Inclines

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Beacon Park starts at just above sea level. By the time the mainline hits Worcester (about 50 miles away), it is about 7-800 feet in elevation. I want to get a visual feel of the incline, and think a 4-5" increase over the length of the layout would be about right.

My question is should I elevate the open grid bench work with the rail incline or increase the height of the tracks above the bench work?

[garethashenden]

Given that Worcester isn't at the top of a mountain, I think it makes more sense to elevate the bench work as you go along. Less to fill in later.

[wm3798]

Level benchwork, then set the risers/scenery accordingly.  It will look better, and be easier to manage the scenery (level foundations for buildings etc.)  It will also look better on top of your book cases, and give the eye something level to follow.

Lee

[Rich_S]

I agree with Lee and it's what I've done on previous layouts, bench work is set at one level and I used the cookie cutter method to get a constant grade up and down.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I also agree with Lee. Keep it level and build up.

[mark.hinds]

I agree with the majority, that benchwork should be all at one level, or at least the bottom edge of the edging fascia all at one level.  The changing height of the fascia gives viewers a visual reference to the changing grade: 



MH

[peteski]

The way I understand this is that not just the track but the level of all the surrounding scenery is to be elevated.  Cookie-cutter the entire width of the layout shelf?  Or just cookie-cutter the track, then fill the surroundings with some material (like Styrofoam or plaster shell over cardboard mesh? That seems counterproductive.  Especially since the fascia will have to be raised to the higher level anyways.

I agree that keeping the bottom of the fascia level is visually important, but I say raise the benchwork as needed.  Especially if the areas to be modeled are flat and at track level.

[davefoxx]

I agree that keeping the bottom of the fascia level is visually important, but I say raise the benchwork as needed.  Especially if the areas to be modeled are flat and at track level.

This.

[Scottl]

I agree, it makes little sense to do a cookie cutter approach when you are talking about a small climb over a long layout.  Keep the fascia bottom horizontal, and raise everything progressively.  Local topography can easily be accomplished with foam board. 

[Rich_S]

The way I understand this is that not just the track but the level of all the surrounding scenery is to be elevated.  Cookie-cutter the entire width of the layout shelf?  Or just cookie-cutter the track, then fill the surroundings with some material (like Styrofoam or plaster shell over cardboard mesh? That seems counterproductive.  Especially since the fascia will have to be raised to the higher level anyways.

I agree that keeping the bottom of the fascia level is visually important, but I say raise the benchwork as needed.  Especially if the areas to be modeled are flat and at track level.

Peteski, I only use the cookie cutter method where the track raises or falls to another elevation and then only the track, except in areas where I want more scenery. Once at that new elevation the entire piece of plywood should be on risers. Here are some photo's from a previous layout, that show the cookie cutter on a previous layout.

Cookie cutter


Semi completed scenery.


Entire area on risers.


Semi completed scenery.


Unfortunately this layout is now history, wish I would have taken more photos, but I hope this answers your question?

[Rich_S]

I agree, it makes little sense to do a cookie cutter approach when you are talking about a small climb over a long layout.  Keep the fascia bottom horizontal, and raise everything progressively.  Local topography can easily be accomplished with foam board.

Scott, just to be clear, we are talking about Massachusetts? Yes it's a slow climb from Boston to Worcester, but there is a lot of rolling foothills leading into the Adirondacks in that area. To slowly elevate the entire table top, in my opinion would not capture the look of the area.

[peteski]

Peteski, I only use the cookie cutter method where the track raises or falls to another elevation and then only the track, except in areas where I want more scenery. Once at that new elevation the entire piece of plywood should be on risers. Here are some photo's from a previous layout, that show the cookie cutter on a previous layout.

Rich,
I understand how cookie cutter method works - thanks!  I was just puzzled why there were couple of early recommendations to use that for gradual raise of the entire layout's surface (at least that was how I interpreted Daniel's question).

[wm3798]

If I understand Daniel's question, he was considering setting the line of the benchwork on a grade... this would make every structure foundation a surveying project...  Obviously, with modular benchwork, you could raise the sections incrementally to obtain the overall rise of the landscape, but still mount the sections level at their location... like stair steps.

[peteski]

Excellent point Lee.

[davefoxx]

If I understand Daniel's question, he was considering setting the line of the benchwork on a grade... this would make every structure foundation a surveying project...  Obviously, with modular benchwork, you could raise the sections incrementally to obtain the overall rise of the landscape, but still mount the sections level at their location... like stair steps.

I may have misunderstood the previous posts, but this is exactly what I had in mind in my earlier post.  Stair steps.  You could still make the bottom of the fascia level and straight.  But the advantage of the stair stepping is not so much landscaping to build up.  2" foam ain't cheap!

DFF