British Modular System - the initial ideas and debates

[PaulRhB]

With the US version we had points operated by PC, DCC with push buttons and switches, manual pull push rods under the board, manual with switches next to them connected by a short wire and standard Peco points with finger control. The last one is slightly more risky as it relies on the blade contact and can get dirty quickly.

[Talltim]

I used the method you described for my module. (As yet unfinished and so not actually tested) however, knowing the requirement to clamp led me to make the ends of double thickness ply without the spacer blocks.

You don't need to specify everything in a standard, let people use common sense.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Talltim

[Talltim]

With regards to module end widths, there is no technical reason for a standard, it's purely aesthetic. Having had the opportunity to study some module joins my opinion is that if you are aiming for visual coherence between disparate modules built by people who may never have met before, the fewer disparities the better. Despite Freemo having ballast and grass recommendations, there were still differences at the joins, ballast width, density of flock, weathering of track etc. However the human mind is an an amazing thing, it is very good at suspending disbelief and ignoring discrepancies if it wants to, and so you (I) didn't really see the differences unless I actively looked for them.

But, the more discrepancies there are, the more likely they are to jar, so I think the end width does matter, plus it's one of the easier end features to specify, definitely easier than colour!

 

However

With the best will in the world and lots of dedicated plain track module builders, you are still never going to get scale distance between the feature (town, station, industry etc) modules. The suspension of disbelief comes into play again, selective compression. However you could choose a different approach for a module standard, where each module is scenically self contained and has an 'end-scene' which trains disappear though to the next module, travelling though lots of imaginary countryside in the transition. Not my preferred option but I thought I'd throw it out there.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Talltim

[Suzie]

If you are going to clamp you need to define the clamping areas, there is no point in colouring the track bus sockets if the modules are reversable - left goes to left and right to right regardless of the colour (having to connect red to black on a reversed module will confuse people!). If modules only have local control then the module will need someone to man the 'box  - having DCC control allows control from the regional signal centre (easy with JMRI nowadays) and perfectly prototypical, and if colour light signalling is used there might be something happening three modules away that will affect the local aspects. A separate accessory bus makes life easier, and specifying track circuit detectors would be a good idea too. The minimum radius does need to be defined - and the nature of modular setups is that they are big so there is no need to compromise - be brave and specify 60" or whatever a long radius Peco code 70 point is and run those close-coupled trains. Different running sessions can run different stock so coupling standards are not mega important unless there is a lot of wagon load freight to be dealt with.

 

It is going to be hard to make modules that are both DC and DCC friendly - not many DC users are going to be convinced that wiring their track bus through the module with 2.5mm² cable and adding the accessory bus and feedback bus is essential for when it pops up in a DCC set-up. Someone will have to set the standards, and if people want to join in they can and if they don't like it they can stay at home.

 

I think there is no doubt that a UK setup will be quite a bit different to a US one and probably a lot busier with double track main line, single track branch line, junction stations, terminal stations and branch stations with passenger timetables (and cancellations!) rather than lots of industries. It should not be too hard to stock up for depicting the last thirty years in a secondary area, 14x, 15x or 17x DMUs and the odd block freight with a 59/60/66/70 (or perhaps something older) on it and that could be almost any part of the country - the stock only gets seriously regional as you go back in time.

[cromptonnut]

 The suspension of disbelief comes into play again, selective compression. However you could choose a different approach for a module standard, where each module is scenically self contained and has an 'end-scene' which trains disappear though to the next module, travelling though lots of imaginary countryside in the transition. Not my preferred option but I thought I'd throw it out there.

 

A bit like an APA box perhaps...?

 

I personally much prefer the idea of 'disappearing through an exit' because that then gives people the opportunity to model different seasons - or in fact different parts of the country - without them looking out of place yet the trains running through them look fine.

[trisonic]

Plenty of double track in the US. The private railroad companies are vastly profitable.

 

Why look at it as just way of getting trains whizzing around? You could have a mainline double-tracked and a full branchline running off it, or two or three each with their own passenger service and industries....

 

The possibilities are endless (well, almost) - here is a real chance to, using a cliche, think outside the usual box or parameters. Don’t restrict yourself to the current norm.

 

Best, Pete.

 

Edit: I wrote this post in reply to Suzie.....

