British Modular System - the initial ideas and debates

[cromptonnut]

There is a separate thread already in the SECAG forum where we have tentatively expressed interest and a potential 'area meet' within our area where it may be possible to accept others who are within reach but not necessarily wishing to be an active part of an area group.

 

But we need standards first before we can even think about meeting - as there's no point with nothing to build.

[jonhall]

 

Absolutes

 

 

Floor to rail height – suggest 45” as a reasonable figure workable for as many people as possible and inclusive of existing Freemo work.

 

Please can I campaign for a re-consideration of this one, to a FREMO and Free-mo compatible height of 1300mm/about 51" , with about an inch of adjustment that measurement can be compatible with both US and European specs including the existing OO FREMO modules on the continent.

 

Jon

[Andy Y]

I'm comfortable that 45" represents a compromise that can allow viewing/operation by wheelchair users and juniors. Although I'd be quite happy with my own layout at 51" (normally I go for 48") I think it's a bit high if we're trying to be as inclusive as is practical.

[cromptonnut]

If one wants to connect "our" standard at 45 inches and others at 51 inches then presumably "just build a converter module" with a 6 inch rise?

[PaulRhB]

Jon you can always have the adjustable feet on a separate 12 inch length of wood that can be bolted in two positions

 

My layout is now adjustable between 40-45 inches by bolting on extensions. You can easily adjust then by moving the up or down as required for a meet.

Edited July 21, 2014 by PaulRhB

[Kenton]

 

Please can I campaign for a re-consideration of this one, to a FREMO and Free-mo compatible height of 1300mm/about 51" , with about an inch of adjustment that measurement can be compatible with both US and European specs including the existing OO FREMO modules on the continent.

 

Although I have no opinion on height and think the correct way to do this would be to widen the adjustable range to state a minimum of 1".

 

I do wonder just how many, if any, of those who have built/will build US and European modules would want to take part in an OO British event. Considering all the fuss they make about the aesthetics and "appearance" and end profiles will they not look a bit odd. Especially with 3.5mm stock/buildings/etc. Of course there would be no problem with them adjusting their legs to suit.

[jonhall]

 Although I have no opinion on height and think the correct way to do this would be to widen the adjustable range to state a minimum of 1".

 

I do wonder just how many, if any, of those who have built/will build US and European modules would want to take part in an OO British event. Considering all the fuss they make about the aesthetics and "appearance" and end profiles will they not look a bit odd. Especially with 3.5mm stock/buildings/etc. Of course there would be no problem with them adjusting their legs to suit.

 

What I'd thought about doing was building  3 bits (not necessarily just 3 modules). A 'neutral' fiddleyard, and then both a German(ic) HO module and a British OO module, so that I could use the neutral + one of the scenic 'layout either as a stand alone layout, or bring the neutral and the appropriate scenic module along as part of a bigger modular meet. I've got to be honest and say as the discussion has gone on, I've been erring on the side of skipping the OO and just having the German/Swiss/Austrian module to FREMO standard.

 

Jon

[PaulRhB]

I can't see that there's been any suggestion of of connecting European or American modules to the ones in this thread

As we've seen end on compatibility is simple to achieve with OO Fremo and all you need is alternative or extensions to the legs.

There is absolutely no reason a OO Fremo spec module can't be built and included in this project with the use of two 6 inch long bridges, (as Felix showed earlier), to incorporate whatever end profile you like if it's not flat. Probably in reality les than £10 to have the best of both worlds.

 

There are simple solutions to doing both as I've done to work with my home requirements lower than the specified height

I bet if I looked into the spec in detail and cut a set of 8 longer legs mine would be OO Fremo compatible simply by drilling the appropriate end holes.

[kevinlms]

If one wants to connect "our" standard at 45 inches and others at 51 inches then presumably "just build a converter module" with a 6 inch rise?

With a rack or wire/rope hauled section?

[FelixM]

First let me express my congratulations for a reasonable and promising discussion once Andy Y has posted his ideas.

 

I've been through the whole thread twice to find this link that Felix posted because I really liked it.

 

The basis for the arrangement of modules is a series of spirals. All different sorts of curve radii and angles. It fills the room pretty efficiently, but definitely isn't straight parallel aisles. Mind, you, its a bit of a walk if you are in the middle and you need the loo!

