Hi Group, March 4th, 07. Sunday 13:25 Hrs. M.S.T. Its Been a While so I'm Not sure If the Topic has Come Up, Guess I'll Find Out, Right?:zip: Are there Others on This Board, Who Have an Interest in the Concepts Known as "Free mo N." Reasons? I've Seen the HO Versions at a Regional Train Show in Calgary. I have to Admit They have a Great Set Up for Modular Tables.:teeth: True I'm on the "N trak System" I do Like the "Free Mo N System" a Lot. While This is an N Scale Board, Trust Its OK to Go Over things Like the "Twin Track - Free Mo N Systems" etc.:angel: Comments Anyone? Thanks Group, Have a Great Day.
I am not familiar with term "Free Mo N"-- is that anything like "OneTrack", a modular system that has only ONE standard mainline track, and can have whatever other tracks are desired which do NOT necessarily connect to standard modules? Just a guess. I would enjoy building a modular scene, but I wouldn't want to be limited to modeling 3-track lines.
All questions can be answered here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Free-moN/ You will need to join the group to get any info. There is also (no joining anything): http://www.wesleysteiner.com/mr/Free-moN/main.html And the current Free-MoN standards: http://www.geocities.com/w_steiner/ModelRailroading/Free-moN/FreemoNStandards.html Jason
Free-MoN standards are for people who prefer operation based railroading using realistic scenery and track with some sort of continuity between modules. Or in others words, the anti-NTRAK. Jason
See here: http://www.fremo.org/ I know a guy who is a member. They are operating modules on a very high level of modeling and operation. Many people think they are too extreme, but I like the results. Nevertheless I prefer to do my own modelling in the basement, lone wolf style
For FREMO look at my site . You'll see the European USA-style meetings listed and I've uploaded pictures. Sorry, text is most in German. But the pictures will tell themselves. Also look for N-scale at americaN, the FREMO USA-style N-scalers. Wolfgang
There is an excellent description of what Free-Mo is (scale agnostic) at: http://homepage.mac.com/jacobsen/LORM2007/ Scroll down to the 11am session, and download the 59 woo woo woo Acrobat Reader file. Very informative. As was stated above, Free-mo is an emphasis of prototypical accuracy, and here in the US, the typical Free-mo modeller is usually also a Prototype Modeler: http://www.pbase.com/tracktime/wpm2006 http://www.pbase.com/mrmrl/wpm_2006 I happen to like the Free-mo concept very much, myself. And of course, in our hobby, to each his own, enjoy your railroad the way that you want to, and more power to you.
I am very much interested in Free-Mo N.... mainly because you can model more in a given amount of space. I currently focus in Free-Mo HO. I have materials to build something in FreemoN... Just need to do it. I have been busy with school and projects lately, and not have had time to really think about what I really want to model. I do know that I have some new rolling stock and am considering several different industries. I want something that can be switched on a regular basis, and still be interesting. Time will tell... But on the upside, freemo is gaining popularity. mike walsh
I've got my first Free-moN module sitting behind me as I type this. The Free-mo standards, Free-moN included, are intended to promote operations on a modular layout. To a certain extent, they are also intended to raise the bar of what is seen on a modular railroad. The modules are higher than other standards (at a minimum 50" from the floor (grades are allowed, so the layout may not be completely level)). For Free-moN, Code 55 trackwork is required for the mainlines, and code 55 or smaller is requierd for sidings. Modules are allowed to be completely free form (as long as you follow the minimum radius requirements) Free-mo layouts are typically point to point, which helps to encourage operations, rather than running in circles. Paul
OneTrak is a more useful standard because they can interface with NTrak modules. It is also more insidious, since the higher quality of oNeTrak modules can then draw the NTrak crowd into finer scale modeling. IMHO
Fremo seems more useful since the modules are likely to be closer to eye level. If oNeTrak interfaces with NTrak, it must be down at the 40" track height. All the time and effort spent detailing N scale equipment is lost when you're looking down at the top of your models at belly level. Is Atlas Cd 55 allowed on Fremo? That's another downside of the Ntrak and compatible standards, is that prototypical trackwork isn't always allowed. I'm part of a modular group now that formed our own standards for double track mainlines, Cd 55, and track height of 53". At shows we get a lot of comments, both good and bad. The good comments, people seem to like it being closer to their eye, as they feel more engrossed in the scene, and can see the detail. Sometimes we get a bad comment about it being too high for the kids. The standard answer to that is, "Sorry, but we didn't build it for the kids."