Edited July 7, 2014 by trisonic

[jonhall]

From an operational pov the single track would be a like more interesting. The n guage multi-track modules* I've seen seem to mostly involve trains thrashing around disparate modules. I like the ide that each module could be a layout on its own, and that freight could be passed to and fro.

 

Jon

*not that I have studied them closely - they really don't float my boat.

[The Evil Bus Driver]

G clamps work well with solid thick timber ends.  Anyone using double skin thin ply separated by blocks and open frame will confirm that joining boards with G clamps is only likely to deform the inner ply beam.

 

It may not seem obvious to you but I can see the need for standards being set in addition to rail top height above ground and track gauge.

You could have a standard for a board connection, or even produce a cutting list and engineering drawing. I was thinking about this earlier on, what if double skin ply is used. Perhaps a consensus can be reached. Or perhaps even a "Converter board" Two skin ply would probably be my preference, due to weight considerations. No reason you couldn't have a solid piece at the end to allow for a g-clamp.

 

I have decided to have a go at making a Freemo module. I just need to gather to wood and things ready, then when some definitive ideas come out i can get cracking. My main considerations are this:

 

Board joins

Wiring

Connecting electrically to the next board (although crocodile clips would work, maybe have bullet connectors or something).

 

You could fit a switch underneath to allow for going between DC/DCC operation, depending on what it's used for 'at home'.

Edited July 7, 2014 by The Evil Bus Driver

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On thing that I havent noticed mentions (apologies if it has), is couplings.

 

With the US outline most people now use Kadee or equivalent knuckle couplers so stock is generally all compatible.

 

WIth many using these on UK outline stock whilst others use tension lock etc a standard would be needed. Luckily most modern stock has NEM boxes which makes it a little easier to swap couplers.

This is true, although in some cases people might bring stock that they usually run in a fixed formation meaning only swapping one or two couplers. That's pretty much what I would do ie have a mk1 rake and set it up in a particular way,  using the pipe  couplers and leaving the tension locks or kadees on at the ends of the rake (I can use both). But perhaps in this case couplings are a discussion for further down the line.

Edited July 7, 2014 by The Evil Bus Driver

[roundhouse]

I know I am reverting back to my layout at Freemo. However it is wired to be an independent layout running with Digitrax system (until recently it was as a DC layout but we just put all the switches in one direction and plugged the DCC track power into the handheld control socket).

 

I have gone for DCC operated turnouts using my Digitrax system but it is completely isolated from the track power (which would be the same for traditionally controlled turnouts outs).

 

So I have a track power socket under the layout t wired to a switch that can be used to switch between my own track power and the Freemo wires. The same method could be used to swap between DC and DCC. One important point here is to make sure your system isn't plugged into the track power when in Modular mode to avoid a loco bridging the modules and the switch being the wrong way.

 

The main point I am hoping that I am making is that it is very simple simple be able to alternate between different systems with a little thought.

 

Ian

[trisonic]

Like I said: think "operational challenges" rather then "difficult problems"

 

(gosh, I really sound like a manager )

I see a self-Improvemnt book coming on in your future!

 

Seriously it’s a way to get away from the layout standard designs of the past 60 years.....or think of it as an Exhibition where every attendee is also an Exhibitor. There is no audience only players, there is no (that’s enough of that, here’s your medicine for the night, Pete).....

 

 

Best, Pete.

[FelixM]

Hi everyone,

 

do you really want to start from zero and repeat all those errors and bad decisions others have already done? There is a modular system which is already running and just waits to be adapted by you: The Fremo (Freundeskreis europäischer Modellbahnen / Friends of European Model Railways) H0-RE system. H0 means 16.5 mm track (suitable for 00 gauge) with a track separation of 46 mm (suitable for 4mm scale as well) for double track lines, R means regular (standard) gauge and E means Europe. Great Britain is located in Europe and has a rail connection to France, just as a reminder. Modules are wired with two cables for every running line and the rails are 1300 mm above floor. The rest is compatible enough if you desire to deviate from the standard. Just make the scenery in 4mm scale and there you go.

 

What will you do in five years if you decided to wire your modules analogue and discover THEN, that you need a pair of wires in EVERY module for each locomotive? Say you opt for 7 conduits. Then you will ever stick to 7 locos at the maximum, even if one daythousands of you will have built modules. Fremo completed the shift from analogue to digital control in 1998 and succeeded.

