BRM - January 2014

[Midland_Red]

CB

 

I'm a DE postcode. But I have noticed our postman has been carrying a lot of junk mail for every house this week.

 

The mail service at the moment is a bit of a lottery depending on where you post it from. I had 3 different items posted first class on the same day last week. One arrived the next day while the other 2 took 3 and 4 days respectively to get here.

 

Ho Hum!!

[Coombe Barton]

It's worth waiting for.

[SteveCole]

It's worth waiting for.

 

Thank you!

[Phil Parker]

If it's any consolation, I've not got my subs copy either. Perhaps I'll have to go to Smiffs tomorrow!

[SteveCole]

If it's any consolation, I've not got my subs copy either. Perhaps I'll have to go to Smiffs tomorrow!

 

The lengths we go to for extra sales, hey Phil!

[Andy Y]

Has there been a conscious editorial decision to de-emphasise RMweb?  Although several forum inmates have contributed to the magazine or are mentioned in despatches there are no references to their screen names.  This is particularly noticeable in the 2014 calendar where a high proportion of the layouts illustrated are the work of RMwebbers.

There's definitely no conscious decision Chris; I know this issue was a bit frenetic in the design/production stage due to all internal deadlines being bumped forward a little with an impending holiday so maybe we didn't mention some of the tie-ins strongly enough. Richard Lambert, owner of Heyside is dikitriki hereabouts, Martin Jones of Kinmundyshire is the inimitable Martin Wales, Pete Harvey of course you know so with the usual suspects there's a high degree of cross-pollenation going on.

 

I did wonder when compiling the Hornby calendar snaps and captions whether to mention the members names but thought it might flood it and make it look like an RMweb calendar, only one month isn't an RMweb member (to my knowledge).

 

Next month has a big BCB feature so there'll be no getting away from some of the names there, I was looking at the B/W snap on the next month page earlier and debating whether to do a whole B/W article.

[Pete 75C]

I was looking at the B/W snap on the next month page earlier and debating whether to do a whole B/W article.

 

Nooooooooooo...

My parents didn't bother getting a colour telly until about 1983... too many memories. You try watching Rainbow in b&w...

[gwrrob]

 This is particularly noticeable in the 2014 calendar where a high proportion of the layouts illustrated are the work of RMwebbers.

 

Chris 

 

Yes the front cover does look fairly familiar.

[Trains&armour]

Yes the front cover does look fairly familiar.

Couldn't tell for sure, but might have seen it somewhere....  ​ 

[The Stationmaster]

Yes the front cover does look fairly familiar.

 

Thank you Miss December   Mind you I think the good Cap'n's interpretation of what ran on the S&DJtR must have reached ultimate expression in the November pic (a 2-BIL at Bleakhouse Road for those who haven't seen it yet).

 

A pretty good issue all round and at least the 'stickers' on content pages and the 'turn over' 'stickers' have reduced considerably or become much less obtrusive.  My only moan is that some top notch pics, especially of Heyside and Kinmundy have been taken over two pages with detail lost in the fold; I realise this is a difficult one as the alternative to get decent size landscape pics would be to turn them through 90 degrees so we'd be forever turning the mag to & fro.

 

I enjoyed John Emerson's review of the 'Star' as he picked up the really good points and didn't miss the dodgy ones - but I was very interested to read that Hornby have said they will swap bogie wheels, I think that is the first indication of that which I have seen anywhere (wonder if they'll refund the cost of my Alan Gibson ones? ).

 

And perhaps I ought not to mention it but I bought my copy in a well known 'High St' retail shop this morning (I was told that they arrived in branch today).

[Andy Y]

 My only moan is that some top notch pics, especially of Heyside and Kinmundy have been taken over two pages with detail lost in the fold; 

 

A point not lost upon my ears; Steve and I did talk about it this afternoon - we thought we'd overcome it in the last couple of issues but we could have done better in some cases this month.

[Midland_Red]

Subs copy dropped through the door this morning.

 

And, yes CB, it was worth waiting for.

[Verityboo]

Subscribed at Warley and the first subs copy arrived safely yesterday. Really good issue, I like the in depth 4f improvements article.

 

The only comment I would make is that the photos in the magazine are superb and it is amazing what close up shots are possible (with great depth of field remaining in focus). I do, however, miss seeing a (single) more general shot of some of the larger layouts which helps give an overall impression of them. Can't be bad if that's the worst I  have to say!

[Andy Y]

I do, however, miss seeing a (single) more general shot of some of the larger layouts which helps give an overall impression of them. 

 

It's often quite difficult to do, especially if a layout is at home, as there's rarely chance to step back far enough to get an overall view. The least favourite image of Heyside on P16  (from mine and Richard, the layout owner's point of view) was included to try and give some idea of the scope but even that cannot include much of the sidings.

 

I'll keep it in mind though.

[gwrrob]

Excellent review by John Emerson of the Hornby Star with no glossing over it's weak points and a very informative researched review was the result.

