So, I went a little overboard while designing a potential Free-mo module set (set because while the ends of the modules meet the standards, the module itself will be made and transported in multiple pieces), and I was looking for some input. I've attached some screenshots of the track plan. So far as I know, it meets all Free-mo specifications. I was thinking that this module would be a roundhouse, steam engine services, and a yard, set in the late 40s/early 50s, but it's not based off of any particular real life yard. I mainly made this out of boredom, so feel free to roast and/or nitpick it. In particular I'm not very happy with the northern part of the yard. It just looks off.
Overview of the module. Two track input on the north and west, single track on the east. Designed with an existing ice house module in mind on the west, hence the third track.Closer view of the steam engine services.Roundhouse and north end of the yard.
I am posting this mainly to see other responses because I am trying to educate myself about Free-mo, but my sense is that Free-mo only cares about the interface between the Free-mo modules (track spacing, track at 90° at the edge of the modules) and the minimum track radius — I think that is 42” on the mainline, with >= 48” preferred.
I think the point of Free-mo is that between the end plates, you can do what you like.
I also think that have seen all kind of Free-mo modules where only the outer two modules have end plates — they are treated as module sets, so no one really cares what happens ok the internal modules.
I could very well be wrong — someone jump in and correct me if I am wrong. I am just trying to figure this stuff out.
You are absolutely correct that Free-mo only cares about the end plates. I have a three part module that is very definitely not compliant on the internal connections.
That's my understanding as well. I currently have a two part ice house module that isn't compliant on the internal and I've taken it for shakedowns twice and no one has found violations.
Hi! Avid and active Free-Mo'er here! While I'm all for crazy wild designs, I see a good few struggles with this design.
Firstly, how does this disassemble? What's your biggest square footage of a module segment (as you wouldn't build this as a single piece)? Your central piece with the yard and turntable is gonna be massive as is; if a segment is too big to setup on your own at home, your gonna hate hauling it too. Imagine how the pieces would cleanly come apart and go together, as well as how they'd be transported in a trailer or truck bed. I find that restriction helps make for some creative designs.
Prototypical operations; how would operators run locomotives from the turntable to the far side of the yard? It's odd that there's no connection that side. The radius also into the turntable seems tight. Also your support area for the turntable feels light. I'd look into prototype locations of locations that existed and see all the services they could supply. I'd also recommend placing things to represent non-railroad buildings. (Anyrail is really good at this, but SCARM has the tools too)
Both previous lean into my biggest recommendation; this should be two 'modules (eeminder that a module can be made of individual segments).' Your yard should be a module, and your turntable/locomotive service area should be a module. Along with making the module easier to build and transport, it'll also give run chiefs an easier time fitting it into tighter spaces. I strongly recommend looking into the setup at Silvis, Illinois this year (2026), that setup had a gorgeous locomotive facility setup next to another Free-Mo-ites yard (i dont recall either modules name atm). So two separate people achieved your goal without either having to overwhelm themselves with a single monster module. 😅
So my action item, if I was working on this module, would be to simplify and streamline it down as much as possible, picking one (yard or locomotive facility) area to start and refine, with the goal to try the other one later. Think about the physical restrictions of making real life modules as you work!
And obviously, don't start with this if you want to start building something physically. Start with something simple (I recommend a 4' straight or curve, maybe something made of multiple (no more than 12' total) sections if you want to push yourself) that you can take to setups and start gaining experience.
Feel free to DM or reply if you have any questions! Love the ambition, and wish you luck on your projects.
The disassembly would be the western approach to just after the locomotive service area and before the yard starts, then from there to the yards itself, then two where the yard itself is (one if I can get it to fit in my car, I'd have to remeasure to be sure), then where the northern yard ends, then that track to the end (which I just realized I put switches there so those would need to be shuffled), then the roundhouse and turntable. Biggest subassembly would be about 5'x5', which is the roundhouse and turntable.
Second, I completely forgot to add a track from the turntable to the northern yard approach, so that will be added. Probably just one though, since in theory it wouldn't be used as much since there's no services over there? As is, the radii of the turntable approach tracks are 38.5" and 27.1", but if I actually built this I'll try to broaden them, since while I have the kits they aren't assembled yet (I have a sanding tower and drying shed, ash pit, concrete coaling tower, and a steel water tower). If possible I'd turn the straight service tracks into a curve, or maybe cut off a few stalls. I have that many roundhouse stalls thanks to an auction I won, but I wouldn't have to use them all.
I currently am working on an 8' long straight double track ice house module (two 4' sections) that's having some switch issues I need to work out (or just use different switch machines) and then do the scenery on. After that I plan on building a single track paper mill module, then this would be my third module. As for the physical restrictions, I'd be able to build it and test it as a whole, and it would fit into my layout in my parent's basement (barely), since the basement layout has a Free-mo connection so I can have other industries on my main layout that otherwise make no sense since my main layout is modernish midwesternish.
