Mainline Modeler ?????


Dave Powell <daveydiesel@...>
 

Hi,
Does anyone know the status of the sale of Mainline Modeler? Maybe
this was addressed all ready but if it was I missed it somehow.
Thanks, Dave Powell Iowa


cj riley <cjriley42@...>
 

Aug was the last issue, and I have heard no further updates locally (Seattle).

CJ Riley



--- Dave Powell <daveydiesel@...> wrote:

Hi,
Does anyone know the status of the sale of Mainline Modeler? Maybe
this was addressed all ready but if it was I missed it somehow.
Thanks, Dave Powell Iowa




____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/


Schuyler Larrabee
 

MM C'est mort.

SGL

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On
Behalf Of Dave Powell
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 11:59 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Mainline Modeler ?????

Hi,
Does anyone know the status of the sale of Mainline Modeler? Maybe
this was addressed all ready but if it was I missed it somehow.
Thanks, Dave Powell Iowa





Allen Cain <allencain@...>
 

I was able to negotiate multiple back issues in exchange for the balance of
my subscription a few months back. In talking to the person on the phone,
it sounded like it was a done deal and they were all looking for jobs.



Unfortunately, this magazine is history unless someone buys the name which I
suspect is unlikely in today's highly competitive market.



Allen Cain


Thomas Baker
 

It is unfortunate that a magazine of the quality of MM had to go. I suppose that I am partially to blame since I never purchased a subscription but puchased those issues of interest to me. I had lost interest in purchasing MR and RMC, but the appearance of Ted Culotta's articles changed that for me in the case of RMC. MM will be sorely missed.

Tom

________________________________


Dave Lambert <dave@...>
 

Tom and Listers,



Mainline Modeler was clearly in serious decline for several years.



Bob Hundman's often meandering editorials showed he was losing interest in
the magazine and that he was hemorrhaging cash with every issue. The
publisher's report (in small print at the back of each November's issue)
told the tale: people simply weren't subscribing to the magazine and
advertisers weren't ponying up for it.



The reasons for this are legion. IMHO, the principal ones were:



1. It was without doubt the most poorly edited magazine on the market.
Spelling and grammatical errors were very common. In the era of spell
checkers and grammar checking software available to anyone, this is
inexcusable.

2. Many "articles" were merely photo essays-and essays of
not-very-interesting subjects. How many photo features of UP MOW equipment
can a general-interest audience stand?

3. The step-by-step scratchbuilding articles were excellent. Bob used
some techniques that were truly ground-breaking and his craftsmanship was
superb. However, have you ever tried to tie the illustrative photos to the
text?. Very challenging, indeed. I fear many modelers simply gave up in
utter dismay.

4. Bob's draftsmanship was second to none. However, many very
knowledgeable rail historians and modelers are skeptical of the accuracy of
those drawings. This is not good. As pleasing to the eye as they undoubtedly
were, it really isn't asking too much to expect them to be accurate.

5. Bob discovered that the publishing of high-value, limited edition
hardcover railroad books is far more lucrative (and more interesting and
less taxing) than meeting the deadline (which often wasn't done) of a
monthly magazine.



So, I, too, mourn the passing of the magazine. But not too much. I was a
charter subscriber, knew Mr. Hundman personally and received no more
courtesy concerning the discontinuance of the magazine than anyone else.



Oh, well.



Dave Lambert



_____

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
Thomas Baker
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 11:09 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Mainline Modeler ?????



It is unfortunate that a magazine of the quality of MM had to go. I suppose
that I am partially to blame since I never purchased a subscription but
puchased those issues of interest to me. I had lost interest in purchasing
MR and RMC, but the appearance of Ted Culotta's articles changed that for me
in the case of RMC. MM will be sorely missed.

Tom

________________________________


Schuyler Larrabee
 

I do know one publisher of model and railroad magazines who is fairly interested in acquiring the
magazine, and carrying it on with an even better quality of production. One hopes that the articles
would revert to the quality that marked the magazine in the first few years. That would be the
desire of the publisher I know.

