British Modular System - the initial ideas and debates

[Andy Y]

A windmill, on a bus, on a bridge over a tunnel.  I can see  it now.  Genius.

 

On BCB we could have had a bus under a bridge on a line which bridged over a canal (which aforementioned road then went over on a hump-backed bridge) which sat on top of a hill over a tunnel but no-one would have believed it - http://www.old-maps.co.uk/maptiles/m100954_393188_299494.png

[Stubby47]

No one ever looks at the BCB layout anyway - all they ever see is the backscene and some chimney pots !

[roundhouse]

No one ever looks at the BCB layout anyway - all they ever see is the backscene and some chimney pots !

It needs some caravans!!

[Andy Y]

I'd hate to place a disagree against you Ian.

 

Even travellers would have found somewhere nicer to pitch up.

[PaulRhB]

The windmill could wind a cassette hidden inside the tunnel up and down between 45" and 1300mm . . . . . .

 

Environmentally friendly powered by all the hot air blowing about

Edited July 25, 2014 by PaulRhB

[bxmoore]

Today, whilst walking over the bridge where Plymouth Friary station used to be, it struck me how perfectly-sized-for-UK-modular the remaining tracks are.  This is the rarely used group of tracks which lets a loco run around its train so that it can head up the Cattedown branch in the other direction.  It would happily fit, without any alteration, onto a 16' length of boards, and provide a lot of operational interest too. 

 

There were also plans for it to be used recently when the St Blazey turntable (the only place where a loco can be turned in Cornwall) was placed out-of-bounds to The Royal Duchy steam tours to Par. The idea was that on the outbound journey the loco, 45407, would bring its eight coaches through the speedway at Laira Depot, go on to the Friary sidings, and cut off and run around the train.

 

Tender-first 45407 and train would then proceed to Plymouth station and Cornwall around the Laira triangle chord.  On reaching Par, it would then be facing in the right direction for a journey back east.  Sadly for many enthusiasts who were looking forward to the spectacle at Friary, the St Blazey turntable was re-instated.

 

Lots of prototypical precedents then, from Class 08 to 66s and a few wagons, to main-line preserved steam.

 

Apologies for deviating from the main theme.

 

Brian

[The Stationmaster]

Today, whilst walking over the bridge where Plymouth Friary station used to be, it struck me how perfectly-sized-for-UK-modular the remaining tracks are.  This is the rarely used group of tracks which lets a loco run around its train so that it can head up the Cattedown branch in the other direction.  It would happily fit, without any alteration, onto a 16' length of boards, and provide a lot of operational interest too. 

 

Brian

That had me puzzled for a few minutes as the site of Friary station has long since been redeveloped and is now under housing - then I realised it's broadly the site of Friary A 'box on the opposite side of Tothill Road bridge 

[FelixM]

Coincidentally I came across a new design of wheelchairs today which would be much more suitable for modular meetings: http://vimeo.com/37309324

 

Kind regards

Felix

[Kenton]

Thinking about pieces of wood - an obvious standard hit me - the connection end plate must be at 90' to the track/baseboard.

 

I know it sounds obvious but for those with minimal woodwork ability (me) getting a perfect 90' on 4" angle is not so easy as it seems. This may be extra important when clamped as the off degree out could break the back of a long module or exaggerate the track gap at the join.

 

As some board designs may not be the basic oblong some of the sides may well not butt at 90'.

[PaulRhB]

Thinking about pieces of wood - an obvious standard hit me - the connection end plate must be at 90' to the track/baseboard.

.

Cheap 90 degree saw boxes can be had in DIY stores for under a fiver and get you accurate vertical cuts in your frame timber every time, plus they can cut angled ends easily too for 30 degree or 45 degree boards!

 

Edited July 26, 2014 by PaulRhB

[Kenton]

Yeah got one very similar yet somehow .... they do not work.

 

On a slightly different subject - I've been looking at some of the Fre(e)mo module plans and there doesn't seem to be a consensus/standard on the location of the track bed - some seem to place the board/bed over the end plate while others but up to it. This only makes a difference of the board/track bed thickness (9mm + cork?) and that could be adjusted by position of the G-clamp. But for the aesthetics among us it would also produce a step at the module join (disguised by a Yorkshire stone wall, Devon hedgerow ...)

