As work progress on Stanstead at a steady pace, I also learn or relearn lessons. The same can apply to the club layout, which provides me with some food for thoughts. Work will resume on Monk in maybe a month of so and I can’t help but revisit some ideas as the automation scheme, using Mini Panel, seems to materialize in a positive way.
The current
Monk version is relatively linear and simplistic. It isn’t a defect, but
exactly what I wanted. But when we are speaking of railfanning layouts, some
liberties must be taken to create interesting vistas to stage the trains. Even
a small layout such as Stanstead shows that a clever use of curved tracks and fascia
can bring life to what should be considered minimalistic and maybe even plain.
At this point, the staging area of Monk has been completed and I’m happy to have had enough foresight to design something both simple and generic. It means I can almost build any track plan and scenery I want over the current yard without needing modification.
Chris Mears sketch that sparked everything
By pure
coincidence, I stumbled upon an old plan for Monk that was based on a
suggestion by Chris Mear to use a helix not to gain elevation but separation
between scenes. The inclusion of that helix created a very aesthetic sweeping
S-curve opening lots of scenic potential. I wondered if such an idea could be
feasible given the lessons I’ve learned recently and how grades and curves can
reduce greatly locomotive traction.
The track plan derived from Chris' sketch... still clumsy.
The helix
serves three purposes. First, it provides a few more inches of clearance for
the staging yard, which would be greatly welcomed on the layout. I wouldn’t
mind 2 or 3 extra inches there for obvious reasons.
 |
| The revised layout with the old design under... |
Second, it changes direction of a train moving on the layout. When you leave the Ste-Euphémie valley, your train is moving from left to right. However, when it exits the helix in Armagh, it appears to move from right to left for a while. This change of direction creates a sense of distance between scene and cuts the direct visual link between them. However, it doesn’t break the railfanning sequence because then disappear right under the spot where it will eventually reappear. This is, from a railfanning point of view, a comfortable proposition because you don’t have to move to get a good glimpse at all the action.
A cleaner version...
Third, it
creates a time separation between scenes. A helix turn at 10 MPH, which is a
speed I like a lot to appreciate a long train, 1:30 minute will elapse between
the movement the locomotive disappears and reappears in the next scene. It may
seem long, which it is, but if you break down the sequence, it also means the
locomotive will emerge from the “time tunnel” only a few seconds after the
caboose is gone from your sight, meaning you can seamlessly see an entire train
moving and catch it up without waiting too much about 20 seconds later. Enough
to install yourself at the right spot, by the grade crossing.
Ste-Euphémie Valley concept
Another
aspect I revised on the layout is the Ste-Euphémie section which used to be
Langlois Siding. This is on a grade and I think it’s wise to not have any
operation occurring there. Instead, removing the feed mill adds 5 or 6 feet of
mainline and spread the grade on a longer stretch of track. I’d like to imagine
it as a valley on which the train is slowly climbing the grade up to Armagh. It
would also be a perfect opportunity to showcase two typical National
Transcontinental type of bridge: the large concrete culvert and the multi-span
deck bridge.
I think
such a long scenic mainline suits better the narrative of the layout and, incidentally,
calling it the Ste-Euphémie valley is quite suitable since Euphemia means “who
speaks appropriately/accurately” in Greek. At the end of the day, long trains
need space to breath and to deploy themselves in front of the public. This is
part of the modelling journey too.
No comments:
Post a Comment