Module Planning - Software

[Scottish Modeller]

Hi all,

 

A thought....

 

To make it easier for all and for planners when it comes to connecting all the modules up at a 'meet'.

 

Should there be an agreed software programme used to produce all the layout plans?

 

Benefits: 

 

makes producing things like end templates easy and means it is easier to keep to the standards.

 

makes it easier to produce the layout design for a meet.

 

Makes it easier to collaborate between disconnected members who have a common theme of module.

 

Thoughts, comments - feel free to contribute!

 

Thanks

[The Stationmaster]

Well as long as it is simple to use and works on all home based (computer) platforms, including Mac, then it might be handy.  However knocking out a quick sketch of what is on a particular module trackwise might be far quicker than drawing it on a 'puter?

[Andy Y]

I think as long as each module's ends meet the standard then it's another constraint and some folk don't have the time/patience/inclination to learn whichever layout planning software. I use XtrCad as a quick sanity check in thought stages but then it changes on the fly.

 

It may be worth having a standardised graphical format of completed modules to assist in event planning but we'll cross that bridge in due course.

[Kenton]

 

makes producing things like end templates easy

But we are not doing templates (we are not Fremo) and I suggest that everyone is capable of cutting a rectangle of approximate dimensions 500mm x 100mm - or having it cut for them by BBQ (other timber merchants available).

 

Otherwise I would agree on the condition the software is non-commercial (ie Free) and very easy to learn (or you are offering a free service at reproducing plans that may have been designed in other software.

 

I am well beyond that stage already - I used Anyrail after trying, and failing badly with SCARM. I usually use XtrakCAD but didn't on this occasion. I am sure there are other flavours of software out there so picking one that will satisfy the needs of all will be a big problem unless some master planner is prepared to volunteer do every one.

 

As I understand it not even the profuse standards gurus of Fre(e)mo have yet taken this step. That doesn't mean we shouldn't just my opinion (you did ask) is that it is a step too far.

[Doc Robin]

I'm not convinced that track planning software is what's needed.  The modules have a known end plate dimension, and are either single or double track. What a meeting organiser needs to know is the overall module dimension, and whether there are curves or branches. The challenge is then how to pack the modules of the varied shapes into the space available, rather than a specific track layout.

[cromptonnut]

I've been drawing up some "basic modules" using XTrackCAD then pasting a screen shot into Microsoft Publisher, trimming down to fit the module itself and then resizing to the right dimensions (I'm using 10mm to 1ft for convenience) and just fiddling around to see what configurations I can make out of the bits that I am considering.

 

After all, if a "station module" is 16ft long, then all you need to know is the dimensions (if it's wider than 18" in the middle) and whether at each end it's single or double track.  What is actually inbetween does not matter for planning purposes any further than a simple description like "station plus yard".  The other key thing is if it's a curved module so you can angle the ends appropriately.

 

Nothing more complicated is really needed unless you want to do nice little programmes and books for attendees - all the planners need to know is that Alan's terminus station goes on the end, followed by Bob's curved bridge section, then Colin's tunnel with a windmill on the top, next is Dave's junction station that has a 30 degree line off the left hand side which Eric's quarry will attach to, meanwhile on the main line you have Fred's 12ft long freight depot then George's 60 degree "Dawlish coastal" themed board, finally at the other end Henry's terminus.  That should be enough to set up and it's only really that you have enough single track to double track conversion modules between everyone that enables the best use of what's on offer to turn up on the day.

[FelixM]

As I understand it not even the profuse standards gurus of Fre(e)mo have yet taken this step. That doesn't mean we shouldn't just my opinion (you did ask) is that it is a step too far.

 

FREMO uses CAD drawings.

[Scottish Modeller]

Hi all,

 

I see the usual spread of opinions have appeared - as expected.

 

I'm not saying that we have to do this.

 

I was thinking that if all the drawings etc were in the same software - then it makes it easier for the designer to create the projected end result.

 

It also gives some idea of what can be achieved in a given space.

 

Thanks

[Kenton]

 

FREMO uses CAD drawings.

Thanks for correcting me - why am I not surprised ? Ah but which CAD there are so many (just like DCC systems all different but are - supposed to produce the same output.)

[cromptonnut]

I'd have thought a sheet of graph paper was probably more than enough for most meetings until we get big in a couple of years time?

[Glorious NSE]

We've been using simple maths and drawings up till now, another group we work with use Open Office Draw (free) which does let you do a scale drawing of the hall and move and link modules within the space, i've been having a play with that and i'm quite impressed so far...

[cromptonnut]

I would suggest that "planning a modular meet" is very much like planning an exhibition, which people have been doing in various ways from graph paper to computers for years.

 

I would always work on one simple principle for modular meets just like I did in my time as an exhibition manager/planner.

 

If a few inches extra length inaccuracy means that something won't fit in the hall, then you are probably trying to squeeze far too much in.

 

Of course, if you are told that a module is 4ft long and Fred suddenly turns up with 12ft saying he forgot to tell you that he'd extended it, then there are two options.

 

1) Fred's extended module means a redesign of the overall plan on the day.  There may be room for extending things but it may be that you move a couple of plain modules to a different side of the square (or whatever design).

 

2) Fred's module can't be used this time if there isn't room for it.

 

I am sure that even the best planned existing modular meets go to pot on the day as nobody can predict illness, car breakdown or other emergency meaning someone can't attend and thus there's a gap.

[Talltim]

To plan a balanced setup, the planner needs a good idea of the content of modules. A 16 foot long station module may contain only one platform and a passing loop, a 6 foot long station module may have 6 platforms. If you just plan based on module size you could end up with the majority of the sidings, platforms, etc. at one end of the setup and nowhere for the trains to go to when they get to the other end.

[Kenton]

 

and thus there's a gap.

what's the CV setting for "flight mode"?

[cromptonnut]

747?

[FelixM]

 Thanks for correcting me - why am I not surprised ? Ah but which CAD there are so many (just like DCC systems all different but are - supposed to produce the same output.)

 

CAD is universal. Everyone sooner or later planners adopt their own styles of drawing though some things are common with everyone e.g. 16,5 mm thick lines or redlines for OHLE track.