Author Topic: Not the Seaboard 2.0  (Read 13756 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2017, 10:24:08 PM »
0
Nicely done, reminiscent of Western Maryland station colors

Thanks.  That's always interesting to me that you and many others on this board have a depth of knowledge that can identify those details specifically as you just did. 8)  That's an area of huge weakness for me as one who's just recently become active in model railroading at a level resembling serious but having grown up in this region, having an inherited, at least passing interest in trains, and having the good fortune to have traveled a fair amount in the east as a child, that must be where my sense of "that looks about right" or at least plausible, comes from.  And at this point that's sufficient for me although I will always be happy to do something "right" and am willing to ask and to learn.   :)

These efforts are adding knowledge (and skills) daily.  I'll enjoy this layout and it will afford me the opportunity to test my skills and acquire new ones needed for this type of work and maybe some day, should the desire strike and the space gods grant me the space, it will be able to be applied to a new more accurate rendition of a specific scene. 8)  Meanwhile, it's being fun! :) 
« Last Edit: December 21, 2017, 10:27:37 PM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

mu26aeh

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5458
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +3755
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #31 on: December 21, 2017, 10:33:32 PM »
+1
Well, at least in this situation, I picked up on it because of modeling an ex-Western Maryland line myself, and helping on an O scale Western Maryland layout.  Not to mention a handful of members here modeling the WM.  Here's a station I built to represent one standing in Hampstead, MD

2017-03-31_12-52-05 by Adam Henry, on Flickr

wazzou

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6761
  • #GoCougs
  • Respect: +1680
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #32 on: December 21, 2017, 10:47:18 PM »
+1
I'd lose the base if possible.  I think it makes it look a little too toy like.
Bryan

Member of NPRHA, Modeling Committee Member
http://www.nprha.org/
Member of MRHA


narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #33 on: December 21, 2017, 10:59:34 PM »
0
Well, at least in this situation, I picked up on it because of modeling an ex-Western Maryland line myself, and helping on an O scale Western Maryland layout.  Not to mention a handful of members here modeling the WM.  Here's a station I built to represent one standing in Hampstead, MD


Wow, that is similar. 8)  I wonder what the WS prototype was for their model.  But then again, railroad stations across the country are often identifiable as such. :|
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2017, 11:09:32 PM »
0
I'd lose the base if possible.  I think it makes it look a little too toy like.

Would you be suggesting NO base or just not THAT base?

It's already in the plan to replace THAT base and for similar reasons.  It's so thoroughly "railroady" with every railroady piece of dock equipment imaginable and all with mounting holes for location right through the small deck space. :(   But I was planning to make another base that better fits the space available.   

I have been considering just a pad at ground level, paved concrete around it or maybe even brick pavement, possibly bordered with concrete.  Also considered raised a little as the original base is but also incorporating a ramp down to ground level, probably meeting the ground level on the sidewalk side.  The raised base could be boards but could also be on a poured footer and could still be brick but my inclination was, wood if raised, brick if left at ground level.  This is only the most preliminary musing at this point and can be effected by the surrounding spaces and building decisions... and the feedback I get here from the experts. ;)  Really. 8)

I was going to proceed with painting that base especially for the practice with the painting colors and techniques but also to have something to set it on until I decide what the final scene and space will be.  Hopefully that won't be too long but... :)
« Last Edit: December 21, 2017, 11:25:44 PM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2017, 11:42:40 PM »
0
Edit add: Here's a link to that kit.  It will better show what I'm talking about when I say "railroady" and to a fault.  Maybe what you're talking about, too.  https://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/Item/PF5207/page/1

And thanks to all for your thoughts. 8)
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #36 on: December 24, 2017, 12:10:06 AM »
0
OK, a little more paint and cleared with Krylon matte finish.  And that leads to a question.  The matte is not as flat as the dullcoat, is it?  I ask because I've heard some folks talk about using matte and others using dullcoat and it seemed that the terms were used interchangeably.  But it looks to my inexperienced eye that the matte is basically what I knew as semi-gloss and the dull coat is what I knew as flat.  Is that correct?  And it would be dull coat that I would use on structures and maybe matte on machinery or a new loco paint job.  Is there a consensus on this or opinions? 

I'm finding those paints to be easy to work with and the very small pointed brush makes it possible to get very precise edges on trim.  I'm very pleased with that aspect but still feel challenged at the next step, the weathering.  I'm open to suggestions.  I guess I should get some chalks? powders? pastels?   Are they similar enough or is there a distinct difference when working with them?

I went ahead and painted the base and clear coated everything.  Will next play with weathering and detailing.  Here is a pic this far.  Again, this base will not be used and maybe not the cart or the other accessories but they were in the kit and I went ahead and assembled them for paint and finish practice.  If they work out, some may get used somewhere, some day. ;)

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: December 24, 2017, 01:45:15 AM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #37 on: December 26, 2017, 05:28:02 PM »
0
During this weeks travels about western PA and with my newfound curiosity about rock colors I have discovered that there are lots of outcroppings that are very similar to those first rocks I did as well as some that are more brown, the direction I thought I needed to go.  So there are both and if anything, at least in the areas I was travelling, the darker colors were the most prevalent and running away.  That was interesting to me. 8)
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #38 on: December 29, 2017, 01:03:04 AM »
+3
Did some more pondering and fitting of the station base and have proceeded with a ground level brick with stone perimeter.  Facing the front of the station the new base is slightly larger to the left, cut a slight amount off the right rear corner where the original seemed too close to the track (it's still a bit too close but we'll live with it) ;), took two squares off the left side sidewalk that parallels tracks as it seemed unnecessarily long and made a better fit for the space for the monument (what's there is a foam scrap, free hand carved, mockup) while affording the extra space for the slightly larger station base. 

