Cliffhanger at Warley

[pilotfriend]

One of the very strange syndromes suffered by some in the model railway world is the 'expectation' of things, which for some reason MUST be included in a model railway display. This does seem to conflict with nature.... in other words, what is really outside of the window.

Cliffhanger was built as a working diorama and is carefully modelled on a small section of the Devon/Somerset cliffs. The area was photograhically surveyed using over 1000 shots, all taken by myself while flying close and low to the cliffs. The photos were taken on June 6th, so colour rendering is exact. I confess that the display was more strongly lit than I would prefer but that was necessary to counteract the ghastly sodium lights at the NEC which distort all colours.

The viewing point of the display is actually 'airbourne' over the sea. More or less, exactly the view that I enjoyed in my aircraft. The cliffs are scale height and there is no linear compression as is almost always the case in model railways. The funicular and lido were added along with the railway of course. While there are waterfalls similar to that portrayed along that bit of coast, I added mine where there is none.

The forest is one of the very few that is natural and the timber has never been harvested. It is the only place in the UK where sessile oaks (Quercus petraea) descend down to the sea due to the protection afforded by Countisbury Head from prevailing Westerly winds.

The colours and heights of tress are excatly as they exist and yes, the forest is huge when fully modelled in 4mm scale. I am very excited by botany and it was important to me to 'get it right'. The trees have very small colour differences but they are all the same species.

This is a screen shot from Google earth in July when the trees are slightly darker.



So for those who are disappointed, I am sorry that I did not include a goods yard, engine shed, ship, fairground and a village. This is how the real world looks and this is how small a narrow gauge railway can appear (which was the whole point of the diorama).

County Gate is a conventional 'table top' layout. Cliffhanger is a working scale diorama. Not the same animal at all. This is how God made this little bit of the World!


Thank you
JdF

[B.Meldon]

Firstly John let me say I was not at Warley so I have not seen your layout myself, but it sounds like you were a bit disappointed with some responses to Cliffhanger.

I wonder if this was from

[pilotfriend]

"I wonder if this was from

[petersmith1942]

If you are going to exhibit there is no point in bothering about adverse comments from other "experts" within the fraternity especially those posted with relative anonymity on fora (if this is a word). I thoroughly enjoyed it and so did all those around me with cameras waiting for the train(s) to pass. It was obvious that the cliff faces and trees had been carefully researched
I thought all the L and B layouts were great and, in my personal opinion, only let down by generally only average performing locos. Even the double header on County Gates had to be rescued by "the hand of God" much to the chagrin of those waiting patiently camera in hand for the train to traverse the bridge. I hope Peco do produce a loco to match the stock and it runs quietly and smoothly. Modelling the L and B will never be quite the same again of course
Peter Smith

[pilotfriend]

"Even the double header on County Gates had to be rescued by "the hand of God"

That was rare though..... a brush failed on Taw. The loco had clocked over 14 real miles however! I am giving it a big talking to as we speak.

"I hope Peco do produce a loco to match the stock and it runs quietly and smoothly"

I have a better chance of becoming an international sex symbol!  ;D

[B.Meldon]

If you are going to exhibit there is no point in bothering about adverse comments from other "experts" within the fraternity...........

Peter Smith

I totally agree with this Peter. If we paid any head to all the adverse comments about Meanderbahn over the years from other modellers it would never be exhibited again and we would get very wound up indeed!

I know of one modeller who stopped exhibiting altogether because of a couple of comments from others about how unrealistic his model railway looked to them. A bit of an over reaction if you ask me.

At the end of the day we all like critical acclaim from our peers but model railways are a very personal things, almost like a painting or a sculpture, some will give it praise others will be critical, but as long as the

[invercloy]

As someone who felt disappointment when I saw Cliffhanger at Warley, I'll bite.

Firstly let me say, John, I really like County Gate, as I've told you several times, and I was expecting similar from Cliffhanger to be of a similar level.  I wasn't expecting a goods yard, marshalling yard, ship, GWR branchline transfer, model of central London etc, but I just felt there wasn't enough to grab my attention whilst there were no trains running, sorry.  Perhaps running one train into the loop from one end, then the other would help break things up, or running them slightly quicker within the fiddle yard.  Running them both into the scenic section together lead to lots of time waiting in between, and at the end of the day a layout is at an exhibition to entertain.

