January Edition Of Model Rail

wrote

Double that figure and add a bit I'd guess.

John.

Well it took abit of Googling but I eventually found this site which will give basic circulation data for free :-

So around 33K for MR & 46K for RM, elsewhere I found a figure of 56K for RM in 1961, so you were pretty close looking over the long term, John ;-)

I suprised RM wasn't further ahead; after all it is the only toy train magazine I can buy from my local Tesco / sainsburys, and I can't imagine them selling low circulation magazines.

I am full of admiration for those who build historically plausible narrow-gauge layouts and manage to resist representing NG as something comically quaint. I would love to see "Borth-y-Gest", which featured in Railway Modeller recently, but I think I shall scream if faced with another "witty" pseudo-Welsh punning name, and there really should be a ban on spiral loops.

I am always surprised at how many narrow-gauge models represent a line in the preservation era (seemingly in a perpetual 1970s) which yet manage to enjoy a thriving mineral traffic. Of course people are entitled to model anything their imagination suggests, but I would suggest that for historical plausiblity a narrow gauge line on the British mainland after WW2 should be either passenger-only or freight-only. (OK, someone will mention the Talyllyn and the Ravenglass & Eskdale - I shouldn't have started on this, should I?)

What I really want to say is that I'd like to see more narrow gauge layouts set in their real heyday which was before 1914.

Andy

Larger outlets will get them on sale or return so will get them in if they think they can afford the display space, etc. Smaller outlets have to buy magazines outright and take the risk so will not bother at all.

MBQ

wrote

There's no sale or return on RM although there is on BRM and MR.

John.

outlets have

Are you talking about just the model trade copies (ie. those distributed by Peco) or also the newsagent copies (ie, those distributed by WHSmiths [wholesale])?

":::Jerry::::" wrote

I always talk from personal experience, so am referring to the model trade and of course the newstrade may be totally different.

John.

On 09/12/2005 10:21, Andy Kirkham said,

I have seen Borth-y-Gest at Scaleforum one year, and I model to the same track standards. That layout is as good in the flesh as it appeared in RM. I have exchanged a few ideas with Paul Holmes - there are extremely few people following this standard! If you put a blanket ban on spiral loops, you are excluding the excellent, albeit OO9, layout of Dduallt (pronounced Thee-acht) by the Wallers, but I do know exactly what you mean. I really don't like those totally implausible rabbit-warren layouts, but in this hobby it is each to their own. But yes, those ridiculous pseudo-Welsh names belong to a different era. There are plenty of real Welsh names to choose from!

My narrow gauge models are based in the early 1970s. I have a few dozen coaches in build, and about, oh, zero freight wagons. Have I got the ratio about right? :-)

I would agree with that, despite modelling 1970s. I find as I get older (I'm almost 40 now!!!), my interests go further back. The layout-in-progress featured on my website will be based at some indeterminate era before the war (either war!), but there will be running rights for newer stock. This layout is a test bed for these track standards, as a prelude to Porthmadog Harbour Station in FSNG (hence the three-way stub point). The track plan is fully Templotted, but a little ambitious just now. My web pages on this are a bit behind, I've noticed, so I'll have to correct that over the weekend.

I shall follow developments with interest!

Andy