Module Standard Poll

Module standard to use for TT scale.

Current NMRA standard with small updates as defined in "Hmmm.." topic.
2
13%
Single main standard of the AKTT type (refer to "LINKS" for AKTT).
5
33%
New "TT Nut" standard defined by us here.
8
53%
 
Total votes : 15

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby AstroGoat760 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:41 am

I really do not like being limited to 2'x4'.

The module I had planned would be larger, to accomodate the engine service area, turntable, and roundhouse. An oval of track would be run around the roundhouse area, which would make the module both a linkable section to a larger layout, and a portable self contained layout of it own, with a smaller landscaped module that Nicholle wants to make that can be hooked up to it or any other compliant modules.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3289
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Bowdon, Georgia, USA

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby TTSMR » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:44 am

Go back and take another look at tt module layout #4 with 5 and 6 added.

I modified the drawing and added possible future growth.

Don
TTSMR
 

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby TTSMR » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:55 am

AngrySailor302 wrote:I really do not like being limited to 2'x4'.

The module I had planned would be larger, to accomodate the engine service area, turntable, and roundhouse. An oval of track would be run around the roundhouse area, which would make the module both a linkable section to a larger layout, and a portable self contained layout of it own, with a smaller landscaped module that Nicholle wants to make that can be hooked up to it or any other compliant modules.


Using a deeper module would not be that big of a deal. It would hang out the front a bit.

As long as the first 24" align with the other modules you can make it 30' or 36" deep. Just remember the larger module would be more difficult and expensive to ship to other locations. Would a transfer table be another option? Or put the turn table on one of the end modules???

tt scale layout modules modified module.pdf
30" and 36" module inkine with 24" module
(1.78 KiB) Downloaded 156 times


Would that work for you?

Don
TTSMR
 

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby ConducTTor » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:06 pm

AngrySailor302 wrote:I really do not like being limited to 2'x4'.

The module I had planned would be larger, to accomodate the engine service area, turntable, and roundhouse. An oval of track would be run around the roundhouse area, which would make the module both a linkable section to a larger layout, and a portable self contained layout of it own, with a smaller landscaped module that Nicholle wants to make that can be hooked up to it or any other compliant modules.



As TTSMR said above, as long as the front 2' are there you can add depth if you want. Go back to page two of this post and take a look at the pic with turntable area that I posted.
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby AstroGoat760 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:11 pm

What I am trying to balance is making modules that will make up my new TT scale layout, and to make a new portable TT layout that is self sustaining and linkable. I would rather make a 2'x8' module than a 2'x'4' module, as it seems that working by factors of 4' would be the best for everyone.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3289
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Bowdon, Georgia, USA

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby TTSMR » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:13 pm

AngrySailor302 wrote:What I am trying to balance is making modules that will make up my new TT scale layout, and to make a new portable TT layout that is self sustaining and linkable. I would rather make a 2'x8' module than a 2'x'4' module, as it seems that working by factors of 4' would be the best for everyone.


You are correct that 2'x4' modules would work best fo most of us.

Is there any way you could create your 2'x8' module from 2 each 2'x4' modules?

Don
TTSMR
 

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby ConducTTor » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:16 pm

TTSMR wrote:
AngrySailor302 wrote:What I am trying to balance is making modules that will make up my new TT scale layout, and to make a new portable TT layout that is self sustaining and linkable. I would rather make a 2'x8' module than a 2'x'4' module, as it seems that working by factors of 4' would be the best for everyone.


You are correct that 2'x4' modules would work best fo most of us.

Is there any way you could create your 2'x8' module from 2 each 2'x4' modules?

Don


I'm don't think that's an issue. If his module is 2'x8', it will simply take the place of two side by side modules.
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby TTSMR » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:25 pm

ConducTTor wrote:
TTSMR wrote:
AngrySailor302 wrote:What I am trying to balance is making modules that will make up my new TT scale layout, and to make a new portable TT layout that is self sustaining and linkable. I would rather make a 2'x8' module than a 2'x'4' module, as it seems that working by factors of 4' would be the best for everyone.


You are correct that 2'x4' modules would work best fo most of us.

Is there any way you could create your 2'x8' module from 2 each 2'x4' modules?

Don


I'm don't think that's an issue. If his module is 2'x8', it will simply take the place of two side by side modules.


I was just trying to figure out how he could ship it back and forth when we have shows far away from him.

Seems that a 8' module wuld be hard to ship.

Oh wait! What about a COD delivery!? You got some good connections !? LOL

(that measm Carrier Onboard Delivery for you non Navy types. Its how the Navy delivers mail to the ships.)

Don
TTSMR
 

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby AstroGoat760 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:37 pm

I am not to keen on shipping modules, however Nicholle has a few uncles that drive for various semi-carriers and have been able to bring her things from her folks and vice versa. We are exiled in connecticut, they are in ND, SD, MN, MO.

Building the engine service yard has become sort of an obsession within an obsession (engine yard within TT scale), so breaking it down into smaller segments would not easily work out, without an insane number of jumper tracks at odd angles (think turntable tracks).

Another thing is that I am unable to be deployed at any time for now, even if I was deployed, chances are that Nicholle could bring the modules out herself, with her truck.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3289
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Bowdon, Georgia, USA

Re: Module Standard Poll

Postby CSD » Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:08 pm

I don't think we require the return loop. If we go with the 2 main lines (which I like), they should be separate (except for a few electrically isolated cross overs here and there). The main reasons are: 1) the ability to run one DC and the other DCC without a lot of switching and reverse loop wiring and 2) more trains can run at once with less attention. This also reduces the size of the end modules greatly as only a half circle is needed. As to the length of the modules, it could be as long as you like. Only the width need be the same. If you build the front scenic portion you must supply staging in the back. Switches for the staging could be incorporated into the end pieces which means that the strait modules can be arranged in any order. Set backs and spacing etc. can be arranged according to the spec previously discussed.
Attachments
Module 1.jpg
Mark
//S
User avatar
CSD
 
Posts: 2269
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests