Modern Image split

[F-UnitMad]

As I recall it, back around the late '70s/early '80s, there would be only a few 'up to date', D&E layouts at Shows or in the mags. That was when the modern scene was relatively simple to follow - 'everything blue'.

Given how quickly the real up-to-date Privatisation scene changes, from liveries to TOCs, I am suitably impressed by how many modellers there are making layouts depicting the contemporary scene.

[dogbox321]

From memory towards the end MRM seemed to have an awful lot of very similar articles (written predominantly by Nigel Burkin) along the lines of fit Kaydees to xyz or fit DCC to abc. Which all got rather repetitive

 

Possibly a sign that there wasn’t sufficient quality of articles on a diverse range of topics available.

 

That said some issues were absolutely top quality, the reference articles on prototype operation in particular. I really need to dig out my copy’s and find the article on GWT loco hauled operations for a summer project...

 

As for a split, I prefer to see a mixture in a magazine. There is always a lot to learn from different scales or periods.

 

Would agree, the editior just covered the issues he were interesting in - It werent really MRM, but  Kadees and DCC bi-monthly!  The skill of any editior is to provide articles that their audience will want to read, and particularly in this day and age, to make people want to buy it.  I think if there was a publication, bi-monthly or even quarterly (its hard to fill a more specialised magazine) for modern image modellers, with a couple of good quality layouts featured, such as Blackmill, London Road, Everard Junction, modern reviews, modelling features and techniques, then it could possibly work. 

 

I think in the context of model rail - it went from Generic to Modern, to get an as larger modelling audience as possible, because ultimately EMAP as it were then, would want as larger market as they can, and ultimately when getting supermarkets etc., to take a magazine they are interested in circulation numbers.

 

Interestingly, what happened to the Rail Express Yearbook, that only came out 1 year, but was brilliant for modern modellers, in my opinion!  That probably could have gone quarterly.  If I had to provide positive feedback for Rail Express Modeller, it would be to actually show people how to do things and upgrade their skills, instead of just showing a completed model.  Likewise, the 40 pages of modelling saga - 50% is advertising, then there are I hate to think how many pages of "prototype inspiration", a few reviews and very little else....  Plus, when you go to an exhibition, I saw them at Etches Park Open Day and GCR Model Event, try not to just sit there behind a load of models like miserable stuffed ducks!  Whilst the models on display have been excellent, sitting behind the stand looking miserable and not engaging with modellers does nothing to promote the hobby.

 

As a general rule (as a subscriber to Model Rail), I know it tends to be based on "Themes", but it would be nice to see slightly more modern image articles, particularly layouts.  Then again, I have also herd some modellers say they don't want their layout to appear in that, because the paper quality!  

 

Regards,

 

C.

[truffy]

It's interesting to note that no-one has spotted any D&E Cake Box dioramas for us to feature yet.

 

Will these do?

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/129437-water-and-london-electricity/

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/129075-cutting-the-cake/

[Joseph_Pestell]

What no one seems to have mentioned here is advertisers.

 

As a publisher, it is adverts that make any publication viable, especially print. Is the UK model trade, retail and manufacturing, willing to dissipate its advertising budget (or indeed increase it) to support such a magazine? I doubt that they are although, for the long-term future of the hobby, they probably should.

 

I don't see content as an issue. There are a lot of very talented modellers out there producing 1980s onwards layouts and everything that goes with that. There are quite a few just here on RMWeb that would merit articles in any magazine.

 

One possibility would be to start up purely as an e-zine and, having proved the concept, move into print.

[grahame]

You've always been at pains to tell us you don't subscribe to the mag and how rarely you buy it. However, while we do look at RMweb, it's not the ONLY source of feedback as the view can easily be distorted by a few active posters. It always strikes me as odd that we hear "All magazines look the same" but when anything different is tried, that's also wrong. You really can't please all of the people all of the time...

 

I think you might be mistaking me for someone else. I may have mentioned once before that I don't subscribe but I'm certainly not in pain about it or have made a regular issue about it.

 

I was trying to provide positive feedback and making some suggestions for consideration, and wasn't expecting that sort of response. 

 

G.

[Phil Parker]

Will these do?

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/129437-water-and-london-electricity/

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/129075-cutting-the-cake/

 

Perfect. I'll point the office at these. That bridge is a superb piece of modelling for a start.

