Picked up Model Railroad Planning 2011 today. MRP used to be a step up from the rest of the crowd … I guess that was then and things have changed. Case in point, nice write about a layout based on the Thompson River Canyon - check out my videos Down the Canyon and Following the CN line along the Thompson river of the real thing - but when it comes to captions … oh dear … they actually have empty coal trains moving West (to tide water!). 
A completely new concept. 
:lol: :lol:
Any conclusion you have reached as to why no evidence in the planning books of the last three years that garden RRs are also model railroads?
Wendell
Sure, lack of submissions.
Apart from that, have a look at the Feb 2011 GR and the two layouts that have a track plan shown. Not exactly inspiring or shining examples of how things could be done.
Lets face it, Kevin Strong’s GR Basics is very timely, at least for those among us who still have some hope that one day a lot more garden railroads will be a bit more than “… just trains through the tulips!”. 
BTW I’m sure there are layouts out there that are the result of plenty of planning - sorry, just throwing down some track to get “the feel” doesn’t qualify, at least not in my book - and are as well thought out as what shows up in MRP. It’s also a matter if one wants to spend the time to get an article for XYZ publication together. I know that I won’t, not for the Kalmbach group, anyway.
Hans I’m very happy with Kalmbach. Custer service has been great to me. Always very nice and quick to fix any troubles I might have had. As for the articals in the Garden Railways that I get have been very helpful. I love the other layouts no matter how simple they maybe. Small, large and everything in between all help me with plans I may have.
BTW. I started with just throwing track down and going from there as well as looking at what others have done and putting my own spin on it from there. I dont think there is a thing wrong with trowing down some track and going from there. Even with my HO train as a kid I throw down the track and played around with what I liked and what worked.
But that is me and everyone is differnt
Geoff,
I agree with you about throwing down some track and getting trains running. Awhile back I purchased about 150 feet of straight track in three footers with a loop and a half of 4 foot circle. Not something I can run my B’mann K27 on, but my 10 wheelers worked. Basically for Xmas I got a circle of 20 foot diameter. NOW I have something I can run with.
Hans, I do have a ‘Grand Plan’ of about a 600 foot main with 15-20 industries, yard, turtable, etc. On a shoestring budget it will get here, but it may take a good number of years. For now, a ‘paper clip’ with the starter set power pack from Aristo is a good start. I watch eBay for track. I just watched a little over 200 feet of the dirtiest , nastiest track I have ever seen displayed for sale sell for $585. Close to $3 per foot and no way to really tell the condition of all the track the way it was piled up. Once it got past $2 per foot I lost interest.
As Geoff said, the magazine can only publish what is sent in. However, I have seen some ingenious use of small space in some of the articles. I read GR and NG&SLG primarily, but always peruse the other rail publications on the news stand. Never can tell what will inspire you.
My Tuppence worth.
Bob C.
Geoff George said:
I don’t think there is a thing wrong with trowing down some track and going from there.
You mean like this?
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa309/FSW4picts/G%20gauge%20projects/throwdowntrack.jpg)
Didn’t know what Model Railroad Planning 2011 was; so a quick glance at the Kalmbach website informed me. It seems to be a subscriber feature only.
I look at the Model Railroader Forum with particular reference to the thread entitled Prototype information. In conjunction with my interest in the 1:1 railroads of the United States Classic Trains has been, besides an interesting read, very helpful in getting to understand railroading railroading Stateside during the 1950’s/1960’s in which era my large scale railroad is hopefully set. Much advice, in the form of photographs, has been gleaned.
Trains magazine, whilst dealing mainly with the present day, does have articles about earlier times. Garden Railways was the fisrt magazine I started to purchase about five years ago and whilst much, particularly the construction and building of a garden railroad has little to interest me - well I built my GR over four years ago - there is a lot of interest still to be read.
All in all I am happy that I can obtain these magazines in the UK: even if they are not on sale until a few weeks later than the States. They do, in the main, deal with American railroads (which is what I model) and not European railroads. I do read the Trains, GR and CR Fora.
Well… Wendell asked what I concluded and that’s what I listed.
BTW Model Railroad Planning is a completely different kettle of fish, the focus is on why and how one arrives at the use of a particular space. In contrast to many other mags there is lots of content and little advertising, but it still makes me wonder how they could come up with a caption that is completely wrong. OK lets call it “Lack of attention to details”. 
@ Alan
I read Classic Trains, Trains and MRP - those I actually buy along with the occasional GR. MR I get from the library and as a rule I can read it in an evening, too much repetition, too many ads and not enough stuff that is both new and correct. Oh yeah, proof reading wouldn’t hurt either.
Honestly? I still have hard feelings over what Klambake did to the Greenberg shows before finally fobbing them off on a new owner… so it’s probably hard for me to be truly objective.
GR, and even the planning guide has to try to strike a balance between stuff for the newbies AND for the old pros. So they have to make compromises. And a lack of contributors probably doesn’t help.
Honestly, I think most folks who don’t hesitate to share pics here probably feel, like me, that their efforts aren’t quite ready for “prime time” publication. So they don’t try.
But, you know, I did tell Rene on the GR forum, twice, that they were welcome to use anything on my AV pages that they found useful. But I guess nothing interested them, as there was no response, let alone requests for more info or pictures. THEIR LOSS!
OTOH, I suppose the AV has no panoramic sweeping curves, no real ‘operational interest’, and not much in the way of un-modified current production stock that could help them peddle their advertiser’s wares… It’s just “trains through the tulips” with manglified 2nd hand junk… (but still better than grand plans and nothing to show, IMO!)
