Fremo N modules

[John]

I know a guy that's thinking about maybe doing a Thurmond module .. since one side would be river, and the other side mountain which would go all the way to one side -- then be flat -- and fremo doesn't do skyboards .. how does the fremo crowd handle that ..   can we just put in backing where the frame and the mountain meet?

[EL3632]

From the Free-moN modules I have seen, usually the facia matches the landforms as seen on this mountain module.

[dem34]

In strict interpretation of the standards that would be non conforming. But in practice just doing what you suggest would be fine with %99 of the participators provided the track runs smooth and meets the minimum standards.

[John]

In strict interpretation of the standards that would be non conforming. But in practice just doing what you suggest would be fine with %99 of the participators provided the track runs smooth and meets the minimum standards.

Thanks .. but it's the 1% that run HOAs and model train clubs

[w neal]

My problem. Digitrax panels on both sides of all modules? C'mon. A bit of overkill.

[John]

My problem. Digitrax panels on both sides of all modules? C'mon. A bit of overkill.

I agree ..

[mmyers]

A 6P6C jack would be compatible with NCE and Digitrax.

[mmyers]

Thanks .. but it's the 1% that run HOAs and model train clubs

I'm in the 99%. I'm converting a bunch of my oNetrak modules now. Longer legs and track to the module ends.

[TravelingCarpenter]

When I built my FreemoN sections, I read the standard about having a Throttle fascia plate on sections that are longer than 4 foot. Since my sections are 6 foot I put UP5’s on both sides.

There are people who believe that they are not needed, along with loconet buss not being needed. These folks are of the belief that wireless is the way to go. All of this has caused people to argue and bicker back and forth. Some have even went as far to make their own standards because they feel the current standards are too antiquated. Some of these folks have displayed an elitist attitude, like they are royalty.

From what I understand, that when you bring your sections/modules to a meet they get looked over by the meet organizer and can be excluded from the set up for not meeting standards.

I currently have 15 sections that make up two modules, with plans to build three more sections. My pieces are also my home layout, so if for some reason I choose not to deal with the BS, I can just keep them at the house.

BTW, I am setting up for the first time at the Red River RPM meet in Forest Hill, Tx June 25th. This will be the first time my sections have left the garage.

TC

[jpwisc]

In strict interpretation of the standards that would be non conforming. But in practice just doing what you suggest would be fine with %99 of the participators provided the track runs smooth and meets the minimum standards.

No issues as long as the endplates are within compliance. There is a ton of flexibility in between. Fascia can go up or down.

As to the discussion about the UTP panels on both sides, it’s a cheap item compared to any other cost of a module. I can tell you it was a joy for people with tethered throttles to run through a 60’ section of our Evanston layout that didn’t have a single UTP panel…. I build large module sections (12’-18’) and one or two doesn’t break the bank and makes it fun for anyone.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Wireless is far from perfect, there are some times when you just need to plug in, so I get the desire for plugs. Especially when you're talking about situations when you have folks with $1000s of locomotives heading for a cornfield meet on a gorgeous trestle.

Every 4' might be a bit excessive, but the beauty of modular layouts is that you never know how they'll be combined.