Tehachapi, BC

[DKS]

FWIW, I would not recommend doing this. "Awkward" is the only way to describe it.

[Cajonpassfan]

I’ve already offered my 2 cents, twice (call it a nickel’s worth). So now it’s time to pop the popcorn.... 
I’m sure whatever you do Gary, it will be fabulous!
Otto

[bdennis]

FWIW agree with DKS. I don't like the idea. I think they need to be kept separate. I also agree that it would be good to get rid of the support if you can.

[ednadolski]

Here is a very quick & dirty mock-up of a way to connect these two scenes:

The mockup ridge line here has a bit more of a 'hockey stick' look to it than I had envisioned. While it seems like there is some room to broaden that out, it might take more out of the 'vista' scene that you might like.

BTW these are some of the Tehachapi images that I was thinking of:

https://www.railpictures.net/showimage.php?id=229828&key=6187475
https://www.railpictures.net/showimage.php?id=563927&key=6187475
https://www.railpictures.net/showimage.php?id=467224&key=6187475

Ed

[Vince P]

Looking Good interesting hill format after looking at the links.

[prr7161]

I agree with Steveruger - a narrow but distinct vertical fascia could do the trick.  Maybe on some 2x2 blocking secured to the front of the existing benchwork to support some more of the slope.

What about mixing the two approaches?
Waterfall the scenery but to a thinner facia say 1.5 inches tall painted to the base scenery color.
The hard line that the facia affords would tell the eye this is the end of that scene but not be too overwhelming to the general aesthetics.
Just a thought.

[pdx1955]

Assuming  that you  don't  need to have room on the fascia  for anything ,  I think extending  the scenery below track level and having a shorter vertical  fascia will work. It's not like you are going to be operating  the layout from a lawn chair 20 plus feet away and trying  to visualize  expansive scenes. When I've  run multi-deck layouts with detailed  operations you forget the other deck and concentrate at the task at hand.

[ednadolski]

This pic has me wondering about what would be a good treatment for the two 'dark' zones on either side of the hill on the lower deck.  What do you have in mind for the backdrop?   It seems to me that keeping it along the wall would look odd, and that it kinda wants to curve forward, roughly following the tracks on either side.  But I'm not sure I see how the two sides should be brought to meet in the middle, other than it probably should not be any more forward than the upper fascia.

Would it help any, to move Tunnel Two either to the left or to the right?

Ed

[Cajonpassfan]

Hey, I like hockey sticks!
Just not on Tehachapi...
Back to the popcorn then...
Otto

[Chris333]

Wow them with ballast and they will deal with the rest 

[John]

Assuming  that you  don't  need to have room on the fascia  for anything ,  I think extending  the scenery below track level and having a shorter vertical  fascia will work. It's not like you are going to be operating  the layout from a lawn chair 20 plus feet away and trying  to visualize  expansive scenes. When I've  run multi-deck layouts with detailed  operations you forget the other deck and concentrate at the task at hand.

This .. while it's not the visual masterpiece of some I've seen,  my entire layout is mostly 1-2 feet wide on both levels ..  you do tend to focus on the section of the track you are currently on .. it's only when you stand back that you can see the entire detail, and even then my focus is usually drawn to smaller sections

[GaryHinshaw]

Thanks gents - I love the feedback.  Pretty clear consensus to keep the decks separate; the direction I've been leaning all along.   And I get the comments about focussed operators.  Lord knows, we've been operating with no scenery for years now...      But this is my chance to "fulfil the dream".  (Cue the music.)

Some quick lower deck comments:
* I will be putting up a backdrop along the wall to cover the stringers that are currently visible there. 
* The darkness that Chris alluded to was due to the fact that I didn't have the strip lights turned on in that shot.  They're really necessary now that the upper deck is covered over.  In fact, I still need one more strip under there.
* I'm not yet sure how I plan to deal with the space-time warp where the opening currently is.  Ideally the stretch of Bealville Rd coming up from Caliente would pass through there and gracefully disappear without being too visible from the Allard (right) side of the peninsula.  A bit of coved backdrop might be just the ticket, but that's a problem for another day.

Back to the upper deck fascia options, and some more quick & dirty mock ups.  For reference, the tunnels are numbered 14-17, right to left.
* At Tunnel 17, I've had a draft version of the land-form in place for several months, but I'm not really happy with it.  This is an example of a straight horizontal fascia:





For reference, here is a nice proto shot looking down on Tunnel 17:

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/576574/

Two things I don't like about my rendition:
* The horrible transition from overflowing scenery to a flat fascia on the left. That's fixable. 
* The clean horizontal slicing looks too contrived.  (It also hangs over the Caliente trackage below a bit more than I'd like.)
As suggested, I should try terminating the over-flowing bits along the lower access road, roughly indicated by the lower orange line in the 2nd photo, and clearly visible in the proto-photo.

Over by Tunnel 14, I tried a quick & dirty mock-up of a curved vertical fascia (the white card stock):







Things are more constrained on this side because:
* The deck separation is smaller so I don't want to drop the scene below the framework.
* There is a fair bit of human traffic in this area during ops, so I don't want to cut off aisle space too much or put anything fragile here.

I do want the scene to extend outward a bit so it has room to breathe, and so the fascia doesn't have to be too tall.  It also provides a bit of a visual break between the Tunnel shelf and the Tehachapi Loop shelf behind it (which is 3 miles and one more tunnel away on the prototype).

Reactions welcome.  Curved vertical fascia the whole way?  Follow the access road (where feasible) and transition to a vertical fascia between tunnels 14 and 15?  Other?  Thanks as always.
-gfh

[DKS]

I do like the idea of a narrow fascia on the upper level, and I think it would work really well if it gently undulates horizontally with the scenery. One bit of awkwardness is that transition in height at the vertical brace I'd highlighted earlier (which will hopefully go away): perhaps do a gentle vertical transition there, instead of an abrupt one?

Edit: A picture is worth...



In the image above, I attempted to simulate the fascia on the second level; a thin yellow line helps indicate the undulations. Also note that the right end of the upper level fascia curves into and blends with the existing fascia to the right at Walong.

In addition, as a suggestion, I modified the lower level landform so that the fascia rises to meet the upper level fascia at the corner, matching its final curve, hopefully creating a less-awkward transition to the split levels. The lighter-colored portion to the right is an optional removable access panel that simply serves to extend and blend the lower level fascia into the existing fascia at Walong.

FWIW, etc.

[DKS]

Another view: here's the plan with the fascia traced out. The lower level is black; the upper, tan. The undulations are for illustrative purposes only, and not meant to be accurate. The idea is to show how the two levels blend into one at Walong.

[John]

If you use the dirt road at T17 as your transition to the fascia -- you can then use that as a dividing point between then two