CJ Freezer and the Railway Modeller (October 1961) Plan

[Rivercider]

There has been a lot of useful input on this thread already, it is a lot of railway in a small space.

Although it is a first post on RMweb by Captain Clive we do not know if it is his first layout.

CJF often mentions in his books that many plans can be improved if more space is available and this is a good example.

 

I noted the lack of storage for stock but having read CJFs notes about how he anticipates this layout to be operated as a suburban line it made more sense to me.

Although it is not my sort of layout if I was going with this plan for added variety I would have two sets of stock and operate alternately with steam and then DMUs, maybe three or four tank locos, or three DMUs and a diesel would cover it. With no tender loco in use I would omit the turntable to give extra storage in the shed area.

Like Il Grifone I also agree that the branch loco shed might be better if replaced by a source of freight or perhaps parcels traffic,

 

cheers

Edited April 28, 2017 by Rivercider

[Glover]

There is a mention in the original article and plan to the Harborne railway in Birmingham.

Google it: fascinating grubby,grotty,grimy railway line!

Quite feasible to model the full branch, although you would need to produce buildings on a mass scale.

 

Glover

[john new]

The use of a single main line station invites a mode of operation that I've seen described in 1940s/1950s literature but which I haven't seen mentioned in recent years. Basically the station does not represent a specific station but, instead, represents every station along the route of a particular train. For example, an up passenger starts from "Newcastle", runs non-stop  through "Durham", stops at "Darlington", runs non-stop to "York", changes locomotives at "Peterborough" and so on. Similarly the goods yard can be used to represent every yard along the line, with wagons being exchanged according to any one of the many wagon ordering systems that have been described over the years.

 

A very valid concept you could still have operational fun with today. Operational (rather than scenic) model railways are too often overlooked these days. One of the most interesting layouts to read up on back in the day - the LMS Sherwood section. Scenically a pile of **** but one of the layouts I wished I could have had. Same with the Gainsborough Club layout today, just wished I lived near enough to be an operating member and help run it.

 

That CJF layout though would need some sort of L extension (Perhaps folding if it isn't in a shed) to give a stock storage area.

Edited April 28, 2017 by john new

[Ian Kirk]

Hi,

I think that this plan has really to be seen in the context of it's time. It could be done as a "retro" layout but even then would not be easy. If you are aiming for something to "modern" standard then I would suggest something simpler, a larger space or a smaller scale. When the late CJF (a boyhood hero of mine who I was privileged to get to know once I was grown up - I still see his son Nick from time to time) drew this up the RTR of the time, Triang and Hornby Dublo, had flangeless centre drivers,some of the coaching stock was shortened from scale length and it was all designed to go round 13.5 or 15 inch radius curves/points. This made the 1ft 10inch radius suggested by CJF generous by comparison. Streamline was in it's infancy I am not sure if the first points were even available and the advance from the train set was most likely to be Wrenn fibre based track and points. When I scrapped my last "big train set" layout-a mix of Triang and Wrenn track (1961 as it happens)in my first attempts at "scale" modelling I had to solder up my own track.

Modern RTR makes no such compromises and a scale length Modern Image coach is very long and looks ridiculous on tight curves. Not to mention the extra space which would be required for clearance.

 

best wishes,

 

Ian

[muir]

I can see this plan as being quite exciting as a comprehensive suburban service.

I'm picturing Commuter trains orbiting a couple of times than terminating at either the high level or branch  with something like the early 60's cross-London style goods hauled by EE or NBL type 1's and their ilk picking up and dropping off in a fairly continuous orbit. Could almost consider two of them running .opposite ways picking up and dropping off to each other, somewhat improbable but if it's only interrupting the busy commuter traffic possibly not that noticeable.

 

I'd imagine that for one operator it would be pretty full on to operate, and yet there's the opportunity to sit back and let trains just do there thing when you want to enjoy train watching.

 

I like it.

 

I actually have a feeling that the CJF plan in question done well with the right scenic breaks, possibly even a few backscene dividers to create little diorama areas would look pretty cool.

