I dont get scenic separators

[bc6]

Ok take my Manning Oaks layout for instance, ok its going roundy round I know that and so do you doh even with a separator. Its suggested that you use a separator on this layout. Now that Ive got this scenic separator it makes things a little more difficult if Ive got a derailment. Even if I were to to put a partition in how tall do you make it a foot tall or 6 feet tall. What are your thoughts on separators do they enhance or detract from running trains

[CoalPorter]

I mostly use mountains, or canyon or taller trees. I use to think it was wierd to have a giant
plywood wall growning in the center of a layout, but i guess i got used to seeing it enough
and now understand the concept behind it. i still dont really like it and try to find more
natural ways to block the views or suggest a scene change.

Some like to use it so they can get away with using building flats, which  i am not a great
big hugh fan of.

[Zox]

It's a situational sort of thing. For my loop module, it was a lot easier to come up with two scenes that would look reasonable inside a curve, rather than one that could justify a loop. It also allows the train to "disappear" for a moment, which always helps make the train and the layout look longer.





I did take some care to avoid inconsistencies when looking past the edges of the skyboard. You can't see the roundhouse when looking straight on from the Area 53 side, and likewise you can't see most of the Area 53 complex or fence from the roundhouse side. The presence of additional modules limits the ability to see both sides from further down the layout:



While it's obviously possible to see both scenes from the loop end,  I've not yet had an audience member comment on the fact that there are two inconsistent scenes--or even on the fact that the roundhouse should by rights be punching through the skyboard.

[wm3798]

I used a hollow core door as a separator on my peninsula.  Decidedly not a roundy round. 



The separation provides a lot of flexibility in how I lay in the scenery on either side, while adding a dimension of distance to the run of both main lines.

The trick is to be a little subtle about how you blend it in to the rest of the scene.
Lee

[hminky]

Scenic dividers give you two complete scenes





There was going to be an urban scene on the unfinished side. Had to tear that layout down

The center spur was a loads-in/empties out arrangement:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/operation/lilo/

Scenic dividers make a small layout really "big".

Harold

[peteski]

Here is another example. We have a scenic divider in the middle of a peninsula.   Not only it doubles the amount of linear space available for scenery, in this example it also provides an opportunity to have "loads in, empties out" operation.  On one side is a power plant which receives loads of coal and sends out empty hopper car trains.  On the other side is a coal mine which receives empty hopper trains and ships them out loaded with coal.  Hidden inside the mountain (and further separated by the scenic divider) is  is a double track connection between the mine and the power plant so the full and empty hopper trains can be invisibly swapped between the 2 industries.

Use the high-tension tower as a reference point in both photos.
Power plant.

Large image: http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7826/mrlgarrison.jpg

Coal mine on the other side.

Large image: http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/7317/mrldrummondmine.jpg

Scenic dividers are quite useful.

[Freight Train]

Bc6,
   I went back and re-read your original posting but have some questions.
Can you get to both sides of your scenic separator or do you have your layout possibly butted up against a wall were you have to reach over the separator to get a possible derailment if it should occur? If the scenic separator might cause a problem if you have to reach over it to get at something....set it up in such away that it can be easily removed. Just trying to get a handle on what your problem might be?

[chuck geiger]

[mcjaco]

peteski, I don't know why that idea isn't used more.  I was in the old Indian Head Line club (the one in the Walthers building), which was built in the 60's and it had the same ops for it's coal and power plants. 

[randgust]

I think its all a matter of viewpoint.  That's tongue-in-cheek, but its not.

Mind you, I'm a complete believer.  But this had me asking....why?  This is a legit question, even if I don't agree with the premise at all!

I think mine work because of the following:

1)  Layout is relatively high; 52" normal track height.
2)  View separators are normally 9" above that; now you're at 61" to top of 'sky'.
3)  My eye level is measured at 64".   So I can 'tiptoe' to see over, but not normally.
4)  View separators extend all the way to the table edge; complete scene division.
5)  Backdrops, mountains, or whatever have to look relatively effective against them.

I'm also a big fan of mirrors on the ends of the dividers.   I've 'boxed in' three of the edges so if you look at them from the sides it just extends into infinity.  Here's my favorite edge-of-table exit, see if you can spot the mirror:
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/winexit8.jpg

Same view from direct overhead so you can appreciate the visual ruse:
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/winexit2.jpg

My room is so small that it's hard to get a 'full room' shot, but this is with the camera held up over my head set on wide angle at the furthest corner:
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/airborne2.jpg



Now as I model an area that only has one tunnel in 1000' miles of main, I had to be more creative on entering and exiting the separators.  I have the two highway overpasses and one 'bare naked' exit into a mirror with only the edges of the mirror hole concealed by a signal bridge, and that one lonely tunnel portal.   If you're modeling Kansas and have a constant string of tunnels to enter and exit, yeah, that can get old.

So if you have a 48" layout at 36" over the floor height, and the separator doesn't extend out to the edge, and it isn't particuarly high either, the ability to really separate the scenes in you mind may not be all that great.  And if you DO use visual separators, you either get really good at either backdrops, building flats, or mountains to make the transition.

I had a 3x6 island-style layout (essentially a folded roundy-roundy) at 36" height for many years, and the view of three levels of mainline across 36" of table with no backdrops or divides had no illusion of distance at all.   I wouldn't go back.  In my situation I'm trying to create the illusion of two towns separated by 50 actual miles and in two totally different climates and scenic areas - Arizona desert on one side, Arizona Divide mountains on the other, and only one main line track is visible from any viewpoint.

[Ian MacMillan]

Here is another example. We have a scenic divider in the middle of a peninsula.   Not only it doubles the amount of linear space available for scenery, in this example it also provides an opportunity to have "loads in, empties out" operation.  On one side is a power plant which receives loads of coal and sends out empty hopper car trains.  On the other side is a coal mine which receives empty hopper trains and ships them out loaded with coal.  Hidden inside the mountain (and further separated by the scenic divider) is  is a double track connection between the mine and the power plant so the full and empty hopper trains can be invisibly swapped between the 2 industries.

Use the high-tension tower as a reference point in both photos.
Power plant.

Large image: http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7826/mrlgarrison.jpg

Coal mine on the other side.

Large image: http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/7317/mrldrummondmine.jpg

Scenic dividers are quite useful.

HA! Funny. I know exactly whose layout that is. One of my favorites to run on.

[peteski]

HA! Funny. I know exactly whose layout that is. One of my favorites to run on.

LOL, that must be during RailRun, right?  That would explain why I haven't run into you there (as I'm visiting other layouts at that time).  Otherwise, I'm there pretty much always at Ernie's when there are layout visitors.

[peteski]

peteski, I don't know why that idea isn't used more.  I was in the old Indian Head Line club (the one in the Walthers building), which was built in the 60's and it had the same ops for it's coal and power plants.

I really don't know.  It wasn't my idea to use it on the layout. IIRC, Jim whitehead (who developed the original track plan) included this handy feature. It does make a lot of sense to use this type of operation as you realistically can have full and empty hopper trans without having to dump and reload  the coal loads each time (which is kind of tough in N scale).

[Brakie]

I never cared much for sky boards,scenic dividers,view blocks since 90% of the time they stick out like a sore thumb.

I prefer using small hills and tall buildings instead.