Dear Neil...

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

First, let me preface this by saying that I have been getting more interesting reading out of Model Railroader since you took the helm a volume or two ago. I find the mix of articles is well done, and the layout pieces do a great job of showcasing the wide variety of approaches that we can take toward this wonderfully diverse hobby. There’s the occasional clinker, but that’s probably more about my interests, and not your editorial style.

I’ve also been pretty impressed with the supplemental publications, although I’m not sure that they are your doing…

Anyway, I’ve noticed that in your column, you do a nice job of tying your personal experiences to the articles that appear each month, which is a nice way of introducing yourself to the audience. But aside from that entertainment value, I’m beginning to think that you write your piece at the last minute, and basically just read the table of contents to us with a couple of footnotes.

I’ve edited a few publications myself, and I definitely know the drill. Sometimes it adds some depth to the following content to hear your thoughts on them. But a lot of times, it’s pretty dry, and I think there’s room there for something more.

Of course, Tony the K has his piece in the back, and love him or hate him, he usually does a good job of stirring the pot. But he’s usually commenting on one facet or another of operating, which is definitely his bag. But what about the other issues of the day?

I know there are things like advertisers to think about, so I won’t expect you to explore things like Bricks and Mortar shops vs. internet retail, or the effect of the recent consolidations by distributors on what flexibility shops can have, or even how the national economic malaise is impacting the hobby.

But what about something about the way the new smaller manufacturers are raising the bar on quality and detail in RTR equipment? Or maybe a thoughtful look at one of the more belea

2

Lee;

Why is there a “battle” between scratchbuilders and RTR fans? I have been scratchbuilding for years, and personally, find it a great challenge with it’s inherent rewards; but if the other guy gets off doing RTR, that is his or her bag. My money, my layout!

Yellowjacket

3

That’s not the direction this thread is intended to go in.… I used the term battle as a literary device to illustrate one subject that could be addressed in the editorial space of MR.

Perhaps my original post should inspire us to suggest other topics that could be addressed by the editor of the most widely read periodical of the hobby.

Thanks for keeping it on topic.

Lee

4

Lee,I agree with you as I also notice Neil’s editorial is a “lead in” to the articles…

It would be nice to see the older “Linn Westcott” type editorials again but,does today’s hobby need such? I think not seeing the advancements the hobby has made over the recent years.

As far as “wars” over this or that facet of the hobby,kits vs RTR etc those are modeler made from my way or no way thinking of some modelers especially on forums…So does MR need to get involved in these bickering “wars”…Again I think not.

I do agree there are concerns and facets of the hobby that could be covered in a editorial beyond DCC(leave that to DCC Corner),operation(leave that to Tony),Godzilla size layouts…

5

So far I’m in agreement with you on this Lee. The RTR or kitbash issue just seems like a continuation of the purist’s (rivit counters) v.s. the just play on the plywood out of the box, or as most, just happen to fall somewhere in between.

I have done my share of kitbash and superdetailing, but lately I am finding those out of the box, superbly detailed RTR, can beat my hard work hands down. Instead of all the countless hours I may put into a specific model, the RTR is up and running in no time at all.Of coarse there are many changes to make even to RTR to get a more acurate model of the prototype.

I think that many of us are just getting a bit lazy, I know it seems to be in my case.

Is this pushing more of the kitbashers and rivit counters over to the RTR side? I don’t really know… But this would be a great topic to pursue for MR.

6

YELLOW CARD!

The topic is seeking more opinion leadership in the MR editorial column, not the particular issue of RTR v. model building… that was cited only as an example!!

Thank you for your cooperation…

Lee

7

Lee,

The odds of Neil actually reading your comments here are probably pretty small…why not send your letter directly to him? From “How to Contact the Staff”:

The Trains.com forums are a great place for fellow model railroaders to post about the hobby and even discuss things you’ve read in Model Railroader magazine. However, if you’d like to pass on a comment to one of MR’s staff members, the best way to do so is by contacting the magazine directly, rather than through the forums. Readers are encouraged to:

  • E-mail MR’s editorial department at mrmag@mrmag.com.
  • Or send letters to Model Railroader, Kalmbach Publishing Co., 21027 Crossroads Circle, P.O. Box 1612, Waukesha, WI 53187-1612.
  • Make sure to reference the appropriate editor’s name (if known) for forwarding.
  • Comments about ModelRailroader.com and the site’s content should also be sent to mrmag@mrmag.com. Thanks!

Don Z.

8

I’ll do that, but I know the staff wanders through here periodically. I’ve gotten PM’s from several following up on other threads.

I guess I’m also interested in hearing if you all share my perspective on this… So far it looks like there’s a few that do!

Lee

9

I’ve got to agree that since Neil took over the magazine has given me more enjoyable reading.

10

Is there a battle or is it one of approach to the hobby? I think its the latter because not everyone has the time or inclination to scratch build. For me it’s a matter of time. Good layouts take a long to build up to the point where trains can be run in a somewhat realistic setting. If everything is scratcgbuilt you could easily spend a lifetime on building and never get to the poitn of even running a single train. So, at some point, having ready to run stuff is going to become very attractive.

Irv

11

I been looking through old MRs for the fun of it and noticed that the builder/buyer battle has been going on since the get/go in the hobby. Subject keeps coming up and running its course like the seasonal cold. The model airplane mags have gone over to almost exclusively ready to fly and electric power. Some like it and some don’t.