Mik dont sell yourself short. You amaze me with what you can do with a box of so called junk. You start with stuff I would throw away and the nest thing I know you have a loco or building or somethng that I would love to have running on my layout. I would think that GR would run some of your builds in themag if you summit them. Low budget builds or what to do with that box of junk. I think would make great reading. You should try it sometime.
Geoff George said:Well, thank you for the kind words. And y'know - everything (except Kimmee!) has a price..... ;)
...You start with stuff I would throw away and the next thing I know you have a loco or building or something that I would love to have running on my layout. ...
I’m still not convinced Klambake is interested, tho.
Mik, I think you are right that they aren’t interested in your skill. I think they are more interested in their advertisers selling new stiff and not people that can create with “junk.”
As my budget gets tighter and tighter I am more interested in what people can create.
Doug, It actually makes perfect sense… for them. Advertisers pay the lion’s share of the bills, not folks who read their rag. For the average guy on a budget, maybe not so much.
On that note, I tossed this together today while waiting for some paint to dry (rather than watching it, lol!)
http://www.the-ashpit.com/mik/budget.html
And yes, I posted it on their website and suggested it might make a good article… we’ll see if they respond
It’s probably safe to say the Railroad Model Craftsman from Carstens has a different take on things than Kalmbach does.
Either way, in the end it’s not life altering deal to me. I buy what I like when they have it.
Now, to put the groceries bought today away before the storm hits Sunday night.
Mik,
Great little treatsie! I enjoyed the reading, and it is probably some of the best basic advice I have seen. Wish some one told me those things before I bought that K27
Would have bought it anyway, it is my favorite locomotive (has been for 35+ years).
Bob C.
Mik,
Just read your story. It appears to follow my thoughts about Garden Railroading.
I have been in the hobby for a few years… hope to lay some track this summer. But I have been collecting track, locos, cars and lots of stuff to create buildings and carloads with.
I do need to watch the dollar have bought most of my things used… but in very good condition if not “never used”. However, I have passed up many deals that I thought I would regreat not getting. Only to find a better deal down the road.
I have also been able to trade items for many of the things I have been looking for. Most trades end up being a “win-win” for both parties.
Russ
Mik,
Also enjoyed your write up. However, by posting it here and on a public web-blog, you may have very well “killed” any chance of it appearing in GRW.
They are looking for original content, and not reprinting something that has appeared elsewhere.
You can bet Bruce Chandler and Kevin Strong’s submissions on the web are made after Marc show’s no interest in the article. They don’t debut a story here and then submit it to GRW.
Ralph
Ralph,
Yep it’s “take your pick along with your chances”. I get my share of ribbing about the lack of pictures and updates on my projects … but there’s good reason.
OTOH I posted plenty of layout plan solutions on a certain forum - most of them based on a specific space and theme that one of the members presented. Always a design that would offer a lot more than just running in a circle.
My layout was not really "designed"but in the back of my mid I think I did. It can be a roundy roundy but it can also be a point-to-point. There is a five-foot tunnel which I can use as the place that trans can’t pass from either side. Thus I have my point-to-point operations.
Ralph Berg said:
Mik, Also enjoyed your write up. However, by posting it here and on a public web-blog, you may have very well "killed" any chance of it appearing in GRW. They are looking for original content, and not reprinting something that has appeared elsewhere.You can bet Bruce Chandler and Kevin Strong’s submissions on the web are made after Marc show’s no interest in the article. They don’t debut a story here and then submit it to GRW.
Ralph
Ralph, Honestly? I don’t give a rip. I quit buying GR about 3-4 years ago. It got to the point that it was 75% ads for crap I didn’t want and couldn’t afford when I did. The ‘revues’ began to sound more like vendor written advertising than honest analysis. Many of the layout articles, while nice, were either modern dismals or cookie cutter, “look what I bought” Colorado types with much the same buildings and equipment as the last issue…SO, when I could (sadly) read the whole of what interested me in about 10 minutes, and the subscription ran out, the point of renewing for another 2 years was?
That, and I’d already had a bellyfull of THEIR superior attitude as one of their Greenberg vendors. They took a perfectly good train/collectible toy/dollhouse venue, tried to remake it into 'train only", and totally screwed it up. The BUYING customers stayed away in droves. There was nothing left for mom or the little ones, and old guys mostly just wanted cheap HO or Lionel collector stuff… The day I got the notice that only “train related” items were welcome, rather than all the little stuff (other kits, steamboats, even wood toys) that usually paid their exorbitant table fees, I knew that it wasn’t going to end well. — When you go from a 2-year waiting list for tables to over a dozen empty tables at the SAME show in ONE year (Monroeville, Pa.), you’ve pretty much screwed the pooch. BUT they didn’t even CARE, all they WANTED was the Greenberg price guide NAME.
Then there was my LAST show with them. On top of all their other rules they announce right after the show closed that no vendor could use the dock ramp until THEY loaded up and left - in a snowstorm… Like WTF? As a promoter shouldn’t THEY be the ones staying until everybody else is out?-- If only for insurance reasons, since they’ve already proved over and over that they don’t give a crap about their vendors?
Has anything really changed over there? Can you prove it? All I see is more and more ‘subscriber only’ content on their website, the forums are all but dead, and the last few single issues that I bought were pretty much SSDD.
Now… You were saying that I should save WHAT to give them FIRST pick? … As ye sow so shall ye reap. The hobby survived the LGB implosion. It will probably survive me not being published by Klambake. Besides, the real-time feedback is worth more to me than a lousy $25 check. I only submitted it to make y’all happy.