SGL


David Powell <daveydiesel@...>
 

SGL.
Lets all hope this comes about and if it does lets support the effort
if it is all he claims it will be. Dave Powell Iowa

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
Schuyler Larrabee
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:45 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Mainline Modeler ?????

I do know one publisher of model and railroad magazines who is fairly
interested in acquiring the
magazine, and carrying it on with an even better quality of production.
One hopes that the articles
would revert to the quality that marked the magazine in the first few
years. That would be the
desire of the publisher I know.

SGL


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.19/663 - Release Date:
2/1/2007 2:28 PM


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.19/663 - Release Date:
2/1/2007 2:28 PM


tmolsen@...
 

Schuyler,

There is one big problem for anyone taking over the Mainline Modeler. Bob Hundman wants to sell it with the stipulation that whoever buys it has to honor all the present paid subscriptions, in addition to the purchase price. That is quite a stretch because a lot of people (including yours truly) had renewed for another year shortly before he folded the magazine in addition to those that renewed earlier.

He had asked Ted Culotta if he would buy it and take it over, but that would have meant that by honoring the outstanding subscriptions, there would be no income for quite an extensive period of time. For that reason, Ted turned him down and that that is why no one else has stepped forward to buy the magazine.

So that is the caveat: know anyone who is a philanthropist?


tmolsen@...
 

List,

Sorry guys, forgot to sign that answer regarding Mainline Modeler magazine and what it will take to buy it!

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@...


mjmcguirk@...
 

Dave,

I'll take a patience pill on that "let's all support it . . ." until I see what it looks like if it pans out.

Frankly, I don't see why ceasation of Mainline Modeler is being treated as a such a huge loss -- the magazine has been suffering from a severe lack of focus for years. Agree with SGL that the earlier years were great -- good techniques, and the willingness to share advanced modeling techniques the other magazines wouldn't touch. But when a magzine that is supposedly the banner for prototype modelers runs the Franklin & South Manchester on its cover (sometimes without a corresponding story inside!) more than any other layout, I have to question whether the magazine is really geared toward the serious prototype modeler, or merely paying lip service. Don't get me wrong, I like George Sellios personally, and I admire his accomplishments for what they are -- but I stuggle to come to terms with its inclusion in Mainline when there are so many other excellent prototype models that could have been used to inspire readers instead.

And don't get me started on the picking up articles from N Scale to run in Mainline (or vice-versa), or the trees that didn't look anything like the drawings . . . (though I have to admit, I enjoyed the four-part Laker ship series, but that's my marine history bias showing).

Marty McGuirk


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Marty McGuirk wrote:
Frankly, I don't see why ceasation of Mainline Modeler is being treated as a such a huge loss -- the magazine has been suffering from a severe lack of focus for years. Agree with SGL that the earlier years were great -- good techniques, and the willingness to share advanced modeling techniques the other magazines wouldn't touch.
Well said. Bob Hundman used to say that he wanted to do a mainline railroad equivalent of the NGSL Gazette, and in many ways that's just what he did. If you think back to 1980, NONE of the extant model magazines had a patch on the Gazette for scenery and weathering techniques, or even for quality of color photos. But as everyone knows, the virtues of MM have faded badly in the last decade--whether because Bob ran out of energy or was just no longer in tune with the forefront of the hobby, or some other reason, I don't know.
The long and convoluted modeling articles Bob used to write were a source of amusement to many of us. Several of them were obviously published while the model was still in progress, and though this permitted a charming sense of "feeling one's way" through the project, it also projected the impression that Bob didn't know what he was doing. And many, many of his own techniques can be described as "doing it the hard way."
But back in the '80s, it was a breath of fresh air, and a revelation of what could be done. As I said, there was NOTHING like this in the mainstream magazines, though of course there was already plenty of it in the Gazette.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Frank Pearsall
 

Good morning:

Purchasing any magazine would include purchasing the subscription liability. There certainly would be negotiations as to how much liability there was versus the purchase price. If there was a high liability, that would (in theory) reduce the purchase price. There's probably another three or four pages discussion on that not worth getting into.

