Joined
·
461 Posts
What would be a good layout height for an exhibition layout?
(feet and inches please)
Pete
(feet and inches please)
Pete
Layout Height
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
QUOTE (Peter_Harvey @ 8 Apr 2007, 21:35) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What would be a good layout height for an exhibition layout?
(feet and inches please)
Pete
Porters Lock is approx 44" if my memory serves me right Pete but I wouldn't like to advocate that as a standard. It does seem about right though I must say both for viewing and ease of building.
(feet and inches please)
Pete
Porters Lock is approx 44" if my memory serves me right Pete but I wouldn't like to advocate that as a standard. It does seem about right though I must say both for viewing and ease of building.
Joined
·
90 Posts
Eye level for a seated adult. This means that small children do not need to be lifted or climb on steps/chairs to view the layout, more importantly it also means that wheelchair users are not alienated as they have no chance of being lifted to see higher layouts!
Most of my small layouts are not self supporting and sit on tables, this brings them out a little lower than eye level for a seated adult but means they are viewable by all. My one freestanding layout has legs which bring it to the same height.
The option is available for a tall person to sit or bend to view a low layout, the reverse is not true with high baseboards.
Most of my small layouts are not self supporting and sit on tables, this brings them out a little lower than eye level for a seated adult but means they are viewable by all. My one freestanding layout has legs which bring it to the same height.
The option is available for a tall person to sit or bend to view a low layout, the reverse is not true with high baseboards.
Joined
·
7,397 Posts
I was at the Australian model rai exhibition yesterday in Collingwood and one of the best layouts there was set at my eye level. That would be the tracks at around five feet or five and a half. I thought this was too high as I had difficulty seeing some of the stuff at the back, kids just wouldn't see this at all nor people in wheelchairs. My current layout is set at four and I believe this is a good height as it's somewhere in the middle between accessability and viewability.
Joined
·
90 Posts
QUOTE (neil_s_wood @ 9 Apr 2007, 00:28) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I was at the Australian model rai exhibition yesterday in Collingwood and one of the best layouts there was set at my eye level. That would be the tracks at around five feet or five and a half. I thought this was too high as I had difficulty seeing some of the stuff at the back, kids just wouldn't see this at all nor people in wheelchairs. My current layout is set at four and I believe this is a good height as it's somewhere in the middle between accessability and viewability.
I saw one at a show earlier this year which was about shoulder height on me (I'm 5'8"). It was far to high for comfortable viewing, the foreground was fine but the layout was about four feet from front to back and I couldn't see the rear properly. There were wheelchair users visiting the show, they wouldn't have been able to see the layout at all. Small (and not so small) children were constantly being lifted to view the layout, they probably had the best view as they were parked on father's shoulder for an even higher viewpoint than a standing adult.
On top of that the operators seemed to be having difficulty seeing what they were doing to run the trains, not a recommendation for layout heights at all!
I saw one at a show earlier this year which was about shoulder height on me (I'm 5'8"). It was far to high for comfortable viewing, the foreground was fine but the layout was about four feet from front to back and I couldn't see the rear properly. There were wheelchair users visiting the show, they wouldn't have been able to see the layout at all. Small (and not so small) children were constantly being lifted to view the layout, they probably had the best view as they were parked on father's shoulder for an even higher viewpoint than a standing adult.
On top of that the operators seemed to be having difficulty seeing what they were doing to run the trains, not a recommendation for layout heights at all!
Joined
·
2,151 Posts
The "Fremo Group" 's modular heights from floor to rail tip are 1300 mm's.(5 foot 11'')
I admit its not truly designed for the disabled on wheelchairs.
![]()
Baykal
I admit its not truly designed for the disabled on wheelchairs.
Baykal
Joined
·
13,319 Posts
QUOTE (Bob Hughes @ 8 Apr 2007, 21:52) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Eye level for a seated adult. This means that small children do not need to be lifted or climb on steps/chairs to view the layout, more importantly it also means that wheelchair users are not alienated as they have no chance of being lifted to see higher layouts!
