Page 2 of 2
Re: Article: Tunnels
Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 12:12 pm
by pete12345
I agree with what Graham says- if you have to make one part over or under-scale, keep everything else in proportion. Having a tunnel that is slightly overscale looks much better than one that is the correct height, but too wide- it will look squashed up. The same goes for 00 trackwork. Having the sleepers at HO scale spacing (therefore underscale for 00) looks much better than spacing out the sleepers and leaving the track gauge underscale (unless you want a narrow gauge look
)
Pete
Re: Article: Tunnels
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 11:43 am
by gppsoftware
pete12345 wrote:I agree with what Graham says- if you have to make one part over or under-scale, keep everything else in proportion. Having a tunnel that is slightly overscale looks much better than one that is the correct height, but too wide- it will look squashed up. The same goes for 00 trackwork. Having the sleepers at HO scale spacing (therefore underscale for 00) looks much better than spacing out the sleepers and leaving the track gauge underscale (unless you want a narrow gauge look
)
Pete
Thanks Pete.
I should correct myself. I wrote that my model was of the Western end of Dainton tunnel. It is actually the Eastern end - the two are quite different in appearance but have the same tunnel mouth size/profile.
Graham Plowman