Railway Modeller archive

[St Enodoc]

7 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Its not like when I was a boy!

Nothing is...

[kevinlms]

10 hours ago, TomJ said:

Im still here. Albeit a ‘student modeller’ not a junior one. 
 

July 97 in case you’re interested!

Was rather weird to see my article that I hadn’t read for 20+yrs!

Luckily you weren't under the title from the early 60s called 'Proprietary Modeller'!

 

Not sure when Peco gave that away, as I don't have many RM's from the 1960s.

[kevinlms]

9 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I’m sure it’s because publication has crept so early - the December edition arrives just after Bonfire Night, and even the January one, which used to turn-up in the few days before Christmas now arrives two weeks earlier.

 

Its not like when I was a boy!

RM used to be published on the 25th of the month preceding for decades, it is currently the 2nd Thursday.

 

So historically, the December issue would have come out 1 month before Christmas Day, now at least 6 or sometimes 7 weeks before Christmas. So the one with Christmas greetings, should be the one dated January!

Edited October 16, 2021 by kevinlms
Missing word

[rob D2]

Excellent I may resubscribe in that basis . I stopped as the steam bias grew even worse this year with every single cover steam I believe,

 

but access that far back would yield great value - I’ll start with April 1972 - my birth !

[Regularity]

On 14/10/2021 at 20:09, micknich2003 said:

Can someone who has bought a subscription please tell me the quality and definition of the various pages when printed out? Many Thanks, Mick.

To be honest, it is generally good, but some pages are a bit blurred, some have pencil markings on them, and some are upside down.

Not many, but it is not a precision engineering* job.

* Peco: Precision Enginering COmpany.

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

Not many, but it is not a precision engineering* job.

* Peco: Precision Enginering COmpany.

Interesting folk etymology!  But I always thought that it was derived from “Pritchard Patent Products Company” -> “3 Ps Company” (as so described in some very early adverts) -> “Peco” i.e. the P(ritchard) company, and thus pronounced “Pee-co”, not “ Pek-o” as you sometimes hear.

 

If only there were some kind of online archive where you could look up the company’s old adverts and see how the name evolved… oh, hang on.

 

:-)

 

Richard T

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

On 14/10/2021 at 20:09, micknich2003 said:

 

To be honest, it is generally good, but some pages are a bit blurred, some have pencil markings on them, and some are upside down

If anyone has ever managed or carried out a mass scanning/OCR exercise on a backlog of hard copy documents of varying sizes and conditions then you’ll know that a small number  of pages with variable resolution/blurring/scanned upside down (not really an issue of reading on a screen) or missing is par for the course. It’s a thankless job, combining utterly tedious repetition with the need for constant attention to detail.

 

Richard T 

Edited October 16, 2021 by RichardT
Clarification

[D9020 Nimbus]

4 hours ago, Regularity said:

Not many, but it is not a precision engineering* job.

* Peco: Precision Enginering COmpany.

There is a PECO (Precision Engineering Company) in the USA (or was?) — it deals in secondhand (real) diesel locomotives.

 

There are some other glitches — in some issues from 2009 the pages are different sizes.

[Regularity]

5 hours ago, RichardT said:

If anyone has ever managed or carried out a mass scanning/OCR exercise on a backlog of hard copy documents of varying sizes and conditions then you’ll know that a small number  of pages with variable resolution/blurring/scanned upside down (not really an issue of reading on a screen) or missing is par for the course. It’s a thankless job, combining utterly tedious repetition with the need for constant attention to detail.

 

Richard T 

Yes it is. Presumably someone was paid to do it, and hopefully someone else was performing QA checks before it was released?

But it is part of a paid subscription service. I am grateful for it, but would have happily waited a bit longer for proper checks had been made.

Also, a genuine enquiry was made. I reported my findings. These are factual, but to prove that I would need to take screenshots which would breech copyright law. 

There is evidence of some slightly rushed work, or a lack of attention to detail, but that’s the job. It detracts from the overall quality of what they have produced. 

 

What’s your problem with that being reported?

Edited October 16, 2021 by Regularity
Autocorrect.

[Regularity]

5 hours ago, RichardT said:

Interesting folk etymology!  But I always thought that it was derived from “Pritchard Patent Products Company” -> “3 Ps Company” (as so described in some very early adverts) -> “Peco” i.e. the P(ritchard) company, and thus pronounced “Pee-co”, not “ Pek-o” as you sometimes hear.

 

If only there were some kind of online archive where you could look up the company’s old adverts and see how the name evolved… oh, hang on.

 

:-)

 

Richard T

Aha. I understand.

[RichardT]

12 minutes ago, Regularity said:

What’s your problem with that being reported?

No problem and it’s useful information.  But as the archive is being offered as a free bonus addition to subscriptions I just thought it worth adding a note to manage expectations.

 

As for QA, there isn’t a chance in 1000 that the quality of every page scanned could be checked - only a small sample at best if costs were to be kept reasonable for what is, as I said, a free bonus extra.  The unfortunate reality is that for this kind of free product the customer is the QA: hopefully people will let Peco know about any pages which are not up to snuff, and they can be re-scanned. 
 