 

I've had a feeling that there should be loads of potential for D&E Cake Boxes. There's a lot of very modelable scenes out there and being current, they would be asy to research. Onimbury signal box would be good for a start: http://philsworkbench.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/warehouse-wednesday-onibury-signal-box.html

[Norm81]

<some quoted text removed to avoid unneccessarily long post>

 

As Andy has said, we are looking for layouts. Sadly, there are very few Hanging Hill's, full of scratchbuilt diesels (and other stock) and no RTP buildings, but if anyone is hiding one, let us know. I like the idea of re-visting old ones, although we can expect a "Why have you gone back to XXXX, it's been in AAAAALLLLLL the magazines before." cry on here if we do!

I personally like the idea of re-visiting old ones, or ones previously covered in other magazines but not BRM. Different photos, potentially different author with a different viewpoint or who picks up on different details. It's the same as when I go to an exhibition and see a layout for the second time, there's always something new I notice.

 

Best suggestion I have is to maybe mention in the magazine you're looking for layouts to reach a wider audience than just on here? I definitely want to see more D+E content, but I'm a bit frustrated that I can't really do anything to help it happen! Except moan a bit about it, but if noone said anything everything would be assumed to be fine if you see what I mean.

[Andy Y]

You really can't please all of the people all of the time...

 

Tell me about it! I think it was about a year ago that comments were made that we didn't feature enough N gauge (or if you believe some Facebook posts we 'never' had any N gauge in the mag) so I made a conscious choice to source more and we've certainly had some 2mm in 80% of issues in the last year - I don't recall seeing any 'thanks for listening' comments. A couple of years ago we seem to be knee deep in D&E layouts but they were 75% West Highland.

 

Looking at the plan for the rest of the year we look to have some 2mm or N in every issue, a D&E or transition layout in 7 out of 8 issues, an EM or P4 layout in 6 out of 8, 7mm or above in 6 out of 8 whilst seeking to cater for the market majority of OO too. There's only so much that can be done in the case of balance.

 

Someone will always be disappointed though!

[Huw Griffiths]

Tell me about it! I think it was about a year ago that comments were made that we didn't feature enough N gauge (or if you believe some Facebook posts we 'never' had any N gauge in the mag) so I made a conscious choice to source more and we've certainly had some 2mm in 80% of issues in the last year - I don't recall seeing any 'thanks for listening' comments. A couple of years ago we seem to be knee deep in D&E layouts but they were 75% West Highland.

 

Looking at the plan for the rest of the year we look to have some 2mm or N in every issue, a D&E or transition layout in 7 out of 8 issues, an EM or P4 layout in 6 out of 8, 7mm or above in 6 out of 8 whilst seeking to cater for the market majority of OO too. There's only so much that can be done in the case of balance.

 

Someone will always be disappointed though!

 

Absolutely.

 

What do we want?

 

50 pages of D&E in every issue!

 

When do we want it?

 

Now!  :triniti: :jester:

 

What do we want? ... 

 

 

OK - I think you get the general idea here.

 

To be honest though, even though I'd personally like to see a lot more D&E - and multiple units - and light rail - and we must not forget all that essential "how to" content - what really draws me is quality.

 

Editors could (in theory) be faced with all the D&E etc themed content imaginable - but, if it isn't of a good enough quality, it might as well not exist. Anyway, I get the impression that they might not actually be seeing enough D&E stuff of any quality (certainly not publishable).

 

I also wonder if there might be a risk of this turning into a runaway effect - not enough of this content available for editors to choose from  >  not much gets published  >  people think there's "no point in submitting it"  >  even less of this content for editors to choose from  >  ... .

 

 

Of course, it's always possible that we could all be wrong (we'd love to be proved wrong) - there might be some decent "modern image" stuff, just waiting to land on editors' desks - and I'm sure that nobody would be any happier than the editors themselves, if this were to happen.

 

Time will tell.

 

 

Huw.

[Poggy1165]

I would argue that the total model railway market is quite small, and there are several magazines. In addition, that market is highly fragmented, not only between periods, but between scales - not to mention the divides within scales!

 

It is unfortunate that so many modellers seem to be intolerant of any interest but their own, because really we can't afford the luxury of special magazines for each and every sector. Frankly, I find diesel and electric prototypes generally less interesting but I would rather read about a first-class modern layout than a p. poor steam one. I also find that there is usually something of interest in practically every well-written article, as long as it isn't purely about how the author opened boxes.

 

It would be interesting to know - and only a editor could tell us - what is the ratio of submitted articles is per subject area. And also, perhaps, the percentage of articles that meet the house requirements in terms of style, or whatever guidelines they have for their authors. 

Edited March 1, 2018 by Poggy1165

[APOLLO]

I model the "rareley modelled era" 1965 - 1968, You CAN have (nearly) it all, Steam, green & blue diesels, maroon, green & blue grey coaches, air braked 100 ton wagons and 4 wheeled unbraked minerals etc etc. I was a young lad back then and that era was definitely NOT boring. Tons of infrastructure was still around also, everywhere,  ancient, old, recent and brand new, mostly all intermingling.

