Magazine Frustration

[Dunsignalling]

Having been an assistant editor of BRM, it's true to state that a magazine can only publish what's submitted. Occasionally, articles can lie on file a while and the product to which they refer might be no longer available once the piece is published. 

 

Is it always necessary for a product to be available for an article to be published about it? May I explain, please? 

 

Dsc_5803.jpg

 

I'm building this Millholme H16 for a friend. There's just the motion to add. He bought it via eBay a year or so ago and the instructions are dated from the early '90s. Clearly, the kit is no longer current. However, I'm writing up its construction for BRM on the request of the editor. Why? For one, has an article on the building of an H16 appeared before? Two, Millholme has a new proprietor and he's hoping to reintroduce the range, with improvements all round. Might a piece about a Millholme H16 generate interest enough for him to reintroduce it? Three, all the techniques I employ in the model's construction are applicable to any kit-built loco; by that I mean 'my' way, not 'the' way. Four, there must be tons of such older kits lying untouched on dusty shelves, just waiting for a trigger for someone to begin building them. One must be careful here, though. Not long ago I reported on my building two Jamieson V2s, only to be told that prices of such kits on eBay had then jumped. Five, speaking of eBay, many out-of-production kits appear on a regular basis. 

 

As Barry Oliver quite rightly suggests, the mainstream hobby is so 'swamped' with RTR now that an 'old-fashioned' build article might just be of interest, if only for a change. Anyway, the style of article has changed so much since I first started submitting pieces, well over 30 years ago. Then, they were text-heavy - a meaty read, with few photos. Now they're all pictorial step-by-steps. Such is progress. 

Thanks for the heads-up on Millholme,

 

I have a Z which I rebuilt from a loco bought in a "finished" state and quite fancy an H16 so I'll keep a look out for further developments.

 

Incidentally, there has been one previous article on building the H16 kit, by L.S. Vass in the December 1988 issue of Railway Modeller.

 

John

[Phil Parker]

I'm not sure everyone cares as much as you think about actually following the articles. Sometimes they just want to be entertained by pretty pictures and something to read. There's a lot more reading and video watching going on in this hobby than actual modelling, or at least so it appears sometimes.

 

On that basis, building an interesting kit isn't a problem. Old kits don't have to vanish as they did in the past. eBay has made clearing out a cupboard a lot easier than it used to be. Tracking down obselete kits is possible, you just can't buy them as easily as current ones but watching auctions, RMweb and club second hand stalls is both worthwhile and fun.

 

It's also possible to read an article for the techniques with the aim of using them on an entirely different model. Old kits can throw up "interesting" problems along the way. I've a Craven Parcels DMU build on my blog at the moment which thanks to MTK, is certainly full of "issue". Would it make an entertaining magazine article? Possibly. At the very least it might warn someone looking at a kit on a stall what they are in for.

 

Maybe more generic articles in the press might be better.The things I have in mind are things like, how to cut and stick plasticard together how to draw your own modelling drawings etc. What tools you need to make etched kits and where to get them etc. Soldering stuff together and more importantly how it's not so hard as beginners might think. What modelling books are worth buying. Articles that state how great you feel when you've made something for yourself.

 Articles that enthuse people and make them feel they want to make better models and be better modellers. Something to give them the confidence and aspiration to give it a try, be it a plate layers hut, expanded polystyrene hill or etched kit.

 

A generic article on sticking Plasticard is great, but what about next month? What you are talking about here is a book - buy it once and refer to it forever more.

 

When I'm writing, I try to stick a bit of this stuff in along the way so although the piece might not be "How to stick Plasticard", if Plasticard gets stuck, the method will be shown. Probably not every time or regular readers will be moaning, but where we can.

 

As for enthusing people, that's what we do and why we do it. Trouble is, when I say to people at shows, "Making things is fun" some of them look at me like I've gone nuts. It IS fun though!

[Nearholmer]

I thought that the Fen Drove article was highly unusual. Compare it with The usual RotM formula, and it is a great deal different, more an essay on avoiding period anachronisms, illustrated by a layout, than anything else. Quite good to see the formula ignored!

 

More broadly, and writing as a model railway magazine addict, with copies dating back as far as the very first, in 1909, around the house, I think that striking the instructional/constructional vs inspirational balance must be a very tricky job for editors, especially when a goodly proportion of their readership is apparently not comfortable to acquire craft skills. The best 'trick' seems to come in articles that use a particular project to provide a stealth tutorial about a generically useful technique.