You've mentioned to me before that you were interested in my opinion on your work, and I've said nothing that I wasn't prepared to say to you directly at Warley on Sunday, but at the time I think you were trying to get County Gate running, so I couldn't.  I've had criticism of my work by you, I'd only expect you to take it as graciously as I did. 

As Brian has said, a layout is a very personal thing, so won't all agree all the time.

[pilotfriend]

When I have made comments about your work, Tom, it has always been in the spirit of constructive suggestions and I have always stated what I thought was wrong. I have never just posted 'Dunbracken - disappointing'. If you had bothered to explain why in your posts it would have been fine. Let us move on.

The lido and loop, as stated above, are placed in a real bit of landscape which is to scale.

Is there any deficiency concerning the way that bit of landscape is modelled? That is a serious question. I really made the effort to get it right and several people who know the area well, including a person who runs boat trips by that area felt that it was exactly right as did a member of Exmoor Park and the Geological Survey team for that area. Yes, we sought feedback during construction.

This thread could be a useful discussion into how we display model trains. Cliffhanger is another way. Are you suggesting that we should always foreshorten a landscape to 'have more in it'. If this is the case, why?

County Gate is hugely foreshortened from an actual three miles, BTW.

Your comments about the operating sequence are accepted and we shall be evolving the programme. This takes time and it was the first outing for CH. I did not have that time before Warley as I was too busy organising L&B World.

Thank you
JdF

[tedp]

I regret I haven't yet seen Cliffhanger for real. Although judging from the photos the scenery overpowers the railway, this is the situation in the real world. It is different from anything we normally encounter in railway modelling as there is virtually no (well, as you say, little) compression. Viewing the trains as tiny caterpillars on the hillside may be unusual to many visitors who are used to and (like myself) probably even like the challenge of shoehorning an idea into a small space.

Some observers mention a lack of train movement. However, a one minute pause between trains (quoting Blair) isn't unusual in exhibition conditions. When I exhibit Rae Bridge, there is a similar interval between trains. If it takes too long, I run a tram to prevent people from turning away. I suggested to Blair the funicular might be timed to run in between trains. Increasing the presence of operating staff to discuss the layout with the public at the front may help as well.

Despite the criticism, I think Cliffhanger is a remarkable idea that took courage and perseverance to carry out. It certainly isn't my kind of layout, but probably it cannot be regarded as a model railway anyway, instead as a stunning theatrical display in which a train happens to run by.

[pilotfriend]

The actual gap between trains is actually 2.5 minutes on average. The funicular runs independently with 20sec stops at all stations. It is designed not to be seen from the other end of the layout.

It is hard to see detail on the tracks and station although it is there. This is what one experiences looking at a real train from a distance.

This is what the station looks like close up.



Cliffhanger was designed to be appealing to the general public and in that it appears to have worked quite well judging from the crowds and comments.

[tedp]

Yes I have seen some close-ups on your website. The detail is there, but the main impression is that awesome hillside. How close can the public come to view the details?

Regarding the 2.5 minute interval between trains, perhaps it would help to reduce that. Despite the fact it isn't the East Coast mainline, the 'theater' function at an exhibition may ask for some compromise.  ;D

[jaymzhatstand]

Having spent most of the exhibition sat between CH and CG, the only negative comments I came across were from people depricating their own efforts in comparison!  I think with CH not being what people expext from a layout could be the main reason for their negativity.  The arm-chair modeller being unable to think outside the box as it were.

There were plenty of layouts that weren't within my sphere of interest, but rather than being negative towards them, I had a quick look for anything which might have a bit of personal interest and then move on.  Constructive criticism. If well put together is generally a good thing, but the attitude of 'I wouldn't build it like that so I'll slag it off' is totally unwarranted and often a sign of jealousy.

