of the other side of the layout. Another option for a view block is a backdrop with different scenery painted on each side. This would help with the notion of two separate towns or scenes that we played around with earlier. 
Or you might want to do what I did and combine a backdrop with a little three-dimensional scenery in the foreground. Incidentally, my scene is only 16" deep at the top and only 8" deep at the bottom, but it looks much deeper than it actually is.

Just some things to think about, if you want.
Regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Haha, good point. I'm not building a 25 ft mountain that's for sure! In comparison to the silo it doesn't look that big. More like a huge hill lol. I'll have to get working on a back drop. The one you did looks great.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

OP, it looks great! I suggest you add another oval in the middle somehow, making it such that it goes under part of the mountain.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Silo*



G5891 said:


> Haha, good point. I'm not building a 25 ft mountain that's for sure! In comparison to the silo it doesn't look that big. More like a huge hill lol. I'll have to get working on a back drop. The one you did looks great.


G5891;

Is that silo the coal flood loader you were waiting for? It looks really good. Yes, you're right, when model railroaders start comparing things like trees, houses, etc. to our mountains, we run into a dilemma. A real locomotive is about 16' tall. Therefore most trees would taller than a locomotive, and a lot shorter than a hill, let alone a mountain. Then we get caught in a squeeze of our own making. Do we keep the trees, and structures very small, or make the hills bigger, in order to keep the tree taller than the train, and still shorter than the hill. There's no one good answer, we just try to average it out in some sort of compromise. The trees in the photo below were called "kinda big for N-scale" by one respondent when I first posted the photo. Well they scale out at about 60' tall, with trunks about 2' across at the bottom; which in my chosen modeling locale, the Pacific Northwest, is at best a medium-size tree. Many millions of huge pine, and Douglas Fir trees cover the landscape up there. My scratch-built model trees do dwarf the train somewhat, which is intentional, and one of the advantages of a small scale. However, the hill under, and behind, the trees is much too small; but that's the price of modeling in a small area, you run out of room for anything quite quickly. 
This is mostly a joke, but if you end up disliking your mountain, you could always re-purpose it into a coal pile next to the loader. 

keep having fun!

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

LOL @repurposing the alleged mountain as a huge coal pile haha. That made me giggle. I now understand what you mean about compromising and balancing the illusion. From what I have seen so far your layout looks really good in that regard. Every picture you've shown me so far looks awesome.

I was planning on adding trees so that will be interesting. Do you recommend any particular brand/kit that's good for newbies? Do some brands come premade or do I have to glue the trees together? I was going to buy the Woodland Scenics RG5152 kit for the ground cover, bushes etc...
https://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/Item/RG5152/page/1
Still haven't figured out the trees yet in terms of what brand/product.

Anyways, I've been working on the layout and made some progress. Looks like I'm modeling one scene, a coal mining operation. I did make the Hill bigger as you can see. The background cliffs are going to be darker, that's just a base coat.


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

I like the new hill much better.
It seems to have a purpose now.

Magic


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Thanks Magic! Yea I am pleased with the final shape/size. Looks like I will be modeling just one scene, a coal mining operation. That is a Norscot mini 315CL excavator. A CAT 793D mining truck is coming tomorrow but I don't think it is exactly 1:160 so I'm not sure how it will look as of now. 

I found a N scale P&H 4100 XPC but it was really expensive! If anyone has advice on mining equipment/vehicles please share your experience. A few days ago I read somewhere that HO Scale construction equipment becomes(close to size of) mining equipment in N Scale? Is this correct?


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Looking good!*



G5891 said:


> Thanks Magic! Yea I am pleased with the final shape/size. Looks like I will be modeling just one scene, a coal mining operation. That is a Norscot mini 315CL excavator. A CAT 793D mining truck is coming tomorrow but I don't think it is exactly 1:160 so I'm not sure how it will look as of now.
> 
> I found a N scale P&H 4100 XPC but it was really expensive! If anyone has advice on mining equipment/vehicles please share your experience. A few days ago I read somewhere that HO Scale construction equipment becomes(close to size of) mining equipment in N Scale? Is this correct?