 

There is even a whole thread here on RMweb about it.  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52572-why-is-this-so-rarely-modelled/

 

As to magazines splitting, perhaps not. The above "era" would probably cross any era divide. I like to see "modern image" layouts, which can be from the 60's to the present. Not that I model them, my cut off date is 1968 - and there was quite alot of blue around 65 - 68 as a trawl through the above thread will reveal. Don't forget blue / grey kicked off in 1964 with D1733 & the XP64 stock - a hell of a long time ago !!

 

Model this and you'll get some comments !!!!

 

 

Brit15

Edited March 1, 2018 by APOLLO

[steve1]

 

left in the 1960s along with greasy haired rockers.

 

Oi, Mortimore!

 

steve

[96701]

I model the "rareley modelled era" 1965 - 1968, You CAN have (nearly) it all, Steam, green & blue diesels, maroon, green & blue grey coaches, air braked 100 ton wagons and 4 wheeled unbraked minerals etc etc. I was a young lad back then and that era was definitely NOT boring. Tons of infrastructure was still around also, everywhere,  ancient, old, recent and brand new, mostly all intermingling.

 

There is even a whole thread here on RMweb about it.  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52572-why-is-this-so-rarely-modelled/

 

As to magazines splitting, perhaps not. The above "era" would probably cross any era divide. I like to see "modern image" layouts, which can be from the 60's to the present. Not that I model them, my cut off date is 1968 - and there was quite alot of blue around 65 - 68 as a trawl through the above thread will reveal. Don't forget blue / grey kicked off in 1964 with D1733 & the XP64 stock - a hell of a long time ago !!

 

Model this and you'll get some comments !!!!

 

 

Brit15

What a belting photo.

[DCB]

I remember circa 1967 when there was only Railway Modeller, Model Railway Constructor and Model Railway news in newsagents such as WH Smith. all covering railways in what was about the past 60 years with the occasional rebel like Mike Sharman modelling the earlier era.  The problem with "Modern Image" and other eras is they didn't last for many years. My own favourite Inverness 1987ish was really only 86 to 88.

I would have thought 2 magazines was the most your average punter would purchase and really it looks like an over supply situation best solved by amalgamations rather than any gap in the market..

[westernviscount]

I model the "rareley modelled era" 1965 - 1968, You CAN have (nearly) it all, Steam, green & blue diesels, maroon, green & blue grey coaches, air braked 100 ton wagons and 4 wheeled unbraked minerals etc etc. I was a young lad back then and that era was definitely NOT boring. Tons of infrastructure was still around also, everywhere, ancient, old, recent and brand new, mostly all intermingling.

 

There is even a whole thread here on RMweb about it. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52572-why-is-this-so-rarely-modelled/

 

As to magazines splitting, perhaps not. The above "era" would probably cross any era divide. I like to see "modern image" layouts, which can be from the 60's to the present. Not that I model them, my cut off date is 1968 - and there was quite alot of blue around 65 - 68 as a trawl through the above thread will reveal. Don't forget blue / grey kicked off in 1964 with D1733 & the XP64 stock - a hell of a long time ago !!

 

Model this and you'll get some comments !!!!

 

 

Brit15

[westernviscount]

I model the "rareley modelled era" 1965 - 1968, You CAN have (nearly) it all, Steam, green & blue diesels, maroon, green & blue grey coaches, air braked 100 ton wagons and 4 wheeled unbraked minerals etc etc. I was a young lad back then and that era was definitely NOT boring. Tons of infrastructure was still around also, everywhere, ancient, old, recent and brand new, mostly all intermingling.

 

There is even a whole thread here on RMweb about it. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52572-why-is-this-so-rarely-modelled/

 

As to magazines splitting, perhaps not. The above "era" would probably cross any era divide. I like to see "modern image" layouts, which can be from the 60's to the present. Not that I model them, my cut off date is 1968 - and there was quite alot of blue around 65 - 68 as a trawl through the above thread will reveal. Don't forget blue / grey kicked off in 1964 with D1733 & the XP64 stock - a hell of a long time ago !!

 

Model this and you'll get some comments !!!!

 

 

Brit15

Yes this era is absolutely fascinating. As a child i too believed the seperation between the steam era and "modern" era to be absolute.

[truffy]

As a child i too believed the seperation between the steam era and "modern" era to be absolute.

Like geological eras, rail eras are not cut’n’dry, although they are considerably shorter. There is certainly blurring at the edges.

