Railway Modeller: 6-year experiment ends

[Oldddudders]

I haven't bought an AP since some time in the mid 1980s when I stopped buying SLRs.

 

Do they still have a lavishly illustrated article about some aspect or another of 'glamour' photography every other week?  I'd be surprised if that was the case: I'd have thought that Rule 34 would have destroyed any lingering appeal it might have had in that regard.  (Not for nothing was it nicknamed Amateur Pornographer back in the day.)

”The weekly with the girls on the front” as it was known.

[pmorgan_cym]

To me RM.means 3 things

Every layout write up MUST included the hint to add a drop of washing up liquid to the watered down PVA when ballasting.

Baseboards MUST 'be constructed in the traditonal way using 2x1 timber..'

Any Layout article which doesn't list the entire loco fleet and it's provenance just isn't worth reading.

Edited October 10, 2018 by pmorgan_cym

[Lacathedrale]

To me RM.means 3 things

Every layout write up MUST inckused the hint tonadd a drop of washing up liquid to the watered down PVA when ballast.

Baseboards MUST 'be constructed in the tradional way using 2x1 timber..'

Any Layout article which doesn't list the entire loco fleet and it's procenance just isn't worth reading.

 

i know this is tongue in cheek, but I picked up MRC Oct/Nov 1980 for the purposes of reading about Andy Hart's SNCF layout Achaux, and I was really happy that he did include this - what each loco was, why it was there, how he managed to build, bash or buy it, etc. - so I don't think this is fully a waste of time IF there's something to share in there. If it's just a list of Hornby model numbers, I agree that's a bit tiresom.

[pmorgan_cym]

As a further point and this stands true of articles in any mag.

 

Said article must included a reference to an extremely interesting piece of rolling stock or scenic feature and then not have it in any pictures or vice versa.

[Legend]

To me RM.means 3 things

Every layout write up MUST included the hint to add a drop of washing up liquid to the watered down PVA when ballasting.

Baseboards MUST 'be constructed in the traditonal way using 2x1 timber..'

Any Layout article which doesn't list the entire loco fleet and it's provenance just isn't worth reading.

I think you are a bit out of date there. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a loco list in the Railway of the Month article . Possibly the reason why is because most are now ready to run and modified , whereas 20-30 years ago they were probably kit built and worth listing.

 

The construction details are usually in a separate narrative box.

 

So things have moved on a bit

 

Railway Modeller still has evolved yet retains its familiar feel. Some great pictures of layouts . It still has the most reading of any of the main 4 Model Railway mags, in my opinion. Others, Model Rail , for instance tend towards large pictures and reduced narrative in their layout articles . It’s horses for courses and whatever you prefer

 

One thing I’d like to see more coverage of is operation . I think RM is best for this , but could still do with more .

[Budgie]

I think Railway Modeller should number its layout photos and put numbered arrows on the trackplan to show where the photo was taken from, as Model Railroader and Model Rail do.

[Allegheny1600]

I think Railway Modeller should number its layout photos and put numbered arrows on the trackplan to show where the photo was taken from, as Model Railroader and Model Rail do.

Yes but they'd have to get it right!!

[F-UnitMad]

I think Railway Modeller should number its layout photos and put numbered arrows on the trackplan to show where the photo was taken from, as Model Railroader and Model Rail do.

Maybe it reckons it's readers have sufficient intellect to work it out for themselves..?

 

Things that are starting to really get on my nerves in some of the mags are the increasing use of terms such as "expert" & "guru" regarding what used to be called 'regular contributors'. Also a little box in a layout article titled "What we think", or "Why this layout is great" or suchlike, with the opinion of some 'expert'. I'll make my own mind up, thanks.

[kevinlms]

I think Railway Modeller should number its layout photos and put numbered arrows on the trackplan to show where the photo was taken from, as Model Railroader and Model Rail do.

Perhaps the MRJ's approach is better? With their photos of a layout, they usually appear in sequence order, i.e. from left to right along the layout. Referencing the track plan (which should be included in ALL layout articles, IMO), ought to make it clear, where each photo is taken from.

I hadn't realised this to be the case, until someone pointed this out to me. Upon checking, this is almost always true.

[Steamport Southport]

I think you are a bit out of date there. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a loco list in the Railway of the Month article . Possibly the reason why is because most are now ready to run and modified , whereas 20-30 years ago they were probably kit built and worth listing.

 

In my opinion they've gone too far the other way in that locos and rolling stock are often ignored.

 

I'm not really that bothered with seeing lists of RTR locomotives. Yes, I remember those articles when people seemed to have one of everything made. BR diesel layouts were often the worst offenders with Deltics alongside Westerns and Warships. Usually with Class 86s and 87s next to them.

 

However sometimes you are looking at a layout article and there is something lurking in the background that is interesting. Sometimes even in plain view, but it's not even mentioned.

 

If someone has interesting locomotives and rolling stock on their layout then I wouldn't mind knowing about them. Not a list of everything they've got, just what is used regularly on the layout. Even if it's just a reference to a previous article or an online site/blog.

 

 

 

Jason

[pmorgan_cym]

Maybe it reckons it's readers have sufficient intellect to work it out for themselves..?

 

Things that are starting to really get on my nerves in some of the mags are the increasing use of terms such as "expert" & "guru" regarding what used to be called 'regular contributors'. Also a little box in a layout article titled "What we think", or "Why this layout is great" or suchlike, with the opinion of some 'expert'. I'll make my own mind up, thanks.

Actually it would be possibly, more useful to list what is wrong what doesn't work.