That is what I was thinking, and if you were to extend it a little longer it could even double as a team track. Either plan would be fun to run. Keep us posted as we do like build threads with pictures of course.
The modules would still always be together, at home or in a larger Free-mo setup. Extending the siding to the end of the module doesn't make much difference in 'home' mode, maybe it could be the place to park the engine, but it would give the option for a longer siding when included in a large setup. As it is, the siding is quite short and not very useful in large setups. That was the point I was trying to make earlier about the pair of modules I got, because they have to go together due to other tracks crossing the module joint, the siding is too short for anything but the shortest of locals and one of the benefits of a larger setup is the opportunity to run longer trains. In fact at the WGH show, the siding barely held one set of power, granted it was 8 locos. I suggest extending the siding over the stream to the edge of the module only for usefulness when in 'large setup mode'.
If these were my modules the tracks wouldn't cross the stream. The tracks would follow the stream like most RRs do. Big reason is, bridges are very expensive. That way the engine track could be off the left end of the siding as the real RRs do it. Then you cold have the left spur crossing the grain spur for another industry or two. It would also be more prototypical to have the spurs of the siding parallel to the siding.
That was an awesome setup at WGH, first time actually seeing Free-mo modules together. I wish I had gotten there earlier on Sunday to watch instead of oversleeping and running around buying stuff.
Great inputs here. Andy, I agree with you on the bridges being expensive. My proportions may be a little off on the stream, making it a little closer to a river right now. I want to put in a fill & culvert style "bridge" for the main where it crosses the creek. This will keep the creek from getting too large. The rest of the spurs can stay off of the creek, thus making the creek a good excuse to have my angled spurs which help break up the parallel lines of the mainline, siding and grain area. KJD, yes, the siding is not very long. At best, it looks like it could have one engine and seven average cars. This would be all I need at home, since the spurs couldn't handle much more than that anyway. I don't envision much operation happening when I connect it to a larger layouts or take it to shows (if I'm lucky enough to live where we have free-mo shows). Most of the time, the through trains can just be on their way through my quaint town scene that really only has a few industries served by rail. Occasionally, a regional train could drop off a few cars on the siding for the switcher to handle, or the road switcher tied to this scene could make trips out to the city to pickup and deliver it's own cars, connecting from the larger railroads. Sure, there's some compression happening here, but in HO scale, I pretty much will always have that. Since this is Free-Mo, the points of the switches need to be 6" from the ends of the modules, so the siding is as long as I can possibly make it. One option available in HO Free-Mo would be to make all your modules double-main, then keep conversion modules handy to go from double to single. Keeping that in my back pocket if later down the line I'm in a club that likes Free-Mo double-main as it would provide the greatest flexibility in operation - double-main one day, single-main with a medium siding the next. Single-mainline is optimized for my home layout; eventually, I'd like to make more modules of single-mainline through scenery. I like how this module should tie in with that naturally.
This plan is more realistic that the other - RR's typically avoided complex trackwork (such as crossovers and slips) on industry spurs if they could help it. The only issue I see is that you have a switch crossing a stream, whereas the RR might consider coming from another angle to avoid a complex bridge arrangement. Don't forget that any industry looking to have rail service would also choose their location carefully, and normally work with the railroads while planning. This is rarely an afterthought to the served company who are always looking at their bottom line. If you must have a water crossing, I would opt for placing the buildings from the lower right to the opposite side, and possibly move the stream to where the road is now.
