i'm trying to tie comments together
SeeYou190I can honestly say that I look forward to Fine Scale Modeler more than I do Model Railroader now.
seems that many are interested in articles on building models of structures
presumably Fine Scale Modeler is more successful because it does just that, focuses on building models of structures. i assume it doesn't cover layout design and other aspects of model railroading.
blackpowder1956I would guess that a lot of us are capable of writing a good article. Whether or not MR decided to publish it is another question. Certainly they should be capable of determining if the readership wants to read such an article.
Certainly they should be capable of determining if the readership wants to read such an article.
i'm curious how many MR articles were written by non-staff in Linn Westcott's day. does anyone know?
while several say they like layout/track plan articles, could they be sacrificed to make room for other types of articles, or is it just too expedient (easy) to publish yet another or two layout articles from repeat non-staff authors. (I submitted one years ago)
perhaps those layout articles implicitly describe alternate design and construction methods. instead of an article on a specific type of benchwork construction, what about one on various types of benchwork? how about an article about different type of bridges?
hardcoalcaseArticles about different rail-served industries, how they work, the basic description of the processing, what do they receive and ship out, and what type of rail cars and special handling provisions are involved.
they have a model railroad, but they don't model a raiload
i assume many will be offended by this comment. of course a layout can serve a number of purposes. i think John Allen used his orignal layout as a backdrop for photographs with finely detailed structures and scenery. i believe (i asked) a large number of modelers are more interested in building a layout, model structures and scenery than running trains, while others just want to run trains.
but shouldn't a magazine called "Model Railroader" be about modeling a railroad. i am puzzled by one large layout that runs trains between staging. but i didn't get the idea of "modeling a railroad" until i saw another layout that is a station, yard, industrial area and staging, and more about trains coming from distance cities, being broken up and returning and service many local industries.
since then i've seen other layouts designed with the intent of modeling a railroad and not just running trains. and fortunately i'm helping build these layouts.
with the thought of "modeling a railroad", i can overlook the shortcomings of a model railroad magazine covering the more technical aspects i'm fond of. but the magazine needs to do this.
this discussion is helping me refine my understanding of the hobby, how its media presence is changing and my expectations (maybe even joining the NMRA)
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
blackpowder1956I would guess that a lot of us are capable of writing a good article. Whether or not MR decided to publish it is another question. Certainly they should be capable of determining if the readership wants to read such an article. Not to sound crass, but does MR pay for the rights to publish an article? This could be an incentive to get off our collective duff to photograph, write, and hopefully publish. If that is already the case it needs to be out there and advertised. I would add that I read more useful stuff on this forum than I do in the magazine. That is unfortunate for MR. The magazine could be much better, more like it was in the 1980's. Perhaps the contributions of readership and forum members are the way forward to how it could be.
Well said!!!
The MR people need to expand their use of available opportunities. They should be actively soliciting new material. They need to do a lot less navel gazing.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I would guess that a lot of us are capable of writing a good article. Whether or not MR decided to publish it is another question. Certainly they should be capable of determining if the readership wants to read such an article. Not to sound crass, but does MR pay for the rights to publish an article? This could be an incentive to get off our collective duff to photograph, write, and hopefully publish. If that is already the case it needs to be out there and advertised. I would add that I read more useful stuff on this forum than I do in the magazine. That is unfortunate for MR. The magazine could be much better, more like it was in the 1980's. Perhaps the contributions of readership and forum members are the way forward to how it could be.
I like articles about scratchbuilding and kit bashing. I love to see other people's creative talents.
But to the point of what I'd like to see more of...
Articles about different rail-served industries, how they work, the basic description of the processing, what do they receive and ship out, and what type of rail cars and special handling provisions are involved.
There could be a series of articles on each industry on how these factors have changed over the span of railroad time.
There are recent publications detailing the coal and steel industries, but how about some other themes such as leather tanning, pickling, meat processing, textiles, regional industries such as lumber, cranberrys, cotton, specific minerals, seafood, agricultural co-ops, on and on.
Jim
danmerkel Frankly, I'm not impressed by articles featuring basement-sized layouts that were in many cases, built by someone else other than the owner. Track plans don'e do much for me either. i already have my track plan and there are tons of track plan books out there for those who don't yet know what they want. dlm
Frankly, I'm not impressed by articles featuring basement-sized layouts that were in many cases, built by someone else other than the owner. Track plans don'e do much for me either. i already have my track plan and there are tons of track plan books out there for those who don't yet know what they want.
dlm
I'm in a different camp on this. Getting a peek at other track plans, regardless of size, era, theme, or who planned them or built them, these are clearly my favorite articles. My own layout plan has evolved over decades, virtually all the many aspects of which, were first seen in the pages of MR. While I'm well into my "last layout", and "ain't no way I'm gonna make" any significant modifications, I still enjoy seeing new and different approaches to layout design.