 

For my money, it is more useful to learn techniques, than to be provided with recipes, especially recipes that require two generous teaspoons of unobtanium to make the cake rise.

 

Kevin

[Geoff Endacott]

I don't buy magazines for the articles. I just love the smell of the ink.

 

Geoff Endacott

[Horsetan]

...A generic article on sticking Plasticard is great, but what about next month? ....

 

Opening a box?

[Lightning]

Opening a box?

You're teasing.................

[Horsetan]

You're teasing.................

Isn't that what magazines tend to do?

[phil_sutters]

I have a slight concern about 'themed' issues, which Model Rail seems to delight in. Does the theme mean I don't bother with that issue if my layout doesn't have much need for scenic water - the November issue -  or is a rural backwater or shunting plank with little opportunity for SPEED - October? I do prefer a mix of subjects each month - there is more of a chance something will be of particular interest. As suggested above quite a lot of purchases are for armchair model railway enthusiasts. I know I fairly regularly bought a magazine or two each month in the 40 or so years I didn't actively model railways. I probably could have quite a decent, well-stocked layout if I had spent the money on models and materials rather than magazines!

[grahame]

Opening a box?

Nah, I'll take the money.

 

G.

[Signaller69]

I enjoy reading through whichever mag I've purchased as there is usually something to take away from them, but if there is one type of article I dislike it is the "how many boxes can we open and how much can we appear to spend on this whilst heavily selling" approach, recent ones being building a (not very big) control panel for DCC which cost upwards of £300 in DCC switches and connecting boards, and moreso a turntable/loco shed scene which cost upwards of £700 or so. All very nice and I'm sure there are people who can afford to do similar who would find them useful, but just not my "thing" at all. Much rather read how someone made something from scratch or built a particularly convincing model or scene.

I agree with others on the "themed" approach being a bit much, particularly when one magazine does much the same as another a month later (HST/speed themes come to mind).

Grumble over. I look forward to reading through whatever I buy and hope that continues.

[gc4946]

Not everyone has a lathe, fully-equipped workshop or a treasure trove of kits and parts from long-discontinued ranges at home.

[jonny777]

I don't buy magazines for the articles. I just love the smell of the ink.

 

Geoff Endacott

 

It is strange that you should say that, because I first started buying Ian Allan monthly magazines in the 1960s, and soon became hooked on the smell of the pages as I opened them. I have no idea if it was the printing ink, or the coating on the paper they used, but I loved that smell and would often open the (then) current magazine just to catch the smell of the pages as I did so.

[Zomboid]

I don't buy magazines often, but when I do it's to look at pretty pictures. Sometimes something instructional or inspirational comes from that, but so long as I get an hour or so of amusement from it then I consider it a success.

Generally for instruction I look here/ the rest of the internet, or as I have on my recent static grass experiment, at the packaging of a product... (I know, reading the instructions; I'll surrender my ManCard immediately). Or as with weathering, I'll buy some stuff and some cheap things to experiment on and have a play.

But I've digressed now.

[JDW]

First off, I should say I tend to browse all the magazines, and then buy which ever has something/s of interest. Second, I should also say that its not unknown that I write magazine articles, though in a different but still transport-related sphere.

 

With that out of the way, I'd tend to agree with what a lot of others have said above, in that I like a good mix of articles. Its a hard thing for editors to decide, and you can't please everyone all the time. Picking up on the "themed" issues, I think that can go both ways. I have sometimes not bought one of Model Rail's themed issues, for example, because its irrelevant or uninteresting to me. Things like water, grass, adhesives, that kind of thing, I've read plenty about already over the years, and lots of it tends to be very same-y. On the other hand, for newcomers or those who are looking to try that particular thing, its a handy and timely thing to read. The flip side is that sometimes of course, the issue is relevant or interesting, and I might buy that over The RM or BRM, because a whole issue about something like prototype operations or something a bit more obscure is better value that one with a modern image OO layout (my thing) and some other marginally interesting articles.

 

As for the relevance of older kits and parts, I think things like that can be relevant, Phil mentioned an MTK Cravens parcels unit, I'd have no intention of looking for the kit to build one, but would find it interesting as an article because its something a bit different, especially if there's something (text + pictures) on the prototype as well. That's one thing I like about Rail Express' Modeller section, although the prototypes are sometimes a bit dull but useful and interesting to those modelling that particular thing.

 

When it comes to the spares box, I think its one of those things that will always irritate people if they don't have X or Y, especially when an author just happened to have one handy. But like tools, spares are something you accumulate as you go along, and just as an 18 year old is less likely to be writing an article in the first place, they are also less likely to have accumulated a stash of tools and spares, each one picked up as and when needed or as the opportunity arose, and thus it follows that older and/or more prolific modellers will have more of both.

