HS2 and RAIL Magazine

[davetheguard]

Agreed.

For me The RM has always done the best at trying to cover all bases, and as someone who in interested in most aspects of railways, that's important for me. The paper quality and photographic reproduction has been a touch poor of late though IMO.

RM: Jack of all trades, master of none. And the photos are often so ridiculously small!

 

[RichmondCommu]

...which is subscribed to by quite a few influential people; two copies go to the Ministerial office at the DfT for a start...

Oh come on! Do you honestly believe that Government decisions are going to be influenced by an enthusiast’s magazine? Really?

 

[Temple Meads]

Oh come on! Do you honestly believe that Government decisions are going to be influenced by an enthusiast’s magazine? Really?

"Enthusiasts magazine" isn't quite correct where Rail is concerned any more.....

 

[corin paul]

I stand in the shop, read bits out of the magazines, and if a bit grabs me. I will buy that one. I don't care which one it is, on the whole.

 

[lord rathmore]

MR for me as i am an engineer (ish) :P

I'm an engineer as well but tbh I prefer RM which I've been reading for yonks. Rail is occasionally interesting but like others I chuck the copy soon as I've read it. Also agree Rail has got a bit boring recently and their Industry Insider is a waste of space.

 

[D1009]

Just like all print and broadcast media, railway magazines have the power to influence minds.

 

[Sidious]

I'm rapidly running out of patience with Rail. I find their style guide (or lack of) a real off-put.

I sent this to Nigel Harris a few weeks ago:

However, with reading issue 731, I feel the problem is now worse than ever - I am talking about the mix of imperial and metric units...

It starts on page 13, where NR are increasing 29,156 yards of track speeds. Including 2,244 yards at Askham from 115 to 125mph. A little lower down a new 246 metre viaduct is being constructed at Doncaster.

On page 15 the train involved in the Stoke Lane derailment ran for approximately 850 metres, while on page 16, 30 chains of track are being retained at the Tytherington branch, while six miles will be closed, but 17.5 kilometres of new tram tracks are being built in Nottingham.

On page 21, ten miles of track are being replaced on the welsh border, and a 132 metre section of tunnel is being reopened in Birmingham, yet over the page 6km of track and 3km of Victorian era drainage was replaced on the Tyne and Wear Metro, and a new loop capable of taking a 775 metre train is being installed at Eastleigh (would a 775 metre train fit into the 30 chains of track being retained at Tytherington)?

On Page 24, 1km of new railway is being installed at Bicester, and on page 27 the s-stock trains are 2.5 metres longer than the trains they replace.

Then moving on to the (excellent) infrastructure article, we find on page 66 NR replaces 500 miles of track a year, and the renewal machine exposes 60 yards of track at one time, but cuts the old track into 90 metre lengths.

6 miles of new tracks were laid at Nottingham (p.74) Things get really silly on p.77 when boxes are either 2,500mm or 2,600mm wide and either 9ft or 9ft 6in high, and wagons are 18.3m long with a bogie spacing of 14.02m...

We are back to 3km of track being replaced at Gosforth on page 80.

The electrification article on page 85 then refers to 900 miles of railway to be electrified by 2020, of which 235 miles will be on the great western, 325 km elsewhere and then goes on to mention a further 156kms (sic) in Scotland.

Congratulations! With a reference to acres for a new station at Harrogate on page 13, your articles in this edition have managed to list units in: millimetres, inches, feet, yards, metres, acres, chains, kilometres and miles.

Will you please have another look at your style guide and adopt either one system or another (especially within the same article)?

No response...

 

[68000]

You were expecting a response?

 

[Sidious]

You were expecting a response?

Generally to a letter of complaint, yes.

As a customer (subscriber), it isn't unreasonable to expect a reply...

 

[Greenback]

If it doesn't increase or at least maintain readership, I doubt it would continue. I agree with AE, if you don't like it, don't read it

I agree. And I have stopped reading it!!!