Richard T

[Regularity]

7 hours ago, Regularity said:

To be honest, it is generally good, but some pages are a bit blurred, some have pencil markings on them, and some are upside down.

That’s what I posted.

How is that not “managing expectations”?

[2mmMark]

5 hours ago, RichardT said:

If anyone has ever managed or carried out a mass scanning/OCR exercise on a backlog of hard copy documents of varying sizes and conditions then you’ll know that a small number  of pages with variable resolution/blurring/scanned upside down (not really an issue of reading on a screen) or missing is par for the course. It’s a thankless job, combining utterly tedious repetition with the need for constant attention to detail.

 

Richard T 

 
Google developed a camera system for rapidly scanning books without the need to lay them flat on a  scanner, which can potentially damage the spine binding.  It worked but came a cropper on the legalities. 

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-08-10-what-happened-to-google-s-effort-to-scan-millions-of-university-library-books

[RichardT]

12 minutes ago, Regularity said:

That’s what I posted.

How is that not “managing expectations”?

It was. And my post gave additional background information.

I’ve obviously offended you in some way by quoting your post, which wasn’t my intention. I quoted your post simply to give context to my own additional comments so that they made sense in the thread.

 

Please accept my apologies.

 

Richard T

[Nearholmer]

30 minutes ago, RichardT said:

As for QA, there isn’t a chance in 1000 that the quality of every page scanned could be checked

 

Ooh, I don't know.

 

If they'd bound them up into magazines, and sent them to me, I would have read them all.

 

I can (sadly) claim to have read every RM published, so reading them all again would have been a pleasure.

[RichardT]

15 minutes ago, 2mmMark said:

It worked but came a cropper on the legalities. 

Oh yes… In different work contexts I’ve looked at buying an overhead book scanner to digitise our holdings without damaging the spines, and also about possibly contributing our collections to the Google initiatives: in both cases they came a cropper on legalities AND costs!

 

Richard T

[RJS1977]

On 15/10/2021 at 16:04, Nearholmer said:

I’m sure it’s because publication has crept so early - the December edition arrives just after Bonfire Night, and even the January one, which used to turn-up in the few days before Christmas now arrives two weeks earlier.

 

Its not like when I was a boy!

 

For many years, publication was 22nd of the month, but for a variety of reasons this was moved to firstly third Thursday and the to second Thursday  - as you say, it has crept earlier. However traditionally the December issue came out around 10th December IIRC in order to get it out before the Manchester show.

[Regularity]

58 minutes ago, RichardT said:

It was. And my post gave additional background information.

I’ve obviously offended you in some way by quoting your post, which wasn’t my intention. I quoted your post simply to give context to my own additional comments so that they made sense in the thread.

 

Please accept my apologies.

 

Richard T

Accepted, but not required: no personal offence taken. We don’t know each other and it’s just a model railway forum. The only one out of the two of us who thinks I have been offended is you.
I just wondered why you felt the need to post what appeared to be a contradictory post, making a minor observation (which is what it was) in response to a simple question appear to be a major criticism (which is what you were doing by drawing attention to it and taking on the mantle of standing up for Peco), especially as you then said you agreed with what I originally wrote.

[RichardT]

Yes, seeing your reply, I understand now.

 

Richard T

Edited October 16, 2021 by RichardT
Wording

[woodenhead]

Funny how the memory plays tricks, forgot the RM was mainly black and white until 1995.

 

Thought it was cheap scanning until I stumbled on the 'in colour' sections

[Darius43]

Just re-read (after nearly 40 years) the 1984 article* on the incredible DMNS (Don’s Miniature New Street) layout.

 

What became of that layout?

 

Cheers

 

Darius

 

* There was also an earlier article on the DMNS in MRC as I recall.

[F-UnitMad]

2 hours ago, Darius43 said:

Just re-read (after nearly 40 years) the 1984 article* on the incredible DMNS (Don’s Miniature New Street) layout.

 

What became of that layout?

 

Cheers

 

Darius

 

* There was also an earlier article on the DMNS in MRC as I recall.

It was broken up after Don died. I don't know when that was. I visited it myself a couple of times when he had Open Days.

[kevinlms]

7 hours ago, Darius43 said:

Just re-read (after nearly 40 years) the 1984 article* on the incredible DMNS (Don’s Miniature New Street) layout.

 

What became of that layout?

 

Cheers

 

Darius

 

* There was also an earlier article on the DMNS in MRC as I recall.

I have found 4 articles

 

Model Railway Constructor 1978 May & June.  Over view and workings.

Model Railways 1992 October  on the control panel

Model Railways 1993 February Photo of city centre.

Railway Modeller 1984 August  RotM.

 

Which makes 5 articles!

[D9020 Nimbus]

I notice that everything up to December 2007 is from scans; January 2008 onwards appears to have been generated electronically. I'd have expected electronic origins for earlier copies than this — perhaps it is connected with the change of editor that took place then.

[kevinlms]

9 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

I notice that everything up to December 2007 is from scans; January 2008 onwards appears to have been generated electronically. I'd have expected electronic origins for earlier copies than this — perhaps it is connected with the change of editor that took place then.

When was the digital version first available?