 

 

I always feel that it seems to be very easy lately to knock layout designs in the CJF idiom.

 

I think it's a bit of a pity that simple scenery layouts designed for operation no matter how simple or complex seem to get frowned upon as being too toy train.

Almost a bit of a pity that seeing how it's just not cricket anymore to have a 3 coach pullman with bulleid fleche d'or sprinting for Southampton, we have to put with having some technicoloured metroland pacer unit or a GWR branchline (not knocking those that like pacers and GWR branchlines of course) but we can't be seen to possess less than scale length express' anymore.

 

I'm reading some 1930's US model builder magazines, and the editors are describing shunting puzzles and operational patterns with one loco, an oval and a couple of sidings.

I feel the modelling publications have quite a tendency to overlook publishing shunting puzzles and operations for very simple layouts. Might help to give a few proprietary modellers' a bit more encouragement to work with and enjoy what they've got and can achieve with, rather than displaying too many unapproachable heights.

 

As everybody knows: a great layout that you can capably build, run, enjoy and actually like is a whole lot better than the incomplete unachievable masterpiece thats progressed well beyond enjoyment or even interest.

 

 

Muir

[hayfield]

Muir

 

You have hit the nail on the head, the hobby is a broad church, this plan is ideal for those who wish to run trains, I think with the normal proviso mentioned quite some time ago if possible increase the plan by 20% ish to be more in keeping with modern day track and stock.

 

The scenic part could either basic or complex, depending on what the operator requires, and as one contributor has stated, it was designed to be a plan that starts off as something basic which can be developed.

 

If you like it try planning it at a larger size to see if it is possible to build in the space required and geometry of RTR turnouts available

[hayfield]

Just out of interest I have had a play with the plan. You are looking at a lot of 2' radii curves. Looking at the plan there is little scope for a lot of trains as its a figure of eight without much in the way of storage sidings. Main platforms could be extended for longer trains, with another 6" width you could get 2 storage loops in, still plenty of play value, especially interworking 2 branch trains. The scenic challenges could also be interesting

[locomad]

What I did like about the Railway Modeller which they tend not to do now is provide an excellent aerial photo of a plan with the plan itself

[JohnR]

I've had a little play with the plan in anyrail, and it seems to me that the point geometry is not too far off streamline medium radius, but this will probably need a little more adjustment - it should be fine for short radius points. The tightest curves are down to just under 2 foot radius - but since modern stock is designed to go around 2nd radius curves (17 1/4 inches) this should be ok. The real problem is going to be the inclines, and here a few extra inches all around should help. Older stock was a lot better at hauling trains up even quite heroic gradients. However, we are talking relatively short trains, so perhaps only a modest relaxation of the slopes is necessary. 

 

If you did that, you might also be able to get in some storage loops - as has been said earlier, in days gone by, the average modeller would not have had as many locos as we have today.

[locomad]

 

If you did that, you might also be able to get in some storage loops - as has been said earlier, in days gone by, the average modeller would not have had as many locos as we have today.

Well said I was looking at RM Feb 1960 railway of the month typical at the time large 14' x 20' attic layout looked very nice, at the time quite common to list the stock of loco's, very few compared to today.

 

Times have changed average Modeller has far more stock than the layout they build

[hayfield]

I've had a little play with the plan in anyrail, and it seems to me that the point geometry is not too far off streamline medium radius, but this will probably need a little more adjustment - it should be fine for short radius points. The tightest curves are down to just under 2 foot radius - but since modern stock is designed to go around 2nd radius curves (17 1/4 inches) this should be ok. The real problem is going to be the inclines, and here a few extra inches all around should help. Older stock was a lot better at hauling trains up even quite heroic gradients. However, we are talking relatively short trains, so perhaps only a modest relaxation of the slopes is necessary. 

 

If you did that, you might also be able to get in some storage loops - as has been said earlier, in days gone by, the average modeller would not have had as many locos as we have today.