But as an early c.1900's modeler, articles on detailing diesel locos... these you can do less of...
Camelbacks rule... diesels drool!
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd I do find it interesting that you would assume that a layout in a magazine article was not built by it's owner without some evidence to support that belief.
On many occasions, I have seen pictorials of layouts that have been professionally built for their owners. My only point is that it takes away from those like you who have built your own.
Some of my favorite articles are models based on actual railroad locations. I recall an article on the old Steamtown roundhouse and engine facility in Brattleboro VT that I built in N scale and another on the St Lawrence and Atlantic where the modeler selectively recreated actual locations from Portland Maine to Danville Junction (now discontinued) and points north.
" considering the interest in Sheldon's post on truck wheels, would there be an interest in such articles in a magazine? "
Id say so. You said it yourself - 'the interest in his post'. I though it was well written and very informative. Put me down as interested.
PMR
I liked the RR you can model or Industry you could model.
Another good article was taking a 4x8 and modifying it for an around the room layout. Steve Otte published it a few years ago. I think more layouts like that. What can you do in a room? I liked the track planning contests.
More about operations... For example, would you dispatch a local from the yard to work the quarry? Or was that done as part of the short road train work? And why?
dstarr The part of model railroading that I enjoy is modeling stuff. So I like articles showing stuff that could be modeled, rolling stock, structures, trackwork, scenery, etc. Photographs, some prototype history, good drawings with dimensions, prototype colors, owning roads, date first built, date last one scrapped. I miss the old Paint Shop. I like kitbashing articles, I do a bit of kit bashing. I like scratch building articles, I do a bit of scratch building. Those layout tour articles would be more interesting if they talked about how the benchwork got built, how the layout got wired, how the track plan come about.
The part of model railroading that I enjoy is modeling stuff. So I like articles showing stuff that could be modeled, rolling stock, structures, trackwork, scenery, etc. Photographs, some prototype history, good drawings with dimensions, prototype colors, owning roads, date first built, date last one scrapped. I miss the old Paint Shop. I like kitbashing articles, I do a bit of kit bashing. I like scratch building articles, I do a bit of scratch building. Those layout tour articles would be more interesting if they talked about how the benchwork got built, how the layout got wired, how the track plan come about.
Agreed. Generally, scratchbuilding structures to accurately scaled dimensions is a bit beyond my interest, but your general ideas of MR articles going maybe one step deeper into how things were built is spot on.
With accurate RTR models being produced these days, the notion of building your own specific loco or car has kind of lost its importance.
But structures are different. Simply plopping an as-built kit structure into a layout is not often possible because of its dimensions. That aspect of the hobby hasn't changed from the 1960's, so articles about how to modify or kitbash an existing kit should be a fairly frequnet topic for the magazine, IMO.
Also, more depth into the benchwork, wiring, layout planning would be appreciated. Doing so would probably add a full page of text to the mag and give it a more robust and comprehensive feel.
Its kind of been dwindling in terms of substance and seems to rely upon hitting the high splashy points.
And the Railroads You Can Model articles were always interesting. There are plenty of shortlines around that could be the basis of an article or project layout.
MR seems to rely upon articles written by readers. But I would think it would not be too difficult for a staff memeber to pick out a RR, arrange meetings with a willing RR, and spend a few nights in a motel to put together the interviews, research, and a cab ride to gather some good information for an article. Maybe the Kalmbach expense accounts don't allow that kind of thing.
- Douglas
Greg, yes the NMRA has a magazine, the content is pretty good, but the volume of content is limited.
More later, busy earning train money.
Sheldon
gregc I think their decline is inevitable.
I do not think it cannot be avoided for all magazines.
Magazines can control their content 100%, so the editorial staff can create something truly magnificent with personality.
What they need to do is keep the magazine something we look forward to receiving in our mailbox every month.
I can honestly say that I look forward to Fine Scale Modeler more than I do Model Railroader now. Fine Scale Modeler is just more fun to read through, and always enjoyable.
I would think RMC is the real test. This magazine lacks all personality and fun. It is an effort to read through, and I dislike the editorial style.
