Chee Tor

mojo · September 26, 2016, 06:25:27 PM

What was the overall size of the much praised layout Che Tor?

Following a visit to the Halifax MRC exhibition this last weekend, I have been thinking what is the ideal size of an N gauge layout and the best way to present it. On display was Melton Mowbray North, quite a large layout I guess about 30' long. I seem to remember also seeing Fencehouses about 2 years ago which was also of a similar length or longer. Whilst both were excellent models neither "floated my boat".

So I pose the question, what is the best use of N gauge to present a model?

My answer would be to be able to view as if you were looking down on a full sized railway from the top of a distant hill or perhaps from an aeroplane and seeing the whole of the railway below. To do this I would suggest that 15-20 feet in length would be the maximum to take in.
If i remember correctly, Andy Calvert's Calverdale would fit this scenario.
Sadly I did not see his Moorcock Junction or the Manchester club's Che Tor.

If you read this I hope that I do not open a can of worms!

Maurice C.

Newportnobby · September 26, 2016, 08:16:03 PM

Size isn't everything regardless what gauge layout IMO.
There are good and bad in all gauges but maybe you should have a look at this thread regarding our top 10 favourite layouts, especially as many of us mention the 'Chee Tor' layout you refer to.
http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=19403.0

I saw 'Chee Tor' many years ago but couldn't say what size it was. I was just blown away by the depth of it - something I had never seen modelled before. How about this N gauge American outline layout which has appeared at local shows to me?

kirky · September 26, 2016, 08:18:39 PM

Hi Maurice
Interesting question that. I suppose the inevitable answer is going to be whatever you want. For instance at the moment I'm building a smallish shunting layout - 5'x 1' . But Northallerton - see sig - is 25 x 5. It depends on what you are trying to achieve ultimately.
I think Moorcock junction was just good because it had lovely modelling with acurate details, it was well planned and well laid out. And whats more it ran well.
There are some really lovely box file models that cram a lot in and are well made, and equally there are the big club efforts, like Melton Mowbray or Northallerton for that matter.
Our brief for Northallerton was a 'watching the trains go by' layout. No shunting. It had to fit in the space we had available and was supposed to be built in 5 years. There were other parameters such as DCC and modern image.
I dont even think we've ever asked our selves whether it is the best way to present N gauge, but much rather 'are we enjoying ourselves?'

just my two peneth
Kirky

Steve.T · September 27, 2016, 07:17:07 PM

I must say Chee Tor ranks as one of my favorite layouts and certainly the best one I have seen in real life (i,e, not just articles and pictures) so I am probably biased a little as seeing these great layouts for real portrays much more than the best picture can ever do.

I do have some old magazines I have kept with articles on Chee Tor if you need to know the size for definite but I think what impressed me the most (as already stated by newportnobby) was the sheer depth portrayed. A lot of this depth does obviously come from the size (width, breadth and height) but the fact it is mainly landscape with really very little railway, which in the countryside is how things are in reality.

How many of us can ever resist the temptation to just add a branch line here and a few sidings over there and so on. Generally, I think so many of us just want as much track as we can squeeze in to a small area and then the scenery gets added around this track at a later stage (or maybe this is just me

). And this is just not how railways were built and for an appearance of reality we should perhaps follow how the real thing was built and have the scenery in mind and build the railway through it.

Just my thoughts, and as I still consider myself a novice I could be talking

Steve

Newportnobby · September 27, 2016, 08:29:43 PM

Quote from: Steve.T on September 27, 2016, 07:17:07 PM

How many of us can ever resist the temptation to just add a branch line here and a few sidings over there and so on. Generally, I think so many of us just want as much track as we can squeeze in to a small area and then the scenery gets added around this track at a later stage (or maybe this is just me ). And this is just not how railways were built and for an appearance of reality we should perhaps follow how the real thing was built and have the scenery in mind and build the railway through it.

Just my thoughts, and as I still consider myself a novice I could be talking

Steve

Guilty as charged, M'Lud

The problem is with space limitations we try to create a railway which will do what we want it to and not what the local area requires so I have loops to be able to sit and watch trains go by and a branch line/shunting area for when I want to play

Bealman · September 27, 2016, 11:47:18 PM

What happened to Chee Tor? Does it still exist?

weave · September 28, 2016, 01:43:17 AM

Hi,

Just for those who, like me, hadn't seen it before.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEiAC_8obfI

Wonderful stuff.

Cheers weave

Steve.T · September 28, 2016, 06:54:50 AM

Quote from: Bealman on September 27, 2016, 11:47:18 PM
What happened to Chee Tor? Does it still exist?

Not sure but I seem to remember reading that it got boxed up and shipped to Canada some years ago.

Quote from: newportnobby on September 27, 2016, 08:29:43 PM
Guilty as charged, M'Lud
The problem is with space limitations we try to create a railway which will do what we want it to and not what the local area requires so I have loops to be able to sit and watch trains go by and a branch line/shunting area for when I want to play

Not just me then

Steve

Bob Tidbury · September 28, 2016, 08:03:52 AM

Me too!

that's what it's all about escaping from the worries and problems of life .
Bob

kiwi1941 · September 28, 2016, 09:17:28 AM

Quote from: Steve.T on September 28, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
Quote from: Bealman on September 27, 2016, 11:47:18 PM
What happened to Chee Tor? Does it still exist?

Not sure but I seem to remember reading that it got boxed up and shipped to Canada some years ago.

Correct, it was bought and shipped by a guy called Chester Machniewski. He wrote to me "As for Chee Tor, that was another case of being careful what you wish for. I'd seen it at an exhibition and loved it and mentioned that if they were ever going to sell it to call me and left my card. About 3 or 4 years later someone called and asked if I was still interested. I was heading to England anyway at the time and they had tried to find a home for it but had just the usual timewasters so I agreed to look at what could be done. Long story short my brother and I spend two days crating it up into 8 big boxes and shipped it by container. So now I'm like one of those cackling old men who shuffles into his basement in his carpet slippers to admire his stolen work of art. Now if I could just get Copenhagen Fields...."

I was in touch with him since we were both building models of Garsdale on the S&C, me in N and him in O! But then it all went quiet in about 2011. I can only assume that he passed on to the great railway room in the sky.

Brian

Bealman · September 28, 2016, 10:50:45 AM

Most interesting.

Thanks!

Still wonder where it is

kirky · September 28, 2016, 05:48:09 PM

Anyone care to enlighten us on the fiddle yard arrangement?

Cheers
Kirky

Steve.T · September 28, 2016, 07:10:05 PM

Scanned this from a 1991 magazine article.

Layout Size is not actually mentioned in the article but from the above drawing looks to be approaching 18 x 8 feet.

kirky · September 28, 2016, 08:06:50 PM

Thanks Steve, most helpful. Presumably an operating well in the middle then?

Steve.T · September 28, 2016, 08:10:14 PM

Quote from: kirky on September 28, 2016, 08:06:50 PM
Thanks Steve, most helpful. Presumably an operating well in the middle then?

From the drawing and from what I remember yes that's correct.