The end of RAIL MAGAZINE?

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I gave up on that mag 20 years ago as I could not stand it coming fortnightly rather than monthly but I can hardly describe RAIL being in danger of ending!

One of my sons was a regular contributor to this magazine, until it decided to publish fortnightly and on writing to them, he received a letter in response that stated they had taken this decision as many of their readership could not wait a whole month for updated information.

Being a wag, he made a response to their letter and said that it was less to do with that stated reason and far more to do with the words of the lyrics to a television programme signature tune...
"Double your money
and try to get rich
Double your money
without any hitch
Double your money
it's your lucky day
Double your money
and take it away"

 

[Bald Rick]

As a colleague once said:

"I read Modern Railways to find out what's really going on in the company, and I read RAIL to find out what press releases we've issued"

 

[edwin_m]

My perception some years ago was that about 50% of Rail was accurate, but you needed to be a real expert to know which 50%. I hardly see it these days.

I think it's possible for one publication to cater for the professional and the part of the enthusiast market which is broadly interested in all aspects of how the railway works and might have or still could become professionally involved. Modern Railways does this better than any other in the UK IMHO, though there will be a lot of slack to take up if and when Roger Ford retires. However I suspect the professional and the "spotter" end of the market are mutually exclusive, too different for the same publication to appeal to both. That's where forums score - just ignore the topics that don't interest, and no time or money wasted!

 

[tbtc]

I like Modern and Rail for being industry focused, I have no interest in fleet lists, heritage tours, modeliing, etc...

I'm in the same boat.

If I buy a magazine, I want to be informed by something I wasn't aware of, which is why an "industry" magazine is much more interesting than a "nostalgic" one (even though I'm not in the industry).

Can't blame the publishers for the direction they have taken the magazine in - there's only so many time you can recycle articles along the lines of "remember when...", there's going to be a limited market in waiting a month to see general pictures of something in a magazine (when everything is uploaded to flickr etc so quickly these days), you're not going to attract many high end advertisers for an "enthusiast" magazine (compared to the rail-related companies who will want to pay a few quid to advertise to "insiders").

I'm just surprised that so many publications continue, given how much information is available online nowadays!

 

[bradford758]

I know it's a bit off track, to do with cycling, but many years ago a new magazine New Cyclist had me interested to take out a subscription. However one year on it morphed into more of a shopping catalogue, this accessory is better etc. So stopped buying.
I'm not sure which mag I prefer. Can't afford to buy regularly these days so j st the occasionally if some article takes my eye . MR is a bit technical. R. Illustrated is pictures so not much for read.

Sent from my 4009X using Tapatalk

 

[Bevan Price]

I have no idea if RAIL has a long term future, but due to increasing costs couple with falling sales, quite a lot of magazines (covering all sorts of topics) have ceased publication in recent years.

Personally, I have not read RAIL since it became one of many victim's of the local library's economy drive, more than halving the number of magazines to which it subscribed. It was never my favourite and I was never a subscriber.

 

[Tetchytyke]

My perception some years ago was that about 50% of Rail was accurate, but you needed to be a real expert to know which 50%.

I don't find RAIL inaccurate, more just constantly sycophantic. Their business model is as a professionals magazine, and to be able to get access to the right people for their business model they need to suck up to the bigwigs. It's not so much that they're inaccurate, more that every article is a puff piece on the subject and it's difficult to differentiate between the genuine achievement and the PR spin. There's no insight and no critique. Every article reads like something you'd see on LinkedIn.

As jonmorris0844 says, the bigwigs normally have enormous egos and like to have them massaged regularly. And 176 articles about how amazing Alex Hynes is is good for advertising revenue, even if it's about as boring as watching Sunderland.

 

[RichmondCommu]

As jonmorris0844 says, the bigwigs normally have enormous egos and like to have them massaged regularly. And 176 articles about how amazing Alex Hynes is is good for advertising revenue, even if it's about as boring as watching Sunderland.

I didn't know you were a Mackam! Still at least you've stayed up even if the football is boring.

