bxmoore

Completely agree about the long run, Ian. Some snaps. Brian

Some video action of this most enjoyable event. Brian

Looks very similar to the duck-egg green colour that I used to paint the underside of my BoB Airfix Spitfires and Hurricanes with. Brian

There's going to be at least one more MoW train running at Christow. MoW'R'Us. Brian

Kenton, I'm not, to use your words, "lording it over" anyone, or even saying, "I'm telling you so". Again, I counsel you to wipe the automatic chip from your shoulder, which rather demeans your otherwise useful contribution to this discussion. You've also contradicted yourself several times when something that you said previously is challenged with fact. A phrase from Little Britain comes again to the fore: "Yeah but, no, but", etc. All I'm doing is attempting to point out, from practical experience, some of the pitfalls that may be avoided through making fixed, prior assumptions; some of which you have stated as supposed fact. Believe it or not, others, including myself, made similar mis-assumptions too, and learned from them. Do you also have the need to drive a powerful sports car? I'm now out of this discussion. Good luck to all. Toodle pip. Brian

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

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

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

Old Gringo, you're reading nonsense into my post. I'm not suggesting for a second that they should be "matching" anything. Why on EARTH would I want to run HO-scale US trains on a US-outline 3.5mm scale module onto one with a different scale that also depicts the railway practices and infrastructure of a different country? A brace of (under-scale) HO Southern Pacific GP9s bounding through an OO Bodmin Parkway, hauling sand to Permanante? It's just that, from actual experience, (heaven forfend) we found that the 45" height works well. Nothing more, and nothing less. So, it's, "Mmmmm, interesting logic" my ****. It's as if this thread is seen by a few as some sort of a place where "secret agenda/Johnny Foreigner" take-over bids are being foisted upon unseeing Brits, and the response is to air almost Ukip-sponsored views. Brian

45 inches work fine, as the US Freemo meets have found for a few years. Also, the longer the leg, the less chance you have of making modules with integral fold-down legs. The mark's been made, and you'll all get familiar enough with it soon enough. Brian

Many people, including myself, prefer to take their own locomotive(s) to use when running on a modular set-up. Firstly, you're familiar with what buttons control which functions (lights, horn/whistle etc), and secondly, the loco is set up the way you like to drive it, in respect of momentum delay, acceleration, speed curve etc. Others don't mind so much, but for me, it increases the pleasure using something you've worked on yourself (perhaps including re-spray, detailing etc), and seeing and hearing it operate in new environments, doing a "real" job. With freight stock, it's different, as they will, depending on type, possibly be scattered across the whole set-up as the car-forwarding scheme you use will order them onto trains and to various destinations. One of the pleasures of this type of operation is that you get to haul lots of various stuff that's new to you, brought by different owners. Brian

"But I keep forgetting that many/most US layouts don't have scenery" says Kenton. If you stopped posting this kind of abject, fatuous, closed-mind, little-brit, embarrassing claptrap (which is demeaning to you), then perhaps I'd take your opinions (and real experiences of module-building and operation if you actually have any) more seriously. You clearly don't have a clue what you're talking about, in respect of US layouts, so why should we want to listen to your opinions on other matters? Why don't you just get on with what you want to do, and then let the rest of us know how you got on, instead of constantly demeaning the opinions and interests of others in this thread? Brian

This discussion is getting daft, and rather grating now. All that has to be said has been said. It should be closed, and the contents looked at by the one who started it. Brian

At the Plymouth HO meet, we concentrate on reasonably accurate operations, with some compromise on appearance. The trains are limited in size to approximately 9 cars, a caboose and a couple of geeps, and the curved boards we use to link up modules, get around the room, and to provide space between locations are 36" radius. Three pictures attached of a three-part 36" set of curves going round 180 degrees, and the trains don't look too bad running on them (but that's my opinion). Brian

