C J Freezer's own layout

[bécasse]

This was Maybank at its first public appearance in 1932 at a small local show (probably a hobby rather than a model railway exhibition) in a church hall in Wealdstone. Note the MRC badges sported by Bill Banwell and Frank Applegate

Maybank_MR_Wealdstone 1933 cropped.jpg

 

Just for the record Frank Applegate is on the left and Bill Banwell on the right in that photo. Their final appearance with their "garden" layout was at the MRC's 1960 Easter Show at Central Hall - and one would have no difficulty in recognising either of them there from the 1933 photo!

[kevinlms]

Sorry and thanks for the corrections. It was indeed the editor Ken Jones who lead the start of the charge down the slope that ended in the disaster that was YMR.

To think they went from the sort of interesting writings of Rice, Barlow ,Rowe, Brent, Sharman etc etc etc  Layouts featured such as Luton Hoo, Gransmoor Castle, ESLR. HighDyke Axford to the sort of  "Build your own crap layout for a £100" in a couple of short years

 

Two good things did come with the mega dumbing down though...... 

The birth of MRJ

and YMR did feature the forever fabulous Rosladen to Trengenver

There is a place IMO for a 'Build your own first layout, step by step - for whatever price' set of articles. But the place for it isn't in regular issues of a magazine. Mostly because beginners, pick up magazines randomly and not at the start of the sequence - yes I'm aware the intention is to sell back issues!

 

The best place for such a thing, is a separate book or magazine containing the lot, perhaps renewed each year or two.

 

The big American model railroad magazines, do this quite well. Kalmbach especially.

[kevinlms]

Just for the record Frank Applegate is on the left and Bill Banwell on the right in that photo. Their final appearance with their "garden" layout was at the MRC's 1960 Easter Show at Central Hall - and one would have no difficulty in recognising either of them there from the 1933 photo!

How dress codes have changed, few would wear a collar & tie, to operate a model railway these days!

 

In case anyone thinks all standards have dropped, at least the once common pipe (featured in many Dublo and Tri-ang publicity photographs), has also gone.

[Jol Wilkinson]

There is a place IMO for a 'Build your own first layout, step by step - for whatever price' set of articles. But the place for it isn't in regular issues of a magazine. Mostly because beginners, pick up magazines randomly and not at the start of the sequence - yes I'm aware the intention is to sell back issues!

 

The best place for such a thing, is a separate book or magazine containing the lot, perhaps renewed each year or two.

 

The big American model railroad magazines, do this quite well. Kalmbach especially.

 

Surely the place for such articles is on forums like this. Lots of scope for photos, plans and input from other members.

[RJS1977]

Surely the place for such articles is on forums like this. Lots of scope for photos, plans and input from other members.

 

But here is probably the one place a beginner is unlikely to look! The purpose of magazines like YMRV (apart from to make money) is to draw new people into the hobby. Therefore they need to be physical print magazines in shops where people can come across them while they're looking for something else.

[LBRJ]

Ill just add two things.

 

I do not mean all starter layout series/plans/articles etc are bad, far from it. Just that particular one struck a very young me as being very poor.

 

I also never realised that Messrs. Banwell and Applegate were that young!

[RJS1977]

Now, here's an idea - how about a layout where all the locos are named after well-known modellers?

 

i.e. GCR Director named after Peter Denny, GWR Castle named after Guy Williams, narrow gauge loco named after PDH etc.... 

[kevinlms]

Surely the place for such articles is on forums like this. Lots of scope for photos, plans and input from other members.

True, I was just thinking of NOT appearing in a monthly magazine.

[PatB]

This was Maybank at its first public appearance in 1932 at a small local show (probably a hobby rather than a model railway exhibition) in a church hall in Wealdstone. Note the MRC badges sported by Bill Banwell and Frank Applegate

Maybank_MR_Wealdstone 1933 cropped.jpg

The following year it appeared at the MRC Easter show at Central Hall, now with signals but without the high level goods sidings and by its fifth appearance there in 1937 Bill and Frank looked rather more relaxed.

