nlogax
Established Member
Another vote for Modern Railways, am a subscriber via its online version. My casual interests are more in dense technical content re infrastructure. Rail is pretty underwhelming in that respect.
The bits you dislike are all those I enjoy. Particularly Ian Walmsley's prog rock references.
This!I suggest a subscription to Readly! Rail, Railway Magazine, Railway Times, Steam Railway, plus various modelling, heritage and historic interest magazines all for £7.99 monthly!
www.get.readly.com
Indeed and I find it rather odd that the magazine as a whole doesn't run a separate Twitter account as it's fair to say some of his tweets are pretty odd.
I'll scan it at newsagents but won't buy it unless a few articles really grab me, which is rare.
Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike those sections, they are very excellent and well-informed. It's just the writing style I don't always fully get on with. Maybe just a little bit on the (for want of a slightly more gentle word) 'arrogant' side. Mr Walmsley has improved from when he first started writing about 10 years ago - I found his early articles almost unreadable.
-Some of the opinion pieces do come across as a bit smug and smarmy (e.g. all the 'joke' Editors notes popped into the articles), and a bit stuck in "what BR used to do". It almost risks becoming a little out of date as Messrs Ford, Walmsley et al advance in years without new contributors (although Mr Ford is quite clued up on things like Traffic Management, and has written some good articles about decolonisation issues)
-On a similar theme, a bit more 'diversity' of the writing team wouldn't go amiss. It's a bit "old white men".
We're of the same mind here. The way one of their reporters (is that the right word?) was sharing all sorts of information about the incident was completely inappropriate - things like coaching set number and power car numbers weren't relevant, and nobody asked for them. People said this several times to the man sharing them and he didn't stop: shows he was more interested in getting views/clicks/etc. than being respectful.Id been going off Rail for a while, and then when they "sensationalised" the accident at Aberdeen last year, that did it for me, some colleagues at work also thought the same. You only had to look at the cover. All the other magazines covered it with dignity. Top marks to them. I vowed never to buy another copy of Rail.
I can accept that diversity of age could be beneficial to try and prevent too much "what BR used to do" but I fail to see why gender or skin colour are being implied as negative attributes? These kind of sexist/racist comments shouldn't be tolerated here.The only criticisms I'd level at Modern Railways (which is generally technically excellent) would be:
-Some of the opinion pieces do come across as a bit smug and smarmy (e.g. all the 'joke' Editors notes popped into the articles), and a bit stuck in "what BR used to do". It almost risks becoming a little out of date as Messrs Ford, Walmsley et al advance in years without new contributors (although Mr Ford is quite clued up on things like Traffic Management, and has written some good articles about decolonisation issues)
-On a similar theme, a bit more 'diversity' of the writing team wouldn't go amiss. It's a bit "old white men".
It was the cover of that particular edition. Of you saw it, you would know what I meant. It was totally sensationalised. There was no dignity or respect at all. Families of the people involved may well have seen that. Every other railway publication had dealt with the incident with respect and dignity, something Rail Magazine failed to do in my opinion, and the opinions of many of my colleagues. Its just a rag, rather than a magazine.We're of the same mind here. The way one of their reporters (is that the right word?) was sharing all sorts of information about the incident was completely inappropriate - things like coaching set number and power car numbers weren't relevant, and nobody asked for them. People said this several times to the man sharing them and he didn't stop: shows he was more interested in getting views/clicks/etc. than being respectful.
-Peter
I believe a certain newspaper also ran a disrespectful front cover and story on the incident. I can't add anything else to what you've said as I'd just be repeating it; others' comments on here are very similar to my thoughts as well.It was the cover of that particular edition. Of you saw it, you would know what I meant. It was totally sensationalised. There was no dignity or respect at all. Families of the people involved may well have seen that. Every other railway publication had dealt with the incident with respect and dignity, something Rail Magazine failed to do in my opinion, and the opinions of many of my colleagues. Its just a rag, rather than a magazine.