[Pete 75C]

I'd avoid a cheap mitre box for the simple reason that the cheap ones are, erm, cheap. Incredibly easy to be a degree or two off which I think is exactly Kenton's point. Just one module with an end piece at 88 degrees (for example) could be enough to make a difference. I use a good quality powered sliding mitre saw but I can justify the expense of that as it's used for other things. They're infinitely adjustable and very accurate if set up correctly. If you don't want (need) to go to the expense of buying one, hire one for half a day. It's worth pointing out that, again, you get what you pay for. A £50 powered mitre saw from Argos is likely to be no more accurate than a cheap mitre box. If you do hire one for half a day, you can make hundreds of accurate cuts (fascias, baseboard legs, framework etc etc etc) without breaking a sweat and the nominal hire charge could well be worth every penny.

[Kenton]

but ... good quality tools in the hands of an untrained tool ...

 

I'm starting to see why the Fremo guys went down a supplier for end profiles (though that doesn't remove my total dislike of their imposition in standards)

Edited July 26, 2014 by Kenton

[Pete 75C]

Sorry, I don't get this whole "I'll lose a finger" worry! Read the instructions, make sure the blade guard works, keep your free hand away from the blade, wear eye protection and obviously don't operate the saw if you're high on drink or drugs. Or you're in love. Or your footie team just lost. Etc etc etc. Seriously, I appreciate power tools aren't for everybody but you can easily lose a finger with a hand saw or a simple Stanley knife blade too. If you don't feel comfortable using one, I guess just don't.

 

Edit: I cut out 6 roof joists earlier with a hand saw because I couldn't be ar*ed to take a power saw up into the loft space. I had to wring the sweat out of my polo shirt... Never again. I think maybe I'm just lazy!

Edited July 26, 2014 by Pete 75C

[PaulRhB]

Yeah got one very similar yet somehow .... they do not work.

 

Looks like you need practice

 

 

I've been looking at some of the Fre(e)mo module plans and there doesn't seem to be a consensus/standard on the location of the track bed - some seem to place the board/bed over the end plate while others but up to it. This only makes a difference of the board/track bed thickness (9mm + cork?) and that could be adjusted by position of the G-clamp. But for the aesthetics among us it would also produce a step at the module join (disguised by a Yorkshire stone wall, Devon hedgerow ...)

Doesn't matter, it's the depth of the endplate that is recommended as 100mm not the distance to the floor, if you butt the top up to the end it just needs the depth of the top adding to the height as below 

Edited July 26, 2014 by PaulRhB

[298]

Edit: I cut out 6 roof joists earlier with a hand saw because I couldn't be ar*ed to take a power saw up into the loft space. I had to wring the sweat out of my polo shirt... Never again. I think maybe I'm just lazy!

Too lazy to go to the DIY store when you're short of timber...?

[Satan's Goldfish]

but ... good quality tools in the hands of an untrained tool ...

Don't put yourself down Kenton.... that's our job....

 

Sorry, I don't get this whole "I'll lose a finger" worry! Read the instructions, make sure the blade guard works, keep your free hand away from the blade, wear eye protection and obviously don't operate the saw if you're high on drink or drugs. Or you're in love. Or your footie team just lost. Etc etc etc. Seriously, I appreciate power tools aren't for everybody but you can easily lose a finger with a hand saw or a simple Stanley knife blade too. If you don't feel comfortable using one, I guess just don't.

 

Edit: I cut out 6 roof joists earlier with a hand saw because I couldn't be ar*ed to take a power saw up into the loft space. I had to wring the sweat out of my polo shirt... Never again. I think maybe I'm just lazy!

 

I know that pain. 'just need to do a couple of cuts so i won't bother unpacking and setting up the laser guided power tool, i'll use the hand saw instead.' Cue sweating, swearing, and unstraight cuts that take longer than if i'd just unpacked the damn power saw.

