MRJ 204

[Re6/6]

MRJ 204 has just dropped through the letterbox and the envelope eagerly ripped open and.......at first glance a major disappointment this time. At least it is to me!

 

Many pages on the details of prototype timetable layout operation (first half of the mag) computer design for buildings, unfortunately none of which is of any interest to me.

The saving grace is a nice LMS 7mm layout of which I'd like to have seen more.......but hey ho... each to their own!

 

....................I'll get me hat!

[Shamouti Ben Yafo]

I've not been getting much inspiration from it lately either. Are people not contributing any more, or is it just non-circumspect editing?

[Mucky Duck]

If MRJ disappoints me it is only when it has too many pages devoted to something about which I may not be particularly interested – but I guess it's the same for everyone.

 

I thought that No. 203 was one of the better issues of late, with a pretty good spread of subjects, none of which appeared to be over-extended – but I was surprised at the relative lack of comments other than 'when is it due?' At the very least I imagined there would have been more discussion about the fact that the Brassmasters is a prime example of a kit maker adapting well to the onslaught of high quality RTR, by producing quite a cheap upgrade (A1 EasiChas) that allows 'oiks' like me to turn a OO loco into a P4 loco to a level that may be acceptable to (some) 'proper' modellers.

 

I have to say that the prospect of half the magazine devoted to details of prototype timetable layout operation doesn't get me quacking in anticipatory delight!

[Ian Fisher]

Surely MRJ is about taking a step from the norm? or it was. I think some people have become conditioned to seeing MRJ as a photoalbum of the top models in the UK, but surely "finescale" is about more than just locos and stock, which without having seen this issue maybe is what the magazine and editor is aiming for.

 

After all Wild Swan dont rely on advertising to the same degree as the other more mainstream mags do and sometihng I think that does at times go without comment.

 

Ian

[The Stationmaster]

While I'm the sort of bloke who is likely to find an article about timetable operation of interest I tend to be rather cynical when approaching such stuff as it often betrays a frightening ignorance of the prototype or a failure to understand principles which could be translated to the model railway world. David Jenkinson did some pretty good articles on the subject in MRJ a good many years back but - from subsequent correspondence with him - I think I was just about the only person who noticed that the timetable graphs he kept referring to did not contain the same train service as the one he was writing about It turned out that they had been drawn up to suit an earlier layout proposal which he had altered considerably before finalising his 7mm layout planning.

I'm not sure if that shows how many folk read this sort of article or how many of them understand what they are reading?

[David Bigcheeseplant]

I think the content is possibly due to the guest editor choise of who he invites to write for him and his personal interest. I am not sure who it is this issue yet anyway.

 

Hopefully the guest editor thing over the last year or so has brought on board new people writing articles.

 

David

[Barry Ten]

Can't say I've been wowed by any of the recent issues - and is it me or is the photography often quite dark/murky? I thought the lengthy article on the A1 EasiChas was excessive, myself - I couldn't see the point in it, given that the gist seemed to be that all you had to do was follow the instructions and you'd end up with something that worked.

 

Moan, moan, moan... B)

[Arthur]

I think the content is possibly due to the guest editor choise of who he invites to write for him and his personal interest. I am not sure who it is this issue yet anyway.

 

Hopefully the guest editor thing over the last year or so has brought on board new people writing articles.

 

David

 

Therein may lie a problem, is a guest editor, naturally, more likely to pitch that months mag to his own interests and a series of guest editors therefore produce mags with somewhat polarised contents, whereas a regular editor, one would hope, would have a more balanced, long term, view of the content?

 

 

 

[sixteen 12by 10s]

In the past I have looked up to this mag for inspiration and standards, but lately I have found the reading very hard going. I think there is only so much you can take in about ''Alpraham sidings'' or the latest fad in loco suspension systems.

 

OK, we still see published, photographs of superbly built locos and rolling stock, but what I have noticed is missing, is, when have we last seen an article on a layout that make you stand back and say “wow,†looking back, the last one that the MRJ published that did it for me was Dewsbury Midland, and that,s OO, isn't that gong away from everything the the MRJ was meant to stand for?.

 

Gary

 

 

 

 

 

[Mucky Duck]

Therein may lie a problem, is a guest editor, naturally, more likely to pitch that months mag to his own interests and a series of guest editors therefore produce mags with somewhat polarised contents, whereas a regular editor, one would hope, would have a more balanced, long term, view of the content?

In my modest opinion you've hit the nail on the head there, Arthur. You used the word 'balanced' and recently balance is what I feel MRJ has possibly lacked, just a tad. However, what is balanced to one man is completely lop-sided to another, as Barry Ten's opposing but valid view of the Brassmasters A1 EasiChas article testifies.

