Just came in yesterday’s mail; I thought this year is the best one in a few years, lots of interesting layouts with some good trackplans. Also, good to see David Popp get recognition for a great layout, even though he is an employee of MRR Mag. What do you folks think about the newest GMR?
One N Scale layout, one Sn3 layout and one “O” guage layout. The other 8 layouts are all HO.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that they are all great layouts but as per usual we N Scalers are left out in the cold again. I realize that HO is the predominant scale, but I do think that we represent more than 9+% of model railroaders. [%-)]
Before everyone jumps on me, I do realize that there are other magazines dedicated to N Scale modellers but the name of this magazine is GREAT MODEL RAILROADS not GREAT HO MODEL RAILROADS and a COUPLE OF OTHERS.
I will continue to purchase MODEL RAILROADER magazine as I have since the late '50’s as I think that they do a commendable job of promoting the hobby. [bow]
Holy cow that was a great addition to my inventory of resources. I got so many great ideas that I had to start one right away. I got some really good pics of steam train weathering and I am now working on one of my own. I am using the chalk dusting method. and it is on a revell plastic kit. Hey I am new and don’t want to damage the riv 2-8-4- berk just yet. Here are some pics of what I have so far.
Still working on the tender. I really didn’t like the way the road grime up the side looked.
Another GREAT issue Andy! I really like the Miami’s, East Rail and Deep in the heart of Texas, SP layout. I would like to see some more articles in MRR about detailing the East Rail.
I got mine yesterday and was really pleased. The layouts were not the usual ones. Most I had not seen or heard about. I thought that the track designs were more sophisticated. I thought this was the best addition of the series. - Nevin
I can’t count the times that I’ve heard someone say, “I really like the (fillinthescale) article, but I can’t use it because it’s not in the scale I model.” Well, so what? Ideas don’t have a scale. Models do, and scale rules from your LHS (or a pocket calculator) makes conversion from one to another the epitome of simplicity. In layout design, especially, I see N-scalers having an advantage - that jam-packed minimum radius HO layout, if built to the same 1:1 dimensions in N, becomes the wide open spaces with broad, sweeping curves.[8D]
As for me, if I only used things that were identified to ‘MY’ scale, I wouldn’t even subscribe to any English-language model magazines - and I could still legitimately gripe that Tetsudo Mokei Shumi devotes far more space to Nj (1:150 scale) than to HOj (1:80 scale.)[|(]
Like it or not, there are still more HO modelers than N modelers, or S modelers, or (fillintheblank) modelers. Publication content will reflect that, unless the publication identifies a specific scale in its title.[;)]
I agree and was slightly dissapionted that the only N scal layout featured was essentially one which we N scalers all have seen and knew fairly well, but overall the other layouts featured are very interesting, and to a certain extent, seem fairly diverse in both their trackplan and period. The “scale” issue does not bother me because I appreciate quality layouts and also can incorporate the ideas and techniques fairly easily!
I have the issue as well. Meat and potatoes. Very awesome. Already ordered the other two to go with it.
That Revell Tender is backwards with the weathering. Usually it’s the front of the tender that gets the brunt of the engine’s sanders, dust, ash, dirt and coal along with lube and it tapers down to the rear with a little bit of top deck water and coal rim. The rear of the tender needs a little of splash from the rails. I suspect you have been watching too many tractor trailers and thier weathering patterns. =)
Got mine in a few weeks ago and still reading the articles, and it has to be one of the best issues of GMR yet!
I am getting a whole lot of great ideas and tips out of this one. In particular, I like the way Joe Mainz and his wife go around and take photos of Texas highway signs and have them printed to HO scale and they give a nice side article on Road Signs on page 53. This got me to thinking of doing the same thing with signs here in North Carolina, then I also started to think about me standing on the side of a busy highway with camera in hand and a tape measure to capture and ensure prototype accuracy. Then the thought of safety issues started to take hold and the idea of me on the side of the road did not seem like a great idea.
So a ran a few corsuary searches on the Internet and found some nice resources for getting ideas on signs, sign poles, sizes and shapes of signs and their correct placement in reference to distance from road side, etc…
So, here are a few links thought I would share from my 30 minutes of Internet research:
Thanks for those links. I liked the last one, you can order actual signs. I wonder if they make any scale-sized signs? LOL But these should make it easier to make our own signs.
I’ve had mine for a few weeks, and enjoyed all the articles. The first article was enjoyable seeing how the owner moved and improved an already top notch layout. The Sn3 layout is very nicely done, with lots of scratchbuilt equipment and structures. Truly a modeler’s scale.
I’m a dyed in the wool N scaler, and I enjoy reading about great layouts regardless of scale. There’s lots of ideas to steal… er… borrow regardless of scale. The numbers don’t lie, there’s a lot of HO guys out there, and I suspect a lot of these articles have been in the queue for awhile.
If you want to see some fantastic N scale layouts, scan the internet. Most of us don’t submit articles that might not be published in a few years because we can take pictures this morning, write about them this afternoon, and get a few hundred hit on the website by dinner time. It’s not that print isn’t prestigious, it’s just not our cup of tea, generally. Although, N Scale Magazine’s new ownership is pretty aggressively courting new authors, so that might change.
