David P Morgan was the heart and soul of Trains. He was above all, a mentor and an gifted writer with a touch of a poet. Trains has understandably looking for a identity ever since-from a Newsweek style mix on the industry to history pieces. You cant run a country or a magazine based on polls. This is evidence enough let alone the food issue
which is really stretching for a theme issue. Dont get me wrong-Trains is still interesting but the quality is all over the place.
Trains was a fascinating magazine well before David P Morgan arrived on the scene
Some of those articles from the 1940s still make for great (and lengthy) reading
I have to admit I seem to get less and less out of each issue of Trains.
Dave Nelson
I am glad that Trains is once again in a process of reinventing itself. I started reading Trains in 1958 and have noticed many changes over the years. I look forward to their next reincarnation and hope it is as succesful as their past attempts.
I’m re-reading TRAINS from prior years, and just read the “system story” on KCS from mid-2003. It told a lot about how KCS got to where it is today, the rationale behind the major changes, and good material on the business of railroading. Fred Frailey RULES!!! That is the kind of story I’d like to see more often. There is a wealth of subjects in the newer shortlines and regionals. The old Railroad Reading section was great, to balance the technical articles with some of the human side of railroading. No offense to Jim Wrinn, because other people’s tastes aren’t the same as mine, but since Mark Hemphill left there’s too much fluff and not enough substance in the magazine. The article on the minerals hauled by the D&RG was one of the best from the 26 years I’ve subscribed to the magazine, but you don’t find many meaty articles like that any more. The April (?) issue, all dining cars and food, was pretty much a waste of time for me. Just my 2 cents worth.
I am satisfied with the overall content of Trains Magazine as it now is. I only wi***hat Kalmbach would go back to using the old masthead on the cover like they were doing right up until about 1988 or 1989. To have TRAINS splashed diagonally across the top of the cover just doesn’t do anything for me.
CANADIANPACIFIC2816
For me,Trains reached its peak in the David P. Morgan era. In the last few years,it seems Trains has ben dumbed down WAY too much.[:(]
I agree that there seem to me more “USA Today” - type articles in recent years - I feel like I’m looking at a “Reader’s Digest” of railroading. I, too, would like to see fewer, longer article - about anything.
Conversely, I would have to say that some of the longer features in recent years have been some the best ever published. The recent " Mountain Railroads" issue, and the article on Rio Grande commodities, would fall squarely into this catagory. I
I’d love to see an issue featuring the history and future of the railroad coal business in the near future.
I have been a reader since 1980. The industry has changed quite much over that time span as we all know. The publication has to do the same. Lets face it, rrs do not hold the public interest now compared to earlier generations and this decline will continue. With the internet & chat rooms, information can now get out instantly and by the time an issue arrives in the mail, “current news” is almost 60 days old (this part needs to be scrapped). I do not know if this idea has ever been brought up, but perhaps the time has come for the publication to go from a monthly format to quarterly format such as Classic Trains. It just seems to me, like the food issue, that there are no longer enough solid features to put out a monthly publication anymore. Sometimes fewer is better.
You are right morristowne, i always liked the articles on shortlines. I have been reading trains for 35 years. I even sometimes miss the professional iconclast John Kneiling.Now that is bad! LOL