[Arthur]

For sure Ryan, and I think perhaps one of the most difficult tasks for an editor must be to get that balance just right to please the target audience. Each issue is going to please some more than others but over a few months the content must satisfy most readers.

 

Oh yeah, and less posting and more work on Barborough please, I'm keen to see more of it!

 

Arthur

 

 

[Penlan]

Reading some of the above, it comes to mind comments by some contributors of their contributed/published articles in various periodicals that "... why have they left that bit (text, photo) out of my article...".

 

But I agree, some could have been cut back a bit, and I too feel MRJ somehow is not what it was, BUT, there's only a finite amount of articles out there, and like RTR models, the other mag's (to many in my opinion) have upped their game.

 

I was the Editor of one of the main line society's mag's a long time ago, and getting a broad section of articles together for a bi-monthly issue was not easy, sometimes if you held an article back to make a later mag broader in appeal, the phone would be ringing to ask why I hadn't published their article.......

 

I await 204 in Smiths.

[chrisf]

To put David Bigcheeseplant out of his misery, the guest editor is Martin Nield. [That's another taboo this man has shattered. Cast him out from our midst!]

 

The arrival of this issue took me by surprise. My first glance inside leaves me feeling distinctly underwhelmed but as I'm the first to admit to having strange tastes this may not astonish others. Contents:

 

Small Suppliers Forum - a page of concise review of new products.

 

Operating Preston - Mike Howard makes the connection, often lost, between modelling a prototype and operating it authentically. This article may give the lie to my first impression of this issue when I have time to read it properly. There is a lot to read and it is illustrated copiously.

 

My Modelling Journey - the guest editor gives a brief account of his journey from Hornby Dublo on the carpet to P4 not on the carpet.

 

Computer Designed Buldings - Barry Luck makes it look easy [and shows Craig that he doesn't have to CAD everything!]

 

Ellerton Road in 7mm - an account of a layout which owes much to Ilkeston Town, credited to The Team [good way of getting you to read the article to learn who they are]

 

Eccleston Coal Yard - Martin Nield's take on the L&Y with some useful tips.

 

Letters - as varied a selection of topics as two pages will accommodate.

 

The closing date for the Christmas puzzle has been extended to 31 January. Bad weather is given the credit for this decision.

 

Chris

[Barry Ten]

I suspect part of my decreasing enthusiasm for MRJ may be less down to any change in the magazine than a creeping realisation that I increasingly couldn't give a toss about the whole finescale "ethos". No other magazine is so closely tied to one end of the aspirational spectrum than MRJ, and there are only so many times you can read about so and so's "latest essay in P4"...

[Pennine MC]

...†looking back, the last one that the MRJ published that did it for me was Dewsbury Midland, and that,s OO, isn't that gong away from everything the the MRJ was meant to stand for?.

 

 

To be fair, I'd say not Gary. I dont think MRJ has ever actively excluded OO as such, and DM is self-evidently one of those layouts where the gauge alone is virtually irrelevant to the overall standard.

 

 

I suspect part of my decreasing enthusiasm for MRJ may be less down to any change in the magazine than a creeping realisation that I increasingly couldn't give a toss about the whole finescale "ethos". No other magazine is so closely tied to one end of the aspirational spectrum than MRJ, and there are only so many times you can read about [insert high-end technique of choice]

 

 

I wonder if it's the old MORRILL 'achievable excellence' thing again Al, combined with simply getting older? (although that word 'finescale' certainly is attracting some unfortunate connotations these days).

 

As a generalisation, the younger we are, the less likely we are to realise that we simply can't do everything to the highest of standards - as we get older and hopefully wiser. we get better at identifying the compromises that will trouble us the least.

 

It's very, very subjective of course, but maybe the sorts of techniques featured in the mag are increasingly less likely it is to inspire via that 'achievability' factor. Dont get me wrong, the mag set out to offer a different approach and it can't be argued that that's what it does, but as some avenues of the hobby go increasingly down more esoteric avenues, it's maybe going to run into that 'one man's meat, another man's poison' effect more often?

[Kenton]

I have to say that the prospect of half the magazine devoted to details of prototype timetable layout operation doesn't get me quacking in anticipatory delight!

As one who has been critical of this approach of MRJ in the past (though it works, and becomes unnoticeable, when the subject matter is one you become engrossed in) I was being put off by this and expecting another copy of MRJ to be set aside without much reading.

 

My copy arriving so early caught me off guard and I settled down to a steady read through.