G5891;

I like the look of your new scene!

However, you may not have to settle for one scene, if you don't want to. The other side of your new ridge could house a small power plant or a coal dealer to give your trains a destination, if you so choose. If you prefer one scene, you could add a couple of passing sidings at the back side. The loaded coal train could park on one, and a pre-parked train of empty hopper cars could exit the other siding, and head over to the mine.
The ultimate step in making this activity believable would be to tunnel through the ridge between the mine and the coal consumer and build your two sidings there, rather than along the back edge of the table. Then you'd have John Armstrong's classic "Loads in empties out" scheme. The loaded hoppers are backed into the power plant, through the tunnel, and parked, ready to be pulled out through the mine loader. On the other siding, empty cars are pulled out of the power plant and run around to the loader. They pass through the loader and into the tunnel and wait to be pulled out of the power plant. Since your trains rival the length of your entire table, the loader could stay where it is, and the power plant, (who else uses that much coal!) would be at the opposite corner, and connected by the longest straight tunnel you can fit. Still, it's a convincing illusion, and might be worth the effort. You decide.

There are actual N-scale metal models of cranes, power shovels,large dump trucks, and bulldozers. GHQ models, and Railway Express Miniatures, are two brands.
As for using HO vehicles on an N-scale layout, I'd recommend not doing that. Though the gigantic machines used in strip mining are certainly at least twice the size of their general construction counterparts, an HO model is simply going to be jarringly out of scale looking, even if it actually close to the scale size of it's enormous prototype. Also some of the details would not look right, since the strip mining and regular machines are different looking from each other.
We modelers have plenty going against us in trying to construct a convincing illusion of a world in miniature, without adding anything odd looking to it. The driver's seat/cabin would also be suitable for an N-scale Paul Bunyan. 

Tree recommendations? Well after trying some Woodland Scenics conifer trees, seeing what they looked like, and trying to recover from what they cost, I elected to skip the kits; and other commercial products, and make my own. Remember though, my model railroad is set in the Pacific Northwest, which is "tree central" basically one enormous, dense, forest, with a few cities and towns carved out of it!
Your small layout will need fewer trees, so you may not have to spend your children's college fund and your retirement IRA to buy commercial model trees, but they are EXPENSIVE! :rippedhand:

There are two basic types of trees, deciduous (the type with leaves that fall off in autumn) and conifers (the kind that have needles instead of leaves and keep their needles year round aka "Evergreens") The deciduous kind are easier to make; twigs, or bush trimmings, for trunks;cotton batting to represent branch structure, and ground foam (or sander dust) for the leaves. There are likely dozens of you-tube videos on how to make them. Conifers are more difficult to make, but quite doable. The first attachment shows how I make them. The trees, above the rocks and train, in my last photo; were made using this method.

The second attachment, near the end, discusses making deciduous trees in a little more detail. Along with generally saving some money.

If you decide to buy, rather than make, your trees; then I've read that "Super Trees" are nice looking. I'm not a big fan of the Woodland scenics trees, (or their products in general; except for ground foam) though. To me they look phony, and cost way too much, in any quantity.

View attachment Paintbrush Pine Trees.pdf


View attachment MODEL RAILROADING ON A BUDGET.pdf



Regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*More realistic overall landform*

G5929;

When you add that second layer of foam board, I have a suggestion. I realize you're brand new to this, so please take this as constructive criticism, not as a personal insult, That's certainly the way I'm offering this.

If you take a hard look at your present layout, you see the much-improved center scenery. It is rather too neatly surrounded by track on a flat table. It looks, in an overall view, much like a train set circling the Christmas tree, with your ridge subbing for the Christmas tree.
It will look much more like the shape of real land if the scenery contours don't neatly stop just shy of the track, but continue under, and beyond, the track.
This will make it look like the railroad was built through existing terrain; rather than the land being constructed afterward, to fit inside a loop of track. If you look back at my photos, I think you will see what I mean. The railroad really appears to be within the overall scene, rather than the scene being within the railroad. 