 

You forget that our modules are at 1300 mm height so we just use the direct way by ducking under. A height of 45" or so is going to cater for a few exhibition layout builders but will pain many backs. Walking along the outside is going to be a problem when the 2nd junction comes into the layout because you then will no more have a direct diagonal walking way. So think again about layout height!

 

If one wants to connect "our" standard at 45 inches and others at 51 inches then presumably "just build a converter module" with a 6 inch rise?

 

Taking into account that every modeller should have the opportunity to bring the tiniest loco with him by raising the track by not more than 1 cm per metre a "converter module" is going to be ~15 m (50 ft) in length. So please think again about layout height!

 

Kind regards

Felix

Edited July 22, 2014 by FelixM

[Talltim]

I'm 6'5" (195 cm) and managed to duck under the 45" Freemo modules. However I mainly didn't as some leg designs made it awkward, and some modules had stuff on the floor under them. I was also worried about knocking them.

[McRuss]

Hello,

 

regarding the height difference between the different module systems. If you built legs that could be adjusted in length, there would be no need for special modules with an incline.

I built my last module legs after a method from a friend.

Here I made a photo for comparison. On the left a legt with the usual leg length for a FREMO module height of 1300 mm (roughly 51"), in the middle for a module height of about 1100 mm (roughly 43") as used by

Great-brit N and on the left the shortest length possible of about 3 feet.

 

 

Here on the picutre you could see them with the height for the use with a flat module, so you could put the legs directly under the decking board of the module.

 

Markus

 

 

[cromptonnut]

If "building legs that can do several heights" is so easy... do any of the existing module standards require modules to be built with adjustable size legs for compatibility with other standards?

[Kenton]

Perhaps the precise height shouldn't even be one of the absolute standards?

 

Perhaps it should be the decision of the group for any particular meeting and given in the absolute standards as "Adjustable legs able to set the independent stable height of the module between x and y inches"?

 

Or am I just being a heretic again?

[Andy Y]

Or am I just being a heretic again?

 

I don't think so to be honest but maybe the majority would be comfortable in building legs to one standard and those who can foresee reason to integrate with other standards will choose to build in that flexibility.

[Kenton]

 

I don't think so to be honest but maybe the majority would be comfortable in building legs to one standard and those who can foresee reason to integrate with other standards will choose to build in that flexibility.

As I said I am easy on what the actual height chosen is - and cannot quite see why it is causing such consternation. Making adjustable legs is a requirement - either that or bringing sufficient old copies of BRM to make the height packing adjustment.

 

Thinking about it - one side of the room could be at one height and the other side at another height and a few connecting modules connected as a gentle gradient ... given the floors in some potential venues I think we could get that anyway unless the is some PW controller going round with his yard stick.

[cromptonnut]

The weakest link in any modular arrangement - however strict the standards - is going to be the interface between the end of your module(s) and those of the builder next to you.

[FelixM]

Existing FREMO modules already have legs to 1300 mm height. These legs have been built mostly to a common scheme in order to get many of them quickly. Because there was no reason in the past to assume that there will be an alternative height they have not been designed to be adjustable. So if a common meeting with FREMO modules is going to happen then the FREMO modules either need new legs (unlikely to happen) or improvised legs like tables, books (unlikely too) or a long gradient (unpractical) or everyone else at the meeting is required to have adjustable legs from the outset. I don't know how acceptance of a need for adjustable legs from the community is.

 

IMG_3341 von – FelixM – auf Flickr

 

How do you think 00Fremo in Germany managed to achieve a 50 m / 160 ft layout in one and a half year? The modules shown are "borrowed" from the H0 Europe group. As you can see they are fairly generous, because the builder wanted them to be part of as many layouts as could be possible, may it Prussian State Railways / Deutsche Reichsbahn / Deutsche Bundesbahn / modern times Deutsche Bahn / Czech layouts / ... and now it came to be that they have became British. The fences weren't originally there, they are Peco flexible fencing which was experimentally fitted with needles and so stayed temporarily yet durable in place. To take advantage of the immense pool of modules on your first meeting to separate your stations is what compatibility is all about. I was never going that a Swedish station iss going to join a British meeting.