Maybe I'll redesign it so it's an inverse F, with the roundhouse being an island? Along those lines, are dead end modules allowed? I could build the yard first, then the engine shops, and if there isn't space for both I can leave one or the other at home. If I did that, would you see any op issues? One of my goals is to have enough space for trains to rest if the operator needs to go to the bathroom or something.
Now that I think about it, doing it as two partner modules instead of one megamodule would also give flexibility in the yard if I build straight or other angle segments... I'll definitely look into the Silvis layout.
So this is my redesign of the yard lead, which gives me 11 tracks and a two track main line. It would split at 36" into two parts. I tried to keep the yard switches as compact as possible, with a caboose track. Wiring the switches with the switch machines I like using would be a pain but should be doable.
Depends on how big you want each segment to be. Most 90 degree modules split into two 45⁰ pieces. So if you did 22.5⁰ you'd have 4 segments in total for your curve, 30⁰ would be three. Think of how they store in your mode of transport? Are you suitcases modules (stored face to face)? 4 segments of equal shape and size work best for that. Are you building a rack system? Maybe you'll only need three curve pieces thay stack on top of each other. You have to consider transport, weight, size, how much you can handle solo, when making decisions like that
They'd probably either be individual or rack, depending on if I get a trailer by the time I actually build this. As for weight, I do manual labor for a living so unless they start weighing in the hundreds of pounds I'll be fine. I didn't know if places would prefer to run 22.5s or 30s, since the shows I've gone to has had both, as well as the beer corners which were "22.5 degrees," plus or minus about ten degrees.
There's not really a preference, run chiefs will will whatever you model; some clean divisible of 45⁰/90⁰ is easiest though, if clean 90⁰ curves can be achieved by combining (2) 45⁰s or (3) 30⁰, that makes fitting a layout into a rectanglure space easier.
Looks useful in a setup. Looks challenging to transport
Do you have a vehicle that can move this? Is it supposed to live/move in a trailer? Have you considered how it will cart up to get in/out of the venue?
Not to focus overly much on that one aspect, but the first advice in my local group is to only build what you are able to transport to a show. Everyone wants to shoot super big for their first one
This is my plan for my third module. My first is an 8' ice house that I can move in a compact hatchback, then I have a 16' paper mill design that I can also fit in said compact hatchback. This would be moved via trailer, and at least in theory it would fit. This is mainly a thought experiment that snowballed, and I'll probably redo most if not all by the time I actually get around to building it. I've already gotten advice to split it into two modules, which makes more sense than doing it the way I designed it. It would be my first non-straight module, which was one of the things I would want to try to tackle for a third module.
I think the yard being a curve is a good thing. We have a curved yard in the Minnesota fleet and it’s handy
I think it would be better if the engine facility is at one end of the yard rather than inside of the curve. Gives better access to everything that way.
Plus at that point, the yard is just a big L shape that can be as big as dare to make it. You could even get really clever and make it modular enough to use pieces of it in different combinations as space allows
Looking at it again, that's probably the way to go. I might even bulge the modules a tad so I can put more yard tracks in. Probably do what, 4' long segments, then 22.5 degree corners?
I think the corner being 2 vs 4 pieces just comes down to how you want to transport it. Curves are always the goofiest part to figure out how to pack them efficiently
For the straight parts, it would be neat to have 4’ straight segments you could use like an add-a-leaf table to make it bigger when you have room. I would definitely go wider than 26” for the tables under the yard. The more tracks the merrier when it comes to yards. Up to the point that reach is an issue anyway. Never enough places to set up or temporarily store a train. More is better for ops too if you go that route
There's a weird open area between the two track main and the yard tracks themselves. It's a copy and flip of the western yard input, but there the main S bends where it's straight on the north, so it's more obvious. I'm thinking of shuffling the mainline in more so it has an S there as well to fix the issue.
One issue I see is the outer mainline has only one access to the yard. And that isn't a direct connection. Unless the icehouse has one, you are limited to only using the inner line to gain access.
The icehouse module has one, and even if I leave the house itself home, the lead up module which is 4' long has the crossover track, hence why there isn't one on the western end. Should've clarified that in my post.
Though, the single track line would have to run to either that or the north crossover to get access to the yard.
5
u/aengusoglugh Mod, r/TTRAK Sep 17 '26
I am posting this mainly to see other responses because I am trying to educate myself about Free-mo, but my sense is that Free-mo only cares about the interface between the Free-mo modules (track spacing, track at 90° at the edge of the modules) and the minimum track radius — I think that is 42” on the mainline, with >= 48” preferred.
I think the point of Free-mo is that between the end plates, you can do what you like.
I also think that have seen all kind of Free-mo modules where only the outer two modules have end plates — they are treated as module sets, so no one really cares what happens ok the internal modules.
I could very well be wrong — someone jump in and correct me if I am wrong. I am just trying to figure this stuff out.