Curves and Turnbacks – Pictures?

[rickb773]

I have done a very poor job of describing the type of pictures I was seeking. My apologies. I am however enjoying all your submissions. I participate in forums mainly to be inspired by other’s work and you have provided some beauties.

Let me fill in the background for the proposed article mini-series. Article 1 (which has turned into a 2-part article, due to my royal windiness) was dealing with why a perfectly sane person (faulty assumption number one) would tear apart a fully functional 90+% sceniced and complete layout and start a rebuild that would affect 70% of the layout.

Since that (somewhat questionably sane) person now had to deal with more curves, including a 180-270 degree end of peninsula curve and a 360-degree altitude gaining curve, the wrestling with those issues became the basis for the last article. (That and keeping the trains off the floor.)

In my opinion the two biggest things that make a model railroad appear toylike are tracks running parallel to the edge of the layout and curves that turn back on themselves. Therefore, this article deals more with providing a reason for tracks to curve and/or hiding or breaking up the curves so the eyes are drawn away from tracks looping back on themselves. Instead of asking for how others sceniced/hid the curves, I should have asked how others hid/sceniced their curves with the emphasis on making the curves disappear or not seem contiguous.

During my rebuild I was particularly stressed with the end of peninsula turnback curve. I model the hilly but basically flat portion of southern New Jersey so I can’t just build a mountain with tunnels to solve the problem.

I know others also wrestle with the same issues and wanted to show their efforts also to give the readers other ideas and inspiration. I have used urban scenes, a mini- “mountain” and highway overpasses on my layout. Chris333’s layout perfectly illustrated my points on both ends of his layout. Large buildings at one end gave the tracks a reason (a very demanding reason) to curve. On the other end he used a road underpass to break up the curve and brilliantly placed detailed stores right in front to draw the eyes away from the curve on the near end.

I was really hopeful someone would donate a nicely sceniced tunnel-trestle-tunnel scene for a peninsula end since I certainly cannot replicate that technique.

DKS’ photo of the eye catching “mess” at the end of his photo would have been good reenforcement of misdirection but he does not own the photo. [I do love his dummy tracks to cover the corner behind the layout. I think a good potential article would be on handling the corners of a small layout ala @Chris333 and @DKS. I certainly won’t be writing it since I have no square corners.]

Potentially @mu26aeh dense use of trees to hide the curve may be of value here depending on how much space Pam/Walt give me. Ed’s photos are well sceniced but I am not feeling the reason the tracks had to curve. I already have a scenic illustration of the highway overpass (@dem34) so I have that covered.

So again, what I was seeking was techniques that demanded that the tracks have to curve and ways to hide or break up continuous curves. I want the readers to be inspired and be given alternatives to make choices to fit their varied requirements.

My sincere thanks for all your suggestions.

[wm3798]

I've got a bunch of shots of my old paper mill which concealed two main line return loops and the staging loops underneath.
If you can wait till morning I can email whatever full size images I can scare up.
Lee

[glakedylan]

I was getting ready to share shots of Windy Point on my RGS...as a turnback location it screamed out for a rock face that overhung the fascia.  But alas...the track in the photos is HOn3, not N.

Dave, i was browsing in FB earlier and when I saw your CM coverphoto on its page i could not help but think that it was a good example of what is being sought here.


sincerely
Gary

[Maletrain]

I don't have photos to share, but when looking for a reason for tracks to curve, it doesn't really require a mountain. 

Following a river bank is a common railroad tactic, even in relatively "flat" territory.  And, rivers are notoriously winding routes.

And, going around the sides of a hill is one way to gain altitude if the track needs to reach a higher elevation.  There are plenty of prototype examples of that on mainlines.  But, just on switching branches, sometimes the track curves back on itself to get to a customer that is higher than the mainline, for instance a quarry.

[wm3798]

Okay.  So here you go...
First, let's look at the Paper Mill complex, which provided the necessary illusion on my WM layout.  It was the first major portion of the layout I built, and I did it in my workshop first for better access, then moved it into place when it and the room were ready.


This view looks into the bowl of the two return loops that wrapped around the back of the mill.


Here's as good a shot of the preliminary layout I can find.


Until I found this one!

From top to bottom, closest to the front edge was the Connellsville sub heading west from right to left.  It emerged from a tunnel at a lower elevation.

Next is the Thomas Sub, which began at the junction to the left then swept around toward the front, curling back around behind the Mill, and entering another tunnel portal.  Here's a view of that when it was finished.



Referring back to the overview, within the two tunnels, the lines crossed, the Thomas Sub rising to climb up along the back edge, and the Connellsville line rising to the level of the junction, where the two line met and proceeded east toward Cumberland. 

So, from the junction around two loops and back in the same direction, there were effectively four routes that were in view in the space of about 9 square feet.

In order to mitigate that, I did a couple of things to trick the eye.
First, I did the obvious, and covered the loopiest bits in tunnels. 



