MRJ 248

[Zero Gravitas]

I haven't had my sub copy yet either - noted that I'm not the only one.  Is there a local strike somewhere which might be delaying them?

In fact, between posting at just after 08:00 this morning and now, the postie has delivered my copy - so they are on their way...

[Kenton]

 

Several posts which were part of an argument have been removed.

 

A little unfairly I believe. I guess this will be removed as well. I did not see it as an argument just a discussion. I am of course disappointed on the censorship on this topic. Have things got so bad here that MRJ cannot be commented on unless we are fawning to it? I am well aware that there are members of RMWeb who contribute to MRJ. I am not aiming to upset anyone and would hope they they can be accepting of fair comment on their articles. Though in this case the comments were more aimed at the editorial decisions being made at MRJ than the specific content.

 

The regular MRJ topics usually descend into a "why have I not got my copy" banter (mea culpa) rather than any comment on actual content.

 

My original post was very much a critique on content as presented in the OP. In particular the number of pages devoted to "old" layouts in MRJ and in general the trend away from "how to do it". I believe that this is a very fair comment to make.

 

As we know there is no MRJ forum or even internet presence, another regular criticism of MRJ on these topics. There is in fact very little recourse or opportunity to provide feedback to MRJ. A letter expressing such concerns will never going to be published, if indeed it is even read.

 

I accept that Andy's decision to moderate this topic in the way he chooses, probably deleting this post as well. It just seems more like censorship of open and justified opinion and comment than evidenced on other far more contentious topics.

I have every issue from No 0 and like many railway modellers eagerly await its release to the public. It probably has never contained everything I want in one issue, and there have been a few issues that contain nothing of my interest. I guess that is in common with most readers. But as I indicated in my first (now censored) post the number of pages dedicated over 3 issues to one "old" layout is excessive.

 

Perhaps it is a problem with MRJ not receiving enough article from the modelling world (I actually don't know) or a reflection on the editors that they are looking to the past rather than the future (again, I don't know).

 

What I do know is what makes MRJ great. Concentrating on the "how to", staying away from the usual fest of the other magazines (latest RTR reviews; little but layouts; general news features), the non accusational style that simply presents all gauges and scales without trying to make converts.

[davidbr]

There have been some dire editions of MRJ in the past and I very much lament the shift, which occurred a long time ago, away from showing how to help modellers improve their skills and achieve better models to the recording of layouts, some of which have occupied large parts of an edition.

 

There has been some move back to the earlier aims but the magazine is still largely pedestrian.  I would very much like to see more of the diversity of this hobby given a practical airing, to inspire, encourage and help people expand and improve their modelling.  Finescale Review was more inspiring and it's success in such a short time showed the need for this, but since it's demise, MRJ has not taken the hint.

 

Most of the articles in 248 are interesting but I thought the review of the Iwata airbrush a complete waste of space.  There was so much unsaid and questions unanswered.  Why a 'Rolls Royce'?  What set this airbrush apart from any other in the Iwata range?  What set it apart from any other airbrush?  What was it like to use?  Why was it not tested with acrylics?  Much was said of the price, but nowhere was this mentioned.  How does it perform at different distances, for different situations, with different paints.

 

What is the point of any review?  I look for a proper analysis and we had a passing reference to the type and build, but we also need it to be put through it's paces.  If it is meant to be top-end, then what makes it so?  More than anything, why should I buy this airbrush rather than, say, a Badger, Iwata Eclipse or any other model?  Is this something I should buy?  Whether it is suitable or not for 'my style of painting' is no good to me unless a) I am given a clear description of that style and b) it has been given a thorough work-out across the board.

 

If anything is going to be reviewed, give it to someone who can do a proper job.  

[glo41f]

Being a "Brit" fan, I thought the article on refurbishing a Hornby Brit was excellent though it was not mentioned whether it had been re gauged (though that may be in part 2). A super model has resulted. I also loved the MJ series as I used to dream about this layout when I was but a lad and it was featured in the MRN. (Sigh)

 

Martin Long

[Killybegs]

Being a "Brit" fan, I thought the article on refurbishing a Hornby Brit was excellent though it was not mentioned whether it had been re gauged (though that may be in part 2). A super model has resulted. I also loved the MJ series as I used to dream about this layout when I was but a lad and it was featured in the MRN. (Sigh)

 

Martin Long

Part 2 will indeed cover building the P4 chassis. Thanks for your comments so far.