 

IMG_3301 von – FelixM – auf Flickr

 

It looks good, doesn't it?

 

Kind regards

Felix

[cromptonnut]

Looks a nice module and great to see long trains but I'm surprised there is no track weathering.  If I weather track on my modules to make them look better is that then going to look strange against adjacent modules where the builder hasn't bothered?

[Kenton]

 

Looks a nice module and great to see long trains but I'm surprised there is no track weathering.  If I weather track on my modules to make them look better is that then going to look strange against adjacent modules where the builder hasn't bothered?

Quite possibly - especially up against my blue ballast!

 

But does it really matter - as long as trains can move from one module to another.

 

FelixM - I still think you are trying to make a British system work with a foreign system and I see it as the other way round - there are going to be more British OO modules (in Britain) than Continental modules that will wish to connect to a British OO. So for those few who want to make that effort then new or adjustable legs is the obvious way to go. But still think building adjustable legs from the start is simple and solves every combination. Leaving it down to the group at/before the actual meeting to decide on height. So if a lot of old Continental modules turn up it will likely be 1300 if (as I suspect) the majority are (new) British then it will be 45" (or whatever).

 

As for supplying legs from a specific source then just like the imposition of end profiles - I'll do my own thing thank you.

[cromptonnut]

I suppose it's not an 'essential' thing but more an 'aesthetic thing' - like matching your blue ballast. 

 

I know that 'standard colours and materials' is something that may restrict creativity (or make extra expense) but it's the "inconsistency" across modular systems that I worry about so you get one well made static grass module next to one with garish coloured sawdust masquerading as grass.

 

But I suppose if "operations" rather than "appearance" is more important... is scenery even needed?

[Andy Y]

But I suppose if "operations" rather than "appearance" is more important... is scenery even needed?

 

I'd say yes but it's more important to get some functionality into proceedings first of all. In a sense I'd see appearances 'led by example' in so much as when we see modules emerging the efforts to which participants go to should hopefully create an appearance standard with people hopefully wanting to utilise existing skills or taking on new ones to make sure the content is to a high standard of appearance whilst not excluding those (of us) who aren't necessarily scenic craftsmen.

[PaulRhB]

Scenery can always evolve over time, reworking bits as your skills increase. In fact a module is an ideal size to experiment on.

In this extract from Steve Williams picture you can see a fully finished board with a basic green board either side and in the distance a plain wood board that was ready just in time. Some bits we just didn't have time to fully finish for the first meet

 

 

Don't worry about inconsistent scenic standards I think seeing what others do will inspire others to chat and find out how to do it too. Look at the meetings as a sort of mini interactive modelling event like RMweb Live is trying out and between 'jobs' you can sit and help or learn. Just seeing how many different methods were used to change points can be good for home layouts.

Edited July 22, 2014 by PaulRhB

[Kenton]

In the spirit of a gathering of modellers of varied skill and experience - Very much so.

 

"Oh I like the appearance of your blue ballast, how did you manage to get it looking so realistic?"

Or

"I'm not convinced by the heavy weathering of your locos - did you do that working with a prototype photo?"

Or

"I can never get my brickwork to look realistic, as you see mine always ends up as if it has rained oil. Where am I going wrong?"

 

Just as I said back-a-long in this topic - lets try to crawl before flying. One day there may well be that GWR only module group where all the group can agree on the colour of stone or that LMS group that can agree on the exact shade of Crimson Lake (but I doubt it) let alone what was the "correct" weathering to apply to the 20ft of track outside the west end of platform 1 of Reading station on that wet Monday morning of the 1st June 2014!

[cromptonnut]

Along the lines of what Andy Y and Kenton have said (but unable to quote as IE seems broken again), I would very much hope that one of the benefits of this would be for the many of us who do not or cannot attend a club regularly to learn from each other. 

 

"Oh, I like the static grass you've used, looks really good, I could never figure out how to get that stuff to work "

 

"Where do you live?  Oh that's not far from me, I'll come round some time with my electric teastrainer if you like, if you can get a bag of static grass from the shop next time you're in, and I'll show you how it works and then we can do your boards together"