cromptonnut Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 As it seems that, although standards haven't yet been locked down, there is enough momentum both generally on RMWeb and within our area group to "make a success" of it. Edit: Standards now defined - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/88537-rmweb-modular-project-standards/ Just to quickly clarify a point that has caused a little confusion, a "module" is defined as a single board, or multiple boards creating a self-contained scene, which can (within reason) be any length and width overall, with whatever tracks in whatever position, as long as at the extreme ends of your contribution there are track(s), board widths and frame depths that match the standard. This enables existing layouts to become part of "the greater project" with the addition of a simple converter board at the end(s) that would normally disappear "off scene" to a fiddle yard, for example. Although perhaps not in "the standard" I would encourage SECAG contributors to create at least one "plain straight" (or curved) board (to standards) to go with their "modules" which will enable a greater distance between stations, junctions, yards etc. This would need be no more complicated than 4ft of straight track, fenced either side, on simple flat scenery (although I'd encourage a bit of creativity; hills, bridges, rivers, embankments etc). But this is by no means essential, particularly if you can't fit it in your car... it just adds length at very little overall extra cost. I just wanted to start this thread to see what ideas people had - or could think about - for their "modules" as if we find that, for example, we have six terminus stations between us then someone needs to work on some junctions and plain track modules (straight and curved) to extend what we had available. Obviously what turns up at any individual meet-up would be different each time, but if we can start with some semblance of a workable layout idea then it will make everyone's lives easier. You may well of course choose to build several different "modular scenes" that will work individually and choose to bring along relevant ones for a meet, or bring them all along and spread them out amongst the design as a whole. Over to you... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Claude_Dreyfus Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 25, 2014 Apologies if this has been agreed. Will this be single or double-track, either? I am not sure if the 'main' thread got that far! Are we considering a SECAG 'branch line' approach, or throwing our lot in with the main group? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Hi Claude I don't think "single or double" has quite been decided upon yet. We're still waiting for Andy Y to "lock down" what the standards are. Personally I think single with passing loops at stations is probably going to give us a more intense service and operational challenges particularly if we can run to "fast clock timetable". I do like the idea of a "SECAG branch line" that is effectively a self-contained branch that joins to the rest of the modular world but that does of course mean we'd have to all be available and willing to travel to wherever that meeting is (or be happy to let others take our modules I guess). I don't know if it necessarily makes any difference overall as long as each of our module "unit" contributions match "the standard" then we can go en mass to a national meetup and assemble our branch line - or simply break up our individual module contributions around the design as a whole. I suppose the thing is to see what us as a group want - do we want to pick a line (something like the Bluebell, for example, is an obvious option) and pick bits between us to work on, or just work on our own random ideas for things that we want, that can work together or be spread out around a larger project. One thing to remember is that there is no reason we can't have "mini groups" working on "modules" - if two or three of you living close to each other wanted to collaborate to build on a larger station, which can all fit in one car and just one of you minimum can bring it to a meetup somewhere, that seems to be fine and within the spirit of the concept. Individually you could also knock up a couple of simple plainer boards to work on at home that can join to "the standard" anywhere else. You may also find that, for example, that there are people nearby who are happy to offer their skills to help you with your contributions on an occasional basis (I'm crap at woodwork, for example...) to help us all raise our standards. So many options... so much opportunity... what do people think? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Claude_Dreyfus Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 25, 2014 I do like the idea of a "SECAG branch line" that is effectively a self-contained branch that joins to the rest of the modular world but that does of course mean we'd have to all be available and willing to travel to wherever that meeting is (or be happy to let others take our modules I guess). I don't know if it necessarily makes any difference overall as long as each of our module "unit" contributions match "the standard" then we can go en mass to a national meetup and assemble our branch line - or simply break up our individual module contributions around the design as a whole. Yes, that makes sense. We don't want to box ourselves in, or become too dependent on everyone showing up at any given event. This could be stand-alone if a we had an area group meeting, form part of the whole if only a couple of modules attended a wider meeting, or form an area group-specific branch if enough turn up to a much bigger meet. Which assumes these will take place! I suppose the thing is to see what us as a group want - do we want to pick a line (something like the Bluebell, for example, is an obvious option) and pick bits between us to work on, or just work on our own random ideas for things that we want, that can work together or be spread out around a larger project. I wondered about this when the idea for SECAR 'group' modules came about. Not necessarily as restrictive as a specific line, but perhaps following a regional theme; for example former Southern region and its predecessors/constituents or successors. If so, I would always add that this would be a broad suggested theme and not a diktat...if someone wanted to build a North Eastern module or even - heaven forbid - a Great Western Modules, then fine; we are, after all, in the SECAR group for geographical reasons, not modelling poison... ...it just gets shoved to the far corner of the layout, that's all! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BlueLightning Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 25, 2014 I like the idea of having a south east themed SECAG branchline and with the suggestion there about the Bluebell I just thought I would make it known that I have track plans for all 4 of the stations on the line as they are now as well as Sheffield Park as a through station in BR days. I also have track plans for several other from LBCSR / SR / BR(S) Stations such as those on the former Cuckoo Line if anyone would be interested in using these in there modules. My personal preference for a module I could contribute would be Hailsham Station as that is where I now live however I would be just as happy to build a scenic section if we had to many stations. Gary Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 I'm honestly open to any options at present - I do like your thought of a "broadly southern or its constituents" theme although of course one of the "risks" of modular setups is that you'll get modern trains passing through representations of stations that closed 40 years before. I think that the "operations" side of things will be enough to get around that mismatch though I'd be very much against rigid "all SECAG modules must" rules (apart from the basic "matching RMWeb modular standards" requirement) but more than happy for there to be a concensus of opinion as to where we go. But whatever we choose to model, we need to make sure that we don't all end up modelling the same thing, whether it's all stations or junctions or whatever, because