 

[Greenback]

Boring and sycophantic are good words to describe how I felt about the last few issues of RAIL that I bought before giving up completely.

I didn't see very much analysis or insight, just a platform for senior figures in the industry to waffle on about nothing much in particular. I may be a little unfair, but that's my recollections. A once interesting magazine had become a tedious pile of PR related guff.

 

[jon0844]

That's what trade magazines become. The only time many trade mags will 'go to town' on a company is it gets prosecuted for something and it's everywhere, or say someone high up in a company leaves when they become fair game.

A trade paper I used to write for had a column for years which exposed bad practices in the industry, PR gaffs and so on. When it had all the advertising it needed and many paid-up subscriptions (print only) it was fine. Then in recent years, where subs were mostly free to keep up circulations for ABC auditing, and then it mostly became online for free, advertisers started to threaten to pull ads if a company was mentioned.

So, suffice to say, after over 20 years, they pulled the section.

I fully understand why they chose to do this. I know it wouldn't have been an easy decision either, but one that would ultimately help keep the whole company afloat.

The other thing that I've seen happen in the industry is the suggestion of an award being given to a company that 'supports' the title. So, basically, you sell advertising in return for an award - and in many cases, new awards are created that sound somewhat fishy to everyone, but nobody cares as they know they too can get an award by playing the game.

And it's mostly all because people want free content and haven't realised what happens when you allow others with vested interests to pay.

 

[FQTV]

My principal reason for starting to read RailUKforums was that I had become so bored of the lack of interesting content being published in RAIL.

That, and with the honorable exception of Wolmar's column and a footbridge in Lincolnshire, the blindly slavish and uncritical support of any UK rail investment, irrespective of purpose, point or plan.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I've continued to buy Rail, but if I'm honest it's because I'm a creature of habit and I know that a new one will be out every other Wednesday (along with Private Eye). It hasn't escaped my notice though that there's likely to be more incisive editorial content in "Dr. B. Ching"'s column in the latter than in the whole of the former. The removal of Dr. Paul Salveson's "Route and Branch" column was a big loss in my opinion, whatever one might think about the man himself.

 

[bradford758]

I've continued to buy Rail, but if I'm honest it's because I'm a creature of habit and I know that a new one will be out every other Wednesday (along with Private Eye). It hasn't escaped my notice though that there's likely to be more incisive editorial content in "Dr. B. Ching"'s column in the latter than in the whole of the former. The removal of Dr. Paul Salveson's "Route and Branch" column was a big loss in my opinion, whatever one might think about the man himself.

Yes, I look forward to the Private Eye column too!

Sent from my 4009X using Tapatalk

 

[Haig paxton]

Wolmar and Barry Doe are the best bits about RAIL. The letters page is rarely critical and on the few occasions they do print anything like this there's always a note from 'Ed' to put the writer back in their place, particularly regarding HS2. It's time for Nigel Harris to move on; any editor who repeats articles that are regurgitations of those just a few months earlier should be fired. I'm sick of reading how great GBRf is, sick of seeing Alex Hynes, Mark Hopwood and little titbits from Harry Needle. Honestly, it's the same drivel every fortnight.

 

[richw]

Ok so who's going to confess to being the bloke reading Railway Magazine I sat next to this evening on 2E88 (17:25 from Truro)

A few glances over said mans shoulder did give me the impression it was the better quality magazine,

 

[RichmondCommu]

Ok so who's going to confess to being the bloke reading Railway Magazine I sat next to this evening on 2E88 (17:25 from Truro)

A few glances over said mans shoulder did give me the impression it was the better quality magazine,

Well it wasn't me but I concur that it is an enjoyable read. Get it on subscription as I do (courtesy of my eldest daughter) and it works out pretty cheap I think.

 

[co-tr-paul]

Just come across this thread. I bought every issiue from no. 1 until late 90s . O stopped because it became too political and has been going that way ever since. It is now basically a trade magazine. For the enthusiast, with the internet, its also out of date before it hits the shops. For instance, in this weeks it gives an explanation why GWR didn't do a full HST in retro. I posted here and on RM months ago why not..... .
For me, I still enjoy re reading the old issiues i kept, from 1 until 2 weekly but now its just a read on the shelf whilst waiting in Tesco..... .