 

The article concerned "Operating Preston" isn't so bad and actually is liberally illustrated, if operating a layout can be "illustrated" by still photography, with some rather spectacular photographs of some excellent track work. The tables and cross-reference tables are a bit mind numbing and soon have you passing over them (unless you are deeply interested), and the images of actual timetables, that were probably illegible in the originals, are a total waste of space (editorial misjudgment?).

 

The computer designed buildings had me re-reading. The buildings themselves not being to my taste, but the principles applied had much wider scope and I think a followup article could be a welcome addition.

 

The LMS Ellerton Road layout (of the month) was given just about the right amount of space and made an interesting read. But the photography, to me, looked very under exposed - perhaps it was meant to be that way?

 

Once again, the most interesting part of MRJ and always the first page I go to, was the Small Suppliers forum. With the announcement of no less than 3 "must build" kits announced. Two SR vans from the Martin Finney stable (they will be fun to build) and one from Dragon Models that will also be a joy (if only in the knowledge of having another with fully illustrated instructions) - Oh, and I noticed one of the Finney kit will appear in an article in the next MRJ - so already looking forward to reading that. Roll on February.

 

All in all, an average issue, by my marking.

 

Though I can see that the fewer articles in an issue caused by the big ones do make the chances of it being less appealing to those of us with narrower interests. (that's me BTW)

 

I have never seen that the level of "fineness" achieved in MRJ as off-putting or necessarily beyond my capabilities. I actually believe in myself to be able to achieve just those levels one day, in other cases I just accept that I don't want to. Usually as I don't have an interest in that field or that level of detail or time to be bothered learning.

 

Now do I order those kits before they sell out, or wait for the next expo?

[Barry Ten]

 

As a generalisation, the younger we are, the less likely we are to realise that we simply can't do everything to the highest of standards - as we get older and hopefully wiser. we get better at identifying the compromises that will trouble us the least.

 

It's very, very subjective of course, but maybe the sorts of techniques featured in the mag are increasingly less likely it is to inspire via that 'achievability' factor. Dont get me wrong, the mag set out to offer a different approach and it can't be argued that that's what it does, but as some avenues of the hobby go increasingly down more esoteric avenues, it's maybe going to run into that 'one man's meat, another man's poison' effect more often?

 

I think that's exactly right, Ian - over the last few years I've increasingly come to realise that even if I wanted to do everything to the highest standards (never mind my ability to do so, which is another thing) it would entail the hobby taking over my life to a degree that, at 45, and with a few other interests in life, I'm not really after.

 

My remarks yesterday came across as more grumpy than I intended, mind - I do still enjoy MRJ and appreciate the effort put into it. But more and more it seems to signpost a direction in modelling that I don't feel any particular inclination to follow. I don't think that's the same as accepting stagnation, though - it's just that the areas of improvement I'm interested in pursuing aren't necessarily the usual MRJ staples of track and wheel standards.

[Jamie]

I guess it depends what inspires you. A bit like not having any intention or means of building one's own home but loving to watch Grand Designs, I enjoy reading about the typical MRJ fare despite having absolutely no intention of even trying most things which are described. Whereas magazines which show modelling 'at or around my level' don't even get lifted off the shelf for a look.

 

But I'm odd, I know.

[Adam]

I guess it depends what inspires you. A bit like not having any intention or means of building one's own home but loving to watch Grand Designs, I enjoy reading about the typical MRJ fare despite having absolutely no intention of even trying most things which are described. Whereas magazines which show modelling 'at or around my level' don't even get lifted off the shelf for a look.

 

I don't think that makes you odd: at least, if it does then it equally applies to me as well. I almost never buy modelling magazines at all, with the occasional exception of MRJ if it has a project in it that is analogous to something I'm doing or want to do or if I'm going somewhere and want something interesting to read that's related to model railways.

 

I'm not sure that I see 'track and wheel standards' as staples to MRJ's content. Not now at any rate, or at least, not so much. Mostly it seems to carry exemplars of top-quality modelling Many of the technical things covered (well or otherwise), still wouldn't necessarily show up in the 'popular' model railway press*, though this has changed - for the better - in the last 20 years. It's only fair to point out that there's been no end of OO between the covers of MRJ too - many of Tim Shackleton's locos for example, Tony Wright on passenger train formations (using Stoke Summit exemplars of course), but an approach to researching the prototype and ways of representing it that might not readily have found a home in say, BRM and so it goes on.

 

This isn't on topic for the current edition however, which I haven't set eyes on yet. I'll have to wait and see.

 

Adam

 

* Though they might - did in fact - have been present in say 'Model Railways' or even Railway Modelller of 35 or 40 years ago, or MRC in the early 80s. This probably shows where the mass market has been in the interim rather than anything else. Those examples all have inspired individuals or groups to thank however: the energy of the young Iain Rice; Paul Bartlett, Trevor Mann et al with the 'Datafile' series in MRC, Bob essery and David Jenkinson in the 'Modeller in the '60s.

