I've been lucky enough to have had several articles published in the NGS Journal, although the last couple were changed around and even had mistakes added. Apparently they went through several proofreaders.

My main area of interest is US outline, although I do have a small British layout. Although the Journal doesn't cover a lot of US stuff I still get ideas from other peoples layouts. Continental coverage is ok and there is the occasional Japanese layout.

I can see where H is coming from but at the end of the day it is our Journal and if you want to see decent articles then we have to submit them.

This forum has a lot of talent and number of members are in the NGS. So when you do a write up for the forum, or a conversion, or a how to do, why not expand it and submit it to the NGS.

I've not done much for the past year or so but I do have a few ideas for an article or two.

Alex 

wow looks like i have some awesome bitching to read when the 6/13 arrives cant wait!
anyway im off to play trains and enjoy myself.
by the way i read this article today in 5/13 while on the train to work how funny!
bart

I like the Journals - sometimes there are articles which are of no real interest to me but I accept that they appeal to others.  It's a bit like this forum, many of the threads don't interest me so I don't read or don't contribute to those.
When I first returned to railway modelling I joined the NGS but left after a year or so as I found the journals too uninteresting as much of the content was beyond my simple comprehension.
However, I rejoined about a year ago and now find the journals interesting and informative.
It's horses for courses.

H's approach to the hobby has always seemed to me to be one of encouraging people to have a go and showing how easy it can be to make small changes to proprietary items to take their realism to another level. I have never viewed his approach in any way to be elitist, although his standards and final product are self evidently very good.

The debate here in my opinion needs to centre around where the NGS Journal should pitch itself. The volunteers that currently run it have my admiration for giving their time to it regardless of the final product. After work and family commitments I have precious little modelling time, let alone time to produce a publication! They have also been disarmingly open in publishing the letters and encouraging the debate H started.

If the journal is not meeting what we want to see in it, then it's down to us to contribute. I think a spread of articles is appropriate, because this thread shows a thirst for a mix and clearly the NGS is a broad church of interests and skills, which is how it should be.

The question I now have to answer myself is this: Does the article I was about to send in pass muster? It's too late to go back and take all those 'work in progress' pictures now!

The one thing I do know is that I joined the NGS because of the access to the shop, kits and RTR products. The journal is a welcome read and whilst I do not find all of it relevant to my interests I would never expect it to. There is enough to interest me even if not directly related to my area of interest.

The latest one has a good article regarding semaphore signals. Does the RTR product from Dapol make this irrelevant? No, not in my opinion, as I need to figure out how to make a bracket semaphore (or two) for my next project. They're not yet available from Dapol, so the information in the article was useful despite it being steam era and I prefer modern diesels.

I fully expect someone to criticise the journal in the Mailvan next February for devoting too much space to the letters! The editor will never please everybody, but H's comments on style and design are apposite and would benefit all articles whoever they are aimed at. What those articles are however is down to us to get writing.

When you think what the 'Team' at NGS actually do it's a pretty brilliant job. I happily renewed a month ago and intend to remain a member as long as I remain able to 'work' in 2mm.

As to the current spat/exchange of views etc  - chacun a son gout or as they say oop north paddle yer own canoe laddie  Compared to some model clubs, NGS is fantastic and I'm proud to be a member

This is certainly achieving what H set out, I think, to achieve what is healthy debate! The one thing this discussion shows is that you can’t please all the people all the time.

I for one, being still a novice within this hobby, have begun to lose interest in the NGS Journal which is one of the reasons I joined about two years ago. I’m also beginning to regret, sadly, renewing at the beginning of this year, for a three year subscription. Mainly because whenever I come across something of interest I then have to go to other sources for further information, generally here on NGF or even RMWeb!

It’s good to see what others are doing but for me it’s also important as to how it was done and mistakes made so that I can learn, so as to improve or adapt what I’m trying to achieve. I’ve often referred to my Handbook for something or other but I can’t remember when I’ve referred to any copy of the Journals for something. Considering I have several commercial magazines that I’ve kept for future reference, I find this quite sad for a dedicated N gauge Journal.   

It seems from some of the comments that one of the problems is getting past the editor’s spike!  If any of the NGS Editorial staff are following this thread, perhaps an article or two within the Journal encouraging and explaining how they would prefer any given article to be presented for publication, along with how to produce better quality pictures.

I also accept that not all members of the Society will want internet or computers and here is where perhaps the new incoming editor maybe a little proactive in encouraging members from various forums to offer their articles for publication. With a quick encouraging message via a forum’s PM system who knows what can be achieved? Maybe the shy ones may come forward with an article.

The experienced members are needed so as to pass on knowledge, but I feel if they are not catered for within the NGS they may take their knowledge elsewhere.

It takes a brave person to poke a “hornet’s nest”, but there are times when someone may have to do it!

In some respects although the Journal may not have the space to include articles going into too much detail,might I suggest that it does try to at least "whet the appetite" of those less skiiled/experienced and tempt them  to look for further detail. If they see something that interests them then they may well follow it up. I note that some articles are followed by references to both print and internet, that can only be a help.