On the subject of editors,well, it seems to me they are less MR hobbyists and more editor on their way thru to another job. I could be way off on this,but its my impression. After 75 years of publication one wonders whats new under the sun. Looks to me like MR staff is working hard to come up with new stuff. I think electronics has had the biggest impact in the last ten years or so.(time flies). Anywaays just my[2c] BILL

12

Myself, I like the way things are going. We’re getting a good mix of stuff through scratchbuilding to RTR --this, I feel, is how it should be. Neither being exclusionary from the other. Neil’s approach makes a lot more sense because it is approachable. It is, in fact, a much better read for all that.

As for all this, “this vs that”–this thread was/is not the venue–maybe someone can post a new arena—I mean thread?[:-,][:-^]

13

Hi, Irv;

That isn’t what I perceived. Most people out in this hobby approach it from whatever base is comfortable to them and that is fine. What I was driving at was that, to one extent or another, there has always been in existence this snobbery relative to the “pinnacles of excellence” if you will that jusr plain shouldn’t be. it is nice to feel good about what you accomplish,and be proud of it-and that is how it should stay; not carried about like some kind of badge that shouts superiority.

Rich

14

I think I understand Lee’s point, so I will add my own two cents worth: I have always taken perhaps most of a minute to skim through the various editorials in each edition (I purchase 10-12/annum). I would take longer, and with more interest, if I had found them to be trenchant and challenging in some way, but I can’t recall one that gave me pause. I don’t fault the editors/guests because the hobby is what it is; many things to many people. For me, it represents a rather intense interest, and I do love my trains. But, that’s all they are. This isn’t a “way of life” in the way the study of science and human behaviour has been for me for 50 years and more. There is little “make or break” about the hobby to me. I don’t know about the mindset of the various contributors to the now 40+ editorials I have skimmed, but I think the authors understand, for the most part, that this is a hobby after all, and not something serious or pivotal in many of our lives. They keep it light. I have learned, now four years in, that it is as it should be. But I do agree that at least one editorial a quarter should be heady stuff, a goad, a challenge, iconoclastic,…it should have some quality that sets it apart from the fluffier stuff. If these particular editorials were to set the theme for subsequent editions and editorials, and if they meant that subsequent editorials were highly reflective of their subsequent edition’s subject matter, I have no problem with that.

-Crandell

15

I’m quite happy with MR as it is. The only thing I would like to see - and this will upset someone at MR- is an occaisionmal review that doesn’t say that product X is perfect!! - the frazzas doesn’t work right!! - not that is likely to ever happen!! [sigh]

16

Hi Lee (and everyone else),

Thanks for the feedback. It’s tough to come up with a compelling editorial every month, but I’ll keep working at it!

Sincerely,
Neil Besougloff, editor

17

I like Model Railroader. I think they do a good job trying to keep with us newly returned, the newbies, mediums and experienced. I would assume it is difficult to keep it fresh for some who have been doing this for years. Keep in mind that if the magazine were to keep advancing then the new people would have a magazine that is too far advanced for them and they wouldn’t be interested. They have to try and appeal to all and I think they do a good job.

Back on Topic. The editorials have good ones and not so good ones. But so do all magazines. I think Neil does a fine job and if his time is spent more on giving a better and better magazine then I’ll put up with an intro for the issue. Good trade-off in my book.

18

So what kind of deep topics do we expect to see in MR editorials?

The closest thing I could come up with is the argument for where model railroading stands as an art form.

Like painting, we have to put everything we want into the scene, each tree, every field, building, crack in the sidewalk, clump of weeds or pile of litter

But is it art?

Why do we do this?

What’s the benefit to the human race?

Is that deep enough for you?

Eric

19

It isn’t easy putting an issue of any magazine together and that is what the editor does most f the time. He or she usually writes an editorial introducing what is in the issue and rarely has a chance to discuss what is going on in the hobby, especially nowadays where there is lots happening.

I;ve been reading Model Railroader off and on since the mid 1970s and I like what I see. But most of it seems to be a rehash of stuff from the point of view that there are just som much you can do with track, locomotives, cars and scenery. It’s nice to see what others have done with the hobby but maybe what is needed is something about the history of railroading and how some have represented that in their modeling.

Many of us are interested in operation and their really should be more of that in the magazine. But You probably need to explain both what operations are and how they have historically developed for different kinds of industries. MR has done this in the past but it the ropic hasn’t really been touched in an detail for awhile. For example, I remember that MR did an article or two on how railroads used barges in the past and that included an article on how to construct such barges.

I am pursonally interested in carfloat operations and how they could be incorporated into one’s layout. This seems to be a good topic to me since I am building a layout which uses carfloats as staging to bring cars onto the layout and others off. I’ve done a lot of research on this topic and seems to me there are a number of modelers who are including such things in their planning.

Irv

20

I hope you were able to secure a copy of Walthers’ book Railroading Along the Waterfront back when it was in print. It had a specific chapter on incorporating a barge into an operating scheme. Now that Walthers is bringing back some of its waterfront models maybe the book will be reprinted too. The 1996 Model Railroad Planning issue had a piece by Paul Scoles on a car ferry as part of operations.

Dave Nelson