 

[Busaholic]

I used to buy about 15- 20 copies p.a. now down to about 10. Frankly, if it cost the same as Private Eye I'd probably go back to 15 or more, but I find it poor value most issues for someone like me, never a spotter.

 

[sarahj]

As a colleague once said:

"I read Modern Railways to find out what's really going on in the company, and I read RAIL to find out what press releases we've issued"

Yep, could not agree more.

The only one I buy most copies is Todays Railway Europe, but then thats where my main interest is. I also subscribe to Private Eye.

 

[Graeme]

I'm another who gets RAIL and Private Eye. I had the pleasure of speaking to both Nigel Harris and Christian Wolmer at a SENRUG meeting in Northumberland a few weeks ago.

I'm still happy reading RAIL as I expect editors to have a viewpoint (which may or may not match my own) - but I feel there's enough of an opposing view given to maintain some sort of balance.

I wouldn't necessarily read a publication which was constantly sniping at the rail industry without also heralding its successes. I can however see why a particular editorial view and angle of the magazine would put people off, though.

Mr Harris, my subscription is safe for the moment!

 

[fandroid]

I used to buy Rail regularly, but earlier this year I got tired of it and managed to wean myself away. I am one of those who wants to know what the industry is up to and have critical articles which seriously question what's going on. For that reason I have stuck with Modern Railways, although I think that has gone from too few columnists, to too many. Alan Williams in particular just seems to go on and on about his tiny corner of Yorkshire. He should have been downgraded when he moved away from Effingham!

Nigel Harris in Rail used to really put me off. Far too puffed up with self-importance. Massive long-winded articles designed to fill up empty space. The bizarre amount of space given over preserved diesels was a total waste of money for me. Next to zero coverage on European systems, except when a staffer went on holiday! Some writers are expert manglers of the English language. The maps are close to useless and often have hilarious errors in them. Does no editor ever check them against the text? Barry Doe has got himself a cushy number, and could do a great job if he focussed entirely on keeping readers informed about ticketing, but he wastes good column space by going off on rambling excursions into his personal hobby-horses. The only positive in recent years has been Paul Clifton, but he alone is not enough to make me buy it again.

 

[yorksrob]

Not everyone's massively interested in European systems. There seem to be enough publications which focus to an extent on that aspect of railway operations anyway.

I've never found Rail overly obsessed with preservation by any stretch of the imagination. For my taste, some of the articles on routes around the country could be longer.

 

[fandroid]

Each to his/her own of course. My comment on preserved diesels was due to puzzlement that the topic deserved several pages every fortnight without fail. It seems to be Rail policy to avoid more than passing references to steam preservation and to cover preserved diesels/electrics as a specialist niche. I wonder how many readers that bit attracts? I did suggest to them that they cut that part to monthly, and put in a monthly feature about some other world railway development. If Rail is aiming itself at the industry market then rail professionals must surely be interested in other systems. I know that RGI and Today's Railways Europe cover those areas in more detail, but there is a limit to how many mags anyone wants to buy and read.

 

[yorksrob]

Each to his/her own of course. My comment on preserved diesels was due to puzzlement that the topic deserved several pages every fortnight without fail. It seems to be Rail policy to avoid more than passing references to steam preservation and to cover preserved diesels/electrics as a specialist niche. I wonder how many readers that bit attracts? I did suggest to them that they cut that part to monthly, and put in a monthly feature about some other world railway development. If Rail is aiming itself at the industry market then rail professionals must surely be interested in other systems. I know that RGI and Today's Railways Europe cover those areas in more detail, but there is a limit to how many mags anyone wants to buy and read.

I think steam's more of a specialist interest in its own right. Perhaps they think there's more of a crossover between those interested in the current railway scene and the preserved diesel crowd than there would be with steam.

I get your point with the expense of them all though.