The only good thing about Rail is Barry Doe. He's absolutely spot on. What a pity he can't work for a nicer publication.
I think you've summed it up perfectly.I haven't purchased RAIL magazine for a few years. It's not as good as it used to be, and there are other magazines that offer what I'm looking for.
David Maxey was an absolute fantastic read - I really miss him.The likes of Railtour Review was occasionally near the knuckle with David Maxey's innuendos and often hilarious. The magazine championed early diesel preservation like the Deltics and class 44s. It also ran in depth articles about subjects like pointwork and signalling and how things worked. It was written for enthusiasts and not the industry. Nowadays it seems to be very commercial,almost a consumer/industry magazine.
Spot on.For in depth articles, Modern Railways is far better than any of the competition - no others have writers of the calibre of Roger Ford, Ian Walmsley and Tony Miles.
Not sure why people get so het up about the vehicle numbers being reported - it's going to be reported; in fact wasn't it on Real Time Trains at the time?We're of the same mind here. The way one of their reporters (is that the right word?) was sharing all sorts of information about the incident was completely inappropriate - things like coaching set number and power car numbers weren't relevant, and nobody asked for them. People said this several times to the man sharing them and he didn't stop: shows he was more interested in getting views/clicks/etc. than being respectful.
-Peter
My issue with it at the time was less about the fact that the information was shared, and more about when it was shared. It was on RTT at the time I believe. To me it just seemed as though some, but not all, people sharing that info seemed a bit too focused on whether they might not be able to 'spot' those locos or coaches.Not sure why people get so het up about the vehicle numbers being reported - it's going to be reported; in fact wasn't it on Real Time Trains at the time?
It's more the tabloid style over-the-top sensationalist reporting. Rail's Head of News was conspicuous by his absence from Tw@tter shortly afterwards for a week or two - I wonder if even Harris thought he'd gone too far (or had too many complaints) and suspended him for a period?
One of my other problems with Rail is the writing style - some of the writing comes across as very "noddy", almost simplistic.
Side note: are you talking about the Manchester Arndale there? Because I've been in there several times and I wasn't aware there was a smiths anywhere; where is it?The quality of sub-editing in Rail is shocking. Back in the halcyon days of actually going to work, I used to have a mooch round the Arndale at lunchtime occasionally and sometimes I’d end up flicking through the railway magazines in Smiths. With Rail, I’d look at the contents, go to the page of something that interested me, and as often as not something else would be on that page
Side note: are you talking about the Manchester Arndale there? Because I've been in there several times and I wasn't aware there was a smiths anywhere; where is it?
Unfortunately this forum was also swamped with people trying to identify the vehicles involved, and how badly damaged they were.My issue with it at the time was less about the fact that the information was shared, and more about when it was shared. It was on RTT at the time I believe. To me it just seemed as though some, but not all, people sharing that info seemed a bit too focused on whether they might not be able to 'spot' those locos or coaches.
-Peter
That's an interesting point. I didn't notice the issue of the ink transferring to hands but I did notice they seem to use much flimsier paper than TRUK and MR and it tears more easily. Much less useful to someone who wants to toss it in their bag and take it with them to read.The lousy print quality which had an excellent ability to transfer itself to your hands was also a bug bear.
It's only the front cover ink which tends to come off.That's an interesting point. I didn't notice the issue of the ink transferring to hands but I did notice they seem to use much flimsier paper than TRUK and MR and it tears more easily. Much less useful someone who wants to toss it in their bag and take it with them to read.
I've never had a RAIL subscription - can anyone who does comment on whether they arrived in good condition or not?
Mine arrived in good condition albeit cellophane wrapped which I can't recycle here.That's an interesting point. I didn't notice the issue of the ink transferring to hands but I did notice they seem to use much flimsier paper than TRUK and MR and it tears more easily. Much less useful to someone who wants to toss it in their bag and take it with them to read.
I've never had a RAIL subscription - can anyone who does comment on whether they arrived in good condition or not?