Maybank at 1937 MRC show.jpg

This was the trackplan as published in a description of the layout in MRN in August 1934.

Maybank_plan consolidated.jpg

The four main baseboards, each six foot by two foot were 1/4 inch ply braced with 2x1 timber as presumably was the seven foot by two foot board holding the motorised sector plate traverser and the removable board mounted above it for the loco shed.

 

According to Bill Banwell they came up with the idea of a terminus to hidden sidings simply because they didn't have room for the then normal continuous run. The layout lived in a thirty two foot long shed that had been converted from a ladder rack when Bill's builder father was forced to retire early for health reasons. The fact that it was run regularly as a home layout explained why it actually worked reliably when exhibited. Maybank appeared as a major attraction almost every year at Central Hall until the war and was apparently a real show stopper. Cyril Freezer said that he "was just old enough to remember it in its final guise" and described it as "the first of the moderns" (Railway Modeller May 1959 Homage to Maybank) Building such a ground breaking layout it in a year or so was an extraordinary feat for two teenage modellers. Looking through pre-war MRNs and MRCs I could only find one other example of hidden sidings and that was rather later than Maybank so I think Bill and Frank really may have invented them.

 

Cyril Freezer's comments are rather pleasant "This was the first time I had seen a properly laid out model working to timetable and spent a great deal of time happily admiring the railway, little realising that in due course both its builders were to become good friends"

 

One curious aside is that in its later appearances, when Cyril Freezer saw it, Maybank was being exhibited with a return loop to replace the traverser and in his original Minories article Freezer did suggest that as a method of operating the terminus. That would make sense as arguably one tank loco hauling a departing suburban train is much the same as another tank loco hauling an arriving suburban train.

Of course, with a reverse loop, all trains are automatically turned and so you can even have differing numbers and/or liveries on each side of every vehicle and so double the number of trains. Mind you, those who care enough for this to be important would probably also object to such hybrid vehicles.

[Pacific231G]

Of course, with a reverse loop, all trains are automatically turned and so you can even have differing numbers and/or liveries on each side of every vehicle and so double the number of trains. Mind you, those who care enough for this to be important would probably also object to such hybrid vehicles.

A fairly large number of Cyril Freezer's plans as well as many actual layouts from that time did rely on a reverse loop to bring trains back to a terminus. Unless you're into timetable operation, the ability to make up a train, send it on its way for a fairly decent run on the "main line" with no tail chasing before it returns as another train, possibly after a couple of others have departed, can be a very enjoyable form of operation. For a solo operator it means that they can do all their work in a railwaylike way in their "real" terminus without having to continually go offstage to reform trains in the fiddle yard.

 

Even it its simplest form as in this 4x2 TT-3 layout, designed and built as a project layout by Mike Bryant, trains get a surprisingly long run

Mike Bryant "Pint Pot" layout MRC Jan 1958 (track Wrenn 15" radius TT-3 points)

 

 

 

The different levels produce some interesting scenes

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_12_2017/post-6882-0-99787800-1512255240.jpg

A slightly modified  version of this layout using the original Tri-ang TT-3 range has been  built by Golden Fleece http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/124744-when-tt3-was-the-next-big-thing/page-23#entry3088807 )

 

Cyril Freezer came up with a similar plan "Small and Simple" in 5ft 6ins x 3ft in OO, the final layout in "Trackplans" but with relatively slightly tighter curves and the terminus and the rest of the layout separated scenically by a backscene. He also came up with a larger and very elegant version, a 14ft x 6ft saucepan shaped layout (plan 24L in the 1st edition of Plans for Larger Layouts)  that has been built by several modellers whose layouts featured at least twice as "Railway of the Month" in RM.  

[PatB]

Not to mention P6 in Track Plans, where quite a substantial double track terminus feeds into a (in CJF's own words) "convoluted main line which is more in accordance with model than prototype practice" on a solid 6x4 board. It would look a bit odd today but, assuming stock that can cope with R1 curves, does offer an alternative to a linear fiddle-yard if only a short but wide space is available for the off-stage area. Treat it as being behind the scenes and it doesn't need more than basic (if any) scenery, and things like end-throw and overhang cease to matter.  I'd probably forego the quarry that CJF put in the middle, in favour of an access hole.

