MRP 2004

[n2mopac]

I received my Model Railroad Planning 2004 in the mail a few days ago and I have to say that this year I am truly impressed. I always look forward to the two special edition's each year (MRP and Great Model Railroads). Sometimes my anticipation is rewarded and sometimes it isn't. That has especially been true with MRP in the past few years. There has been a recent trend toward making that edition revolve around a theme, and often the theme does not relate to my specific interests or needs, thus most of the issue is lost to me. That is not true of this years edition. It covered a wide variety of topics in both theme and scale as well as a good variety of authors. I believe this is overall one of the best issues of MRP I can remember (I've been reading MRP for about 10 years). Thanks Tony and MRP staff and contributors for a good solid publication in 2004.
Ron Marsh

[Martin4]

Lucky you are ! It's been said MRP would be in stores starting March 5.

Martin
Québec City

[CNJ831]

While I've been a great fan of MRP and have pre-ordered it yearly for about a decade, I have to disagree with the sentiment expressed by n2mopac's with regard to the 2004 edition. I was left disappointed and unimpressed by the latest issue. Beyond the X factor staging article, I found none of the clever, fresh ideas and concepts that I had come to expect from this annual publication. Rather than the diversity of topics n2mopac seems to applaud, I found the material a rather disjointed collection of largely uninspiring subjects. I felt that a couple of the articles were more layout tours that anything else, more suitable to the pages of MR. I give this year's offering a thumbs down.

CNJ831

[nfmisso]

I beleive that Tony's primary intention of MRP is to make you think. With that belief; I say that the 2004 edition is very good. I have not seen an edition of MRP that did not make me think about the possibilities. Many of the concepts are not applicable to my railroad, but they do expand my horizons - make me think.

[CNJ831]

"I beleive that Tony's primary intention of MRP is to make you think." - nfmisso

Your right there, Nigel. It makes me think I won't spend the money for a copy next year!

CNJ831

[Anonymous]

We alas found this year's uninspiring and somewhat monotonous. It was overwhelmingly plans of tracks on skinny shelves around the walls of a large basement, with occaisional peninsulas. There were a few minor variations of this theme, but not much to get us thinking. The intererurban was the only intriguing one of this lot with the unusual city street trackage at each end.

Usually there's 1 or 2 Iain Rice designs to liven things up, but not this time.

[MikeSanta]

I thought the magazine was pretty good. What I'd like to see someone do is another story about Bruce Carpenter. Is he driving his restored speeders ON THE RAILS? How is he getting permission to do that? I'd LOVE to see a story in Trains about that!

[Anonymous]

I actually liked the X Staging article as it just might be the solution I need to a little problem I've got. I also really liked the one on Oyster Bay. The surprise with that is that I don't generally care for commuter trains, but that article made them seem interesting. But over all, I agree, there seemed to be something lacking in this issue as the rest were forgetable.

Something that has been lacking for at least a couple of years now is Smiles. Nobody seems to be having fun. The few pictures that include people are of "grumpy-old-men" wearing some serious frowns. This year we did get two pictures of "sullen-teen-agers", but either way, these aren't people I want to show to my friends as examples of the world's greatest hobby.

[wp8thsub]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rkurschner
Something that has been lacking for at least a couple of years now is Smiles. Nobody seems to be having fun. The few pictures that include people are of "grumpy-old-men" wearing some serious frowns. This year we did get two pictures of "sullen-teen-agers", but either way, these aren't people I want to show to my friends as examples of the world's greatest hobby.

I'll take issue with the above partly because I have worked and operated on Ted York's Cajon Pass, and his kids (including Shawn and Elliot pictured in the article) are regular fixtures in the train room. They actually like trains and frequently operate with the regular crew. One of the elementary-school age girls is usually the crew caller. Maybe because I know them, I see the kids in the photos not as "sullen" but just as normal people who don't often pose for magazine photos and probably aren't trying to convey a specific image to the camera. I thought showing typical teens in MRP was possibly a good thing.

I may not be typical, but I don't go for the pictures of layout owners with artificial grins. I for one don't like the way I look in pictures with said grins, so for the photos of myself that have appeared with my MR and "Model Railroading" articles I have avoided wearing them despite requests from the photographers. Maybe some of the other people we see in MR or MRP eschew the big grins for similar reasons (don't wanna, don't hafta).

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wp8thsubI may not be typical, but I don't go for the pictures of layout owners with artificial grins. I for one don't like the way I look in pictures with said grins, so for the photos of myself that have appeared with my MR and "Model Railroading" articles I have avoided wearing them despite requests from the photographers. Maybe some of the other people we see in MR or MRP eschew the big grins for similar reasons (don't wanna, don't hafta).

Yes, Robert, and I've always thought you looked angry and somewhat unfriendly in those photos. I'd guess from what I've seen on this board, you're not, but that's not what the pcitures portrayed.

[Anonymous]

I think that MRP 2004 is the best magazine that I have ever read !!!!!![:D][^][8D][:)][:)][:P][;)][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][4:-)][C=:-)][C):-)][C):-)][(-D][(-D][swg][tup][tup][tup][tup][tup][wow][wow][wow][yeah][yeah][yeah][yeah] There were many articals on operation and realism. I agree with Nigel, it really made you think. I hope that MR will have more articals like this ! I agree that the guy with the Southern's Rat Hole division layout did not look to excited about his amazing accomplishment.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I can't imagine anyone going to the trouble of building and operating a huge layout and not being happy with it. It's just that they don't LOOK happy. If people aren't poising for magazine shots, the magazine should be more selective: if they don't look like they are having fun, find another shot with them or without them. A couple of years ago, there was a multideck layout in a functional dining room. I will always remember the lead photo of the couple having dinner at their table and SMILING. Yeah, I thought the idea silly. Yeah, I thought their smiles a looked maybe a little forced. But their enjoyment of the hobby was so obvious and it brought a smile to MY face. I didn't mind showing that one around to non-railroaders. The big layout articles that last two years I will not show as the people look like they are working, not having fun!

Rob you make a great point that including the pictures of the boys is a good idea. Our hobby needs to have more young people in it. I wonder how many girls saw the hobby in a new light when Bruce Chubb's daughters were shown operating the SV in the pages of MR back in the 70's?

Most model railroaders are great people who enjoy their hobby. I'm sure that you Rob, as well as Shawn and Elliot are that way. My complaint is with the photo selection, not the photo subjects. I'm just looking for more signs of that fun than have been showing up lately. This is a hobby, not a job, and hopefully not an obsession (in the true meaning of the word.)

[wp8thsub]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rkurschner

Honestly, I can't imagine anyone going to the trouble of building and operating a huge layout and not being happy with it. It's just that they don't LOOK happy. If people aren't poising for magazine shots, the magazine should be more selective: if they don't look like they are having fun, find another shot with them or without them.

I can buy that. I didn't necessarily want my picture to accompany my articles. In photos I either look drunkenly silly or totally pissed off, so it would probably better for the hobby if I had remained visually anonymous. When I see a photo of someone who isn't grinning ear to ear, though, I don't automatically make the assumption that the person isn't having a good time. After all, they aforementioned layout owners don't have veins bulging, teeth clenched or weapons brandished. Not everyone is photogenic when artificially trying to look stereotypically happy, like me they may just look like they're ready to be taken away in a rubber truck.