The editor of a magazine can put whatever they like into their own magazine as long as they think that it's relevant. The magazine is called "RAIL" after all and HS2 is a very important proposed new rail line. I don't see any problem in having a lot of content related to HS2 in "RAIL". In fact, I would be surprised if they didn't.

This is true, but by the same token, if enough people like myself have become bored with the level of coverage every fortnight, then circulation will decline.

On the other hand, if I am in the minority, circulation may rise!

As for the information being recycled, you have to remember that not all buyers of the magazine buy each issue, or have a subscription. In fact, some people might be buying this issue for the first time.

Indeed. There is a balance to be struck, but it seems to em as if the balance is not quite right.

Don't forget that this is a magazine. It doesn't have to have any kind of balance. If the editor wants to lead a campaign on a particular issue they have every right to.

They have every right to campaign, but if there is no balance the magazine could end up as not viable commercially due to declining sales.

If you don't like "RAIL" don't read it.

As I say, if enough people follow that advice, then the magazine will sink unless it changes.

I used to love Rail, but it has become progressively more industry orientated, just as Modern Railways did before it. Now, from the point of view of someone interested inr ailways, but not overly interested in technical specifications, political arguments and the like, I have to agree that Today's Railways is the better read.

I only realised this quite recently, when, in the supermarket, Mrs Greenback asked me if I was going to go to the magazine section and I replied I couldn't be bothered to even flick through Rail any more, never mind buy it. At that point I realised I hadn't bought a copy for several months!

 

[simon.exd]

"Enthusiasts magazine" isn't quite correct where Rail is concerned any more.....

Spot on... I dont need to see photos of over paid project managers picking up awards etc... or adverts for civil engineering jobs offering massive salaries... that is not rail enthusiast material..

pictures of 37s clagging up the skyline and news about locomotive restoration are...

 

[asylumxl]

Modern Railways all the way. Rail seems to be mostly ads and I swear the paper quality has just got worse and worse. Cost cutting I assu,e.

 

[tbtc]

I used to love Rail, but it has become progressively more industry orientated

In fairness to Rail, going for an "industry news" angle*may secure it a niche.

With the Internet, I can find thousands of railway pictures (and only search for the trains/ units that interest me, not have to wade through pages of pictures of other stuff), I can find paths, I can find "unusual workings"...

...so why pay a few quid for a magazine that provides me with that (especially since I wouldn't have to wait a month to find things out)...

...but the "Industry" stuff may be something that people will pay for, something that you can't freely get online.

The market for "here's a picture of a class 66, here's the latest update on which EMUs have been repainted into the latest colour scheme and here's some information about what deputised for a failed 153 a couple of weeks ago" is probably going to shrink further and further as people expect most things to be available for free online.

 

[Muzer]

I'm very confused by people who say RAIL is mostly ads. I find there are very few ads compared with most magazines...


I counted a total of a mere 6½ single pages of ads (half a page on the same page as the crossword) out of 80 in the latest issue - one and a half pages of which were things not directly related to the magazine (two job adverts on page 46 and the back page) - I'm being harsh and counting subscription offers/next issue contents as being ads - by some measures, it would be one and a half pages of actual ads (ie paid for by third parties).

 

[68000]

RAIL is not full of ads, it is just some lazy generalisation. I do read Rail for the reasons that some here list they do not read it

 

[johnnychips]

Just bought 735, so I'll be able to see if it's going OTT on HS2.

Just read it; it is. But there were some other good articles.

 

[corin paul]

Spot on... I dont need to see photos of over paid project managers picking up awards etc... or adverts for civil engineering jobs offering massive salaries... that is not rail enthusiast material..

pictures of 37s clagging up the skyline and news about locomotive restoration are...

My view too. It's more business mag now.

 

[irish_rail]

Well having read the lastest edition of Rail cover to cover now, I can honestly say that in the 11 years of which I have bought every single issue, this was probably the worst ever.

Riduculously full of HS2, virtually no news whatsoever, usual spelling/other errors, and packed with flimsy non thorough articles.