 

 

Here is a challenge, to update the plan for today's modeller.  Since the 60's houses have got smaller, having said this the use of sheds, garages or lofts has increased. A plan that would fit a modern garage, as cars are too big to go in them now.

[The Johnster]

Well, let's get back to basic principles.  The curse of railway modelling has always been space, solvable only by having the wealth to either live in a castle or palace with enormous rooms of the sort that would not be a part of even the most plush modern architect designed luxury home, or to live somewhere with sufficient grounds to build a specific structure to house your railway, which can then of course be any size you like.  The obvious example of this is Pete Waterman's Leamington Spa, a magnificent layout designed by a superb modeller who has rock star resources at his disposal and knows what he wants and the standards he wishes to achieve.  I do my best not to be jealous, not just of the resources but of the vision and skill he has used to create his railway.

 

H0, and it's dubious companion 00, scale model railways were devised at a time when it was technically possible to mass produce reliable working models that size, and they were marketed as being suitable for the 'modern family home', which in the post WW1 era had become too small to entertain much in 0 gauge.  Sadly, the 'modern family home' kept getting progressively smaller and smaller, and by the time Cyril Freezer published this plan you were pushing the envelope to get any sort of working railway into a spare room despite the short trains and often under scale length coaches; the plan is very much a response to this post WW2 world.  It was around this time that people started talking about garages, lofts, and garden sheds, still a feature of modern modelling but we have learned the hard way to insulate, ventilate, heat, and aircondition them; they have not proved to be the solution they looked like in 1960 and increase the capital investment by a factor of lots.  Within a very few years, Beeching had put paid to traditional railways and nobody had a spare room any more; they were all nurseries, studies, workrooms, studios, guest bedroom or whatever, and unavailable for railways!

 

It has always been my opinion that a model railway, in order to preserve the enthusiasm, comfort, and health of it's owner, is best situated in a room inside the living area of the home, centrally heated and protected from the elements.  This opinion is undoubtedly reinforced by my father's idea of a loft conversion in the 60s for my railway when I was a teenager, to get it out of the living area of the house.  It was pathetic, insulated but not very well, unheated, and the ambient temperature was whatever it was outside in winter (remember 1963?), and with no ventilation but plenty of draugts in winter, oven-like in summer.  My railway perpetually destroyed itself by expansion and contraction.  Back to square one!  I now live in a smallv one bedroomed flat, and my railway is a minimalist 10 inch wide 4mm blt that takes up half the wall space in my bedroom, and I very much doubt that I would be able to have it at all if I did not live alone and do not have to worry about what a partner's views on the subject of sleeping with what would from their point of view be something large, anachronistic, ugly, badly presented, in the way, and very un-bedroomlike (I mean the railway, though that describes me well enough as well).  A further point is that I rent, and hence have imposed upon myself the limitation that the layout must be free standing and not permanently fixed in any way to the flat so as not to run foul of the tenancy agreement; my landlord appreciates this and is supportive of the railway as a result, just as well as his agent is not the sort of woman who understands...

 

I have had to accept that a layout featuring reasonable length express trains running at realistic speeds is not ever going to be available to me, not only on space grounds but because I would not be able to afford the cash to buy it rtr or the time to build it from scratch, even if I had the skills which I most certainly don't!  This acceptance, the concept of working with the space, resources, and abilities which I have actually got as opposed to the ones I wish I had, has led to a satisfying and practicable layout which meets my needs and works; I am, despite not having expresses or 60 wagon coal trains coming out of a fully modelled colliery which would be lovely, happy with it.  I am past retirement age, and this will probably do me for whatever time I have until I am withdrawn from service, and as I am unlikely to be preserved, scrapped.

 

I would never, at any time of my life, have had a suitable room in which to build this plan of Cyril's, and if I had it would have been beyond my woodworking skills.  It is a plan for a skilled carpenter, not a DIY cowboy like me!  It would be an interesting project to build as drawn and work with rtr stock available at the time, but I see little point personally in recreating it for any other purpose or adapting it to modern use.  One is, IMHO, better off designing something to suit one's own purposes, especially as software to assist this is easily available and easy to use and one does not need the draughstman skills to draw out a plan like one used to back in the day.  