I like 'em both for different reasons. They both promote operation (Free-moN a bit more though, as was pointed out). oNeTrak has the advantage of being able to be set up as a branch line off of NTRAK, thus seeing more traffic, which the public seems to like. Free-moN however is more protypically interesting, as fewer compromises to meet geometric limitations are required. It is also specified as code 55 / DCC (oNeTrak was also to be DCC-centric, but AFAIK, that has not been universally held to). I think even kids would see the difference (if they were tall enough). I had a discussion sometime back with Wesley about interfacing the two, and he pointed out (and correctly, I think) that there was no desire to make them compatable, with the Code 55 track, 50" rail height and track interface techniques being differentiators (among other things). That said, my oNeTrak module could easily be converted if there was a Free-moN group in my area. Even here in the home of oNeTrak, there is not a lot of opportunity to run "linear". Doug Stuard
I considered OneTrak for a long time, being a long time N-traker (I own 3 operable N-trak modules at the moment), but I decided along the way that OneTrak carries too much baggage along with it due to being an off shoot of the N-trak standard. The biggest drawback to OneTrak IMO is the requirement to include code 80 rail just like you have to do with an N-trak module. Also, most of the OneTrak layouts I've seen have been loops, which is fine for the portion of the world that wants to run in circles, but for those of us who want to operate, we feel like we're chasing our tails. Paul
Hmmm...... When did it become unacceptable to operate on Ntrack or oNe track modular layouts? Seems to me the only thing holding you back is the simple explaination to the group members that we are operating on blank line and most of the time it is DCC. We had a heck of a time about 4 years ago on our Group Ntrak modular layout in a mall and it was all DC. You just need the people and the desire to have fun in my opinion. Sooner or later Freemo people will get upset at running point to point or something and design something else. Besides it would be hard to run point to point with 75 Autoracks or 100+ Swift Roadrailers.
That's only part of the equation. You also need modules that are suitable for operations. In particular, the modules need to have switches that cars can actually get through in both directions (i.e. no Peco Short turnouts). Some modules also need to have passing sidings and/or runnaround tracks that are useable. People may design an N-trak module with one or more of these features, but since there is a tendency for people to build POFF modules, there is usually some kind of compromise made on the modules. It makes operating a real nightmare. That Depends entirely on the size of the layout, especially the availability of yards and passing sidings. Plus, most of us building Free-mo modules are not concerned with running LONG trains, but in actually switching with the trains we run. You're not likely to be able to operate with a 75 car train of autoracks on the layout unless it's a through train. You may be able to add and remove cuts from the train, but buidling an entire 75 car train just takes up more real estate than most of us cann transport (Think about how your auto loading/unloading facility need to be to handle 75 autoracks... and still be able to switch them in and out of the facility). Paul
The N scale club I belong to uses AusTrak, an Australianised and metric variant of NTRAK with only 2 main lines laid with Peco code 80. It has similar limitations to NTRAK with fixed length modules and mainly "roundy roundy" operation. A subset of the club want to do something in finer scale and preferably DCC, so Free-moN seems an attractive option. There are few queries which aren't immediately obvious from the somewhat brief standards documents. 1) How strict is the baseboard width requirement? The standard says at least 12" with 24" preferred to avoid "cosmetic misalignment". Looking at a lot of Free-mo and Free-moN set ups, there is a lot of variation in module width and some misalignment seems inevitable. If somebody wants to build a 12" wide shelf switcher for use as a home layout and join it to other modules for exhibitions, does the misalignment really matter? The European Free-moN "standard" appears to be 400mm (about 16"), plus they have a different end plate arrangement with a hand/wiring hole in each end. 2) Is there any standard for double track spacing? There is in the Free-mo standard but nothing obvious in Free-moN. 3) The standard specifies Digitrax/LocoNet, but nobody in the entire region (in any scale) is known to use Digitrax. The early adopters of DCC generally had big layouts and went for Lenz, and the recent converts went for NCE mainly because the PowerCAB was not expensive and suited relatively small layouts. Is this an issue elsewhere and is there an easy solution? 4) Are there any particular pros and cons of Atlas and Micro Engineering code 55? Apart from the current supply problems of ME turnouts. Hand laid track would be a longer term aim. Without wanting to open the obvious can of worms, does anybody use Peco code 55 for Free-moN? Cheers David
There is a freemo-N group at Yahoo. Join, and they will be more than happy to answer all of your questions. At this point, they will probably just be happy if you build a module regardless of what track you use. Jason