I would like to have an article about my layout done, but I don’t have much time to fool with rising to the exacting standards of Kalmbach, I don’t have any friends named Sassi or Dolkos, and when I do write about my layout, it’s usually in my blog, so whatever I’ve written has already technically been published.
The GMR 2008 gets a thumbs up as a great resource and inspiration, but I don’t expect it will ever be chock-a-block with anything but HO. I suppose the only real issue I have with that is that there’s so much commercially available stuff available in HO, that great looking layouts really aren’t that challenging to build, as long as your wallet can handle the price. I haven’t done it yet, but I suspect that if you went through all the HO articles, you wouldn’t find a great deal of things that can’t be bought &quo
This is one of the best Great Model Railroads published in many years! There were more types of bridges modeled in this one magazine than can be found in the movie, “The Bridges of Madison County!”
There were actually “1.15” N Scale articles…
* David Popp’s “Steaming along the Naugatuck” and the earlier steam era conversion. The interesting operations quote: “The bottom line is that by backdating the Naugatuck, traffic levels would more than triple what I would run in my 1959 setting.”
* Robert Lawson’s “Take a turn around the Southern” with the forced-perspective combination of HO Scale with N Scale in the distance.
The whole issue is a welcome change of pace from “geep-central” with the steam era, or the combination of steam era and transitiing to diesel. There were many article examples of forced-perspective scenery along with track plans that were so much more than parallel tracks parallel to walls & parallel to table edges.
P.S.: The Hoosic Valley has always been a favorite layout as far back as I can remember, and I can remember Howdy Doodey!
just got mine yesterday aswell, Very happy with it, lots of great articles, and i love just flipping through all the great pictures. One of my favorite MRR’s in general this year, and my favorite of the GMR series
(can’t wait to see how MRP 08 turns out, theres always a LOT of good info in those issues, atleast for me [:D] )
I enjoy seeing great model railroads regardless of the scale. You can’t tell at a glance whan scale layout is from a picture. You could get a clue if you look closely at the size of the track or the couplers, but generally a picture of a great N scale layout will be as impressive as a picture of an O scale model.
I think the reason you see a predominance of HO layouts in GMR is because N scale seems to be the favored scale of those who lack space. Now a small layout can be great as well, but size does matter. A large layout provides more photographic possibilities. Having said that, I wish GMR would feature at least one small layout every year. One in which the emphasis was on craftsmanship over large scale operations. The scale wouldn’t matter. A well done O scale shelf switching layout could exhibit as much craftsmanship as the smaller scales.
Craig’s exactly right … scale doesn’t matter much in a lot of cases. I keep an eye on the N scale magazines even though I model in HO. Some of the N scalers are doing rather innovative things and I have learned a lot from them.
If you set your sites so narrow that you don’t bother seeing what the guys in other scales are doing, you’re going to miss some great ideas!
On a slightly different note, I bet most of the really good N scalers are submitting their articles to the two (count them, TWO) N scale magazines in the hobby. That’s certain to siphon off a lot of great N scale articles from MR. If you model N scale and you want to see more N scale articles in MR, then submit one! They can’t print what they don’t get. [swg]
Picked it up on Tuesday. Just read my first article lastnight. It was Tom Johnson’s Logansport & Indiana Northern. Really enjoy the freelanced railroads and this was no exception. Really got me motivated to start working on my own project. Just need to really buckle down and get going figuring stuff out.
Do you know if there is any way to contact the people that had their articles published? I would love to write an email to Tom about the story behind his layout.
Two comments - 1 disagree, 1 agree:
Disagree:
I can tell without much close scrutiny of a picture what scale a layout is. N scale is REAL easy - just look (for the most part) at the lack of fine detail on locomotives. Another way to tell N scale - look at a picture of the track with a piece of rolling stock and you’ll see the N scale track stand out like a sore thumb. That’s because a preponderance of modelers that have their layouts shown in a magazine use code 80 and not something more prototypical.
Agree:
I would love to see a well done O scale switching layout. I remember the project layout Mike Tylick did many years ago. I keep that around as reference for what can be done with scenery and details. You’ll definitely see as much craftsmanship in an O scale layout as in any other scale, if not more. Lot’s easier to add significant detail. For reference, see any issue of Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette.
jecorbett wrote: I wish GMR would feature at least one small layout every year. One in which the emphasis was on craftsmanship over large scale operations.
So, in your view, a 9’x10’ L-shaped shelf layout (Lance Mindheim’s CSX East Rail) does not qualify as small? How about the 9’x11’ Sn3 Chili Line? And these layouts do not show an adequate level of craftsmanship?
In addition, the Logansport & Indiana Northern may be in a large room, but it’s a long shelf layout of very modest scale (just 22 turnouts).
I especially liked the SP Dalsa Cutoff layout, 12’x24’ with 27 turnouts, because it is similar in size and concept to my own in-planning 15’x18’ layout, although I plan to have an “in-the-open” staging yard out of sight of the main operations area.
For myself, I was pleased with the number of non-intimidating layouts in this issue. Without actually going back to previous issues of GMR, this issue gave me more of an “I could do this” feeling than ever before. Years back, it always seemed to me as if the editorial objective was primarily to “wow” the reader.