Which came first?

[Approach_Medium]

Hi;
I am trying to create a rail line that ascends into the hills, but am having trouble keeping the topography in check.
If I create the hills, and then lay my track, I have too many fills and cuts. I would like to make it look like the rr was cut along the ledge of an ascending river bank, then up into the mountains.
Problem is, I create the topography and have no idea as to what kind of grades my rr will have to climb/descend.

I'm thinking it would be better to lay the track first!
That way, I could have the correct grade, and then fill in the topo as deemed fit.
Anyone take this "backwards" approach to rr building?
Any other ideas?

Thanks

FW

 

[Alex23]

Hi FW,

Either way can be correct and it depends on the individuals own approach.

Personally, I prefer too set heights and gradients first. Then landscape after.

This way I can raise the ground under the track too remove any unsightly gaps between the track and the ground.

But like everything, everyone has their own approach, and who's too say there wrong.

HTH

Alex

 

[leeferr]

I also lay track first, bring the ground to the track and then landscape around it. You can raise the ground to cover the track and then cut the grade to the track, but your track spline heights need to be set to be able to do this or the spline points will raise and lower as you raise and lower the adjacent ground.

 

[Approach_Medium]

Thanks for the help guys
Laying the track first works best for me.
Wouldn't the prototype RR's love it if they could do this?

FW

 

[Harry_James_Potter]

yes but they'd lay all of their track flat and straight and thus make it very boring...

A few hills livens things up.

regards

Harry