Steve-e

Just a thought... Perhaps once things have settled down and we have an area of the Forum someone could make a map like the South East Coast area group have here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/85692-secag-members-locations-on-google-map/?p=1447104 Which would identify where people are in relation to setting a meeting of the boards up, this could also show what type of boards are available to those planning the layouts and also maybe also promote regional get togethers. Cheers Steve

the cupboard under

for safety of

indicating irritating infection

caused much foaming

Thanks for getting us started Andy just a couple of questions? 1. Are there any scenery standards to observe at the module ends as in colour , ballast etc? 2. Are there any baseboard/endplate/leg kits out there that fit these standards? Many Thanks Steve

Do you get the board laser cut/water cut? There is an interesting article in the latest BRM magazine which would suit the shape. Cheers

That's what I was thinking so It maybe would have been better to say Include a non flat end plate as the wording seems to suggest we use a non flat and nothing else.

I didn't get this question so could not comment the bit i am querying is the bit that says we should use a non flat end profile It would have been better if it said include a non flat end profile as you could use flat for stations etc and non flat for cuttings etc... Unless I have missed something.

causing bacteria to

except the earth

I think the majority on here are now just awaiting the standards to be set by Andy Y then its either yes abide by the standards crack on and see how it goes or no they don't want to be part of it and will wander off to do something else. Maybe I am been naive to think it will work like this but it does in my head and I hope it does in others too. Cheers Steve

remains of fish

into action upon

clothing store selling

down by the

when without notice

I see getting a basic standard of measurments first then we can go from there but.... What I was getting at is that you could have both depending on the situation for example if you were at a ‘traditional’ UK exhibition where you were allotted a set space you could go for example A below. This is probably the bare minimum but would depend on all boards been equal length you don’t need backboards just imagination and an explanation to the public that all of the boards have come from different homes, it may be better to have some straights down the sides then you could sit in the middle to break up the scenery but this was just an example. Also if someone had say boards 1,4,5,8 2 and 7 from a Large Garage Layout you could add to those. I see this as a good way of promoting RMWeb to the public/ modellers not yet on the web. Then if you had a Hall only for Fremo you could go for option B again it has its benefits of the social side to RMWeb. I think this is similar to what is been said above. I do see option B taking off initially as this is probably easier to manage logistically example if one board didn't turn up to an exhibition you would be stuck but if one board didn't turn up to a general meet you can adapt the plan. So probably best to take option B first then see where things go once we have some boards made but I am open to everything with my little board so I can follow and learn just awaiting some standards. Please excuse my effort in MS Paint but hope you get the idea... Cheers Steve

began to sink

mik please maid

This may sound like an Aldi advert, I like this one and I like this one but... This would be quite good. There maybe times at exhibitions due to space constraints where this would work and be very interesting 8 modules coming together to form a roundy, roundy 'standard' exhibition type layout to show people that they can bring their home 'layout' to an exhibition and show of the collective power of RMWeb, it may just need more explaining to the public what's happening so they get the idea. The problem though I see is that you would need to introduce a length standard to the board so everything matches up.. This actually appeals to me , I'd rather enter the group as a basic beginner with either a straight board or a corner board with just one or two tracks with basic 2 wire electrics and my interpretation of scenics which I see as a step up from my APA box. Then when I find that the whole thing does indeed manage to fit to the other boards (the first hurdle) I can learn from other boards as to the how and why then look to step up again. I find the whole thing interesting and a way to get to be part of a larger layout with my little bit that I cant have in my current layout area at home. I personally think it would be better to stick to the spacing that is offered by joining 2 points together without any cutting or adding of tracks. The problem seems to be agreeing the two track or more system, the single track on a board shouldn't be a problem it just seems to be height to top of track standard and distance to center of track from the front of the board that needs to be established if I'm picking this up right. Cheers Steve

into a pile

the congregation of

found the source

I can see where you're coming from and maybe the 'UK' standard should have certain standards of those who have gone before even for just the sake of board sharing within the UK or abroad as the more boards to call is probably bigger and better, as someone said many of the scenic sections could pass as somewhere in the UK after all we were connected many years ago and it would be a shame if we had some Freemo/Fremo UK independence thing in place where we are isolated (or the rest of the world is isolated depending on your view). Another interesting thing is if there was ever an UK/European get together in the South East, say for example in Ashford the modellers from Brussels (171 miles), Amsterdam (276 Miles) or Paris (229 miles) would actually be nearer to Ashford than most of the UK, myself included (357 Miles) so perhaps having common standards may be a benefit in the future. Cheers Steve .