I also note (and to be fair this isnt just a criticism of Rail), there is a huge picture bias towards the former eastern region. All pics throughout, except for a few Pendolinos showed trains on the former Eastern region or in London.
You would be forgiven for thinking the Great Western, Midlands, Wales , North West dont exist!

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I subscribed to Modern Railways for many years, it went too 'professional journal' for my liking so I cancelled - they are still publishing.

I subscribed to Rail instead and then I got bored with 'one track Harris' and the poor quality journalism elsewhere - aren't editors supposed to check these things?

For the moment I get it through Tesco Boost (aka Tesco Rewards) - £7 for 6 issues. At that price I don't mind skipping content I'm not interested in. £7.20 per month is too much, perhaps it should go monthly and then there will be enough news and article subject matters to fill the pages?

Interestingly, all off the paperwork associated with the Tesco offer is also riddled with inaccuracies e.g. a six month subscription (it isn't), a quarterly subscription (technically it isn't but I wouldn't want half an issue through the letter box) and others.

 

[Morgsie]

I have brought it today but I have yet to read it.

Nigel Harries may be in favour but Christian Wolmar is anti

 

[Essexman]

I usually buy Rail and occasionally The Railway Magazine.

Out of all the magazines I prefer Rail as it concentrates on modern railways without being too technical. I enjoy behind the scenes features on individual trains (such as this issue’s Highland Chieftain), stations, lines, depots etc.

The current issue of Rail is particularly good as it has a short review of my book!

And in answer to original question, as HS2 is biggest current railway issue I would expect a lot of coverage.

 

[trainplan1]

My local newspapers editor and all articles are anti HS2...
I'm never expecting a fair balanced story so I choose to not buy it.

Fair play to Nigel though for at least trying to drum up support and show the positives.

As Essexman says, it's the largest rail project currently and will be for another generation so quite rightly it's going to get discussed.

 

[irish_rail]

I agree it (HS2) should be discussed, just not that that discussion should take up over a third of the content of the magazine.....

 

[jon0844]

I agree it (HS2) should be discussed, just not that that discussion should take up over a third of the content of the magazine.....

Are you saying they should scrap discussions on HS2 and upgrade their existing content instead?

Isn't there a risk that at the end of all that work, the content will simply be the same as it was and not of a sufficient standard to keep up with the reader demands of tomorrow?

And lots of valuable time and money will have been wasted to find that out...

 

[Chris125]

A HS2 edition of RAIL includes a significant amount of material about HS2 - I really can't see the problem. If it was to continue in the same vein then perhaps, but this was not a normal edition.

Chris

 

[alienined]

HS2 is the most significant rail event of the last century, it deserves the best and most informative coverage, but there has to be a limit. Now that the Bill has passed through the House of Commons, perhaps Rail can turn to more immediate issues, such as freight provision on the Borders Railway, or lack of it!

 

[theageofthetra]

Free lecture by the head project engineer for HS2 @ Novotel Hammersmith tmmr night. Am going, think registration is still open.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I do read Rail for the reasons that some here list they do not read it

Me too. I enjoy all the "political name-dropping"-type coverage. I find it very interesting to know who is behind various decisions and all the inter-personal clashes that influence things. I like to read about the human factors behind the decisions made, rather than just to read technical detail about the end result of those decisions.

Someone mentioned the articles about signalling; I always thought they could have a much more personal angle but tend to be full of dry technical detail; on the other hand, the articles about historical locomotive design (which have the potential to be much dryer) actually include loads of fascinating detail about philosophical clashes between different engineers, biased preferences for one engine manufacturer over others, the need to keep certain factories busy for political reasons and so on - in other words the whole picture (both on the technical and the human side), which I enjoy reading about.

 

[6Gman]

HS2 is the most significant rail event of the last century,

More significant than the Grouping, nationalisation, the Modernisation Plan, Beeching, privatisation?

I think not.

 

[Johnnie2Sheds]

I'm no fan of RAIL, Wolmer or that other fella, havent bought one for years. I come here to find out What is going on....... I used to use WNXX too until they started charging...£10? A year? PAH. ok ok I'm just Careful not tight.