[John M Upton]

As an aside I found the latest issue in the Brighton Station WHSmiths a day earlier than advertised on Wednesday!!!

[queensquare]

Just picked up my copy and on first flick through there seems to be plenty of meat for a descent read. The two main articles that caused me to part with my hard earned this month, TW's reworking of the new Bachmann 4F and Mick Simpson's account of finescaling the Farish J39 look good although the size of the photos is a little disappointing. The J39 article in particular has pictures not much bigger than a postage stamp illustrating the process of turning down the wheels when elsewhere in the mag we get numerous double page spreads of essentially RTR models or flashy self promotion. Could not a little more room be given to these practical type articles, it is, after all a 'modelling' magazine. I know us 2FS modellers are supposed to have particularly good eyesight but this is just a myth....honest.

 

Whilst having a moan, there is also a mention of a piece on the MRL website regarding how Mick made the collets. I've had a good look around but can't find it anywhere. Any chance of a link please.

 

Jerry 

[NHY 581]

Well, on the strength of this issue,I am a convert. The photos are great. Highlight though was the 2BIL on Bleak house Road. What a photo!

 

Sat with a bottle of Wych woods finest having an armchair moment...Ta.

 

Rob

[Izzy]

Not having bought a BRM for quite a while like Jerry/Queensquare I did so for the 4F/J39 articles. Having just recently got an android tablet I did consider trying a digital version, but having issues with pocketmags, and fancying the 2014 calender, today I got a hardcopy instead, and also wished my eyesight was better. At least with a digital version I could have enlarged the shots to a more adequate viewing size. As it is I feel rather disapointed.

 

Izzy

[Jon020]

Mine arrived yesterday, which is fine, but I did see it in WHS yesterday too... post late I suppose. Some nice bits in it, and quite like the supplement, although I'm not quite sure about the portrait layout calendar.

But, sorry, I've got to mention the spelling mistake I saw; one that as an avionics specialist always gets us ... and has to make us sigh a little... Mr Parker, the plural of antenna is antennas; insects have antennae (page 77)... and the two are not interchangeable. There... I've said it.... and had another chuckle, all OCD'like.

Otherwise, the mag will pass a few tea time reading sessions ;-)

Jon

[Coombe Barton]

But, sorry, I've got to mention the spelling mistake I saw; one that as an avionics specialist always gets us ... Mr Parker, the plural of antenna is antennas. Insects have antennae (page 77)... and the two are not interchangeable. There... I've said it. Otherwise, it'll pass a few tea time reading sessions ;-)

Jon

Hmmm. The concise OED odes not make the distinction, although the Shorter OED states that the plural form of antennas is chiefly used (not exclusively) for the plural of antenna meaning aerials. This may be because of the American usage of antennas in this context.

 

Merriam-Webster makes no such distinction.

 

So it's hardly a mistake ad the authoritative sources do not explicitly support the assertion.

 

</pedant_mode>

[deltic17]

Bags vs no Bag - well I rarely tend to buy a model railway magazine that you can't get to see what is inside in detail......how naughty of them to put it in a bag!......but.......it is very simple really......all you do is make sure the shop is a bit busy.....have a sneaky look around over your shoulder to see if anyone is watching and if the all clear is given....then quickly rip the bag open and then read & read the magazine to your hearts content......it never fails. If there's a load of dressed up rubbish in it then you simply put it back where others can probably come to the same conclusion/have a good free read too. Of course if you then decide to 'BUY' you must disregard the copy you've been reading and get another clean bagged version and take it to the checkout....simple eh?.....now when does that latest BRM come out?.....only joking of course....

[Jon020]

Hmmm. The concise OED odes not make the distinction, although the Shorter OED states that the plural form of antennas is chiefly used (not exclusively) for the plural of antenna meaning aerials. This may be because of the American usage of antennas in this context.

 

Merriam-Webster makes no such distinction.

 

So it's hardly a mistake ad the authoritative sources do not explicitly support the assertion.

 

</pedant_mode>

... ah, but neither the OED nor the other refs are quite the technical point of reference for radio equipment ... ;-) It's a point that those of us who work in - or with - the field like to point out from time to time ... hoping to spread the word that fauna and RF transmission equipment are works in different fields ;-)

[Coombe Barton]

I know that we're off topic but it does seem that both alternatives are acceptable in UK usages but differences apply in US usage. Depend if you -ise or -ize I suppose, although the pre eighteenth century UK usage tended more to -ize.

 

If this is incorrect, the best place to take it up is with Oxford Dictionaries.

[BRealistic]

Has anyone congratulated you on your photos, Andy?  If not, let me be the first! 

 

Particularly impressed with 'the smoke'... with that eminating from the 2P on page(s) 23/24 looking soooooo realistic... giving the impression of heat haze. Spot on, I'd say.  Brings the scene to life (helped by the superb modelling, of course!)

 

Brilliant issue, by the way... and I'm really warming to the new format.