MRJ 251

[NHY 581]

At the risk of appearing overly serious, given the chaos generated by the two threads running for MRJ 250, I thought I would kick things off regarding MRJ 251 with a question or two.

 

 

The content of MRJ has an unequalled consistency in terms of content and contributors.

 

Recently we have seen the occasional article featuring, wait for it,overseas subjects.

 

Does this detract or add to the reputation of MRJ? Should we see more of the same? Should we have a complete issue devoted to these 'foreign' subjects from time to time?

 

 

Secondly, would we the customers like to see a return to basics and welcome features providing step by step advice on subjects such as kit building and scratch building stock and structures?

Would a series of duffers guides to everything hit the spot and encourage more of us to explore a more fine scale approach ?

 

What say you?

 

( Aside from the usual distribution excitement.......which is exciting !!),

 

Rob.

[Horsetan]

I'd like to see more Continental P87 if only to make it more accessible.

[griffgriff]

How does the general population in Ealing feel about this?

 

Seriously though. I don't mind one bit. I'm a regular purchaser but I'm no high end fine scale modeller. I buy it because good modelling is good modelling no matter the scale, era or prototype. The material within is provoking and well written and the quality of the content is simply inspiring.

 

Griff

[backofanenvelope]

Also a regular consumer and on the whole I will enjoy what ever is in.. I just enjoy that moment of sitting down and opening the cover looking forward to a good read.

[Hroth]

The content of MRJ has an unequalled consistency in terms of content and contributors.

Recently we have seen the occasional article featuring, wait for it,overseas subjects.

Does this detract or add to the reputation of MRJ? Should we see more of the same? Should we have a complete issue devoted to these 'foreign' subjects from time to time?

... would we the customers like to see a return to basics and welcome features providing step by step advice on subjects such as kit building and scratch building stock and structures?

Would a series of duffers guides to everything hit the spot and encourage more of us to explore a more fine scale approach ?

 

The two threads were the result of a late attempt to be "serious", when it was thought that the natural exuberance of MRJ readers was getting out of hand.  I suppose serious is in the eye of the beholder.  Anyway, back to the questions....

 

Whatever is modelled, the key to publication in MRJ appears to be, is the model "finescale" and is it "true to its location".

 

Overseas subjects that meet these criteria are as acceptable as similar models of our own dear Isles. However, a complete edition of things beyond the Channel or the Pond might be over-egging things a bit! 

 

Building technique articles are occasionally contentious as they are seen as too basic or too complicated, depending on the expectations of the reader.  Sometimes authors start from the premis that they are helping the beginner, but fail to address which level of beginning they are starting from. Duffers guides to finescale might be useful if they select a particular topic and don't spread themselves beyond a page of text and a page of illustration. They also need to be a regular feature that doesn't appear too regularly, so as not to upset the advanced workers......

 

Oops - have you seen the time?????

[Bernard Lamb]

An up to date technical article on motors and how to control them

Might as well include turnout operation as well.

There seem to have been many changes and an unbiased guide and explanation could be of interest.

I have not got past the brass wire droppers soldered to a length of rail with a small wooden handle stage myself.

My last KPC unit decided to fry itself recently.

Other than that it is Gaugemaster Ws.

I doubt that I am alone in lacking any knowledge of progress in such areas.

Bernard

[The Stationmaster]

Simple answer - if it means you can include Pempoul then let's definitely have continental.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Such a disappointment. I had thought MRJ readers were above wishlists.

 

If you want something different, write to Cygnet Publications. As they are noted for eschewing the interweb, then surely this exercise is a waste of time for even the most dedicated keyboard warrior.

[bbishop]

Very few continental layouts meet the strict MRJ criteria. Obbekaar and Pempoul yes. My layout, Höchatädt) uses rtr stock and track. So the stock is correct for time and location and the track plan is prototypical, but this isn't sufficient justification for MRJ. Probably typical of most continental layouts. The criteria that I would meet are the comprehensive research (albeit not just by myself) and the sourcing of small supplies.

 

Bill

[Horsetan]

Such a disappointment. I had thought MRJ readers were above wishlists....

 

Mmmm...I thought you were above MRJ....

[Jol Wilkinson]

Mmmm...I thought you were above MRJ....

Wrong! Never miss it and accept that the editors decision is final.

[t-b-g]

The answer is that it depends.

 

I don't have any problem with articles that fit with the general MRJ philosophy and an article on how to create fine scenic work that is applied to a layout set abroad is probably equally applicable to the home scene.

 

I am not sure that I would want an in depth article on superdetailing a French or German RTR loco, whereas I find such articles on UK models are often worth while.

 

So whether I would like to see more foreign based articles in MRJ would very much depend on the quality of the modelling and the type of article. I wouldn't want it to be every issue though, just once in a while.

 

If a magazine aimed at the finescale end of the hobby doesn't have room for a layout like Pempoul, then the magazine has got it all wrong!