I can't help feeling that some people are missing the point and creating an entirely false straw man argument - there is nothing elitist or uncharitable in anything that Grahame has said, in fact the exact opposite - he's trying to encourage people to explain how to do things and to show a bit more ambition in their modelling (and ultimately the content of the Journal).

Cheers, Mike

I've bought H's recent publications, and I'm really looking forward to reading them. I also get the Journal when published, and I enjoy reading that too.

I also buy modelling magazines, and obviously I subscribe to this here great and diverse forum. For me, it's all varied, has good and not so good articles, and all tries to cater for a wide readership.

People have asked why I'm interested in railways, and it comes from my Grandad, who was a driver with a 50+ year career. My Dad bought my first model trains, OO stuff from a mate of his, and then my Grandad bought me more, including N gauge. From small acorns mighty Oak trees grow.

Put 20 trainspotters (FerroEquinologists) on the end of a platform, ask them all the same question, "What interests you about trains?" And they'll all have a different answer.

We all want different things from our diverse hobby. RTR, kit built. scratch built. Encourage, and criticise, develop and nurture, and maybe the future will be bright. Who knows.

Cheers. Timmo

Quote from: red_death on December 15, 2013, 05:36:48 PM
I can't help feeling that some people are missing the point and creating an entirely false straw man argument - there is nothing elitist or uncharitable in anything that Grahame has said, in fact the exact opposite - he's trying to encourage people to explain how to do things and to show a bit more ambition in their modelling (and ultimately the content of the Journal).

Cheers, Mike

I agree, Mike, and would support anybody or anything that encourages us to improve our skills in this absorbing hobby. I see Grahame as a person striving to encourage all of us to raise our individual standards and fail to understand how that can be considered 'elitist'. I do believe we need to feel there is something to strive for but am sorry to say there is little in the NGS journal that does that for me at the moment.

Gerry

since we are on the suggestion soapbox, would not it be a great option if it could be received as a soft copy to help save on postage costs for overseas members and the NGS; other mags do it now as an option
maybe others might also consider this option worth while
bart

Quote from: Cooper on December 15, 2013, 02:48:44 PM
I fully expect someone to criticise the journal in the Mailvan next February for devoting too much space to the letters!

Cheers for the idea - consider it done ^*  !!!

Mike

^* - no, not seriously 

Quote from: 1936ace on December 15, 2013, 06:20:35 PM
since we are on the suggestion soapbox, would not it be a great option if it could be received as a soft copy to help save on postage costs for overseas members and the NGS; other mags do it now as an option
maybe others might also consider this option worth while
bart

Would be handy for UK members too - it takes up a lot less wall in digital format.

Quote from: NeMo on December 14, 2013, 11:27:37 PM

Quote from: EtchedPixels on December 14, 2013, 11:05:45 PM
I can't decide if the magazine has gotten dumber or I've got better. I'm going to pretend it can only be the latter

That's the age-old problem for hobby magazines of all sorts. They're most attractive to beginners, may be read by intermediate-level hobbyists, but eventually become too shallow to appeal to the advanced hobbyists. It isn't the magazine that changes, it's the readership, and all hobby magazines have to appeal to a new readership on a continuing basis. My understanding is that most hobby magazines expect people to read them for a couple years before dropping them.

At any one time the majority of model train hobbyists won't be experts or people who prefer to kit-build all their rolling stock. It would be truly insane for any magazine to focus on just 10% of their potential readership to the exclusion of the other 90%, especially if that 10% doesn't buy or read the magazine anyway, and has little/no interest in the advertisements published in it either. I've worked with a major hobby magazine in another field for about 15 years now, and one editor tried to do exactly this, turning it into something for the more discerning hobbyist interested in the most challenging aspects of the hobby. The result was not a success.

My real problem with Graham Hedges' letter wasn't that it was wrong but that it was uncharitable. At the end of the day the NGS Journal is put together by volunteers, and unless Mr Hedges' is volunteering to help 'improve' the journal in the directions he suggests, his letter seemed (to me) a bit unkind towards the people running the society and its journal.

I also don't like the assumption that people who aren't kit-building (or scratch-building) aren't modelling. That smells of elitism to me, which is a bit daft since we're all playing with toy trains and really don't have anything to be elitist about. It's not like we're doing Ironman triathlons or something similar that genuinely separates the boys from the men*! But what constitutes real railway modelling is perhaps another discussion for another day...

Cheers, NeMo

*And something I'm the first to admit I'd definitely be among the worst at!

I totally agree, we may not all achieve the pinnacle but we're having fun and it is our hobby to do with as we please
Cheers, Graham 

I've bought a number of Grahame's publications, and from my point of view, he walks a fine line.  When he's good, he's truly inspirational; sometimes, especially when he slips into language like bemoaning "train set" items, he can come across belittling and alienating.

I can see why the NGSJ team (or the editor as an individual?) might have made the decision to strongly avoid falling into the latter trap, even if it means they do less of the former.  If someone is willing and able to write articles on "difficult" topics which include some pointers on how to get *there* from *here*, and steer clear of phrases like "real modellers" and "toys", I'd be delighted to see them in the journal.