[Pete 75C]

Too lazy to go to the DIY store when you're short of timber...?

 

Yeah, I needed some legs for a layout. I'm sure the roof will be fine...

[Satan's Goldfish]

In preperation to start building i've started some rough sketches of breaking up a larger plan to make small parts that are Modular compliant which others toying with this idea might find helpful. Appologees for the dodgy paint drawing, these are very rough plans until i get the big computer at home up and running. The plan is based on parts of Norwich Thorpe and Crown Point, some parts pre-resignalling, some post resignalling (There's parts of both layouts that i like)

 

 

So the overall big plan is at the top and broken into 2 parts below. The whole layout is much much bigger but i'm not drawing it all!

 

Starting with the Junction Module which is half of 'Thorpe Junction' (post resignalling on the Yarmouth lines at the bottom, pre resignalling on the London line curving above), it does leave an isolated track curving round at the top that wouldn't connect to anything, and some removable buffers would be needed for the other stubs of lines at the bottom. All ends of this module would be the decreed 18inches wide.

 

The TMD module is more 'interesting', it has the other half of 'Thorpe Junction' leading down to what would be the station approach point work (lots to do track planning wise there but that's not the point of this exercise!) and this diverges just far enough to allow space for an 18inch module end connection. At the top is the TMD and the goods approach point work. Enough space would be left here for getting engines in and out of the undrawn shed. At the other end because of leaving space for the mainline divergence below there would be a selection of single and double track possible connection positions depending what other modules are availble (just for Kenton, this would mean that end is wider than 18inches and the tracks probably aren't in the centre!) and what has been attached to the 'mainline' below.

 

Anyway, hope someone else thinking of breaking up a bigger plan finds that useful.

[bxmoore]

Could not agree more with the above poster.  That's a HUGE thing to build and carry, unless you've always got a couple of totally committed helpers, and even then...  

 

You'll get more than enough enjoyment and challenge from a, say, 16' long and 20" wide set of boards, which will still take a double track (although single-track makes operations more interesting), and provide a good amount of space for scenery, loops and several tracks off.  Built on four boards and carried back-to-back, that's over half a car-load already. And then there's the stock and legs etc.

 

And unless you're actually giving train crews things to do that slow them down on their journey, even a relatively long (eg 50-60') stretch of track will be rattled over in a matter of seconds.  And it soon becomes boringly Ping-Pong-like. 

 

Today it took four of us over two and a half hours to erect and get operational three 16' modules connected by stretches of single track and with a 9' storage yard at either end of an S shape.  There's more than enough operational value in such an effort, and although I'm well aware of the views of many in respect of how different this type of US-themed running may be on a British-outline system, the principles remain the same.

 

Brian

 

 

[Kenton]

 

it soon becomes boringly Ping-Pong-like.

 

The best description yet for a straight/curved through single track module.

 

Probably the best reason yet not to build one. None of us can imagine something more useless as a layout (apologies to all SLT fans).

 

Operationally I can see your point - after all who cares about what you are driving through - one flat US plain looks as boring as the next one - it is all about operating locos and stock after all.

 

I do, in part, agree about complexity though after all a module with a point on it will require a bobby/stationmaster or the driver to get out and do something useful like throw a switch.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Kenton

[PaulRhB]

If you had loads of people you could allocate signalling jobs too but I think on smaller branch stations it would be best to let the 'guard' do all the other jobs apart from driving. You only need a couple of sidings at a passing station to occupy a train for a few minutes, then check the timetable and if they are booked not to cross anything ask Control for permission to set the signal into the block section

I think the idea mentioned in CromptonNuts thread that people try to build a plain run module too if they are building a station would alleviate useless modules at home

Edited July 26, 2014 by PaulRhB

[bxmoore]

Kenton, you'll find that you actually NEED to have some basic track modules between stations/operational spots.  Otherwise, trains will be constantly having to move onto the next module to shunt/run around etc.  This really p*sses off the people who may well be trying to do the same thing on the next "active" module along.  Putting in a space of 4' does make a world of difference.  The fact that this is learned on US-outline modules makes it no less a factor for any other scale or type.  You need some space between the boards you will be having trains work on.