The option is available for a tall person to sit or bend to view a low layout, the reverse is not true with high baseboards.
St.Laurent is 39" to rail height, some of the scenery is 3 - 4" lower & some of it up to 12" higher.
We find that this is suitable mor most people - so far we have had not adverse comments.
It may be that SL is a tad on the low side - it seems that somewhre between 39 - 44" is about the right height.
I agree with the comment about wheelchair users - there were some (IMHO unacceptable) comments on a forum some time ago whereas the writer more or less stated that due to the low numbers of people in wheelchairs they did not have to be considered ! Needless to say, in my best sledgehammer dimploymacy mode I made the comment that "there for the grace of God, anyone of us could be in a wheelchair this time next month". There - Monday rant over.
Hope this helps.
BTW - looks like I'm a Station Master now - but I thought they now had Duty Station Managers !
The option is available for a tall person to sit or bend to view a low layout, the reverse is not true with high baseboards.
St.Laurent is 39" to rail height, some of the scenery is 3 - 4" lower & some of it up to 12" higher.
We find that this is suitable mor most people - so far we have had not adverse comments.
It may be that SL is a tad on the low side - it seems that somewhre between 39 - 44" is about the right height.
I agree with the comment about wheelchair users - there were some (IMHO unacceptable) comments on a forum some time ago whereas the writer more or less stated that due to the low numbers of people in wheelchairs they did not have to be considered ! Needless to say, in my best sledgehammer dimploymacy mode I made the comment that "there for the grace of God, anyone of us could be in a wheelchair this time next month". There - Monday rant over.
Hope this helps.
BTW - looks like I'm a Station Master now - but I thought they now had Duty Station Managers !
Joined
·
13,319 Posts
QUOTE (neil_s_wood @ 9 Apr 2007, 00:28) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I was at the Australian model rai exhibition yesterday in Collingwood and one of the best layouts there was set at my eye level. That would be the tracks at around five feet or five and a half. I thought this was too high as I had difficulty seeing some of the stuff at the back, kids just wouldn't see this at all nor people in wheelchairs. My current layout is set at four and I believe this is a good height as it's somewhere in the middle between accessability and viewability.
Be no good taking Maggie to see this one then - she's only 4'12" !
Be no good taking Maggie to see this one then - she's only 4'12" !
Joined
·
4,505 Posts
"the Fremo's group are 1300mm (5ft 11inch)" - I make 1300mm = 4ft 4inch. This seems low, looking at the height of the layout in the photo compared with those walking round it. 4ft 11inch is about 1475mm which looks closer to the picture. Any chance of clarification at all, please?
Regards,
John Webb
Regards,
John Webb
Joined
·
2,151 Posts
QUOTE (John Webb @ 9 Apr 2007, 10:17) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>"the Fremo's group are 1300mm (5ft 11inch)" - I make 1300mm = 4ft 4inch. This seems low, looking at the height of the layout in the photo compared with those walking round it. 4ft 11inch is about 1475mm which looks closer to the picture. Any chance of clarification at all, please?
Regards,
John Webb
John,
Peter asked the height in feet. Sorry we are all metric down here not so familiar with inches and foots. The actual height as I have said is 1300 mm's thats what they say in their site.
Obviously I miscalculated it.
baykal
Regards,
John Webb
John,
Peter asked the height in feet. Sorry we are all metric down here not so familiar with inches and foots. The actual height as I have said is 1300 mm's thats what they say in their site.
Obviously I miscalculated it.
baykal
Joined
·
90 Posts
QUOTE (dbclass50 @ 9 Apr 2007, 10:15) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>BTW - looks like I'm a Station Master now - but I thought they now had Duty Station Managers !
Obviously stuck in the steam age where station masters ruled the roost.
![]()
Now, maybe if you were to replace your BR50 with something a bit newer ... and if I replace the Austerity in my avatar with an 08 in Vermin Trains livery do I become a train manager instead of a guard?
![]()
Obviously stuck in the steam age where station masters ruled the roost.
Now, maybe if you were to replace your BR50 with something a bit newer ... and if I replace the Austerity in my avatar with an 08 in Vermin Trains livery do I become a train manager instead of a guard?