It tries to present factual information devoid of all fun and flair. This is what the internet excels at. All that boring stuff in RMC can be found in a web search.
I believe that magazines that will demise are the ones with cold personality where their content can be found elsewhere easily.
I expect that if magazines become "episodes" of something entertaining, they will continue to be viable. They need to be enjoyable, entertaining, and fun to spend time with.
Just my , and that is all it is really worth.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
reading these replies has given me a different perspective on the value of today's magazines and why i think their decline is inevitable.
as i originally suggested, most agreed with how-to articles. but as others suggested, such information may not be easily accessible by modelers without subscriptions and would be better posted on more public or less commercial (NMRA) web sites. Also the suggestions that magazine staff may not be qualified and "we" need to write those articels as Sheldon did suggests magazine staff may not be able to provide such articles.
i don't believe the magazine had such limitations in Linn Westcott's day. back then it was a primary source of information and we were fortunate that Westcott had the technical background to write significant articles are many aspects of the hobby
so i'm starting to think of today's magazine as more of entertainment, more for reading about the hobby than as a source of technical (from benchwork and scenery to electronics and operations) information. back in the day, if you wanted to learn about model railoading you bought magazines. today you do a google search and are unfortunately flooded with information.
i'm impressed with the size, scope and concepts of the few basement size layouts i see. i don't believe those modelers are inspired by what they read in today's commercial magazines. several of them are NMRA members and i believe the NMRA has a magazine (?). (i need to ask them).
i wonder where this and many other hobbies will be in the future and how the internet is affecting all of us.
gregc what types of articles would you be interested in seeing?
what types of articles would you be interested in seeing?
I'd like to see more layout visits and associated track plans. There are many fabulous layouts out there that aren't getting any press. GMR is good, but there are even better layouts. My favorite forum posts are the layout build threads. You get "invested" in following the builder's progress.
Ray
BigDaddy I'm not convinced that Rod Stewart built all of his layout, but it has a cool factor. Some of the authors give credit to friend who helped wire, build structures or lay track. I'm not a big 2000 sq ft layout kind of guy.
I'm not convinced that Rod Stewart built all of his layout, but it has a cool factor. Some of the authors give credit to friend who helped wire, build structures or lay track. I'm not a big 2000 sq ft layout kind of guy.
I know some of the people who helped Rod Stewart with his layout.
One is a known industry professional, the other, now retired, was once in the electronics side of the this industry supplying various electronic items. This second person manufactured my custom circuit boards for my advanced cab control based on schematics I provided.
He also provided electronics for Rod's layout. He got that opportunity thru the first not to be named industry professional because I introduced the two of them regarding another modeling project, then later Rod contacted that first individual for his services.
None of us do this completely alone, but very few simply get a checkbook out......
As for 2000 sq ft layouts, or even my soon to be underway 1500 sq ft layout, there is an opening statement and discussion in my thread which contains my trackplan about layout size vs layout complexity.
I understand those who don't want a big layout.
But size and complexity are separate ideas, and we all have different goals.
I will use my classic example - an 8 track doubled ended classification yard 24' long is no more complex than an 8 track double ended classification yard 12' long.
And the 24' long yard is only slightly more expensive to build - but it will support dramaticly more realistic train lengths.
So if you see more space as requiring that you build two 12' long yards rather than one bigger yard, you are right, you don't need a bigger layout and you may be shooting yourself in the foot with a bigger layout.
Ones on modeling traction, both older ie interurbans and street railways and modern light rail that is very much a part of many urban land scapes around the globe. More exposure might encourage more modeling or companies to offer models of modern light rail(which is larger ignored outside of Kato Unitram and Tomy N scale products). Yet you seldome see any traction articles in Model Railroader. But traction modeling lends itself to small spaces with its very tight curves and smaller equipment. With many younger modelers living in apartments and inner city dewelings, small space layouts should be a focus and push by the magazines to help move the hobby forward. Not all modelers have that house in the burbs with a big basement or spare room.
Silly NT's, I have Asperger's Syndrome
We do all realize that the magazine staff need US to generate all these articles.....right? I can't disagree with any proposals, biases, interests, or preferences posted above my own post; they're all legitimate opinions, and they all indicate that if such things were to appear, the magazine could look forward to some appreciation of the effort of publishing it. But, they can't do it all. I know, I know...somebody always says this. But, it's true.
I would like to see how-to articles on lineside details, weathering of 'bout anything, especially the ballast and tracks, how to make truly realistic forest canopies (and any accompanying photos have to walk the walk...!).