 

Also try to get away from this "useless modules at home" stuff.  All our modules are never used at home, and only come out every month, regular as clockwork, to be erected in a hall, along with the simple single-track spacer boards.  They may be worked on and improved at home, but the whole point is that, together, they make up a great train set, well beyond the scope of one individual, and the sum is much greater than their individual parts.

 

From our experience over several years of learning how to do this, putting lots of time into making modules "dual use" can backfire.  Sure, it's good to be able to use them at home, but most people can't even put up 10 feet of anything in their houses.  This is one of the main attractions of modular layouts.  That you can with a few others, concentrate on building something that is NOT used at home, and instead, take it out to join up with others every week/month etc.

 

Brian 

Edited July 26, 2014 by bxmoore

[Satan's Goldfish]

Ref my above diagrams in response to Dutch Master and Bxmoore, they are very basic! The aim of the drawing exercise was to show where they could be split down into a 'module', not an individual board. It's also not an exact track plan of the location (the TMD bit especially, i bodged that big time) and there's quite a bit missed off. I do have real plans of the location on 'The big computer' at home (but that's currently not plugged in) so i am aware of the complexity and size of the site, by mashing the 2 eras of design together with the bits i like (compromising the plan) it does remove a lot of the useless track work.

 

My current employer needs me to be mobile and likes me to move every few years, the example i was trying to show is that someone like myself who has 'grand plans' but currently not the space, stability, and time to be able to carry them out could start by building small sections of that plan as part of this RMWebOO modular concept so they could see use. Not all modules built would always be required to go to a 'meet', just 1 or 2 and they don't have to be located next to each other. Due to the plan, some would need to be larger than others granted, and they may not even be able to be built until the layout had a permanent home, but the smaller modules could be and they would be operable. When the day comes that i don't have to moved any more and i have space then the majority of the layout could already be built and proved to work and the whole thing just needs fixing together and the last couple of infill areas making.

 

I already have an 18ft fiddleyard which i'm hoping to adapt to the correct height to be compatible (this can be split down into 2x 6ft fiddle yards or a 6ft and a 12ft yard as required), the first 'scenic' sections likely to get built if i go ahead with this plan would likely be a small terminating yard that would be just 1 part of the riverside goods complex, or the junction module above as i already have all the track for it, i just need to finesse the design of the odd shaped board(s) required to make it managable and fit the RMWebOO spec.

[Andy Reichert]

In preperation to start building i've started some rough sketches of breaking up a larger plan to make small parts that are Modular compliant which others toying with this idea might find helpful. Appologees for the dodgy paint drawing, these are very rough plans until i get the big computer at home up and running. The plan is based on parts of Norwich Thorpe and Crown Point, some parts pre-resignalling, some post resignalling (There's parts of both layouts that i like)

 

Junction.JPG

 

So the overall big plan is at the top and broken into 2 parts below. The whole layout is much much bigger but i'm not drawing it all!

 

Starting with the Junction Module which is half of 'Thorpe Junction' (post resignalling on the Yarmouth lines at the bottom, pre resignalling on the London line curving above), it does leave an isolated track curving round at the top that wouldn't connect to anything, and some removable buffers would be needed for the other stubs of lines at the bottom. All ends of this module would be the decreed 18inches wide.

 

The TMD module is more 'interesting', it has the other half of 'Thorpe Junction' leading down to what would be the station approach point work (lots to do track planning wise there but that's not the point of this exercise!) and this diverges just far enough to allow space for an 18inch module end connection. At the top is the TMD and the goods approach point work. Enough space would be left here for getting engines in and out of the undrawn shed. At the other end because of leaving space for the mainline divergence below there would be a selection of single and double track possible connection positions depending what other modules are availble (just for Kenton, this would mean that end is wider than 18inches and the tracks probably aren't in the centre!) and what has been attached to the 'mainline' below.

 

Anyway, hope someone else thinking of breaking up a bigger plan finds that useful.

 

I have a sneaky feeling that at lest the LH module will be HUGE if you plot it out for minimum main line radius.

 

Andy