Wrong scale, but the next Project Layout in Model Railroader, beginning with the January 2024 issue is a FreeMo module... in Horribly Oversized as we call 1:87 proportion around here. The construction of a single module begs the question, well, how do you operate it, and the answer is not restricted to any scale: detachable tail tracks. Something to think about if you've only got room for one at home.
Big Jake, I am agreed on all 3 of your earlier points. To which, I would add... Strike 4: FreeMoN layout height is still too short. In my experience, track height of about 53" offers a much more presentable view of N scale. But then, I'm a taller person. I understand, it's a compromise. However, I think we can do better as N scalers. The concept has great potential. But often, FreeMoN still seems to fall short of what it can be. I'm always bummed out, as an N-scaler myself, to see the usual N scale stereotypes of disjointed scenery, the circus & the all beer reefer trains, and unballasted track on FreeMoN setups. Sorry, but I have more realism as my goal. I am very biased, I admit. When I display my sectional layouts at shows, I'm always amused by the blank looks I get after the following exchange: "Who's (modular layout) standards are you using?" "My own." I'm not saying these organizations are bad. They are a great place to start. I'm just trying to save you a few steps in the process. Consider spending some time observing the great model train universe. Collect methods and techniques you like. Consider venturing out on your own. Its very rewarding.
Therefore, and my point, don't feel you have to use anyone's standards. Feel free to strike out on your own
You've made an important point here that I think is frequently missed: There's a difference between "Modular" and "Sectional." Modular (to me, anyway) implies standards that enable connection of pieces together including those built by people who are perhaps as far as away as the other side of the country, if not the world. ("Galaxy" not included.) Sectional (again, to me, anyway) implies that the layout in question can be separated into pieces for transportation and setup "elsewhere"-- be it another temporary location or another residence. Chances are that those sections can be put together in only one way, and isn't meant to align with other people's sections. The first major iteration of the Wilmington and New York, my home layout, was built in sections, and was transported from my then-apartment to my first house.
Good point. Some modules are sectional, too, so they can be broken down for transport, but when assembled together, the external interfaces comply with the modular standard, so as to integrate into a layout of modules by different makers.
https://www.google.com/search?q=sec...MSBAiAYBkAYIugYGCAEQARgT&sclient=gws-wiz-serp ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................https://www.google.com/search?q=Mod...AIEGIBgGQBgi6BgYIARABGBM&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
Well I had a day today. A very fun day of setting up a HUGE Free-MoN layout. I am at Evanston 2024, also known as E24 and today was setup day. I cant tell you how many modules there are, I dont have the final count but this is huge. We are setting up in the old UP shops here and the pics below are what the venue looked like before everyone showed up with their modules. Tomorrow we finish setting up the Free-MoN and start on the T-Trak and NTrak and we play Friday, Saturday and Sunday. If you are near Evanston WY, come stop by on Saturday between 12:00 and 4:00 for a public access. And here is a module I helped build. It belongs to Paul from PnP Trains.
Here is a video showing some of the setup yesterday. Still more to do today. Over 450 free-min module sections!
Nice show! There were some beautiful modules on display. I really like how FreeMoN only stipulates the modules' external interfaces (physical and electrical), yet internal interfaces between sub-modules are not governed, allowing huge modules to not only be built, but also portable by disassembling the module into its separate sub-modules. But I wonder how non-linear (e.g. looped) assemblies of multiple modules can be effectively managed. Of course, a module could consist of multiple submodules implementing a local loop, but it would be difficult to ensure that continuous running is supported/allowed, across a mainline spanning multiple/all modules, without coordinated design across the multiple modules. I also took a gander at the FreeMoN module interface standards, which stipulate Loconet for the accessory bus across all modules. Whether Loconet is used on a module or not, it appears that the module must convey the Loconet bus between module endpoints. It would be advantageous to see the FreeMoN module interface standard amended to include LCC (Layout Command Control), which is a non-proprietary NMRA standard. There are gateways available that bidirectionally translate between LCC and Loconet, which could support a transition to LCC, while still providing interoperability with existing modules. But as it is, FreeMoN participants are essentially locked into Digitrax command stations and boosters, which also use a proprietary transponding protocol, instead of NMRA-standard RailCom transponding. I understand that, likely at the time FreeMoN standards were developed, Digtrax transponding and Loconet were the only/leading solutions for those functions. But NMRA has settled on RailCom and LCC, and the model railroading industry is moving toward those standards. FreeMoN should be supporting NMRA standards over proprietary solutions. But please don't let my rant take away from the amazing work by the participants and organizers of the show. Those are some awesome modules!
So we have a LCC bus here at the show. The command station that is powering the branchline (where the modules I helped build are located) is running a CS-105 and we have loconet as well. So we are not locked into Digitrax per se. But we were also running into an issue with the loconet only accepting a track power command, both off and on, but we couldn’t select a locomotive. We could at first, but that went away, so I’m not sure what happened, it’s not my command station so imma leave it alone. This isn’t the only instance of LCC, we have a signal bus on LCC as well as some modules have turnouts on LCC.
Im FAMOUS!! OK, well maybe not, but I can be seen around the 25-30 second mark standing beside Paul’s modules. Good times.
Thanks, Massey, and good to know. Did your LCC network span multiple Free-MoN modules (not just submodules within a module, but between modules too?) Is there an emerging "standard" way to connect LCC between FreeMoN modules yet? A Loconet-LCC gateway is available, manufactured by RR-CirKits, but it is not clear whether you were using it for your setup or not. It takes some configuring from what I understand, but it's the only way I know of for the CS-105 to talk to Loconet. Cool stuff, anyway you slice it!
We seem to be just using Ethernet cables between modules for LCC. I was not involved with the wiring aspect or the command system architecture, that was handled by a large club that came. I do know we are using a mix of NCE, TCS and Digitrax. The T-Trak guys are Digitrax only. And the loconet-LCC gateway is indeed from RR-Cirkits, I’m not sure of the configuration settings as I don’t yet own one. As for the setup it seemed to fail little by little, so we will see.
Whoever is at the Evanston show, say Hi! My modules are the Mott / Azalea forested set of 4 and Binney Junction if you need to find me. Would be nice to put a face to the trainboard screen name.
Hey Ryan, I’m Dominic, you were running your train on the branchline right next to me, I was trying to fix the Digitrax throttles and was running the Amtrak and ICE trains.
Thanks for the info. Yes, Ethernet cables are the standard way to connect LCC nodes, whether inside the same module, or on different modules. I'm curious, though; are all the Free-MoN modules strung together into a big network of track, or are they set up in groups as islands, separate from other islands, particularly those controlled by different DCC systems? While I can see how the gateway might allow TCS and Digitrax command stations to cooperate, I think it was intended to allow replacing a Digitrax setup with a TCS setup, or vice versa, by simply replacing the command station and adding the gateway, while still using the same trackside devices and throttles. Of course, that could cut both ways, replacing a TCS layout with a Digitrax one. I'm assuming the T-track layout(s) are separate from the Free-MoN layout(s), unless someone created an adapter module (and some tall tables for the T-track modules) to connect between them? That would be interesting...