As I said to John, CH was, in my opinion breathtaking, and I feel it will also appeal to those who have been brought to a show who are maybe not full rail-aholics (often, but not exclusively a begrudging wife!) The look on many people's faces as they went round the corner to get their first glimpse was often the 'kid on Christmas morning' look of wide-eyed amazement!

As others have hinted at, you can't please everyone all the time, but if you're happy with it, and de-socked by it then you're onto a winner!

Just my five-penneth worth!

Cheers

J

[petersmith1942]

Sorry to respond twice but
1 I really look out these days for something different and Cliffhanger is different and worthwhile
2 From my experience on Sunday 2.5 minutes between movements is too long and I felt the twinges of others frustration, especially those with cameras (cameras used to be annoying only to operators, not so sure now)
3 I am not particularly trivial but whilst waiting for the train I did look for the guess the number of trees competition!So as a genuine enthusiast my mind wandered during the wait
4 there seem to be one or two personal issues spoiling this discussion of a really interesting contribution to the 009 world
5 Clffhanger fitted perfectly into the L and B theme which I really enjoyed even though my first love these days is US narrow gauge. I would never do Land B because I am unfortunately old enough to have seen it modelled virtually to perfection in a larger scale in the pages of RM
Peter Smith

[pilotfriend]

Those cliffs are the highest in the UK and in themselves are IMO worth celebrating.

It is not possible to speed up the train operation as each train has to go back to its correct position before the sequence begins again. We are looking, as stated earlier to change timing a little but nothing can speed up the rear repositioning.

If bookings and further funds allow, we do intend to add a screen with live camera shots from differing angles, including two from the railcars. This will also include behind the scenes shots. This will require some more difficult programming so it is not as simple as it sounds.

We had a few problems running the three layouts as can be imagined. Insufficient time was given at Warley as electricity was not switched on until 8.00 hrs and the public were in before we could get all three running properly. This affected County Gate the most as this is the most complicated. Some of our Desperados were given tasks they had not done before and IMO they did very well indeed. It is so much easier with one layout in show, believe me. This did, at times result in longer delays. Three layouts was a one-off to support the L&B World. The L&B Trust benefitted hugely from the show and it is probable that Warley itself benefitted.

Some of our railcar chassis have to be run several circuits before they are running to specified speeds and this cannot be hurried.

[invercloy]

When I have made comments about your work, Tom, it has always been in the spirit of constructive suggestions and I have always stated what I thought was wrong. I have never just posted 'Dunbracken - disappointing'. If you had bothered to explain why in your posts it would have been fine.

I have to be careful with what I post on the location I posted that comment, I'm sure you are well able to guess why given a recent update to your website!  So I felt it best to be brief, like I said, I'd have happily talked to you about it on Sunday but you were busy.

Is there any deficiency concerning the way that bit of landscape is modelled? That is a serious question. I really made the effort to get it right and several people who know the area well, including a person who runs boat trips by that area felt that it was exactly right as did a member of Exmoor Park and the Geological Survey team for that area. Yes, we sought feedback during construction.

To my mind, no there's nothing wrong with the landscape, it looks like North Devon.  I remember that coastline well from when I used to travel along it to go and volunteer in the early days of Woody Bay.  The colours did look a bit vibrant, but perhaps that was due to the lighting having to be turned up like you mentioned above, and the trees looked quite uniform in size and colour from the front, but if I remember right, that's reasonably prototypical.

This thread could be a useful discussion into how we display model trains. Cliffhanger is another way. Are you suggesting that we should always foreshorten a landscape to 'have more in it'. If this is the case, why?

Good idea.  I don't think we should foreshorten layouts if avoidable, I'm all for the idea of a 'layout in a landscape', but I think that in the available space there should be enough natural features or buildings (the latter not being appropriate in your case) to keep interest in the areas of the layout where there is no track.

Your comments about the operating sequence are accepted and we shall be evolving the programme. This takes time and it was the first outing for CH. I did not have that time before Warley as I was too busy organising L&B World.

Fair enough, I think that thing comes in time with a new layout.  We had issues first time out with Isle Ornsay, but hopefully it will be better at Barton le Clay and NGSW.

Let us move on.

Yes, lets.