 

John

[Wheatley]

or a reflection on the editors that they are looking to the past rather than the future (again, I don't know).

Given that they have, in the past covered Borchester, Norris's layout, GP Keen's layouts and others, it's hardly a change of direction. The difference being that this one is still there to see and the record is therefore not restricted to a handful of glass negatives rescued from a shed before the roof fell in, so I don't think the increased coverage is unjustified.

 

If this stuff isn't recorded it will be forgotten.

[Dunsignalling]

I went to ExpoEM this year for the first time as a result seeing the first instalment of the coverage of Metropolitan Junction in MRJ. The trip was very well worthwhile IMHO.

 

The layout is evidently still at a relatively early stage in the restoration process but the quality of the original modelling shines through the faded appearance.

 

Equally, not all of what once worked still does but functional point-rodding modelled quite closely to 4mm scale is something almost nobody attempts in the smaller scales even today with all the fancy CAD, etching and 3D printing techniques available to us.

 

Metropolitan Junction is inspirational in a way that blow-by-blow accounts of computer-based techniques requiring substantial training for the user to become proficient in generally aren't. 

 

I enjoyed seeing the layout and, having done so, appreciate the articles all the more. Given that the renovation of MJ won't be a five-minute job, I hope to see further coverage, perhaps annually, documenting its progress.

 

John

[Bernard Lamb]

It has arrived.

Very interesting to read the Britannia article and to cross reference it with the article by Allan Sibley in the 1988 Compendium.

It does show just how good Hornby can be with their body mouldings when they put their mind to it.

The article on wheel shorting leaves me puzzled. If you are going to use an etching that contains spokes then why not make it with the cut out for the crank pin included, rather than having to cut and file to obtain the required shape. Is a photograph of filing off a tag really worthy of space in MRJ? Kingstorre and Metropolitan Junction will keep me occupied this evening.

With the politicians talking about a Northern Powerhouse my only comment would be that there is a marked south, even south west of England bias.

Bernard

[Mark]

It has arrived.

Very interesting to read the Britannia article and to cross reference it with the article by Allan Sibley in the 1988 Compendium.

It does show just how good Hornby can be with their body mouldings when they put their mind to it.

The article on wheel shorting leaves me puzzled. If you are going to use an etching that contains spokes then why not make it with the cut out for the crank pin included, rather than having to cut and file to obtain the required shape. Is a photograph of filing off a tag really worthy of space in MRJ? Kingstorre and Metropolitan Junction will keep me occupied this evening.

With the politicians talking about a Northern Powerhouse my only comment would be that there is a marked south, even south west of England bias.

Bernard

 

The shorting strips were designed this way for a number of reasons. Firstly I wanted them to retain a reasonable amount of strength on the fret and to ensure the rim stayed round. The reason for having to remove the spokes for the crank pin is because some engines have their crank pins in line with the spokes requiring the removal of one spoke and others with a later pattern have the crank pin between the spokes requiring the removal of two spokes. Others such as outside frame locos have no crank pins and so the design was intended to cover all variants. The article was written last September and I haven't seen it yet but if there are pictures of filing off tags it was probably done in the context of showing how important it is to keep the etches totally flat with no burrs. I'm sorry if you find the inclusion of such detail offensive.

 

Regards

 

Mark Humphrys

[Osgood]

The Daily Mirror are on the pulse!

 

[Grovenor]

in another, related, topic:

But you are right: I don't have to read such rubbish, which is why I have removed the MRJ area from my followed forums list. Quite simply the amount of stupid crap (to paraphrase Clive James, anything which gets called "banter" is best avoided, and a lot of what goes on is definitely in that category) pretending to be witty has taken its toll.

 

Hope that clarifies matters.

It seems that removing this area from your 'followed forums list' has not achieved the expected result.

Regards

[Bernard Lamb]

The shorting strips were designed this way for a number of reasons. Firstly I wanted them to retain a reasonable amount of strength on the fret and to ensure the rim stayed round. The reason for having to remove the spokes for the crank pin is because some engines have their crank pins in line with the spokes requiring the removal of one spoke and others with a later pattern have the crank pin between the spokes requiring the removal of two spokes. Others such as outside frame locos have no crank pins and so the design was intended to cover all variants. The article was written last September and I haven't seen it yet but if there are pictures of filing off tags it was probably done in the context of showing how important it is to keep the etches totally flat with no burrs. I'm sorry if you find the inclusion of such detail offensive.