Unless the specified end boards (ie the ones that present the "universal" facing between two distinct modules) are able to be made, at home, with minimal woodworking skills, then you are again alienating a lot of people. Ditto in respect of trying to create some sort of captive market where you have to order them from one or more manufacturer. People would be rightly suspicious of that, especially us Brits, for various reasons. The UK OO concept may well really develop into something approaching what you see both on the Continent and in the US, with huge set-ups, but they're a complete pipe dream until you break through the required metaphorical sound barrier. Learn to fly in a Tiger Moth first, and safely enjoy the experience; you can then aspire to the Typhoon. It's a lot of fun getting there, and you may wish never to "move on" to jet engines. At the risk of sounding negative, notions of creating modules with interchange stations where you arrive from another module, change GWR power to LMS power, and then depart to yet another location, are a long way in the future. At the very least, you would need six or seven really committed individuals, all of whom would have to build big (for the UK) modules, plus a lot of "spacer" boards to give a feeling of distance between active modules. Start with something that's achievable with a few people in a, say, 12-month time frame. You'll also learn a lot and probably change your mind on a few things in that period of time. Brian

I couldn't agree with Cromptonnut's post above, more. Keep to the basics, and keep to one idea. Again, I counsel against following the people here who have their own apparent agendas. If you don't, and there's too much that's required to build a "basic module", then you won't attract the majority needed for the concept to take off. It'll be viewed, rightly or wrongly as elitist, as so many other things are in railway modelling. It's the people who you NEVER hear of on these forums that are the ones you need to get on board, if this is ever going to work. Brian

Putting in extra features to a modular standard "just in case" a few folk actually make it to anywhere else in the EU to join up with others is surely stretching the whole concept. And even the doughty few would only be doing it once in a blue moon. Keep it simple. Keep it accessible to the majority. Don't get stuck down dead ends of people with their own agendas, hidden or not. Brian

Whilst the actual modelling in the two YouTube videos submitted by Andy Reichert is impressive, am I the only one to think that the actual depiction of "realistic operation" was minimal at best, and a spoof at worst? They were, almost without exception, tearing around the layouts like scared mice being chased by a cat. I've so far refrained from commenting on Mr Reichert's complete dismissiveness of my post in which I appended an NMRA(BR) poster that attempts to encourage newcomers to the world of modular/DCC/operations, but what he's showing us here, is ANYTHING but prototypical operation. The moving vehicles are running at Lionel-type speeds, and several times faster than they'd have run in real life. I'm surprised they stayed on the track as they took the corners. If this is his notion of "scale model railroading" (his quote), then I'm a banana. Brian

Most of the guys at the Plymouth meet use H-shaped legs that slot firmly into notches under their modules - no screws required. On my slowly-but-getting-there 16', four-board module, I'm using legs that are integral to each board. One board has two sets of legs and the others piggyback onto it. Less to carry, and no nuts and bolts either - the legs are secured when standing by a simple L-shaped pin. I'm using pink foam surrounded by marine ply. It looks wobbly, but it stands solid. Brian

It's obviously your choice for what you finally decide to go with, but in our experience over several years, clamping two flat surfaces together is far simpler, involves less FAR bits to lose (and you will), and doesn't result in any instability if done properly. Bolts take time, even if only for a couple of minutes (times how many individual boards you want to put together), and they can be fiddly. Brian

The guiding influence should always be that other people, who may never have operated on, or even seen your module before, should be able to use it on their own (you may well be on the other side of the hall, using theirs), without big lessons being given. Adding bespoke features, and making things possibly more complicated (despite how simple and straight-forward they may seem to you) can back-fire. Brian

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

I've got a good handful of HO-scale Classic Metal Works, Model Power and Atlas automobiles dating from the mid-sixties to the early eighties, Koos, so they are out there. Brian

Mal, The only way to start is to start. With patience and common sense, you'll get there. At times it seems like trying to install a two pints into a half-pint pot, but just be methodical. In some instances, I've had to remove quite a bit of weight from a chassis to get the speaker in, but the loco has always been able to pull a more-than-adequate load after surgery. If possible, try to find space for a rectangular bass-reflex speaker, even if you have to remove weight to do so. When you're more adept, you can also do "tricks" like passing wires for rear lights through the speaker itself. http://www.dccsupplies.com/shop/product_info.php?products_id=3542 Brian

Sound is in the ear of the beholder, but I'd always go for Loksound first, as they usually run very smoothly in any locomotive they're placed in, without any need for tweaking, unlike the Soundtraxx Tsunami which can be a veritable nightmare. The Loksound Select soundfiles can be heard on their website. Brian