 

What will you do one day if you discover that it would be more sensible to exchange certain signals in a given location to suit different combinations of modules? Say one day a junction is immediately following your station. You never had this in mind and have no junction signal at the advanced starter position. Will you THEN start to look around how others have soluted this problem? A standardised slot for plugging in and out signals was invented in Fremo in 2005 and is now widespread.

IMG_3344 von – FelixM – auf Flickr

A used and an unused (at the opposite side of the track) slot. The unused slot is well hidden. A Fiddle Yard is in the background. Fences are still missing.

 

What will you do if you opt for digital control but not for Loconet control? Discover THEN that it could be dangerous if everyone can type in DCC addresses, because just one wrong digit and somebody else's loco is moving at the opposite side of the room and in worse case is falling down on the floor? Discover that the DCC bandwith just allows ~15 locos moving at the same time? Looking THEN how Fremo uses multiple DCC command stations and a Loconet gateway so that trains do not need to stop to get under the control of another command station? This of course does not work with Xpressnet.

 

I can only warn against hasty decisions which prove erroneous in a few years. There is so much exxperience around, please do not do ignore this. Incidentally, if you one day would like to make friends in Europe there will be noone following a non-standard British modular system because there already is the proved Fremo concept. A channel tunnel module is already under construction in Kent as far as I know.

 

I include you the plan of our May 1st to 4th meeting in Rendsburg.

Rendsburg_Halle_2.pdf

 

Kind regards

Felix

[PaulRhB]

Felix, the Fremo OO standard is very good the only stumbling block is the large radii specification. It seems you have access to some much larger buildings than are common in the uk. Hiring school halls and sports centres is very expensive as they all want business rates. Village and church halls are significantly cheaper but obviously limited in space. Maybe because of the established and busy exhibition circuit we don't see it growing to the size it has in other parts of Europe to build the vast set ups we see. I think the eventual outcome will be a slight variation of an existing standard not starting from scratch just the discussion is ranging all over the place as it's new to most on here

[kevinlms]

Andy,

 

Be fair, we Brit's need to have a free and frank debate to produce great innovation.

 

This is best demonstrated by the discussions that were held to settle on the dimensions of 'Standard Gauge' , and what a great result that turned out to be.  Two Standards one at 7' 01/4" and one at 4' 81/2" - Perfect!

But you're forgetting that the US, wasn't always Standard Gauge universally (lets not go down the path of debating US narrow gauge!).

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_gauge_in_North_America#United_States

 

And Canada had extensive 'Indian Gauge' railways too.

[Stubby47]

Can't we do something different and use 4mm 7ft gauge ?

 

 

Edit : Probably time for a vote..., unless Andy decides.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Stubby47

[298]

One reason why I doubt the HO track spacing would be suitable for 4mm is stock overhang on curves- can someone confirm that passing trains will clear on a nominal 3' radius with 2" track centres...?

[PaulRhB]

As Andy mentioned a few posts back there's been some suggestions he puts his head above the parapet and makes the decision once the discussion has run a bit.

It's never going to please everyone initially but based on the experience this weekend and previous members days it will be workable and a slight tweak rather than a totally new standard.

 

One thing more to comment on for me, I'd avoid having view blocks for scenes as one of the best things about this was being able to watch a train travel 40ft towards you like you sometimes see the real thing do. It makes it different to a conventional exhibition too. There's no reason not to model the seasons too but as snow layouts are fairly rare anyway I don't think there's going to be an abundance here and it's not unrealistic to pass from green fields to snow and back in a trip in the uk in winter either.

 

I was also thinking around themes of stock for running different eras and what you might see.

BR steam / diesel transition

4-6 coach passenger trains on the main route.

2-3 coach branch trains

Local freight of 6-10 wagons ( a general goods could have a 2-3 coal for different stations, a few vans for local businesses to unload in the goods yard, flats and opens for agricultural and building supplies) dropping off and picking up 2-3 at each station.

Specialist block freight, coal trains for a colliery, MOD, cement etc. Rather than having to model the industry for all of them some could run from a yard through to the biggest station then be spilt up to serve the local freight.

Light loco moves to the local depot.

 

BR blue could be very similar but replace all the branch trains with DMUs.

 

Privatisation

Far less local freight and shunting but the freight emphasis can be on enterprise workings of short rakes, 2-3 silver bullets, 4 VGA's etc.

General goods yards at stations could be designated as one industry to be served, even have alternative buildings to drop over and hide a goods shed etc?