Here are some pics.

In this one you can see the original base with the right and left sidewalks removed.  The left side has already been cut for the new expanded space, evidence the white space.  The pencil is laying where the two sidewalk squares are to be removed.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

In this view the original base has been removed exposing the cork spacing material.  Also the two sidewalk squares to the left are removed and the right rear corner new angle can be seen... if you look close and use your imagination. ;)
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

And this is the new base fitted with the partially completed station in place.  The small amount of extra space as well as ground level base makes the freight doors much more believable, a little working room, for my way of seeing it.  The raised and smaller base that was part of the kit was impossible to believe as I had noted as well as Wazzou's "toy like" comment. :)  It is evident that the scenery needs some touchup and the people on the benches and the cart are by no means final, just getting a feel for the look.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

This view shows the additional clearance to the track at the right rear corner.  It's still pretty tight but was worse.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

And finally, the rear/ street view.  The small grass triangle was from the old base and is just set in there.  It will be replaced with the scenery work.  The local garden club may do some work in that space and the other side of the sidewalk, planting some flowers and such, as well as the area around the monument when that is ready.  8) :lol:
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


I was very uneasy taking a knife to the board but it has all gone well so far.  I didn't hit any utilities with my X-Acto backhoe! :)
 I'm pretty well satisfied with how it's progressing and will welcome any and all comments/ criticisms. 8)
« Last Edit: December 29, 2017, 01:39:19 AM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18546
  • Respect: +5864
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #39 on: December 29, 2017, 01:35:53 AM »
0
Fits right in next to that fine hand crafted curved turnout.  :trollface:

But yes the base looks much better.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #40 on: December 29, 2017, 02:34:34 AM »
0
Fits right in next to that fine hand crafted curved turnout.  :trollface:

But yes the base looks much better.

Thanks, Chris.  Dave told me you hooked him up with at least that one and maybe another near the engine house?

I needed a really small station and when I went looking with some dimensions didn't find many choices. :|  Some that I liked were really too old style or too rural.  Great for some future things in mind but I thought would be too out of place for this spot.    Was on the verge of a scratch build when that one went on sale. 

I hadn't really considered it on first search even though the dimensions seemed like they would work.  It was probably the trinkets crammed in that turned me off with little more than a glance but on a more careful look the second time around, the basic station seemed OK.  On arrival that proved to be pretty fair.  And it would fit!  Filled a glaring hole on the board.  I'm satisfied this far. 8)
« Last Edit: December 29, 2017, 02:47:40 AM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

Kentuckian

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 911
  • Gender: Male
  • "This all started with Romans 10:9!" -Apologetix
  • Respect: +532
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #41 on: December 29, 2017, 09:19:20 AM »
0
Looks good! I like the brick platform outlined with the curb stones. Will the station get a sign?
Modeling the C&O in Kentucky.

“Nature does not know extinction; all it knows is transformation. ... Everything science has taught me-and continues to teach me-strengthens my belief in the continuity of our spiritual existence after death. Nothing disappears without a trace.” Wernher von Braun

nuno81291

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 744
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +312
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #42 on: December 29, 2017, 10:12:20 AM »
0
Looking good! Base plate is a big improvement, I think it overall fits very nice. A bit of landscaping will tie it all together. :D
Guilford Rail System in the 80s/90s

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #43 on: December 29, 2017, 04:49:41 PM »
0
Looks good! I like the brick platform outlined with the curb stones. Will the station get a sign?

Thanks. :)  Yes, it will get a sign and probably a bit of an interior, general detailing, and lighting.  I don't know yet what the sign will be but just last night asked my lady friend what she thought, if anything struck her. 

At least this far, this is a totally fictitious location with its primary purpose being a place to run trains. :)   Secondary is to do some modelling that is fun and might fit a feel of the eastern coal fields.  As such the main road through town could easily be Rte. 19 and fits the intended region in location and feel (and maybe a bit idealized) ;).  It was the main north/ south road prior to the Interstate System, starting in Erie PA and ending all of the way south in Memphis Florida.  It connects the great lakes with the Gulf of Mexico and goes directly through the Appalachian Mountains, the heart of eastern coal fields.  PA, WV, VA, TN, NC, etc.  The flavor I'm after and this look could be in any of those states and in the proximity of that road.  Here's a link with more detail on the route.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_19
« Last Edit: December 29, 2017, 05:11:10 PM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #44 on: December 29, 2017, 05:09:05 PM »
0
Looking good! Base plate is a big improvement, I think it overall fits very nice. A bit of landscaping will tie it all together. :D

Thanks. :)  Will get some brown paint and ground foam down tonight.  Enough to clean it up.  The gardening might wait until some more decisions are made with the rest of the town scene. 8)
Mark G.