 

Regards

 

Mark Humphrys

Oh dear.

I try to write a constructive review based on over 30 years in QC and production engineering and look at the response I get.

I don't know where you get the idea that I am offended.

I find your attitude just about sums up the worst of fine scale modellers.

Do you really think that any MRJ reader does not know how to prepare parts?

You have designed a very useful item, but with a little bit more of an open mind it could be so much better.

Making a superb etch and asking the user to hack it about just ain't good workshop practice. 

Bernard

[Wheatley]

Bernard Lamb, on 11 Jul 2016 - 20:08, said:

Do you really think that any MRJ reader does not know how to prepare parts?

 

Yes. I didn't when I first started reading it. Which was partly why I started reading it.

[Zero Gravitas]

Post 39 had it about right. This thread is now starting to make eggshells look like reinforced concrete.

 

I think liked it better when we just talked about WH Smith.

[Jub45565]

Do you really think that any MRJ reader does not know how to prepare parts?

I didn't know there were minimum requirements for reading MRJ...

 

I agree that if every article taught granny to suck eggs it would be tedious, but surely raising the points of where specific issues can creep in with using a product is a useful exercise?

 

(NB I haven't got mine yet, due to a convoluted supply chain of choice, but speaking generally)

[rjh]

I went to ExpoEM this year for the first time as a result seeing the first instalment of the coverage of Metropolitan Junction in MRJ. The trip was very well worthwhile IMHO.

 

The layout is evidently still at a relatively early stage in the restoration process but the quality of the original modelling shines through the faded appearance.

 

Equally, not all of what once worked still does but functional point-rodding modelled quite closely to 4mm scale is something almost nobody attempts in the smaller scales even today with all the fancy CAD, etching and 3D printing techniques available to us.

 

Metropolitan Junction is inspirational in a way that blow-by-blow accounts of computer-based techniques requiring substantial training for the user to become proficient in generally aren't. 

 

I enjoyed seeing the layout and, having done so, appreciate the articles all the more. Given that the renovation of MJ won't be a five-minute job, I hope to see further coverage, perhaps annually, documenting its progress.

 

John

 

John, and othere whose complientary posts re Met Jct have survived the editorial pruning,

 

Thank you for your kind remarks.

 

I am looking into republishing D.A.Williams's constructional and other articles.

The copyright of his texts passed to Mrs P. Williams on Doug's death and the original illustrations by him survive.

 

regards, Rodney Hills

[gwrrob]

I was surprised to find this delightful copy in my local Morrisons store.Kingstorre and Gerry's siphon in one issue was too good to miss.

[John_Hughes]

As I've said here before, I wouldn't mind a bit more How to in the mag; the generally superb standard of the modelling just calls out for more And this is how I did it. But then I mustn't be greedy - we've had some good stuff of that sort recently, after all.

 

On the other hand, did anyone - anyone at all - find the airbrush review useful? Personally I'd give it a total thumbs down, but then perhaps I'm just a miserable old git!

 

Otherwise, smashing!

[Loconuts]

As I've said here before, I wouldn't mind a bit more How to in the mag; the generally superb standard of the modelling just calls out for more And this is how I did it. But then I mustn't be greedy - we've had some good stuff of that sort recently, after all.

 

On the other hand, did anyone - anyone at all - find the airbrush review useful? Personally I'd give it a total thumbs down, but then perhaps I'm just a miserable old git!

 

Otherwise, smashing!

 

Yes I did read the review of this Airbrush, wanted to see the opinion of some one else of this product as I own one. The review is pretty fair and it is a quality product but it does have its limitations for use in the modeling world. I still get the best effect with my trusty Badger 200-3 Airbrush, great for spaying Locos and stock with the basic livery, the finish is all down to the medium being used and thinners.

 

The Iwata along with any other make of Airbrush which have moveable needles are fine for weathering or scenic work where changes in paint cover density is required. Most important thing and worth spending the money on is a large capacity compressor which can supply a constant regulated air pressure and can keep up with the air usage. I use a 25 litre one regulated to 35 psi flow to the Airbrush.