 

For my money, ‘modern image’ is anything that you can’t make a pot of tea from.

 

IGMC

[westernviscount]

 

"Like geological eras, rail eras are not cut’n’dry, although they are considerably shorter. There is certainly blurring at the edges"

 

Agreed, and its this blurring of new motive power and ancient infrastructure and practices that i think is ripe for modelling. I am too young to have known this period but i feel a definite pull towards it! Up until now e have restricted myself to 68' to 71'ish but intend to move further back in time...in the future!!

 

An excellent example of this period is/ was a layout called south pimlico https://youtu.be/a-pxEOAtR80

Edited March 4, 2018 by westernviscount

[Ravenser]

 

 

Anyway, the solution for a lack of D&E is simply for D&E modellers to write something. We aren't inundated with articles so it's an easy way to see your modelling in print and earn some cash. The steam era boys have a harder time as there is more for the editor to choose from. It's interesting to note that no-one has spotted any D&E Cake Box dioramas for us to feature yet.

 

 

 

Actually the solution is for D&E modellers to build something - specifically a layout. 

 

The flip side of the obsession with "the definitive Class 37" and heavy stock hacks is a relative lack of interest in building layouts. An alarming proportion of D&E layouts have been built for various "challenges" - alarming because it suggests that unless a rocket is put under them D&E modellers don't do anything involving baseboards. There is a marked tendency for D&E modelling to focus on what is effectively a glass-case model of a single vehicle.

 

This may be because D&E modellers are younger, and possibly weighted towards the SE (and maybe some conurbations), because that's where the surviving network is densest and growing - and that is also precisely where the chronic housing shortage bites hardest. If you need a spare room, a loft or a garden shed to build a layout then D&E modellers are the least likely to have access to such luxuries.

 

Nevertheless layouts are still possible - Buckingham Mk1 - not exactly a micro - was built when Peter Denny was living in a single rented bed-sit room

 

There are however two other factors cutting in the other direction. Some D&E modellers seem to have the attitude that they join a club so that the club will provide them with a large exhibition layout on which to run their trains at shows. Building the layout themselves isn't part of their vision - they are stock-builders, and possibly regard that as a higher and more skilful form of modelling than building layouts - because that's where the prestige is in D&E. I've known modellers who built (kit-built) stock that looked very pretty but simply didn't work properly - a fact to which they were completely oblivious and which they had no interest in addressing , because they weren't even around to see the thing run. (Whereas Muggins starts to tear his hair out and feel his model is utterly worthless if it won't stay on the rails in all circumstances all day and start without touching or stalling every time)

 

Secondly most D&E modellers are fundamentally uncomfortable with the nature of their prototype. Most of them are basically interested in freight, and tolerate passenger trains as a necessary supplement - the 21st century British network is essentially a passenger network. Hence the obsession with Peak Forest and the desperate quest for the EWS equivalent of a West Virginia coal road. This is kicking against the pricks. It is probably not a coincidence that the strongest sectors of D&E in terms of producing good well-observed layouts are third rail and LT modelling - because the people involved are comfortable with their chosen prototype as a passenger railway.

 

We are awash with TMDs but I'll tell you what I've never seen modelled and that's a multiple-unit depot. Despite the fact that the traction depots of which I was most conscious were places like LN, CA, CO , IL (and potentially others like Hull Botanic Gardens and Bradford Hammerton St). The average "diesel depot" bears little resemblance to places like IM, TO, TS, FP and the rest . In fact it is a complete fantasy - a model of something which didn't actually exist , but the modeller wishes did. That is not a sound basis for layout-building

 

<rant mode disengaged>

[Clive Mortimore]

"Like geological eras, rail eras are not cut’n’dry, although they are considerably shorter. There is certainly blurring at the edges"

 

Agreed, and its this blurring of new motive power and ancient infrastructure and practices that i think is ripe for modelling. I am too young to have known this period but i feel a definite pull towards it! Up until now e have restricted myself to 68' to 71'ish but intend to move further back in time...in the future!!

 

An excellent example of this period is/ was a layout called south pimlico

Lloyd (AKA Baby Deltic) boroowed one of my class 23s and ran it on "Keep it Southern" Colin's South Pimlico. Next thing I new there was a Q1 on the fuel point at Hanging Hill. Poor old Harry the fitter who also done the refuelling spent ages trying to find where to put the diesel in it.

[Clive Mortimore]

Actually the solution is for D&E modellers to build something - specifically a layout. 