 

[highdyke]

I've traditionally bought Rail and Modern railways, been reading them for about 30 years.

Recently I've pretty much stopped reading Modern railways, it's been increasingly stuck in the late 1980s for for too long, promoting the virtues of BR.

The magazine pretends to reflect 'modern railways' but has only every run a couple of articles on HS2 (an absolute joke considering it will be the biggest rail project of our lifetimes) is highly critical of the Digital Railway and more. Run by a ex-BR uncle figures - great for some wise advice but hardly finger on the pulse stuff. Hip and modern it is not.

The railway industry comes across at times as stuck in the 1970s (Motorola 6800 SSI chips and Mk3s being the latest thing) run by politicians and railwaymen for politicians and railwaymen. Any young professional worth his salt is likely to end up eying an alternative career in the automotive, IT and aviation sectors. Elon Musk was quoted as the rail industry seems intent supplying overpriced 1970s equipment, he must have read a copy!

The online rail engineer and RTM are better deals.

http://www.railengineer.uk/

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/

Rail is quite political, which I really don't mind, as there is a balance of view from Nigel Harris and Christian Wolmar. The issue I have with it right now is there are two many regurgitated press releases/reports which can be read elsewhere.

All the magazines (model, steam, modern) have failed to reflect the new digital age of online forums, social media, railcam, blogs, open train times, photo groups, real time trains, digital simulation, that has brought in lots of new younger people to the subject.

I'm interested more in steam, models, foreign railways these days so have cut back massively anyway.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I cancelled my subscription to Modern Railways at the end of 2015 and the only magazine now delivered to my home is Rail Engineer. The August 2016 issue has the Harringworth Viaduct and the Bermondsey Dive-under featured.

 

[edwin_m]

I've traditionally bought Rail and Modern railways, been reading them for about 30 years.

Recently I've pretty much stopped reading Modern railways, it's been increasingly stuck in the late 1980s for for too long, promoting the virtues of BR.

The magazine pretends to reflect 'modern railways' but has only every run a couple of articles on HS2 (an absolute joke considering it will be the biggest rail project of our lifetimes) is highly critical of the Digital Railway and more. Run by a ex-BR uncle figures - great for some wise advice but hardly finger on the pulse stuff. Hip and modern it is not.

Without going away to check, I think you'll find it's a lot more than a couple of articles on HS2.

And over the years Roger Ford in particular has called it correctly on many technological developments including the IEP bi-mode in its original power car configuration, WCML moving block in the 1990s and further back dismissing both the over-specced class 210 and the Pacers with "Perhaps the best DMU replacement is a new DMU".

So while he's not always right I do have a lot more time for Uncle Roger than for most of the other commentators out there.

As far as I'm aware none of the main commentators ever worked for BR except Ian Walmsley.

 

[highdyke]

Some of it is spot on, some of it barmy. Some of it reflects the railway 'can't do' attitude. Roger Ford is a great commentator, I just wish the magazine would move away for BR was great (nope cheapskate as it had no money, the staff were paid next to nothing) and continous London and Scotland specials.

It all gets rather tiresome at times, predicting the next east coast franchise failure and the next signalling cock-up.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I gave up on all the magazines over a period of time and get what I want nowadays from on-line sources. Rail went downhill when it went two-weekly: too many pages, not enough content. As others have said Modern Railways is too much of a BR "love-in". And Roger Ford is not beyond criticism. When he was officially Technical Editor he regularly arranged cab rides which formed the basis of some really good reports on technical progress, like a 59 out of Merehead on a jumbo train to highlight the marvels of creep control or 90 and 91 to see speed selection in action. But he seems to ignore more recent trains: I suspect he's a loco "dinosaur" and can't bring himself to be seen in the cab of a multiple unit. As for Ian Walmsley, if he was so right about everything why didn't he make it into senior management?

 

[yorksrob]

Modern Railways is rather refreshing in not assuming that the world began in 1994. Rail sometimes seems as though it can't resist the chance to do a hatchet job on BR, even though this is by no means always justified.