[Pacific231G]

There is a place IMO for a 'Build your own first layout, step by step - for whatever price' set of articles. But the place for it isn't in regular issues of a magazine. Mostly because beginners, pick up magazines randomly and not at the start of the sequence - yes I'm aware the intention is to sell back issues!

 

The best place for such a thing, is a separate book or magazine containing the lot, perhaps renewed each year or two.

 

The big American model railroad magazines, do this quite well. Kalmbach especially.

The French publishers of Loco-Revue have done just that with Clés pour le train miniature which is a low priced bi-monthly magazine aimed firmly at the beginner, early stage  or "proprietary modeller" The annual subscription is €13 for the digital edition and €19.50 for the printed magazine and it does appear regularly in newsagdents.

 

Each year they go step by step through the building of a new layout with advice on the where to get everything for each stage and an overall cost. The first layout used a Hornby Jouef goods train set  plus a couple of Hornby track packs to provide the basics of loco, controller, wagons and track and the baseboard was a standard interior door blank (available from the French equivalent of B&Q or Wickes)  The end result wouldn't find its way into MRJ (or LocoRevue) but it was a perfectly respectable single track passing station with a concealed passing loop and fiddle yard  at the back that I think anyone would be pleased with for a first layout with reasonable operating potential (far more than the beginners' layouts I've seen from Kalmbach) . The step by step how-to articles are backed up by examples of layouts by other modellers that a newish modeller could aspire to and advice on everything from how and what to buy (and not buy) second hand to what is a pick-up goods train (Train Omnibus Marchandise or TOM)  They also include a good selection of card building kits (card inserts in print and downloadable to print on card from the digital edition) 

 

The annual project layout seem to be gradually more sophisticated but still achievable over the year but as they shouild be atttracting a stream of new modellers they're heavy on providing back issues.

 

With this and their TRAIN'IN BOX product* , LocoRevue (which like Peco is a private family owned company) are clearly trying to attract new people into the hobby including those who may only dabble in it. the message being that you don't have to be a dedicated lifelong enthusiast to have a model railway. Such newbies are of course the future customers for their weightier magazines and modelling products and it's very clear that Christian Fournereau, the current head of the business, has been giving this matter of attracting future modellers a lot more thought than most of the model railway industry. .

 

*TRAIN'IN BOX was a crowdfunded project that was launched at the large Trainsmania exhibition that Locorevue organised in Lille last year to mark the magazine's 80th anniversary. It is a large cardboard box containing absolutely everything a beginner would need to build their first model railway from baseboard and trackbed to building kits and tools, and even the PVA glue. Track is Peco flex with Peco Setrack points

I don't know how well it's doing

[bécasse]

Although a long way from the original topic, it is worth adding that the regular issuing of "défis" (challenges) to build small layouts, either stand alone or to work with those of others, to appear at a nominated exhibition, has been a continued success in persuading people to build layouts. The last thing that I expected to do when I moved to francophone Belgium at the age of 65 was to become a regular builder of layouts, but in fact I have built three which have appeared at a total of five exhibitions, and one of which has even featured in the Railway Modeller and a Peco Special (ah! back on topic).

 

One remarkable feature of some of these layouts is that they are taken to exhibitions by train!

[RJS1977]

Indeed, I've transported four different layouts to shows by train myself:

 

Devil's Bridge - Pulborough, Amberley and Farnham Rural Life Centre shows.

 

Aberystwyth Old Loco Depot - Swanley and Tadworth

 

Rhiwfron Siding - Chelmsford

 

Where Seagulls Dare - Steventon, Tadworth and Hersham, and also on static display at Cholsey station.

 

 

Perhaps the most unusual though was taking my model of the current Wallingford station (10' long) to the Kenavon show - by bicycle!