without a variety of types of module contents... it'll all get very boring very quickly! I'm initially looking at a couple of sets of boards that will form individual modules myself that will eventually form a 'standalone' layout in their own right. - Small passing loop station 8ft - A plain board with a river - three 60 degree curve units with basic scenery - 8ft fiddle yard (this will be sceniced so can be a module in its own right) - Small "end of the line" module to truncate the line past the station to enable the modules to form a layout in their own right. Probably just a headshunt and a couple of sidings. - A junction module It'll be the woodwork that causes me difficulty... it always does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 My personal preference for a module I could contribute would be Hailsham Station as that is where I now live however I would be just as happy to build a scenic section if we had to many stations. I don't think we'll ever necesarily have "too many stations" but what we do need is the simple scenic boards inbetween, which will spread out the gaps between stations and at least give an impression of the train travelling from somewhere to somewhere else. Hence my suggestion that we all build a plain board as well which we don't necessarily use (or have room for) at home which will expand our capabilities. Re the track plans, it may be of interest to people wanting to collaborate on a larger project; certainly I know something like SP or HK at the Bluebell would be beyond my individual capabilities in a reasonable time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Claude_Dreyfus Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 25, 2014 I'm not too sure we need to worry about too many stations, junctions etc. There will be lots of grand plans to begin with, but I suspect there will be a fair number of 'plain' boards in the end. I do fancy giving a couple of boards a go, but these would simply be scenic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 25, 2014 I am very interested in doing some modules. At present though, I probably would only to be able to do a curved or straight plain module due to working on a new layout but eventually would be keen to build a station which would be Southern region although highly likely to be South Western as thats where my main interest in UK outline is. I might be able to persuade a few others ot consider building modules who are not on RMweb but live in the South East. Will have to speak with them the next time I see them. Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Hi Roundhouse, sounds good You could always look at building a "converter board" between the layout you are working on and "the standard when it gets defined" so that your layout could become part of a bigger project? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted July 25, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 25, 2014 Hi Roundhouse, sounds good You could always look at building a "converter board" between the layout you are working on and "the standard when it gets defined" so that your layout could become part of a bigger project? The one currently being built is Czech HO so doubt it will be of much use on a Uk set up. The plain modules I hope can be use on both (and possibly at US Freemo meets) depending on what I put on them. I have plans to build a new Southern Region layout in the not too distant future but space is limited at present. I need to build the 20 ft shed!! Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 OK 3 modules (ultimately) Module 1st: top left (as I look at it) track apex enters from 30' angle to top face of board; straight through and exits to bottom face (exiting on a temporary connector end plate. a junction just after entering the board splits to form double track - a through station loop (single/double platform) along the top face of triangle leaving module 1 on the right side of board. Module 2nd: to right of first module - end of station (double track) - the board is a near mirror image of Module 1. Module 3rd: takes the two bottom face single tracks to join at the bottom apex (has a bit of a surprise I'm working on. The modules would form a T shape. But until such time as they are progressed they can be used in any form. As for Southern 'colours' I doubt it at this stage. Probably more rural than urban. All very rough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GRC Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 i will look to extend my Shillingstone layout as I've said elsewhere. Need to understand some more about the standards before finally committing as I want to stick with C&L fine scale.track I will have 4 foot extender boards each side of the station once I've worked out if I can fit them in the car with the scenics on these dependent on space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Still throwing ideas around - in absence of a topic grouping. I have also decided (keeping in spirit with cromptonnut's idea of a "plain" module for each "active" module) to create this one Very simple 60' curve module - pure scenic (nondescript location). A 3ft front and angular edges to other side (I struggle with curved woodwork). It is slightly greater than a R4 curve so should keep all locos happy. Shouldn't take too long to get built (boards/track/wired) - everything to hand to at least get that far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 27, 2014 Author Share Posted July 27, 2014 Ihave similar plans But away from home at present so can't keep drawing up all these ideas that keep coming to mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 All we need is six and we could make a roundy-roundy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 27, 2014 Author Share Posted July 27, 2014 Curves can of course be visually 'relaxed' with fairly simple scenery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 i will look to extend my Shillingstone layout as I've said elsewhere. Need to understand some more about the standards before finally committing as I want to stick with C&L fine scale.track I will have 4 foot extender boards each side of the station once I've worked out if I can fit them in the car with the scenics on these dependent on space. The "converter boards" don't necessarily need to be any more than flat boards with maybe an inch or two gentle embankment either side of the track with anything larger (such as trees) removable for transit; I plan to have little scenery around the edge inch or two of each board so that anything on them is "inside" the frame of the other when stacked closely for transport purposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted August 16, 2014 Author Share Posted August 16, 2014 So... how is everyone getting on? I'm plodding on with my first module fairly well, should be complete by the end of September (would be this month but we have a 2 week holiday and no room in the car for the board). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Temeraire Posted August 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 20, 2014 You could always look at building a "converter board" between the layout you are working on and "the standard when it gets defined" so that your layout could become part of a bigger project? I've been pondering this one. I could knock up a converter board to enable "Tidworth" to become the end of the line or branch perhaps? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 Perfectly possible option there Ian - although we don't want too many termini. I'm planning an 8ft station module that is straight double track, useable as a through station, with a selection of addons that can make it a terminus one end, and a pair of double to single track converter the other so it can be used within single or double track as well. We just need someone to build a couple of junction type boards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share Posted September 6, 2014 I've just done a quick calculation on the modules I'm intending to work on, and if everything goes to plan and it all gets constructed it could well end up at about 45ft of boards. That could be fun to fit in a Fiesta... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.