Gary...I'll have to try that next time I see a creepy crawler...

Gus, it works for me!

Should work for you too.

Well, the last few days, I have mainly just been testing operations and playing with the DCC - programing locos and speed matching and such. Now that 98% of the trackwork and uncoupling magnet installation is complete, I'm trying to decide what I should do next. I'm thinking I will start on the bridges. There will be five of them. For the longest bridge, I am considering modeling what is in the following photos, both the rail bridge and the street bridge and the bayou.

Only question is, are the bridges too modern? I'm doing 1979. Still, I'll probably just go with it anyway. Any thoughts?

[attachment=19838]

[attachment=19837]

[attachment=19836]

[attachment=19835]

[attachment=19834]

Those bridges certainly don't look to "modern" to me. And even if they are, they don't look that much different than what was built in the 1960s, so I doubt anyone would ever know (unless you invite a civil engineers convention to view your layout ).

Check out those weird pilings, though. It looks like they were in place, and then the channel was deepened and widened. Look at that weird massive concrete rectangle about 1/3 the way up on some of the pilings. It looks like the bottom of that "rectangle" is rough, like it was the original footing at the ground surface. And notice the concrete pilings below the "rectangle" are cleaner and show less staining.

Kevin, you're right about the bayou being widened. Houston has always had drainage issues and the various local governements are always doing projects. I too thought it was really interesting that the bridge supports show evidence of the previous bayou depth and width. Do you think modeling it just like it is would look funny on the layout? Is it one of those "out of the ordinary" things that would make someone looking at the layout think that it wasn't prototypical?


Here's a group of photos of another bridge about a mile south of the one above. Will model it too, and the road bridge.

[attachment=19844]

[attachment=19843]

[attachment=19842]

[attachment=19841]

[attachment=19840]

[attachment=19839]

I think recreating something like that is a nice detail. At almost any beach or river there will be evidence of recent erosion or channel modification.

[quote="Gary S"] Is it one of those "out of the ordinary" things that would make someone looking at the layout think that it wasn't prototypical?


Would you really care? I once had a joker tell me my S-1 wasn't prototypical, the 12 inch = 1 foot one, because the floor wasn't original. I'm sure if a class 1 would have done it it would have been OK.
I admire great modeling, but if you start worrying what someone else might think there is no more fun.
I will take constructive criticism but comparing to a prototype is a no-no for me. There are a couple people I know that will never be invited to my layout.
You must remember, as great as things can be, they are not the prototype.
Are we going to install scale prime movers and pollute the air by our layouts? Ya gotta draw a line.
Model the "out of the ordinary.
Charlie

Charlie's right - model it whichever way you wish, and don't worry about pleasing anybody but yourself. If you build your bridge in the same manner as the prototype, you could place a photo of the real one on the layout facia, just to silence the critics, but I wouldn't worry about it. That said, if I were modelling that scene, I'd probably build it without the quirky supports - not out of fear of what others might think, but simply because, had I been the guy doing the work on the real one, I would have removed the original supports and replaced them with new ones.

Wayne

I saw a photo of this structure in a magazine while waiting for a job interview last week:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.capemayviews.com/Attractions/Lighthouse/bunker.htm">http://www.capemayviews.com/Attractions ... bunker.htm</a><!-- m -->

The exposed pilings are clear indication of how much beach erosion has taken place since the 1940s. The photo I saw was after the beach had been "restored", but obviously it has not been restored to the way it was in 1940 (the pilings and foundation are still exposed). Even here in dry Arizona, bridge pilings show evidence of bed scour even over dry rivers. I think details like this are an excellent way to show the bridges and structures on a layout aren't brand new. If you notice in your photos, one bridge has those rectangle footings in the air, another has about 15 feet of the "underground" portion of the piling exposed, and the third (middle) bridge was obviously built post-channelization.

Kevin: Thanks for sharing the bunker photos and the erosion. There is at least one of those on Galveston Island. Since there is a seawall to prevent erosion, it is still firmly planted in the ground.

Wayne and Charlie: The thought of "it is your layout, do what you want" has significant merit, but on this one, I'm not really set on one way or the other. When that happens, I appreciate thoughts about what would be most appropriate to other viewers. I admit that I am leaning towards modeling it like the prototype with the old footings up in the air. Not sure how I want to do it though... Make a form and pour plaster in and around the pipes? Or build it out of sheet styrene?