Lay the second foam board directly under the track. Carve out, and/or add small pieces on top, to visually connect the existing scenery inside the loop; to the scenery outside.
Cut a stream bed parallel to, and then under, the track. (Besides creating a nice bridge location, this makes it look like the railroad followed an existing stream or river; something that real railroads often do.)
Build up parts of the outer scenery to hide the track in a few spots. This emphasizes the train's movement and adds to the illusion that it is going somewhere. Carve drainage ditches along both sides of the track. These ditches should only be about 2-3 scale feet deep. (1/8"-3/16" model) They are a required item on real railroads, seldom modeled, and make a great visual impression.
Finally, look at some other scenery online, both real and model, and see what looks best to you.

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:

P.S. Thanks for the compliment on my scenery. Here's some more photos.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Traction fan, good job, your layout provokes nothing but jealousy and envy. Maybe One day I will get there. But for now, within my budget and restriction, I am going to have to adhere to a bitter sweet compromise. I appreciate all the knowledge and experience that was directed towards me. At the end of the day I wanted something lightweight, simplistic, portable/able to be stored which I think I have achieved. I recorded a song on the guitar that sums up my experience with this project which was nothing but joy. It may be rough sounding but so was I when I decided to wing this project. Thank you to everyone who listened and contributed.






EDIT: 
The end of this October I just turned 33 and in the future when I know I can dedicate a final resting place for a layout, I plan on for a far more impressive setup In the process I learned so much in regards to what to do/not to do do. Thanks again for the advice and guidance. I will continue to update the thread but will not be making changes to the track layout or other major modifications. The ground cover kit from Woodland Scenics is coming soon. I will post the progress.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

G5891 said:


> But for now, within my budget and restriction, I am going to have to adhere to a bitter sweet compromise. .


It's great If you like what you see and get fun from working on this. But honestly I don't see any restrictions that can hold you off from improving the existing scene in the space you already have allocated. not budget , a lot of scenics can be done for near nothing using common household stuff. I guess the only constraint is finding the time.

Traction fan had some very nice suggestions and examples. I'm not going to pile more on you just a quick word - don't be afraid to take a hammer to something that already done if you think you can improve it. The satisfaction from redoing something the right way will be so much greater.

Looking forward to seeing your layout develop


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Good for you!*



G5891 said:


> Traction fan, good job, your layout provokes nothing but jealousy and envy. Maybe One day I will get there. But for now, within my budget and restriction, I am going to have to adhere to a bitter sweet compromise. I appreciate all the knowledge and experience that was directed towards me. At the end of the day I wanted something lightweight, simplistic, portable/able to be stored which I think I have achieved. I recorded a song on the guitar that sums up my experience with this project which was nothing but joy. It may be rough sounding but so was I when I decided to wing this project. Thank you to everyone who listened and contributed.
> 
> https://youtu.be/_ueYMJjG2-c
> 
> ...


 G5891;

Understood. Feel good about your situation. You have achieved something that I, and many others, have not. A nearly finished layout on which you can run trains! 
Don't be envious. This isn't my first layout. My first one looked pretty bad, though I didn't know that at the time. As long as you have what you want, that's great! Hobbies are supposed to be fun! Nothing else really matters. 