Would ALL yards have extensive cinder coverage/spillage, or just those where the practice was de rigueur?
How would one model a track pan on a small/mid/large layout?
An article on uncoupling setups would be welcome about now.
I think the hobby is large enough, with enough new releases, that several items could be trialed and evaluated each issue. This would include the mats, corn rows, fencing, switch machines, rolling stock, scenery materials of other kinds, glues, lubes, heck, I could go on for a while.
Someone who KNOWS they're good with scenicking and using the flocking and ground foam could generate a two or three part series with lots of photos on what goes where, and why, and how to put it down so that it looks decent.
How does one paint a good backdrop if one doesn't want to use wallpaper types? Or, how does one create a realistic sky above a mountain range?
How does one create the illusion of distance over successive mountain/hill ranges or peaks using tinted paints to generate the obscuring/blueing/haze? Is an air brush necessarily going to be the best bet?
How to articles, where there are 10 pictures the size of two postage stamps aren't helpful.
There is the problem of being relevant to both new modelers and long term subscribers. If you are a newbie you will really enjoy how to weather a freight car with pastels or powders if you've never seen it. If you've been around for a while, you've seen 5 or 10 of those articles.
I belong to an organization, whose topic is banned here, but it has some associations with the Bill of Rights and their monthly publication has stuff from WW1, stuff from WW2, stuff from Vietnam, stuff from Iran, stuff from the Revolutionary war, and then they find new authors to rehash all that stuff year in and year out. Their magazine isn't worth reading anymore.
MRVP had a brief series of the staff building the same Walthers model. I enjoyed it, but how often can they do that? None of the iterations would have fit my layout.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I would like to see more articles on structure building, especially scratch built structures.
I have also enjoyed the "Staff" competitions where each staff member builds their own version of a "project."
I also like to see articles about how a modeler dealt with a particular problem on their layout.
Hornblower
An artical on weathering rolling stock step by step without an airbrush by someone who accually knows what they are doing.
danmerkelFrankly, I'm not impressed by articles featuring basement-sized layouts that were in many cases, built by someone else other than the owner. Track plans don'e do much for me either. i already have my track plan and there are tons of track plan books out there for those who don't yet know what they want.
I couldn't disagree more. The vast majority of basement layout articles I've read were not built by someone other than the owner. I've read many articles over the years. The only one I can think of off hand was an article about a guy who got a company to come in and build his layout. There were probably some who had help, but they still designed and built their own.
As for track plans, I eagerly look to see track plans in articles. It has given me idea's on how to design layouts myself.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Mark B The new RMC has a very detailed article on building an access gate to bridge a doorway opening. It's something I've been contemplating for some time. Not only to access some unused area but allows us "seasoned citizens" to enter an area with bending over. Such layout enhancements may be of interest to many of us but we have no idea of how to go about it. I think something about fascia, layout skirting, backdrops (both installation and how to paint your own), storage, lighting would deserve some interest. Nothing real technical, KISS methodology works best for me. Resin/plaster casting and mold making. I know 3-D is out there but it can get a bit pricey. I'm sure others will have other subjects that I have not thought of. Mark B.
The new RMC has a very detailed article on building an access gate to bridge a doorway opening. It's something I've been contemplating for some time. Not only to access some unused area but allows us "seasoned citizens" to enter an area with bending over. Such layout enhancements may be of interest to many of us but we have no idea of how to go about it. I think something about fascia, layout skirting, backdrops (both installation and how to paint your own), storage, lighting would deserve some interest. Nothing real technical, KISS methodology works best for me. Resin/plaster casting and mold making. I know 3-D is out there but it can get a bit pricey. I'm sure others will have other subjects that I have not thought of.
Mark B.
Me too, I have been considering something like that for my new layout. That article was a like a proof of concept for me that allowed me to finish the design of my own access gate.
danmerkel Frankly, I'm not impressed by articles featuring basement-sized layouts that were in many cases, built by someone else other than the owner. dlm
Frankly, I'm not impressed by articles featuring basement-sized layouts that were in many cases, built by someone else other than the owner.
That is an interesting assumption. Which seems to indicate some sort of bias not based in available facts.
I'm getting started on a "basement-sized" layout, without any paid or volunteer help. It will fill 1500 sq ft, the track plan you are not intertested in is posted in a thread on this forum.
I built the last one that filled a 1000 sq ft room without any help.
I'm a little too "fussy" to accept much help.......