 

I didn't draw out a plan at all, as no railway I ever drew a plan for ever got built exactly to that plan.  I just started at the town end and worked outwards from the buffer stops, letting the track lie naturally and, except for a little persuasion here and there to fit the room, follow it's own course; buildings and scenery follow the track, and so do the trains, fairly smoothly and reliably.  It works for me; Cyril Freezer's plans don't, by and large, except for Minories; I know it's not supposed to, but it makes me think of Merthyr...

Edited May 2, 2017 by The Johnster

[Joseph_Pestell]

Looking at the plan again, I think that I would be inclined to get rid of the upper loop and replace it with an L-shaped terminus at the higher level (left-hand end).

 

There is also scope to have a gradient down on the lower branch and continue on through the terminus shown to hidden sidings or even a reverse loop.

[hayfield]

Johnster

 

You are quite right in naming a few skills required to build a model railway, along with space to house it and monies to fund it

 

Having moved house last year the initial plan was to have a purpose built shed as a railway room workshop, at the same time we were planning to build a modest extension to enlarge the kitchen and lounge. It soon became apparent both financially and aesthetically that the shed became part of the extension, the kitchen became slightly larger and the proposed railway room shrunk slightly.

 

One of the ideas came from a 1960's Railway modeller, initially designed for a garage (which housed a car) The layout board ran the length of the room and had an integral back-scene board. The top of the  back-scene board is attached to the wall by hinges, in the closed up position is locked in place to a shelf by catches, when in the open position there are fold out legs to stabilise. I plan to use this idea in my new modelling room for a 60's retro layout, based on one of CJF's plans for a BLT so I can use my small collection of vintage stock.

 

Just to show there are many uses for CJF's plans, either as planned or developed. Having said this garages are quite often too small for modern cars and one of the new uses is for railway rooms

[The Johnster]

Johnster

 

You are quite right in naming a few skills required to build a model railway, along with space to house it and monies to fund it

 

Having moved house last year the initial plan was to have a purpose built shed as a railway room ###### workshop, at the same time we were planning to build a modest extension to enlarge the kitchen and lounge. It soon became apparent both financially and aesthetically that the shed became part of the extension, the kitchen became slightly larger and the proposed railway room shrunk slightly.

 

One of the ideas came from a 1960's Railway modeller, initially designed for a garage (which housed a car) The layout board ran the length of the room and had an integral back-scene board. The top of the  back-scene board is attached to the wall by hinges, in the closed up position is locked in place to a shelf by catches, when in the open position there are fold out legs to stabilise. I plan to use this idea in my new modelling room for a 60's retro layout, based on one of CJF's plans for a BLT so I can use my small collection of vintage stock.

 

Just to show there are many uses for CJF's plans, either as planned or developed. Having said this garages are quite often too small for modern cars and one of the new uses is for railway rooms

 

Cars should be able to live outside without coming to much harm anyway, at least in the less lively inner city areas and beyond...

 

Problem with a garage is it isn't properly heated and ventilated, you don't want a great deal of temperature variation or dust, and it'll cost a good bit to make suitable for a railway.  Ideally you want access to running water not too far away for actual modelling as well. If you can afford it, and wait while it's being done, fine, but it isn't all plain sailing!  And a garage too small for a modern car is too small for all but a a basic railway; it still doesn't solve the space issue, and not much does.  I'm not convinced by the hinged baseboard dodge either, as all stock and anything else than is not fixed down has to be removed from it before a session ends, and replaced before it starts, another reason to stay in the living room and watch telly on cold winter nights...

 

But. like me, you'll have to work within the restrictions of the space, resources, and skillsets you've got to hand at the time!  

[PatB]

Cars should be able to live outside without coming to much harm anyway, at least in the less lively inner city areas and beyond...