 

I did disagree with Horace Batchelor's statement, of modelers in the smaller scales not requiring machine tools, total rubbish all modelers, what ever scale they work in, should at least own a good vertical bench drill and if your pocket can afford it a small model/clock makers lathe is very useful. I have a friend who works in 2mm scale and he has a small Axminster Tools Mill and Lathe both of which he says he would not be without.

 

Loconuts

[t-b-g]

It is a crying shame when moderators have to spend their valuable time editing and removing posts from a topic.

 

Especially when it is over something like MRJ, which has only ever done good things for the hobby.

 

Very sad.

 

Tony G

[Penlan]

I hoped to see the price somewhere in the Iwata CM-C review, but to no avail, then again it does say 'A Rolls Royce Airbrush', and as the saying goes with Rolls Royce's, if you have to ask the price you can't afford one.
One on Amazon at present £338.  The Airbrush Co., is £365 (Version 2?).

 

I have a Badger 200-3 set (in fact 3 sets, people have passed them onto me - probate etc.,) plus a decent capacity compressor, just like 'loconuts', I'm happy with that.

[Platypus]

John, and othere whose complientary posts re Met Jct have survived the editorial pruning,

Thank you for your kind remarks.

I am looking into republishing D.A.Williams's constructional and other articles.

The copyright of his texts passed to Mrs P. Williams on Doug's death and the original illustrations by him survive.

regards, Rodney Hills

Dear Rodney,

 

I too enjoyed your articles about a layout I heard of via Iain Rice's books, so to me it is an eye opener . The publication of DAW's texts is I think a good idea and I for one would be interested in a copy please,

 

Regards, Platypus

[corneliuslundie]

I was rather surprised by the statement "all modelers, what ever scale they work in, should at least own a good vertical bench drill and if your pocket can afford it a small model/clock makers lathe is very useful."

I have neither and have no desire to own either. I just don't do the kind of things for which they would be needed. My best modelling period was when I was living abroad in a rented house and had nothing more sophisticated that modelling knives, small pliers, drills and files, a cutting mat, a good set square and the necessary paints, solvents, adhesives and transfers. It was all done on a table. I scratch build buildings and rolling stock, build vehicle kits and build my own track - and baseboards of course, though not while abroad.

Jonathan

[t-b-g]

I was rather surprised by the statement "all modelers, what ever scale they work in, should at least own a good vertical bench drill and if your pocket can afford it a small model/clock makers lathe is very useful."

I have neither and have no desire to own either. I just don't do the kind of things for which they would be needed. My best modelling period was when I was living abroad in a rented house and had nothing more sophisticated that modelling knives, small pliers, drills and files, a cutting mat, a good set square and the necessary paints, solvents, adhesives and transfers. It was all done on a table. I scratch build buildings and rolling stock, build vehicle kits and build my own track - and baseboards of course, though not while abroad.

Jonathan

 

I did see that and chuckle! I used to think the same and purchased a second hand lathe about 10 years ago. I have used it once to make some chimney pots for a model building, really just to try it out. I do "turn" things in my Minicraft drill with files from time to time.

 

I don't have a pillar drill but again, an opportunity to purchase a second hand milling machine was too good to miss and around 5 years ago I became the owner of a nice little machine. I have used it a few times but in nearly all cases, the job could have been done with saws and files.

 

I modelled for around 20 years, including scratchbuilding locos, with neither.

 

They are luxuries, not essentials.

 

Peter Denny used a hand brace in a vertical stand and also "turned" chimneys and domes on a hand drill!

 

I do have friends who have machine tools and use them for all sorts of jobs. One of them says that it is because he can't cut straight and that the modeller who does his own cutting by hand probably has more skill and ability than the one who uses machine tools and technology. 

[Steamport Southport]

It's also possibly a generational thing. Looking through old magazines from the 1950s and 1960s quite a lot of the articles consist of phrases such as "turn the chimney and dome on your lathe" or other such instructions. It was probably second nature to many modellers back then.

 

I'm in my mid 40s and wouldn't even know how to turn a lathe on, never mind turn something on one. Very few children at my school did any metalwork, even fewer after the "options" when you picked what subjects you were going to study for O levels. Most of the factories were gone and anyone of a mechanical bent was encouraged to take up motor mechanics instead or if they were a bit brighter then they were told to do science subjects such as Physics and Chemistry. Or the new science of computers.

 

It's all very well suggesting that we purchase these machines, but many of us would never be able to gain the skill to use them properly or have the time to learn.

 

 

Jason