 

The flip side of the obsession with "the definitive Class 37" and heavy stock hacks is a relative lack of interest in building layouts. An alarming proportion of D&E layouts have been built for various "challenges" - alarming because it suggests that unless a rocket is put under them D&E modellers don't do anything involving baseboards. There is a marked tendency for D&E modelling to focus on what is effectively a glass-case model of a single vehicle.

 

This may be because D&E modellers are younger, and possibly weighted towards the SE (and maybe some conurbations), because that's where the surviving network is densest and growing - and that is also precisely where the chronic housing shortage bites hardest. If you need a spare room, a loft or a garden shed to build a layout then D&E modellers are the least likely to have access to such luxuries.

 

Nevertheless layouts are still possible - Buckingham Mk1 - not exactly a micro - was built when Peter Denny was living in a single rented bed-sit room

 

There are however two other factors cutting in the other direction. Some D&E modellers seem to have the attitude that they join a club so that the club will provide them with a large exhibition layout on which to run their trains at shows. Building the layout themselves isn't part of their vision - they are stock-builders, and possibly regard that as a higher and more skilful form of modelling than building layouts - because that's where the prestige is in D&E. I've known modellers who built (kit-built) stock that looked very pretty but simply didn't work properly - a fact to which they were completely oblivious and which they had no interest in addressing , because they weren't even around to see the thing run. (Whereas Muggins starts to tear his hair out and feel his model is utterly worthless if it won't stay on the rails in all circumstances all day and start without touching or stalling every time)

 

Secondly most D&E modellers are fundamentally uncomfortable with the nature of their prototype. Most of them are basically interested in freight, and tolerate passenger trains as a necessary supplement - the 21st century British network is essentially a passenger network. Hence the obsession with Peak Forest and the desperate quest for the EWS equivalent of a West Virginia coal road. This is kicking against the pricks. It is probably not a coincidence that the strongest sectors of D&E in terms of producing good well-observed layouts are third rail and LT modelling - because the people involved are comfortable with their chosen prototype as a passenger railway.

 

We are awash with TMDs but I'll tell you what I've never seen modelled and that's a multiple-unit depot. Despite the fact that the traction depots of which I was most conscious were places like LN, CA, CO , IL (and potentially others like Hull Botanic Gardens and Bradford Hammerton St). The average "diesel depot" bears little resemblance to places like IM, TO, TS, FP and the rest . In fact it is a complete fantasy - a model of something which didn't actually exist , but the modeller wishes did. That is not a sound basis for layout-building

 

<rant mode disengaged>

Utter tosh.

 

If you had been at the Glasgow show where there was a predominance of D&E layouts, many of them big passenger ones, including Aberdeen Kirkhall a passenger rolling stock depot layout you would not have written the above.

 

Clive a D&E modeller who is not young. Has built his own baseboards and the bits on top.

[LBRJ]

Actually the solution is for D&E modellers to build something - specifically a layout. 

 

 

 

<rant mode disengaged>

 

 

That is probably the single  most insightful post regarding "D&E" modelling I have ever read!!

Edited March 4, 2018 by LBRJ

[Legend]

The trouble is the TMD is the up to date version of the GW Branchline of the 60/70s . Yes one or two would sustain interest but there is massive over exposure and very limited operating potential. But there are lots of layouts around that are big and fascinating to watch. Shenston Road that I came across here , as an example. Lots of different types of traffic, fantastic scenery it’s like you are standing on the platform transported back to the 70s . As well as the previously mentioned Coppell that was at Model Rail Scotland I don’t think I’ve ever seen that in print either. What about Robert Carroll’s fantastic layout showing various D+E periods, that’s something different.

[Kelly]

More D&E content is always welcome, but sometimes the modelling can give inspiration regardless of era. (modern image is too broad a term these days, to many newer modellers it might mean post-97, whereas a lot of people tend to think of it as post-55).

 

Mention has been made of UPDate. Whilst yes to get access to it you need to be a member, usually at shows there are copies that you can look at and have a flick through. DEMU's Showcase event tends to have a selection of very good D&E modelling across multiple scales too.

 

As well as UPDate, again as mentioned in this thread, there is really only the modelling section in Rail Express.

 

I no longer subscribe to any of the main modelling magazines, purely for financial reasons. But I tend to have a look at each new issue and decide on a month by month basis which grabs my attention.

[Kelly]

There is a modern era magazine that has been published for a long time, four(ish) issues a year. It's call UPDate and published by DEMU. http://www.demu.org.uk/update.php

 

Andi

 

Very true. The society website has just had a new makeover too, which means that everyone can search the index of past issues to see if anything is of interest, etc (at present issues 0-82 are available for members to download, the latest 3 issues being kept print only for a time).