 

Problem with a garage is it isn't properly heated and ventilated, you don't want a great deal of temperature variation or dust, and it'll cost a good bit to make suitable for a railway.  Ideally you want access to running water not too far away for actual modelling as well. If you can afford it, and wait while it's being done, fine, but it isn't all plain sailing!  And a garage too small for a modern car is too small for all but a a basic railway; it still doesn't solve the space issue, and not much does.  I'm not convinced by the hinged baseboard dodge either, as all stock and anything else than is not fixed down has to be removed from it before a session ends, and replaced before it starts, another reason to stay in the living room and watch telly on cold winter nights...

 

But. like me, you'll have to work within the restrictions of the space, resources, and skillsets you've got to hand at the time!  

 

The fully hinged layout certainly doesn't appeal, for exactly the reasons you state. However, plans have been devised iincorporating narrow, fixed sections for stock storage, with only the wider scenic bits/return loops/whatever else hinged. Of course, others have sought to get layouts in garages out of the way by slinging the whole thing from Heath Robinson pulley arrangements. CJF was a frequent advocate of putting a permanent layout around the walls above car door, or even roof, level, with a wide board at the end extending out over the car bonnet. Lots of ways to skin that particular cat.

 

However, I fully agree with your broader point that an in-service or unimproved garage is a terrible place to put a model railway. Out here in Oz, uninsulated outside buildings are possibly even less suitable for railway rooms, seeing a temperature variation approaching 50 degrees in some areas.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Maybe worth reminding people that while CJF was editor of RM in the early 60s, these small space designs - occasionally he did a large one - appeared as "Plan of the Month". But there was also a monthly reproduction of a BR trackplan for those that wanted something to base a "proper" model on. So he managed neatly to appeal to a broad sector of modellers which is the big difficulty for most of the magazine publishers.

 

I think that it is a pity that the magazines do not show more real plans like that and relate how they can be transformed into a model.

[hayfield]

Cars should be able to live outside without coming to much harm anyway, at least in the less lively inner city areas and beyond...

 

Problem with a garage is it isn't properly heated and ventilated, you don't want a great deal of temperature variation or dust, and it'll cost a good bit to make suitable for a railway.  Ideally you want access to running water not too far away for actual modelling as well. If you can afford it, and wait while it's being done, fine, but it isn't all plain sailing!  And a garage too small for a modern car is too small for all but a a basic railway; it still doesn't solve the space issue, and not much does.  I'm not convinced by the hinged baseboard dodge either, as all stock and anything else than is not fixed down has to be removed from it before a session ends, and replaced before it starts, another reason to stay in the living room and watch telly on cold winter nights...

 

But. like me, you'll have to work within the restrictions of the space, resources, and skillsets you've got to hand at the time!  

 

At my previous house I converted the garage to a modelling room, I insulated the walls and sorted out the electrics, had I been staying there I would have connected a radiator to the central heating system. Whilst not perfect its better than nothing, lofts tend to be bigger, but so many issues from temperature swings to health and safety.

 

The hinged layout by its nature is a solution to a problem and in most cases will be a small compact layout. As you say not ideal but the other option my be even more awkward, any portable layout has to have the stock removed.

[6029 King Stephen]

With the price of the new Hornby Merchant Navy class loco being around £180 and a Pullman coach costing around £50, I don't suppose it will be long before the 12 coach Atlantic Coast Express will be represented by a 4 coach train on most layouts (assuming you already have the observation car). 

 

I like CJF's plans as they give food for thought and elements of his larger layouts could be incorporated into smaller schemes.  I have recently returned to N gauge modelling and suddenly all those really large CJF layouts for the "desirable maximum" of 20' x 10' are achieveable in the smaller gauge.

 

With regards to prototype layouts being adapted to model layouts, I had considered modelling Redruth station in Cornwall but had dismissed it as requiring too much space.  I bought the Barry Norman book on planning a layout and was interested to see that he had drawn a plan to make it more suitable for modelling in a reasonable space.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

[RJS1977]

 

 

I like CJF's plans as they give food for thought and elements of his larger layouts could be incorporated into smaller schemes.  I have recently returned to N gauge modelling and suddenly all those really large CJF layouts for the "desirable maximum" of 20' x 10' are achieveable in the smaller gauge.

