RAIL magazine

[nlogax]

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.

 

[Starmill]

Modern Railways has slowly begun giving more credence to rumours, think tank reports and aspirational materials than is justified. To put it politely, RAIL has been doing so for some years.

 

[Ianno87]

The bits you dislike are all those I enjoy. Particularly Ian Walmsley's prog rock references.

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.

 

[Cumberlandkev]

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

This!
Can’t recommend it highly enough. Great value for money. Have a look and see before you buy! Selection of daily papers as well

 

[Ianno87]

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.

The other thing about use of the Rail Twitter account is regularly retweeting/quote tweeting things that are, whilst they have gone viral, are not fact checked or are misleading (e.g. images that laterturn out to be photoshopped to look bad).

Lack of fact-checking is ironic for a journalist, to say the least...

 

[yorksrob]

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.

I think that for me, some technical issues in Modern Railways can be a bit heavy - but I accept that's because it's aimed at the industry with a bit extra. Ian Walmsley manages to bring humour to the driest of subjects. and as a whole its very accessible.

I think that there's definitely a specific market (in which I include myself) that's a bit more popular/accessible between rail professionals and enthusiasts which Rail is ideally suited for - it's just a bit too industry orientated at present.

 

[Ashley Hill]

The trouble with Rail is that it's no longer a magazine aimed solely at the enthusiast. Each peice seems to be accompanied by a picture of some grinning railway manager,angry politician or official publicity shot.
Railnews was mentioned above,that's no better. That's just a back slapping newspaper for middle management. It bears no meaning to the average railway(wo)man on the ground.

 

[the sniper]

-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)

It is "what BR used to do" heavy in the opinion pieces, I very much enjoy the historical insight, but do sometimes wonder whether they're too heavily skewed by that (though I don't think it detracts from Ford's work at all, in particular). The thing is though, they're all too often proven to be spot on with their analysis, highlighting lessons that have been unlearnt over time, even sometimes over relatively short periods of time...

-On a similar theme, a bit more 'diversity' of the writing team wouldn't go amiss. It's a bit "old white men".

The thing is, if you're going to match their level of expertise/experience, it'll probably be quite some time before you can get anyone other than that second hand from the industry. I can't imagine anyone filling these roles who aren't at retirement age from the industry, and there aren't many non 'old white men' in that bracket.

 

[Sprinter107]

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.

 

[Peter C]

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.

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

 

[py_megapixel]

As an enthusiast (and, I should add, definitely not an expert on, nor in any way employed by or otherwise affiliated with, the railway), I have to say that for staying "in the loop" the threads on these forums are just as good as if not better than any of the magazines. Not least because if something ends up in one of the magazines it tends to end up online shortly afterwards.

I like Today's Railways and Modern Railways and buy them when I think I'll have time to read them - unfortunately I often don't, so I can't really justify a subscription to them.
Railway Magazine is good as well though I feel it has a bit more of a focus on preservation and particularly steam, rather than the everyday working railway, which isn't really to my personal taste.

RAIL to me always feels a bit like the 'tabloid' of railway-oriented publications: the content feels slightly more sensationalist and less refined, and there's a lot of highly opinionated columns, particularly reader letters. I like it less.

 

[richa2002]

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".

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.

 

[Sprinter107]

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

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.

 

[Peter C]

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 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.

-Peter

 

[greatvoyager]

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.

 

[Sprinter107]

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.

I think you've summed it up perfectly.

 

[Thepacerfan]

If you don't want to pay for rail magazine you can get it for free on press reader app

 

[Busaholic]

For the life of me I can't understand why you provide free online content for those who don't want to shell out £8 per month for the print copies. Drop the online stuff (except perhaps for topical news items in-between issues) and halve the price for the casual shop buyer, with perhaps a third off current subscription price. I might then consider buying the mag again if a particular article or two grabbed my attention. Not being the slightest bit interested in rolling stock, freight trains etc, writers like Doe and Wolmar appeal, though the latter doesn't have enough new or relevant to say to command a too regular column imo. I'm only an armchair traveller these days, and after reading Barry Doe wild horses wouldn't drag me back onto a medium or long distance train from Cornwall.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

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.

David Maxey was an absolute fantastic read - I really miss him.

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.

Spot on.

 

[43096]

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

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.

 

[SteveM70]

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

 

[Peter C]

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.

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

 

[py_megapixel]

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?

 

[SteveM70]

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?

Yes. It has an entrance on Market Street at one end, and at the other end there’s an entrance from whatever bit of the Arndale it is

 

[Galvanize]

Stopped buying and indeed reading RAIL about 15 years ago. Mainly for reasons already stated above by others. Even in the early noughties despite getting a bit more political and industry focussed, there were still plenty of interesting Features about all things railways past and present...but they were starting to get less and less after 2005. I think I gave up when Pip Dunn left to become Editor of Railways Illustrated.

Only magazine I really regularly purchase these days is Modern Railways...its Ian Walmsley’s “Pan-up” that really does it for me!

 

[ChilternTurbo]

I've just cancelled my subscription. To echo other comments in this thread, I found it had become a rather self-congratulatory industry publication and I was finding I would skim through it in about 15 minutes. The lousy print quality which had an excellent ability to transfer itself to your hands was also a bug bear. I'll miss Barry Doe's column but not really anything else.
I'll give Modern Railways a go. Although I do get a lot of news and interesting view points on this very forum, I still like to read print publications.

 

[Journeyman]

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

Unfortunately this forum was also swamped with people trying to identify the vehicles involved, and how badly damaged they were.

 

[py_megapixel]

The lousy print quality which had an excellent ability to transfer itself to your hands was also a bug bear.

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?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

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?

It's only the front cover ink which tends to come off.

The magazine has always arrived in good condition.

 

[ChilternTurbo]

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?

Mine arrived in good condition albeit cellophane wrapped which I can't recycle here.
The ink transfer to my hands was from the front and rear cover which, being a traditionalist, are the parts of a magazine I tend to handle the most. I'm not sure I've got particularly sweaty hands either...