Jump to content

61661

BRM June 2014 Issue

Recommended Posts

..... Research shows that a significant percentage of readers class themselves as "non-modellers" too, so are unlikley to understand the distinction.....?

If you don't even bother to explain that there is a distinction, how are people going to learn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

If you don't even bother to explain that there is a distinction, how are people going to learn?

As mentioned above, it's fully explained in the article.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beginners have enough of a problem with wiring without insisting they bond rail joins and add extra switching for frogs. The Peco system will work, but it does rely on clean connections between stock and switch rails.

Hence the 957 RMweb threads asking for advice on what to do when the Peco system doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unusual for me to be positive, but I really enjoyed the Paul Lunn planning article and the photospread of short freight trains.

 

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unusual for me to be positive, but I really enjoyed the Paul Lunn planning article and the photospread of short freight trains.

 

Ed

Hi Ed, Many thanks for the kind remarks.  Have been trying to re-visit my 'style' over recent months, looking for a slightly different, fresh approach and 'Windermere' is one of the first with more track plans and more prototypical information.  Whilst I still anticipate including 3D artwork from time-to-time it's a time consuming aspect of any article and therefore brings its own problems.  So really pleased you, and indeed others, liked the offering and would welcome any helpful comments in response to future works.  Kind regards Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for those who suggest it's been done as a deliberate provocation to shift copies of BRM - I think you're wildly overestimating the influence of those pages. I've never met anyone whose decision to buy was based on the contents of the letters page!

 

 

Well I for one will be picking a copy up on the way home to see what all the fuss is about :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ed, Many thanks for the kind remarks.  Have been trying to re-visit my 'style' over recent months, looking for a slightly different, fresh approach and 'Windermere' is one of the first with more track plans and more prototypical information.  Whilst I still anticipate including 3D artwork from time-to-time it's a time consuming aspect of any article and therefore brings its own problems.  So really pleased you, and indeed others, liked the offering and would welcome any helpful comments in response to future works.  Kind regards Paul

Hi Paul, I too enjoyed the article, and as I moving soon and planning a couple of new Layouts any ideas that are outside the box are good.

 

Nice work,

Thanks,

Andy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought on Peco electro points from a man who did his engineering degree with a slide rule - I would have no hesitation in recommending the Peco web site which has a clearly explained re-wiring method on a free technical sheet. If you can wield a soldering iron, you can cope with it!

Kind regards,

Jock67B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought on Peco electro points from a man who did his engineering degree with a slide rule - I would have no hesitation in recommending the Peco web site which has a clearly explained re-wiring method on a free technical sheet. If you can wield a soldering iron, you can cope with it!

Kind regards,

Jock67B.

I don't think the issue is with someone's ability, it's more to do with persuading them to drop the "that'll do" atitude when they've allegedly never had a problem with electrical reliability in the past. Edited by 298

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2mm FS or N? Who cares how it was advertised? It's an amazing layout and the article which described it correctly was really good! "Rivet Counters" will care however and that for me is pretty sad as there are more important things in the world to be worried about!

Sits back and awaits the backlash from the "few"

I wasn't going to bite, but if I'd gone to the trouble of building a layout to 2mm FS standards, I'd be miffed if someone invited it to a show, but decided to tag it and anything N gauge all under a generic 2mm banner. When I see a 2mm FS layout listed, I broadly know what standard I'm getting..... Edited by 298

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the generic 2mm scale is the problem, it's the generic N gauge.

 

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

For the benefits of those who haven't seen the new-look BRM, I've uploaded a selection of pages so you can see how the magazine has changed (for the better).

 

These pages are taken from the current issue (June 2014) which is on-sale now. It's available in newsagents, supermarkets and model shops or as a Digital Edition from www.brmm.ag/BRMdigi

 

post-14186-0-82658400-1400151031_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-46057700-1400151059_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-15675100-1400151062_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-97891100-1400151066_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-26636300-1400151069_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-51722600-1400151071_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-39931800-1400151077_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-64210100-1400151081_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-96684200-1400151083_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-32485600-1400151086_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-18963500-1400151088_thumb.jpg

 

post-14186-0-80696100-1400151090_thumb.jpg

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,


 


As you've re-published the Market Stall article front page, please can you also add the rest of the shopping list that was obscured by the image of the Wills kit ?


 


Cheers


 


Stu


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a selection, Steve.

 

Nearly half the article section of the magazine there!

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a selection, Steve.

 

Nearly half the article section of the magazine there!

 

Jeff

 

Yep. We're really pleased with how the magazine's looking so we wanted to share it with the world. Amazingly, there are still some people out there who haven't bought the new-look BRM.  :nono:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. We're really pleased with how the magazine's looking so we wanted to share it with the world. Amazingly, there are still some people out there who haven't bought the new-look BRM.  :nono:

 

And I'm sure it's your job to whip them to their senses with  tree branch, Basil Fawlty style?!

 

I wasn't too keen on the "old" British Railway Modelling but have bought quite of the few of the revamp. 

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. We're really pleased with how the magazine's looking so we wanted to share it with the world. Amazingly, there are still some people out there who haven't bought the new-look BRM.  :nono:

Me included, my local supermarket usually stocks it but it had sold out.

 

I wanted to read it to see this infamous "letter" having heard generally positive comments about it. One thing I would add is that as an experiment, it is curious to note that it has neither been done with the agreement or a prior response from the builder (who may now be having second thoughts about sending in any future articles), and it wasn't about a project layout or one from a member of staff or regular contributor.