[45157]

I must admit to a bit of disapointment with this months issue as I to rekon too much of the mag was given over to the one operational article.

But, but ..... as one who is slowly being turned to a more prototypical way of playing trains, if nobody ever published such articles how would I never learn, as I am not yet converted enough to want to go out looking for timetables.

 

Although I am a MRJ subscriber, if there is one thing that puts me off the mag, is this reputation it gets as being for the "finer scale" modeller only.

Myself, I am perfectly content being a so called fine scale (bog standard ie not coarse, not S7) 7mm modeller, but I still want to be inspired by reading and enjoying articles from those who are prepared (and able) to push the limits in all aspects of railway modelling as I am always open to new and improved methods of working.

The world of railway modelling would, IMHO, be a much poorer place without MRJ, and I am sure it will settle down again soon with a regular editor.

 

regards

Stewart

[Mucky Duck]

…Oh yeah, and less posting and more work on Barborough please, I'm keen to see more of it!

Arthur

Thanks Arthur, I will be reviving the layout from hibernation in the next couple of weeks… with any luck!

 

My remarks yesterday came across as more grumpy than I intended, mind…

I suspect part of my decreasing enthusiasm for MRJ may be less down to any change in the magazine than a creeping realisation that I increasingly couldn't give a toss about the whole finescale "ethos"...

Indeed, it sounded more like it was intended for the Grumpy Old Men thread – but it did make me laugh out loud!

[pete_mcfarlane]

I must admit to a bit of disapointment with this months issue as I to rekon too much of the mag was given over to the one operational article.

 

I guess that's the downside of the "guest editor" approach - you can't really split lengthy articles like this over several issues as would have happened in the past

[Neil]

I still enjoy MRJ (see it's sounding a bit half hearted already) but (knew it) there is something missing that was there in the earlier days. Unlike Al and Ian I wonder if it's more to do with the age of the magazine rather than our ages as readers.In the begining MRJ had something of a pioneering spirit about it, the stuff it described wasn't easy or commonplace but experimental and way off mainstream. These days lots of the original hand made solutions are now available as kits and componets that we can apply to out of the box models of ever increasing quality.

 

These days I don't necesarily see MRJ as cutting edge, more the achievable excellence that was the MRN/MR and MORRIL territory. As the quality of rtr, kits and bits has increased the engineered approaches that were the staple of MRJ have become less exotic and a bit more humdrum. It's now art and composition that separates the great from the good, I'm not sure that magazine publishing has fully cottoned on yet.

[craigwelsh]

I haven't got this issue yet but is the layout being operated Mike Norris' Preston and was it the 1980s timetables discussed or the older one he eventually want to run?

 

First issue with a guest editor I haven't met or heard of. These guest issues really are down to the editor getting his own articles commissioned and printed so you may get a skew each month. If they don't have someone with a nice newly finished stunning layout to write about i'm afraid those may be out for a while. Thankfully some new writers are doing some articles who wouldn't have done anything before even if not professionally edited I think this is a good thing. Photos are up to the contributor too, sadly they don't send Chris Nevard around!

 

Laser cut buildings, computer design software have all appeared in MRJ first even if Wild Swan still dont have a PC of their own! Most of the stuff in the recent issues still wouldn't get published anywhere else so if you want to read something slightly different that may inspire its still MRJ.

 

Once again, the most interesting part of MRJ and always the first page I go to, was the Small Suppliers forum. With the announcement of no less than 3 "must build" kits announced. Two SR vans from the Martin Finney stable (they will be fun to build) and one from Dragon Models that will also be a joy (if only in the knowledge of having another with fully illustrated instructions) - Oh, and I noticed one of the Finney kit will appear in an article in the next MRJ - so already looking forward to reading that. Roll on February.

The new Finney vans were launched at Scaleforum, pictures on his website. Nice sprung wagons and I compared them there to what I was doing. They certainly aren't quick and i've seen the commercial price charged to build a few, its not pocket money!

 

 

Now back to my wagons or i'll never get a train done .

[Bernard Lamb]

At first glance I thought it would not contain much of interest to me. When I did get into the Preston article I found it quite fascinating. A few thoughts went through my mind. Did the photos add any thing to the article? Not to me, other than to show the signalling. Could the layout be called 'finescale'? P4 track but with very tight curves. No wires and no weathering of stock as far as I could make out.

The brown cast in some photos now seems to be a regular feature.

Eccleston Coal Yard by the guest editor was the highlight for me. Excellent modelling of the every day scene. But then that's what MRJ has always been about.

Bernard