Joined
·
13,319 Posts
I think I'll stick to my BR50 - maybe I'll look up the German for Station Master - one things for certain - it will be a much linger word !.
Like the "Vermin Trains" - maybe we ought to start a "nicknames" thread ?
Could start off with ;
Notwork Rail
Like the "Vermin Trains" - maybe we ought to start a "nicknames" thread ?
Could start off with ;
Notwork Rail
Joined
·
90 Posts
Bahnhofmeister?
Vermin Trains is pretty common around here (near Crewe)
I quite like Farce Great Western, from what I hear it sums up their operations to a tee.
Vermin Trains is pretty common around here (near Crewe)
I quite like Farce Great Western, from what I hear it sums up their operations to a tee.
Hi Peter
This is a recurring topic and you'll always get various answers.
Really its down to two factors., 1) What's your audience and 2) How tall are you/your operators? Durring an exhibition day the operators will need to be able to sit and still be able to see the trains running and reach over to access all sections of the railway.
I have always built my exhibition layouts with the baseboard nominally at one metre above floor. As this allows virtually all ages to view it. Don't forget exhibition layouts are viewed by lots of children and those in wheelchairs too. At a metre high I don't find working on the layout to much of a problem on the back either. But if you go a lot higher, then those in the above categories won't be able to view the layout and you'll find you can't reach everything easily (Back to front distance) assuming your operating from the rear?
In the end there is no set height for any layout. But think carefully of your operators who will need to see and reach over a back scene which may be some 300mm or more above the track level and those who will eventually be admiring your work.
This is a recurring topic and you'll always get various answers.
Really its down to two factors., 1) What's your audience and 2) How tall are you/your operators? Durring an exhibition day the operators will need to be able to sit and still be able to see the trains running and reach over to access all sections of the railway.
I have always built my exhibition layouts with the baseboard nominally at one metre above floor. As this allows virtually all ages to view it. Don't forget exhibition layouts are viewed by lots of children and those in wheelchairs too. At a metre high I don't find working on the layout to much of a problem on the back either. But if you go a lot higher, then those in the above categories won't be able to view the layout and you'll find you can't reach everything easily (Back to front distance) assuming your operating from the rear?
In the end there is no set height for any layout. But think carefully of your operators who will need to see and reach over a back scene which may be some 300mm or more above the track level and those who will eventually be admiring your work.
Joined
·
13,319 Posts
QUOTE (John @ 9 Apr 2007, 21:04) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Yes it is longer, but not by much - Bahnhofsvorsteher.
Thanks for that !
Thanks for that !
QUOTE (dbclass50 @ 9 Apr 2007, 10:15) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>St.Laurent is 39" to rail height, some of the scenery is 3 - 4" lower & some of it up to 12" higher.
We find that this is suitable mor most people.
"sledgehammer dimploymacy mode"
BTW - looks like I'm a Station Master now - but I thought they now had Duty Station Managers !
Quite agree on the height front -most layouts I have seen at shows seem to be about this sort of height.
Dimploymacy - Didn't see you at the beer fest.
Congratulations on your elevation.
Regards
John
We find that this is suitable mor most people.
"sledgehammer dimploymacy mode"
BTW - looks like I'm a Station Master now - but I thought they now had Duty Station Managers !
Quite agree on the height front -most layouts I have seen at shows seem to be about this sort of height.
Dimploymacy - Didn't see you at the beer fest.
Congratulations on your elevation.
Regards
John
Personally I don't like the "birds eye view" of layouts where you look down on them. I find it detracts for the realism and can dilute the effect.
The best layouts I've seen at exhibitions tend to be set higher at around the 4 foot + or - a couple of inches, or even higher.
The best layouts I've seen at exhibitions tend to be set higher at around the 4 foot + or - a couple of inches, or even higher.
Joined
·
56 Posts
I have always gone for 60" for home layouts as I like a high layout for ease of getting under. I also hate looking down on layouts from a birds eye view.
Shaun
Shaun
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Join the discussion
