what type of magazine articles would interest you that you rarely see?

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
21

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 [2c], and that is all it is really worth.

-Kevin

22

Me too.

Next up are new product reviews.

Finally, I like tech tip articles. Often I need to read these many times to absorb the information properly. Oddly, the better written the more I find I need to concentrate on understanding all the information included in sometimes quite short articles.

Sheldon’s post is a good example of well written concentrated information. You get the gist first time you read it but you benefit from careful re-reading.

That’s the type of article magazine publishers need and generally try to deliver. The objective is attracting the potential customer eyes on the advertising. So the advertising also needs to be attractive and interesting.

The internet is a lousy way to deliver advertising content and there’s no improved method in sight. That business model, like businesses such as Uber, is hollowing out the more effective business models by pretending to deliver equivalent services for less. They actually deliver a lot less value than the businesses they claim to replace, often by ignoring regulation claiming it doesn’t apply to them and most often by driving down employee compensatio

23

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

24

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 w

25

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?

26

" 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

27

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.

28

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.

dlm

29

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… [:D]

Camelbacks rule… diesels drool![:D]

Jim

30

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

31

I like articles about scratchbuilding and kit bashing. I love to see other people’s creative talents.

Dave

32

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.

33

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

34

OK, firstly I should state that this is a good topic for discussion but while Sheldon’s post on wheels and trucks was well researched, concise, and personally useful, the question is; would I buy a magazine on the strength of it’ and continuing similar articles? [^o)][^o)]

I don’t find any of the suggestions of what contributors would like to see unworthy, but I must admit that I agree with doctorwaynes assessment that articles/threads/posts that are available on the internet, if they are of particular interest to me, I can copy, paste, and store on my own computer. (I must admit that having the Model Railroader 75 Anniversary Collection, and having had access to RMC and other magazines at the club, I have several folders of photocopied future things to do, one day(??))

However, it is apparent that some contributors to this thread, did not read selectors post*;*
*“*We do all realize that the magazine staff need US to generate all these articles… right?”

35

I’d like to see more articles about modern rail served industries that don’t take up a lot of real estate and that utilize a variety of rolling stock.

36

i’m trying to tie comments together

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.

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?

they have a model railroad, but they don’t model a raiload

i assume many will be offended by this comment. &nb

37

Out of curiosity, I had a look in the MR 75 Anniversary Collection, and came up with the following.
Linn Westcott became editor of Model Railroader with the February 1961 issue.

Not counting the regular features like Trade Topics, Trackside Photos, Kinks, etc, for his first year in charge, the MR staff were responsible for 19 articles, 63 were submitted by “Readers”.

Of course, I’m going to claim a 3% margin of error with my figures but…

It getting past my bedtime, but if it’s another rubbish weather day, I may look at some other years.
Cheers, the Bear.[:)]

38

Greg, in the interest of space I’m not going to quote all or part of your latest post, just make a few comments.

I find it interesting that apparently you are trying to define the hobby. This is a very abstract hobby, who’s ultimate definition exists in the mind of the individual.

I imbrace the hobby from a lot of different perspectives, but have no problem skipping over the parts that do not interest me, and likewise embracing some aspects others don’t consider important.

I almost hate to say some of this, at the risk of sounding arrogant.

I have been at this since age 10, I’m 64 now, and as a teen embraced the idea of modeling “one place” and the coming and going from that place rather than trying to model the origin and destination of a railroad system.

After all, unless we are the train crew, we see railroading from one place…

Being the train crew is just one model railroad experience, not necessarily my favorite railroad experience…

All aspects of the industries that support this hobby are very challenged right now to understand and supply the needs of their customers.

I often feel the model press works too hard trying to define or steer the hobby, but that could be a false impression on my part?

Good or bad I will continue to buy MR and RMC, and will continue to support the NMRA, because in the BIG picture it is good for the hobby and good for my participation in the hobby.

And if some issues offer little or no useful info as it applies to me, so what? My approach and goals are unique.

Maybe when I have more time, I will submit and article or two…

Sheldon

39

define the hobby?

i am trying to understand what to expect from today’s (vs Linn Westcott’s) version of Model Railroader and other magazines, and learning what others find interesting and expect helps put that into perspective

as i said, i am seeing aspects of the hobby from the layouts i visit that i have never seen described in a magazine nor forum (once seen, seem obvious). and each has a different concept.

i’m beginning to think the NMRA provides a more advanced perspective. several of the modelers i know are NMRA members. the few local (< 10 mi) meetings i’ve attended are about what you expect, but i’m guessing are more important about providing social contact and it’s that social contact that shares ideas and make modelers aware of various aspects of the hobby.

all the layouts i’m familiar with are designed to operate in realistic ways and use various construction techniques. current work involves building benchwork, trackwork, switch machines, (lots of) wiring and various electronics (some custom).

building model structures becomes more important when the layout is mostly complete. but i’d bet, most MR subscribers are actively constructing a layout, laying track and wiring, and would be interested in articles about that. Of course, there have been similar articles in the past; why another on building a structure.

*** i see the Tony Koester has an article on Freelance vs Prototype and another on Staging, in the last couple issues of MR (july, june).

it would be good i

40

Ok, makes more sense now.

Yes, back in the day “layout concept” was talked about in the magazines. Not so much today from what I see.

Most people I know who have built larger layouts have their own clear concept, which yes, they did learn thru contact with other modelers.

They also generally don’t build their layouts to rigid construction “process”. That is all the benchwork and track first, then all the wiring, then scenery then structures, etc.

Most are build in phases, one section is build “nearly” complete, allowing them to be engaged in all aspects of the construction process at once, and to get at least some part running early.

So I would think a great many modelers are always interested in a wide range of information.

I own a lot of “information”. I have MR and RMC back into the 50’s and 60’s, and as we have discussed before, I don’t think much of that info becomes totally obsolete.

I still say the hobby will continue to become more diverse, and that will be a big challenge for publishers and manufacturers.

But here is what I have not gotten into personally, I don’t watch videos as a general rule.

One, I learned how to read, two, most of them are slow and boring with too much fluff, just like most of the fluff articles in MR these days.

I don’t want an article, or book, that tells me I can use computers to run my signals, I want an article that spells out exactly what to do. Just like when Bruce Chubb and Ed Ravenscroft wrote electronics articles decades ago.

Sheldon