 

I hope we're not creating an environment where people are quick to criticize, no matter how knowledgeable or constructive their comments might be, especially when the builder has had to make a conscientious decision resulting in such a compromise or inaccuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me included, my local supermarket usually stocks it but it had sold out.

 

I wanted to read it to see this infamous "letter" having heard generally positive comments about it. One thing I would add is that as an experiment, it is curious to note that it has neither been done with the agreement or a prior response from the builder (who may now be having second thoughts about sending in any future articles), and it wasn't about a project layout or one from a member of staff or regular contributor.

 

I hope we're not creating an environment where people are quick to criticize, no matter how knowledgeable or constructive their comments might be, especially when the builder has had to make a conscientious decision resulting in such a compromise or inaccuracy.

 

If you're struggling to get a copy, you can always purchase a copy direct from www.model-railways-live.co.uk/magazine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people need to obtain permission from the layout builder to write into a magazine with observations on an article published in said magazine?

 

It is not as if the letter in question - which I have read - is written in a way intended to unduly criticise.

 

Ben makes mention it was chopped down for space - that shows clear passion for her subject and a willingness to share knowledge, which are inherently good things.

 

I'm all for putting things in a constructive manner and agree in principle that being quick to criticise unduly is wrong.

 

That isn't what happened here, however.

 

Sorry to be a dog with a bone but I do feel strongly about injustices and in no way has the criticism of the publication of that letter been in line with the reality of the piece. Constructive, informative and exactly the sort of reasoned letter writing the hobby should be encouraging.

 

Once again I applaud BRM for publishing it - I suggest those who disagree should write in with a counter view to Jane's letter or the decision to publish it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Steve,

 

As you've re-published the Market Stall article front page, please can you also add the rest of the shopping list that was obscured by the image of the Wills kit ?

 

Cheers

 

Stu

 

Hi Stu

 

A bit of a design hiccup there - I'm sure the page was right earlier!

 

Anyway, here's the list in full:

 

Busch Market Stall kit (1070), Wills Market Stall kit (SS37),  Woodland Scenics’ Fruit (T47), Lifecolor Weathered Wood acrylic paint set (LC CS-20), Lifecolor Dark Wooden Stock, Railmatch New Timber  and Weathered Black acrylic, MEK solvent glue, Thick superglue, Coriander seeds

 

Cheers

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people need to obtain permission from the layout builder to write into a magazine with observations on an article published in said magazine?

 

I think it would have been courteous for the whole letter to be forwarded to the layout's builder so perhaps they could change said inaccuracies, the magazine could even make a regular feature of these updates as a means of providing a continuity for those who might not buy the magazine on a regular basis.

 

When I had an article published in a US magazine, the editor forwarded all correspondence to me- mainly for my own interest, but also to show the standards they get. Most were complimentary but one stood out, the author suggesting I made a trip to the museum to see the loco I'd modelled. The fact that I'd mentioned that I had measured it up, used my own prototype photos in the article, and featured a photo of me driving it in the "about the author" bit wasn't picked up by him.

 

It's fine having these "experts" writing in, but will the magazine be authenticating the stated inaccuracies be fore printing any future letters....? It'd be embaressing if one proved to be a hoax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would have been courteous for the whole letter to be forwarded to the layout's builder so perhaps they could change said inaccuracies, the magazine could even make a regular feature of these updates as a means of providing a continuity for those who might not buy the magazine on a regular basis.

 

When I had an article published in a US magazine, the editor forwarded all correspondence to me- mainly for my own interest, but also to show the standards they get. Most were complimentary but one stood out, the author suggesting I made a trip to the museum to see the loco I'd modelled. The fact that I'd mentioned that I had measured it up, used my own prototype photos in the article, and featured a photo of me driving it in the "about the author" bit wasn't picked up by him.

 

It's fine having these "experts" writing in, but will the magazine be authenticating the stated inaccuracies be fore printing any future letters....? It'd be embaressing if one proved to be a hoax.

 

Agree with that. It can't have been nice for Andrew seeing that letter for the first time. I think that the mag team could have contacted him first and discussed the letter, which may well have been meant in a constructive manner but didn't really come across as such.

 

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with that. It can't have been nice for Andrew seeing that letter for the first time. I think that the mag team could have contacted him first and discussed the letter, which may well have been meant in a constructive manner but didn't really come across as such.

 

Ed

Can you explain why you felt the letter didn't come over as constructive Ed? Purely out of curiosity in case I've missed something obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people need to obtain permission from the layout builder to write into a magazine with observations on an article published in said magazine?

 

It is not as if the letter in question - which I have read - is written in a way intended to unduly criticise.

 

Ben makes mention it was chopped down for space - that shows clear passion for her subject and a willingness to share knowledge, which are inherently good things.

 

I'm all for putting things in a constructive manner and agree in principle that being quick to criticise unduly is wrong.

 

That isn't what happened here, however.

 

Sorry to be a dog with a bone but I do feel strongly about injustices and in no way has the criticism of the publication of that letter been in line with the reality of the piece. Constructive, informative and exactly the sort of reasoned letter writing the hobby should be encouraging.

 

Once again I applaud BRM for publishing it - I suggest those who disagree should write in with a counter view to Jane's letter or the decision to publish it.

Once again I have to disagree entirely with your comments.

 

PLUS

 

IT WAS AGREED THAT THE MATTER WOULD BE DROPPED FOR THE SAKE OF R M Web and BRM.

 

YOU ARE A DOG WITH A BONE NOW LET GO OR YOU WILL BE THE ONE BRINGING THE R M Web INTO DISREPUTE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.