That shot shows all four portals.  In order to have access to the track for the inevitable wreck, I built a lift-off mountain ridge that I could pull off to reach in.  I also provided for access below the table, but that was limited by the stuff I stored under the layout.

Second, because of the geography of the track plan, I was able to use changes of elevation to mask the roundy roundiness of the mainlines.  The Thomas sub climbs to the back, the Connellsville line drops to the front.  The junction was the mean height of the layout platform.  So at no point does the looping train appear to be on the same plane at the front, middle or back of the layout.  Remember, I only had 3' from front to back owing to the sloping ceiling of the attic room I was in.



Third, I tried to make the industry be the focal point of the area.  I used the larger buildings to mask parts of the main lines from view which helped limited the need to see the front and the back of a train at the same time as it looped around.  The mill complex was also busy with its own sidings and sub structures, so there was plenty to look at and operate while the main line trains would sneak around the corners...



In this view you can see how the Connellsville line is tucked between the large structures, while the Thomas sub climbs behind the warehouse at the right.  From the aisle this was very effective at masking the return loops.



I also utilized some high ground at the front edge of the layout to create another view block that guided (forced?) the visitor to look at the layout from angles that lessened the views of the returns.



While the viewing angle from the aisle was much improved with the deployment of these deceptions, they also created some wonderful photo spots that were not easily seen from by a typical visitor looking at the layout.  This helped promote the illusion of a much larger railroad, with longer runs through lonely scenery than actually existed on the layout.  These little vignettes were especially fun for me.











I've given you a lot of pictures, but I'm afraid most of them were resized for old web postings and may not be suitable for print.  But hopefully this will inspire some other readers to chime in.

Lee

[CRL]

Lee - nicely documented and well thought out. Not everyone has the space to have a linear layout where a train only passes through a scene once on a long mainline run like Dave Barrow’s Cat Mountain & Santa Fe. That was my original goal, but reality has imposed more space restrictions where I’ll either have to drastically reduce the scope of the track plan or employ more of the old model rail-roady tricks to lengthen the mainline run in a smaller space. I think I’ll opt for the latter approach, but still work to have some reasonable amount of “country” between towns/industries so the end of the train isn’t fouling the last town while the loco is switching cars in the next town.

[rickb773]

(@wm3798) Lee, do you have the original .jpg(s) for pictures 4 (Thomas Sub 141.jpg), 6 (LRV Maryland Jct (18).jpg), and 9 (Summit Viaduct.jpg)?


@randgust same question on original .jpg.

[Caddy58]

Would it not be more meaningful to provide prototype pictures were the real railroads had turnback loops?
Otherwise we would base our models on other models, not on the real thing.

Cheers
Dirk

[wm3798]

@Caddy58 , I believe the objective of the article is to solve a fairly typical model railroading problem, not to ask the modeler to limit their modeled world to something that's pretty infrequent in the real world.  Prototype railroads just do what they have to do.  We have to create the illusion that what we've built extends beyond the benchwork, and that takes some scenic sleight of hand to do effectively.

F'rinstance, if I want to represent a branch line here on the Eastern Shore, but also wanted to have a loop so I can run continuously, I'm going to have to figure out what kind of buildings or other scenic elements in a flat landscape will conceal the track that connects to create my loop.  As much as I'd love to model Richmond's Broad Street Station and its wonderful return loop, it just wouldn't have enough traffic in Denton to support all that infrastructure!!

Lee

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Oh shoot, you don't know about my turn back?

That's the end loop at the end of the old layout.

It featured two fun things: It was sceniced to look like a junction with the two other tracks completely non-functional, AND, concealed in those trees at the back of the loop was the entry to my staging yard.

[wm3798]

(@wm3798) Lee, do you have the original .jpg(s) for pictures 4 (Thomas Sub 141.jpg), 6 (LRV Maryland Jct (18).jpg), and 9 (Summit Viaduct.jpg)?

I do have Thomas Sub 141, but I think 139 illustrates the scene better.  It also shows the access hatch I included in the fascia that allows additional reach into the "hole"...



The Summit Bridge shot is compressed too small to be able to print.  But I'm sure I have other shots of a similar view, and the LRV Maryland Junction (18) shot is a bit murky.  Let me see if I can find a better shot of that view as well.  Stand by.

Lee

[rickb773]

I do have Thomas Sub 141, but I think 139 illustrates the scene better.  It also shows the access hatch I included in the fascia that allows additional reach into the "hole"...
The Summit Bridge shot is compressed too small to be able to print.  But I'm sure I have other shots of a similar view, and the LRV Maryland Junction (18) shot is a bit murky.  Let me see if I can find a better shot of that view as well.  Stand by.
Lee

I like the Thoanas Sub picture better because it also ties in the idea that rivers also cause tracks to curve.
[Shot wise my favorite view is the Maryland Jct but the Thomas Sub works into the article better.]

[wm3798]

Pm me your email.  I'll email what I have.
Lee

[CRL]

Is this what you’re looking for in the real world?

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[wm3798]

Rick,
I just emailed you some better pictures.  Let me know when you get them.
Lee