Keep on having fun;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

tankist said:


> It's great If you like what you see and get fun from working on this. But honestly I don't see any restrictions that can hold you off from improving the existing scene in the space you already have allocated. not budget , a lot of scenics can be done for near nothing using common household stuff. I guess the only constraint is finding the time.
> 
> Traction fan had some very nice suggestions and examples. I'm not going to pile more on you just a quick word - don't be afraid to take a hammer to something that already done if you think you can improve it. The satisfaction from redoing something the right way will be so much greater.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing your layout develop


You are right, multiple sidings via kato track/turnouts and more foam board would be more money in my pocket and not an expenditure. Clearly you have read and comprehended this thread. I stated from the start that capturing reality was never my goal. In terms of what I have done in comparison to my father's/grandpop's setups you would think of them as hacks. They didn't glue anything down and it could be changed at any moment. They weren't rich and neither am I. At any rate, I raised the bar and went further in terms of scenery, I apologize if it wasn't enough to please the "professionals". This "project" is for me; a tribute/remembrance of my father, a vietnam vet and my grandpop a WWII vet who both loved trains.


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

Just delete the entire thread which has equated to nonsense.. Please as the original poster I ask you of this favor. Nothing good will come from this this. End it before it begins.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Sorry*



G5891 said:


> Just delete the entire thread which has equated to nonsense.. Please as the original poster I ask you of this favor. Nothing good will come from this this. End it before it begins.


G5891;

I'm very sorry that you were offended by anything in this thread. I hope I have not offended you with any of my replies to your post. Though I have suggested things, that's all they were ever intended to be; suggestions. Whatever you want on your layout is automatically best for you. I think I have mentioned this, and the entirely optional nature of my suggestion throughout my contributions to the thread. A forum member can't delete a thread. Possibly an administrator can. You can ask GunrunnerJohn about that. 
I genuinely hope that you will continue enjoying this hobby in whatever way you please.

Traction Fan


----------



## G5891 (Oct 11, 2018)

traction fan said:


> G5891;
> 
> I'm very sorry that you were offended by anything in this thread. I hope I have not offended you with any of my replies to your post. Though I have suggested things, that's all they were ever intended to be; suggestions. Whatever you want on your layout is automatically best for you. I think I have mentioned this, and the entirely optional nature of my suggestion throughout my contributions to the thread. A forum member can't delete a thread. Possibly an administrator can. You can ask GunrunnerJohn about that.
> I genuinely hope that you will continue enjoying this hobby in whatever way you please.
> ...


Don't be fatuous traction fan. I appreciate all the insight and advice you provided, you were nothing but helpful and it was much appreciated. You made it very clear from the start that what you wrote were only suggestions and that it was up to me to decide. I just didn't care for "Captain Hindsight's" remark which implied I wasn't willing to spend the time to improve my situation. Yet he offers no suggestions to which household items may be used to improve the layout or any advice in regards to how to achieve it. He mentioned that you suggested to make the track look like it blends into to the landscape rather than the landscape being built around the track. Which is fine but I don't feel comfortable cutting into the "base" layer of 2 inch foam and compromising the structural integrity. Which would mean that I would have to buy more foam board and build up rather than carving in which is more money. But yet he said I can improve my layout without spending more money if I was willing to just spend the "time" but without experience that doesn't make sense to me. Skill and knowledge through experience is achieved over time. You can see the paradox? His comment was not very helpful, very vague and implied I was impatient. But anyways, As of date I have enjoyed the process of seeing the layout come to life regardless of how unrealistic it may be. Thanks again for helping me improve my layout. I will be looking forward to its completion so I can come home from work, drink a few beers and play with the trains.

Sincerely,
Greg


----------



## rrjim1 (Mar 12, 2015)

The main thing is to have FUN, if your not then you need to find a different hobby. I enjoy running trains more than anything else so the 5000 more tress that I need will have to wait.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2018)

Greg, one of our members, Denny, has in his signature, "Good judgement comes from experience and experience comes from bad judgement." I really like that since there is so much truth in it. 

Always remember the first rule of model railroading, it's your layout and you're the only person who's opinion really matters. If you're happy with it it's wonderful. If you're not, it doesn't matter how many other people like it.

I will enjoy seeing your layout come to life. Have fun with it and don't let anyone's comments get to you. 99.9% of those who comment mean well even if they don't express themselves well or give advice that is of no real value to you.


----------