I can get in my car and drive to a dozen or more 1000 to 2000 sq ft layouts less than 20 minutes away, and while some owners had some help from fellow modelers (including my help), most all represent primarily the efforts of their owners.
I have met a great number of modelers, and visited a great many layouts here in the Mid Atlantic region, and many are "basement filling" since basements are rather common here.
I am not aware of one that was not primarily the work of its owner, with some help from a few of his buddies.
And I do find it interesting that you would assume that a layout in a magazine article was not built by it's owner without some evidence to support that belief.
I really got into model railroading in the early 50s and I was really into building kits of all kinds. Didn’t make much difference what kind of kit it was it was the construction, just making something that looked nice did it for me.I stayed with kit building until the early 2000s when I bought a laser cut kit and after looking at the goodies in that kit said to myself “I can do that”.I had lots of computer CAD experience getting into CAD in the early 80s so I worked at drawing up the basic walls as such and made HO scale templates of the parts in the kit. I cut out the paper walls and taped them together and I was into scratch building.Mainline Modeler had articles on scratch building and reading those helped me to get into scratch building. With Mainline Modeler gone it would be nice to see articles like those.
I found a great site with floor plans that I have drawn up to HO scale on my CAD then scratch built them.
http://www.antiquehome.org/ Click on House Plans, hundreds of floor plans.I would like to see articles for first timers into scratch building, I didn’t think I could ever build any thing that would nice enough to put on my layout and wasted many years not scratch building.Here is a link to a scratch build post on my bloghttps://melvineperry.blogspot.com/2017/09/september-1-2017-hickory-house-scratch.htmlMel Modeling the early to mid 1950s SP in HO scale since 1951My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California Aging is not for wimps.
gregc"what type of magazine articles would interest you that you rarely see?".
Sheldon's offering on trucks and wheels is certainly noteworthy, but since it's here rather than in a magazine, those of us who value the information can simply click and copy it for future reference.
I was very late to subscribe to model railroading magazines, but for many years bought them at the many hobbyshops that used to be in this area. They included Model Railroader, Railroad Model Craftsman, Trains, Classic Trains, and Mainline Modeler.
RMC was always my favourite for its how-to articles, and the fact that they included an annual index of articles, too, while MR was noted for its photos. I was a big fan of Mainline Modeler, too, but tended to cherry-pick the ones I bought, as they were considerably more expensive. The drawings in Mainline Modeler were a big draw for me.I eventually bought a subscription to RMC, but cancelled it a year-or-so after White River took over, as it lacked the depth of information for the eras in which I had interest.
I had MRs from the mid-'50s to 2004, and RMC from 1970 to 2018. I gave my MR collection to a friend in Ottawa, and most of my Trains magazines to another friend in British Columbia...fortunately, both were able to pick them up.
I should probably thin-out what's left, and donate it to someone nearby, as it would cost a fortune to mail it to somebody that's not within less than a day's drive.
Wayne
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
Articles on trackwork. Proper superdetail and weathering of track elements, including tie and fishplates and low rail joints, and perhaps trompe l'oeil shadow under the railhead to simulate the effect of sunlight and shade there.
An article like the one on transition spiraling many years ago, including the compressed template for model practice. Discussion of what sort of compression of superelevation and management of vertical transitions ought to be 'common knowledge' for the community.
An article on the original and evolved versions of track gleaming, including the metallurgical discussion of different alloys and fabrications used in different types of track, the effect of different top-dressings, how to check surface quality and clean properly -- including inaccessible track locations. Etc.
Of course there may be little call for the level of detail and illustration involved, which is much better provided in pause-and-review high-definition video. There's certainly a place for printed articles, including those that can be copied and then read under the layout in uncertain light, too.
I'd love to see a series on steam superdetail -- there was one many years ago, on how to make all your piping prototypical, but it did not (as I recall) have the breadth and depth of detail seen in actual practice over the years. I don't think there is that much interest here in how the prototype actually works as there is in getting the rivets and the lines reasonably correct. But it helps to know how it works, and how it might get damaged or abused and then fixed, when detailing or weathering a model. I have yet to see very many examples of proper weathering involving boiler operation and maintenance (and problems therewith!)
Where much of this stuff needs to live is with the NMRA or other organizations, not a for-profit magazine with dubious search availability. Whether they do that in part by linking to subsidized content is their option. But there needs to be one place where a search for answers can start without redundancy or mystery. This forum has too many threads and too little search-engine navigation sense to be that one first place. Hopefully some of the issues will be fixed by the end of stage 3.