You'd probably get the best representation of the rough bottom of those "floating" footings with a casting, but a mould around the pipes would have to be cut off unless it was made as two halves - that could cause a problem with alignment. Of course, the pour would have to be with the mould inverted, so that the rough bottom would be facing up.
You could try making a mould for only the footing (again, upside down for the pour, to allow for a rough bottom), then drill it for the pipes. You'd need a good, hard plaster - hydrocal, dental plaster, or Durabond might stand up to the drilling without cracking.
If you wanted to do it all in styrene, you could make the footings as hollow boxes of .060" sheet styrene, then drill for suitably-sized styrene tubing. This would give you a good, solid assembly that could easily be worked into the rest of the scene (this is coming into my head faster than I can type, but I like it even better than the cast plaster/tubing idea), allowing you to do all of the concrete work of the spillways, erosion protection, etc. in sheet styrene. To achieve the roughed effect on the bottom of the "floating" footings and also on the concrete pilings whose formerly-buried lower extremities have been revealed, moisten the area with lacquer thinner, then use a #17 X-Acto blade to roughly apply some Squadron putty. (Achieving that latter effect was eluding me with the cast-and-drill method. )

Wayne

Thanks for those comments Wayne. I like your idea of doing it all out of styrene. Awhile back I bought 3 - 4'x8' sheets of styrene in preparation for the "shoe-box" buildings, so I have plenty of that.

Considering that I have never done scenery, the bridge scene seems fairly straightforward. Do you guys think that ground foam would be okay for the grass or should I use static grass with the static applicator (possibly the DocWayne version)? For the murky water, should I just pour some plaster, paint it, and then put a clear coat on it, or use some of the "magic water" type stuff? Would I build the bridge at the workbench and then set it in place, or try to build it in place from the start?

Anyway, been a busy week at work so no time spent on the layout, but perhaps this weekend I can start on the scene. I'm really looking forward to giving it a whirl. And I'll keep it in mind that if it doesn't turn out as desired, WRECK IT OUT AND START OVER!!!!

I built one of Doc Wayne's applicators awhile back, and a friend who saw it wanted to make one. When he tried to order the, oh crap, I can't remember the name of the part, the heart of the applicator, it was discontinued, I might have gotten the last one in stock. If anyone finds a source, please post it here, so I can tell him. Thanks!

Gary S Wrote:Thanks for those comments Wayne. I like your idea of doing it all out of styrene. Awhile back I bought 3 - 4'x8' sheets of styrene in preparation for the "shoe-box" buildings, so I have plenty of that.

Considering that I have never done scenery, the bridge scene seems fairly straightforward. Do you guys think that ground foam would be okay for the grass or should I use static grass with the static applicator (possibly the DocWayne version)? For the murky water, should I just pour some plaster, paint it, and then put a clear coat on it, or use some of the "magic water" type stuff? Would I build the bridge at the workbench and then set it in place, or try to build it in place from the start?

Anyway, been a busy week at work so no time spent on the layout, but perhaps this weekend I can start on the scene. I'm really looking forward to giving it a whirl. And I'll keep it in mind that if it doesn't turn out as desired, WRECK IT OUT AND START OVER!!!!

Gary, I would DEFINITELY do ground foam with the static grass over that. NOTHING I have seen looks as good and as realistic as the static grass. I'd also use Envirotex or Woodland Scenics EZ-Water (I have had much success with both) and build the bridge in place, starting with the footings (bents) having built those on the workbench. I'd then assemble it all in place. But that is just *me*. You're mileage may vary.

If you decide to go the Woodland Scenics EZ Water method, it comes in pellets that the directions say to heat on a stove in a can and pour. Scrap that idea, it sucks. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I have found it best to line the area I want to pour and surrounding areas with plaster cloth over the styrafoam, pour the pellets in, and then heat them to a melt with a Wagner heat gun (found at any hardware store's paint dept.) in one had while blowing hot air in one direction with a hair dryer in the other hand to make slight ripples on the surface. Make sure to prep, detail and paint the bottom and sides of the river or lake first. MUCH easier than melt and pour, this is melt in place, much more reliable.

Tom, if all my bridge supports are from styrene, and I use a heat gun to melt the water pellets, won't I also melt the supports?

Also, the water in the bayou is a murky greenish brown. So paint the color onto the bottom of the bayou and then put a thin layer of the EZ water on top? I'm trying to remember how DocWayne did his water.... I think he painted the bottom and then used gloss medium brushed on top? DocWayne?

Well, I am off to the layout room to start the initial terrain building at the bridge location... knife, faom glue, wire brush, and a shop vac.