[kevinlms]

This was Maybank at its first public appearance in 1932 at a small local show (probably a hobby rather than a model railway exhibition) in a church hall in Wealdstone. Note the MRC badges sported by Bill Banwell and Frank Applegate

Maybank_MR_Wealdstone 1933 cropped.jpg

The following year it appeared at the MRC Easter show at Central Hall, now with signals but without the high level goods sidings and by its fifth appearance there in 1937 Bill and Frank looked rather more relaxed.

Maybank at 1937 MRC show.jpg

This was the trackplan as published in a description of the layout in MRN in August 1934.

Maybank_plan consolidated.jpg

The four main baseboards, each six foot by two foot were 1/4 inch ply braced with 2x1 timber as presumably was the seven foot by two foot board holding the motorised sector plate traverser and the removable board mounted above it for the loco shed.

 

According to Bill Banwell they came up with the idea of a terminus to hidden sidings simply because they didn't have room for the then normal continuous run. The layout lived in a thirty two foot long shed that had been converted from a ladder rack when Bill's builder father was forced to retire early for health reasons. The fact that it was run regularly as a home layout explained why it actually worked reliably when exhibited. Maybank appeared as a major attraction almost every year at Central Hall until the war and was apparently a real show stopper. Cyril Freezer said that he "was just old enough to remember it in its final guise" and described it as "the first of the moderns" (Railway Modeller May 1959 Homage to Maybank) Building such a ground breaking layout it in a year or so was an extraordinary feat for two teenage modellers. Looking through pre-war MRNs and MRCs I could only find one other example of hidden sidings and that was rather later than Maybank so I think Bill and Frank really may have invented them.

 

Cyril Freezer's comments are rather pleasant "This was the first time I had seen a properly laid out model working to timetable and spent a great deal of time happily admiring the railway, little realising that in due course both its builders were to become good friends"

 

One curious aside is that in its later appearances, when Cyril Freezer saw it, Maybank was being exhibited with a return loop to replace the traverser and in his original Minories article Freezer did suggest that as a method of operating the terminus. That would make sense as arguably one tank loco hauling a departing suburban train is much the same as another tank loco hauling an arriving suburban train.

Homage to Maybank, actually appears in May 1969 not 1959 as you state above.

[Hroth]

There's been much mention of 70s and 80s Railway Modellers, but there is a layout in The Railway Modeller of March-April 1951 (yep, that long ago) called "Layouts for the modeller, Number 1" that CJF describes as suitable for both the younger modeller and also the older modeller whose space is limited and illustrates a 9ft by 8ft L shaped branch terminus and fiddle yard in a small box/bedroom.  While there are no pictures, the write up suggests that this is one CJF has had some experience with!

 

The article itself is small and perfectly formed too, occupying 1 page, including the plan, of more or less what would be called A5 nowadays...

[Pacific231G]

There's been much mention of 70s and 80s Railway Modellers, but there is a layout in The Railway Modeller of March-April 1951 (yep, that long ago) called "Layouts for the modeller, Number 1" that CJF describes as suitable for both the younger modeller and also the older modeller whose space is limited and illustrates a 9ft by 8ft L shaped branch terminus and fiddle yard in a small box/bedroom.  While there are no pictures, the write up suggests that this is one CJF has had some experience with!

 

The article itself is small and perfectly formed too, occupying 1 page, including the plan, of more or less what would be called A5 nowadays...

Thanks for spotting this one.

I find that many of the more interesting plans and layouts do come from the 1950s and 1960s, perhaps because that was when many of the now very familiar ideas for small personal layouts were being pioneered.

 

Possibly because it was published when The Railway Modeller was still owned by Ian Allan (It moved to Peco and went monthly in November 1951) , this particular 9ft by 8ft shelf layout doesn't seem to appear in any of the Peco plan books. That is a pity as it's still a very good plan. Making one goods siding face in the opposite direction from the others works well especially if, as Cyril Freezer suggests, a passenger train arrives while the local goods train is still being shunted which means planning the order of shunting very carefully to avoid getting "snookered" . 