 

 

Indeed, there is an N gauge version of 'The desirable maximum' in Conway Valley Railway Museum, alas in need of a good dose of TLC.

[john new]

Fully concur re lofts & garages if unmodified being a terrible place to store stuff. Have had to for a few years (effectively 6-bed levels of stuff but 3 bed house) as daughters have left home but we still have lots of their gear in store!! Not good, little irrevocably damaged but a lot with issues from the damp.

[Flying Pig]

 

The hinged layout by its nature is a solution to a problem and in most cases will be a small compact layout. As you say not ideal but the other option my be even more awkward, any portable layout has to have the stock removed.

The other option being the unhinged layout?

[hayfield]

With the price of the new Hornby Merchant Navy class loco being around £180 and a Pullman coach costing around £50, I don't suppose it will be long before the 12 coach Atlantic Coast Express will be represented by a 4 coach train on most layouts (assuming you already have the observation car). 

 

I like CJF's plans as they give food for thought and elements of his larger layouts could be incorporated into smaller schemes.  I have recently returned to N gauge modelling and suddenly all those really large CJF layouts for the "desirable maximum" of 20' x 10' are achieveable in the smaller gauge.

 

With regards to prototype layouts being adapted to model layouts, I had considered modelling Redruth station in Cornwall but had dismissed it as requiring too much space.  I bought the Barry Norman book on planning a layout and was interested to see that he had drawn a plan to make it more suitable for modelling in a reasonable space.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

Steve

 

It just depends on which part of the hobby interests you, this plan is designed for operation, though the challenges of incorporating scenery to a decent level would test the most accomplished modeller

 

Also this plan could easily be developed to modern standards quite easily,

 

 

As said lofts and garages, especially when not converted raise many challenges. Using lofts may be reducing, but many now see the benefits of converting the garage to domestic use. There is also a growing band of those who have high quality sheds built. Opportunities abound and perhaps with the demise of the use of lofts, smaller layouts are now more common  

[6029 King Stephen]

John,

 

Sorry, I should have mentioned in my reply that I hadn't been able to see the plan posted by the OP (what plan number/book was it from?) and was just referring to other people's comments regarding CJF's layout plan books and the Plan of the Month that appeared in the Railway Modeller.  I am currently concentrating efforts on a OO gauge dockside themed layout with small locos as I seem to have a lot of goods stock and will sell off my larger locos to fund this and my other N gauge layout based on Tavistock North SR.  When we return to the UK, I am hoping to build a 20'x10' shed to accommodate both these layouts, my modelling activities, books and woodworking equipment as SWMBO has told me there is not enough room in the house for my stuff!  I might even consider a camp bed and stove and then it will be home from home.... 

 

Regards,

 

Steve

[hayfield]

Steve

 

We moved last year and the plan was much the same, I was to be banished to a shed in the garden (next to the house) and we were going to extend the rear of the property (lounge and kitchen)

 

There is a very good shed manufacturing company in the Village, as it happens we inherited with the property a 9' x 8' one for garden items. High quality etc. I obtained a quotation for my own work room, the cost of insulating it and installing an electrical supply was obtained and we quickly came to the conclusion it was just as cheap to build it in brick, the cost of electrics is minimal as the whole house is being rewired and most of all heating costs will also be minimal as will be part of the central heating (I had a bit of a shock as to the cost of electrically heating a shed with electricity), Security is also far better

 

To be quite honest we took the opportunity to rework the downstairs of the house, the railway room whilst being slightly smaller than had I gone for the shed, has really improved the rest of the down stairs layout and given us potentially a fourth bedroom or extra study/office at little or no extra cost than we would have spent on the original idea. She who must be obeyed has a far better kitchen, I have an indoor room,

 

Good luck, the move for us is a really nice change in lifestyle (or will be once the builders have finished)