 

Today's railway

Similar to Privatisation era with short block trains, ok it may be stretching it to have so many in a small area but this is about operation and in reality this would be representing a much bigger area.

 

If a couple of groups could build an adaptor for the fiddleyard off a big roundy layout to go at each end you could also run big freights down a central spine route.

 

Edited July 8, 2014 by PaulRhB

[McRuss]

Hello,

 

maybe Felix could give you some information regarding the minimum radius on the Rendsburg meeting.

And Paul, usually the FREMO meetings are no official events. Visitors are only allowed when they were invited.

These is due to health and safety regulations, which says that if it is a public event that the venue has to be

evacuated within 90 seconds. These isn't possible with large modular arrangements like that on Rendsburg.

So for a FREMO meeting there is no chance to collect entrance fees from the visitors.

The rent is usually paid by the FREMO board and so all FREMO members pays for the events.

 

Markus

[cromptonnut]

There's no reason not to model the seasons too but as snow layouts are fairly rare anyway I don't think there's going to be an abundance here and it's not unrealistic to pass from green fields to snow and back in a trip in the uk in winter either.

 

Possibly because winter layouts are difficult to do well, although I have seen a couple of good ones on the exhibition circuit.  A self contained 4ft module (or mini-layout) is a perfect opportunity to try some of these scenic techniques that many of us put off trying because we don't want to risk ruining the whole layout by messing it up?

 

(from a personal example I tried using snow only to find that if you used diluted PVA on a ground foam "base" rather than Woodland Scenics "Scenic Cement" the colour bled out of the foam and I ended up with blue snow.)

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Possibly because winter layouts are difficult to do well, although I have seen a couple of good ones on the exhibition circuit.  A self contained 4ft module (or mini-layout) is a perfect opportunity to try some of these scenic techniques that many of us put off trying because we don't want to risk ruining the whole layout by messing it up?

 

(from a personal example I tried using snow only to find that if you used diluted PVA on a ground foam "base" rather than Woodland Scenics "Scenic Cement" the colour bled out of the foam and I ended up with blue snow.)

Question is.Is the blue snow edible? We all know about the yellow...

Edited July 8, 2014 by The Evil Bus Driver

[2ManySpams]

Possibly because winter layouts are difficult to do well, although I have seen a couple of good ones on the exhibition circuit.  A self contained 4ft module (or mini-layout) is a perfect opportunity to try some of these scenic techniques that many of us put off trying because we don't want to risk ruining the whole layout by messing it up?

 

(from a personal example I tried using snow only to find that if you used diluted PVA on a ground foam "base" rather than Woodland Scenics "Scenic Cement" the colour bled out of the foam and I ended up with blue snow.)

Yellow snow is prototypical...

[roundhouse]

Yellow snow is prototypical...

 Go on, youve made some!!!

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Yellow snow is prototypical...

Especially if you put a dog near it lol

[bxmoore]

In the several years I've been participating in US-outline HO DCC&modular&ops sessions (which we perform every month at our meet in Plymouth, and have a most excellent time), I rarely if ever use more than one (or one lash-up of two) medium-sized locomotive the whole day.  This is the beauty of the idea. 

 

I append a poster used by the NMRA(BR) which sums the whole thing up.  Replace that SD7 with a Class 08, and just add some four-wheel wagons. 

 

I confess that, if I didn't find Kenton's views on the matter so amusing, I'd probably have chucked myself under a train. And while he's telling everyone all the negative stuff, we just get on with it and have a hoot.

 

Brian  

Edited July 8, 2014 by bxmoore

[2ManySpams]

I've never really considered the Freemo style modular set up before. Those I've seen at shows leave me decidedly cold due to the mish-mash of scenic treatments and the whole lot failing to gell visually.

 

I suspect I've probably missed the main point though in that the Freemo type concept is more about operation and cooperation between people to build something interesting to play with. Sounds like there's a strong social side too, without the 'pressure' of entertaining a paying public.

 

It did get me thinking about the type of modules I'd consider. Boscarne as it has both a junction and exchange sidings. Wadebridge shed, which I've always fancied, which could be adjacent to a running line(s) and provide somewhere for locos to go. Little Petherick Creek - a single line scenic section with the added visual interest of a three span steel truss viaduct. All would be subjects I'd never build for a home layout but would be interesting to see as part of something bigger.