 

 

I don't know the copyright situation for CJF's original plan so have redrawn it as closely as possible in Anyrail using Peco medium radius points as most 4mm scale modellers at that time used 3ft radius points which are about the same geometry. I also ried to use a minimum radius of 30 inches as again that was the recommended standard for 4mm/ft but had to go rather tighter to 26 inch radius on the curve between the terminus and the portable "loops" (the term fiddle yard hadn't yet been coined) in order to not make the station too cramped.

 

I don't know how much personal experience CJF had in 1951 of building his own branch line terminus to fiddle yard layout. He was working on an EM version of Ashburton and mentions it in the Jan-Feb 1951 edition but it's not clear how far he got with it before he moved with the magazine from London to Seaton. He was certainly very familiar with Peter Denny's second Buckingham branch which was a BLT-fiddle yard with a small intermediate through station and a terrminus based loosely on Ashburton. I suspect it was Buckingham that sold CJF on the branch line theme.

 

CJF, who took over as editor of The Railway Modeller for the June-July 1950 edition, also knew Maurice Deane who later pioneered the modelling of an actual rural branchline with his Culm Valley.,

 

Layouts for the Modeller no 3. in July-August  1951 is a BLT based on Maurice Deane's idea of a fiddle yard hidden behind the terminus with a hidden connection to give a continuous run used on his "Portreath" layout (RM Aug-Sept 1950) Portreath That article does also reveal Freezer's interest in the working of branch lines, an aspect of full size railways that, John Ahern apart, had been largely ignored by modellers until the post-war era,

[bécasse]

Looking for something else I came across this letter from Cyril which was published in MRJ 22, almost exactly 30 years ago. It is interesting because it throws light on his personal modelling in the years immediately after WWII when he had yet to become editor of RM, and on his subsequent philosophy as an editor.

 

​When I occupied the hot seat I worked on the simple principle that anyo{ne who had taken active part in the construction of a good, interesting model railway was not only entitled to air his point of view, but that the methods he adopted to reach that position were worthy of consideration. I suspect that the same motives led to your publishing Roy Jackson's article, since, by any standards, Dunwich is an outstanding layout [comment - it certainly was]. For my part, it is one of the select few that takes me back to the days of my youth, when I travelled around Britain's steam age railways.

​That there would be criticism of his methods is only to be expected. I do not take issue with the individuals who chose to write in so aggrieved a tone, but I would like to set the record straight.

They claimed that since compensated suspension is the latest thing, it should be regarded as the correct way to construct model locomotives. I regret to have to tell them that as far back as 1946, I built a GWR 157 class 2-2-2 with compensated suspension. It ran quite well and could pull a reasonable load, though by current levels it is rather poor. However, after this, wanting a workhorse in a hurry, I built an 850 class 0-6-0 saddle tank with rigid frames.

To my intense annoyance, this infuriating beast ran better than the 2-2-2! I also finished it in less time. I can therefore fully understand the reactions of anyone who, having spent several weeks patiently assembling a fully-compensated chassis, discovers that someone id able to build a good, smooth, slow-running chassis in a couple of hours. I can only say that it's slightly worse when you do it yourself.

I would, however, take issue with Roy when he talks of 'bashing' a chassis together. If you adopt rigid frames, then you must be able to drill all your holes in line, and furthermore, dead square. Mike Sharman's 'Flexichas' was conceived to help those many modellers whose workshops aren't up to this task.

I consider it to be totally irrelevant how long one takes to build a model, the end result is all that matters. However, when I served my time in a fairly exacting field of engineering, the real craftsmen were the ones who could finish a given task in the least time with the least effort. The 'work involved = quality' syndrome is a purely amateur concept and the bane of good model making. What is more, it is an amateur concept that claims that the more complex the mechanism, the better. A couple of years in maintenance engineering will soon show the folly of that belief.

One last minor point. Although I was using compensation over forty years ago, I was by no means a pioneer. Indeed, springing and compensation were applied to small scale model locomotives and rolling stock before I was born. The only new feature is the availability of commercial components. Even here, the ideas aren't quite as new and revolutionary as some people claim. A lot of ideas where tried out before the last war, but were a trifle ahead of the market.