[Talltim]

I mentioned it on another thread, but Bernard Kempinski's Aquia Line would suit MRJ very well http://usmrr.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

I like to see the occasional foreign layout in MRJ

[sharris]

 

Building technique articles are occasionally contentious as they are seen as too basic or too complicated, depending on the expectations of the reader.  Sometimes authors start from the premis that they are helping the beginner, but fail to address which level of beginning they are starting from. Duffers guides to finescale might be useful if they select a particular topic and don't spread themselves beyond a page of text and a page of illustration. They also need to be a regular feature that doesn't appear too regularly, so as not to upset the advanced workers......

 

I think general building techniques might be out of place in the magazine - it's still possible to get an Irwell Press or Wild Swan technique book for the price of 2-4 MRJs which are far more comprehensive than an article could ever be. However techniques applied to a particular model are interesting to me to read, as are novel or particularly clever methods.

 

As for foreign models, if they're well done I'd welcome them.

 

I do think though that a single subject issue is pushing it a bit, whether it be foreign, modern image, whatever.

[Bernard Lamb]

 

I do think though that a single subject issue is pushing it a bit, whether it be foreign, modern image, whatever.

Dunno about that.

It might work for 18 201.

The history, the RTR model and rebuilding it in P87.

Should do the trick.

Bernard

[John_Hughes]

The old MRN - which was almost entirely interested in UK railways - nonethess carried some fascinating articles by the late and much-missed Dennis Allenden on how he built his French and Belgian locomotives.

 

Something like that would certainly fall within the remit of the Journal, I'd say.

[NHY 581]

The two threads were the result of a late attempt to be "serious", when it was thought that the natural exuberance of MRJ readers was getting out of hand.  I suppose serious is in the eye of the beholder.  Anyway, back to the questions....

 

Whatever is modelled, the key to publication in MRJ appears to be, is the model "finescale" and is it "true to its location".

 

Overseas subjects that meet these criteria are as acceptable as similar models of our own dear Isles. However, a complete edition of things beyond the Channel or the Pond might be over-egging things a bit! 

 

Building technique articles are occasionally contentious as they are seen as too basic or too complicated, depending on the expectations of the reader.  Sometimes authors start from the premis that they are helping the beginner, but fail to address which level of beginning they are starting from. Duffers guides to finescale might be useful if they select a particular topic and don't spread themselves beyond a page of text and a page of illustration. They also need to be a regular feature that doesn't appear too regularly, so as not to upset the advanced workers......

 

Oops - have you seen the time?????

 

I would venture that the lethargic progress of this thread demonstrates that removing the natural exuberance of the average MRJ reader has a detrimental effect on proceedings.

 

On a positive note, I have noticed that Smiths in Cardiff have moved their magazines to a different part of the shop altogether. Not so crowded and much lower than we are accustomed to. In addition they apoeared to have dusted the shelving.

 

Mendips.

 

Rob.

[Captain Kernow]

I would venture that the lethargic progress of this thread demonstrates that removing the natural exuberance of the average MRJ reader has a detrimental effect on proceedings.

 

On a positive note, I have noticed that Smiths in Cardiff have moved their magazines to a different part of the shop altogether. Not so crowded and much lower than we are accustomed to. In addition they apoeared to have dusted the shelving.

 

Mendips.

 

Rob.

Sausages.

[Captain Kernow]

Sausages.

 

Haverfordwest.

[bbishop]

Sausages.

 

Wurst.

 

B

[NHY 581]

Haverfordwest.

Bless you!

[Captain Kernow]

Recently we have seen the occasional article featuring, wait for it,overseas subjects.

 

Does this detract or add to the reputation of MRJ? Should we see more of the same? Should we have a complete issue devoted to these 'foreign' subjects from time to time?

 

Good modelling is good modelling, no matter what the subject matter.

 

As the title covers model railways, any good quality modelling of railway subjects should qualify, in my view, such as anything by The Baron von Harrap.

[corneliuslundie]

I am glad you mentioned Monseur Harrap and his exquisite modelling. Yes, a vote for layouts of that quality wherever in the world they emanate from. And we are still waiting on the article on how to make his apron.

I have said before that I would like to see a return of No 1 Shop type articles, though I don't think it is likely that Mr Rice would wish to restart writing them.

Small Suppliers Forum could usefully be extended.

I agree that there is a problem with articles for "beginners" as most of those that have been published in MRJ are far too advanced for me, but then I have only been modelling for 57 years or so.

One problem for any magazine these days is that there is so much good material on the web, and specifically on this site, that it is difficult for magazines to compete.

But for me MRJ is simply streets ahead of any competition, whatever faults it may have.

Jonathan

[Enterprisingwestern]

Observing the general drift of this thread, perhaps there is a call for the compendium to make a re-appearance to do more in depth articles?

 

Mike.

 

PS, 251 hasn't hit the shelves of Benidorm yet.

[Adrian]

I would venture that the lethargic progress of this thread demonstrates that removing the natural exuberance of the average MRJ reader has a detrimental effect on proceedings.

 

On a positive note, I have noticed that Smiths in Cardiff have moved their magazines to a different part of the shop altogether. Not so crowded and much lower than we are accustomed to. In addition they apoeared to have dusted the shelving.

 

Mendips.

 

Rob.

 

 

Not having to wade through pages and pages of turgid postings trying to find a solitary nugget of original new content is hardly detrimental in my opinion.