 

Sooo... anyone want an article on my DC Kits class 144 centre car conversion...? :-D

[Enterprisingwestern]

Not everyone has a lathe, fully-equipped workshop or a treasure trove of kits and parts from long-discontinued ranges at home.

 

They don't????

 

Mike.

[Horsetan]

Not everyone has a lathe, ....

More's the pity?

[bgman]

Isn't that what magazines tend to do?

Just the ones on the top shelf !

[Dava]

There is not enough quality material for the publications out there. If you build something, write an article with photos and email one of the editors to enquire if it's of interest.

 

My material over the past few years has gone into the Gauge 0 Gazette, it's all been published which is not to say it's wonderful, simply different from the rest. If you do something different or interesting, write about it, even on here.

 

Dava

[kevinlms]

Maybe more generic articles in the press might be better.The things I have in mind are things like, how to cut and stick plasticard together how to draw your own modelling drawings etc. What tools you need to make etched kits and where to get them etc. Soldering stuff together and more importantly how it's not so hard as beginners might think. What modelling books are worth buying. Articles that state how great you feel when you've made something for yourself.

 Articles that enthuse people and make them feel they want to make better models and be better modellers. Something to give them the confidence and aspiration to give it a try, be it a plate layers hut, expanded polystyrene hill or etched kit.

Model Railways (when it was called Your Model Railway) actually tried that in late 1984, printing the same information of beginners stuff. At least 3 consecutive issues had a listing of then available loco kits. Didn't take long to give that idea away!

[Steamport Southport]

Careful now!

 

I remember when Model Railways had an article about expanded polystyrene and there was an argument in the letters pages that lasted months about how it was a fire hazard with the properties of napalm.  

 

 

To me and probably the OP, if I was reading his post right, it's frustrations as in trivial grumbling that hopefully the magazines and writers will take a little bit of notice of. More constructive criticism than toys out of the pram time.

 

 

Jason

[Signaller69]

Not everyone has a lathe, fully-equipped workshop or a treasure trove of kits and parts from long-discontinued ranges at home.

Well indeed, neither do I. I do have "bits boxes" of useful bits left over from old projects and salvaged from junk boxes at shows, old layouts etc.

My point was that for me personally, I like to see articles of a constructional nature rather than how many boxes can be opened at rather great cost. I am not suggesting for a moment there is anything wrong with that approach, its just not for me.

[ejstubbs]

Careful now!

 

Down with this sort of thing!

 

[ianmianmianm]

My drink-a-shot one is the ubiquitous line about not wanting to do into detail about track being ballasted in the usual way... then going into detail including the drop of washing up liquid to break the surface tension. ;-)

[Torper]

My point was that for me personally, I like to see articles of a constructional nature rather than how many boxes can be opened at rather great cost.

 

I think that the ready availability of excellent RTR has led to a dumbing down of most model railway magazines.  I too like constructional articles and very much regret that I didn't take part in the MRJ Manning Wardle project that was published over five issues, 66 - 70.  Basically, you scratch built a small locomotive using plans and detailed instructions in the magazine, helped by a set of brass castings that MRJ had specially commissioned.  I think that MRJ repeated the exercise a few years later with a different industrial loco.  Now that, in my mind, is the way that magazines should be going and I'd really like it if MRJ were to repeat the exercise.  I very much doubt if any of the more mainstream magazines, with their commercially understandable emphasis on beginners and the average modeller, would dare to do such a thing.

 

DT

[Darth Vader]

Now that this particular can of worms has been opened, my main gripe is not necessarily with the articles, but with the reviews.

Living on the other side of the planet means that you cannot see a new release first hand until it makes it way down under, sometimes a couple of months. Therefore you tend to rely on the reviews.

Most reviews are pretty poor, containing a lot of prototype information (sometimes most of the review is prototype information) and then a cursory look at the model, all in all it just reeks of “it’s available go out and buy it”.

Two things that stand out for me are;

The model is fitted with NEM pockets – yeah well are they at the correct height, have you tried another type of coupler to test if it works.

The model is DDC ready – yeah well how do you open it up to get at the insides to fit a decoder.

 

The other real pet gripe is details of haulage capacity; “It ran around our test track and pulled X number of vehicles”. Yet when I get the model and put it on my layout that is dead flat and has generous curves (min radius 36 inches) it will not pull anywhere near the quoted figure.

There should be set standard to measure haulage capacity.