Cyril Freezer

Hemel Hempstead

Herts

[kevinlms]

One thing I've noticed with early Railway Modellers, is that many articles & especially drawings are not attributed to anyone.

 

Picking up an issue at random (Railway Modeller 1958 March) finds the following articles.

 

1/ Fixing the Peco Simplex auto coupler. There is half a page of sketches depicting how this coupler could be fixed to then current models & types of vehicles. The other half is text explaining the techniques.

 

2. Junior Modeller (when did the term change to the more modern Student Modeller)?

 

Description of the tools & methods of creating drawings. Also a list of some basic dimensions. This is almost certainly by CJF.

 

3/ Junior Modeller

 

Wagon Turntable drawings. While its a generic turntable, it certainly captures the look of a typical wagon turntable.

 

Railway Modeller has always made a strong effort to encourage younger recruits.

 

 

So why no attributes, was it a case of not wanting to appear to write/draw half the magazine? Other articles do appear under the CJF name.

 

 

[BlackRat]

That's a very interesting point re time v quality.

 

I remember building my very first body line kit, and agonising over the fact it only took a few hours to put together, even after Fetling and filing......

 

But there's only so much time you can spend on 4 or 5 pieces of white Metal!

[RJS1977]

 

 

2. Junior Modeller (when did the term change to the more modern Student Modeller)?

 

 

 

Around 1993 IIRC. This only lasted a couple of years before the concept was dropped altogether.

[Pacific231G]

One thing I've noticed with early Railway Modellers, is that many articles & especially drawings are not attributed to anyone.

 

 

 

So why no attributes, was it a case of not wanting to appear to write/draw half the magazine? Other articles do appear under the CJF name.

Exactly so. They may also have not credited staff writers (if they ever had any apart from Cyril!) but it's often a convention that unattributed editorial material is assumed to have been penned by the editor. I think CJF confined his own byline to the editorial and Plan of the Month (when that wasn't contributed by someone else as it quite often was)  it's not too difficult to spot his writing style and that's definitely present in Junior Modeller. I'm not sure that CJF didn't also use pseudonyms when he wanted to put a squid under various tails. 

The Peco Simplex piece may have been written by Sidney Pritchard. He did have his own column called Peco Topics for a while after he bought RM but eventually dropped that. Apart from that RM was fairly scrupulous about not favouring Peco but I suspect he'd have kept an eye on any editorial directly relating to his products

 

I've noticed the same thing with pre-war MRNs where I'm pretty certain a good few articles were written by Maskelyne sometimes under pseudonyms. . 

[kevinlms]

Around 1993 IIRC. This only lasted a couple of years before the concept was dropped altogether.

Never dropped, just a title change. For a while it was 'Right Away'!.

Later and currently Railway Modelling Explored.

[St Enodoc]

Never dropped, just a title change. For a while it was 'Right Away'!.

Later and currently Railway Modelling Explored.

There was a long period too when it was "Proprietary Modeller".

[rockershovel]

Exactly so. They may also have not credited staff writers (if they ever had any apart from Cyril!) but it's often a convention that unattributed editorial material is assumed to have been penned by the editor. I think CJF confined his own byline to the editorial and Plan of the Month (when that wasn't contributed by someone else as it quite often was)  it's not too difficult to spot his writing style and that's definitely present in Junior Modeller. I'm not sure that CJF didn't also use pseudonyms when he wanted to put a squid under various tails. 

The Peco Simplex piece may have been written by Sidney Pritchard. He did have his own column called Peco Topics for a while after he bought RM but eventually dropped that. Apart from that RM was fairly scrupulous about not favouring Peco but I suspect he'd have kept an eye on any editorial directly relating to his products

 

I've noticed the same thing with pre-war MRNs where I'm pretty certain a good few articles were written by Maskelyne sometimes under pseudonyms. .

 

Bike Magazine was notorious for this at one time, being written and edited almost entirely by Martin Harrison..