I'd love to get back into model railroad magazine publishing. I figure I'd need at least four million bucks to do so; half of that would be for the divorce court proceedings...

Frank A. Pearsall
Brevard, N.C.

On Feb 1, 2007, at 10:24 PM, tmolsen@... wrote:

Schuyler,

There is one big problem for anyone taking over the Mainline Modeler. Bob Hundman wants to sell it with the stipulation that whoever buys it has to honor all the present paid subscriptions, in addition to the purchase price. That is quite a stretch because a lot of people (including yours truly) had renewed for another year shortly before he folded the magazine in addition to those that renewed earlier.


Charlie Vlk
 

What we miss of Mainline Modeler is not the tree articles, the editorials, or multi-installment construction projects.... but the prototype pictures, reproduction of builder and railroad drawings and diagrams, the prepared drawings (however imperfect), in-depth studies of locomotive and car types, introduction of new model building techniques, etc...
We miss the POTENTIAL of Mainline Modeler and its overall legacy more than the reality of its recent past.
Somewhat like X2200 South.... another publication that has "gone south" if you pardon the pun..... they established the taxonomy of Diesel Locomotives beyond what sufficed for the builders and the railroads... but have devolved into a reporter of roster changes and new deliveries and liveries in contemporary railroading.
I would think with the obvious popularity of modeling the prototype, as evidenced by the growing attendance at seminars across the country, there would be a market for a magazine to fill the void left by Mainline Modeler.... that would expand and complement what we can get from the occasional article in the mainstream magazines and the RPC, Essential Freight Cars, and other books and journals (and online magazines such as the PRR & B&O efforts).
While freight cars, locomotives, and structures have been covered hard for the past four decades there is still much to learn and document.... and we've not scratched the surface on Passenger Cars, Traction and many other topics.
We owe a huge debt to Bob Hundman. His body of work in Mainline Modeler and other publications, as well as his behind-the-scenes work in supporting the Manufacturers has made a tremendous positive impact on the Hobby.
I, for one, miss Mainline Modeler and can only hope a group of people comes along that can continue his work.
Charlie Vlk


Dave Lambert <dave@...>
 

Marty,



My point precisely.



Could not have said it better myself.



I was deservedly upbraided about my comment on the accuracy of the drawings
in MM-by people much more versed in the artistry (for such it is) of
mechanical drawing than I.



We can all agree that Bob is an exceptionally gifted mechanical artist.



The disagreement is clearly in his skill set as an editor and a
publisher-two very different and not necessarily related skills.



Best regards,



Dave Lambert



_____

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
mjmcguirk@...
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:44 AM
To: STMFC@...
Cc: David Powell
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Mainline Modeler ?????



Dave,

I'll take a patience pill on that "let's all support it . . ." until I see
what it looks like if it pans out.

Frankly, I don't see why ceasation of Mainline Modeler is being treated as a
such a huge loss -- the magazine has been suffering from a severe lack of
focus for years. Agree with SGL that the earlier years were great -- good
techniques, and the willingness to share advanced modeling techniques the
other magazines wouldn't touch. But when a magzine that is supposedly the
banner for prototype modelers runs the Franklin & South Manchester on its
cover (sometimes without a corresponding story inside!) more than any other
layout, I have to question whether the magazine is really geared toward the
serious prototype modeler, or merely paying lip service. Don't get me wrong,
I like George Sellios personally, and I admire his accomplishments for what
they are -- but I stuggle to come to terms with its inclusion in Mainline
when there are so many other excellent prototype models that could have been
used to inspire readers instead.

And don't get me started on the picking up articles from N Scale to run in
Mainline (or vice-versa), or the trees that didn't look anything like the
drawings . . . (though I have to admit, I enjoyed the four-part Laker ship
series, but that's my marine history bias showing).

Marty McGuirk


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dave Lambert wrote:
I was deservedly upbraided about my comment on the accuracy of the drawings in MM-by people much more versed in the artistry (for such it is) of mechanical drawing than I.

We can all agree that Bob is an exceptionally gifted mechanical artist.
I agree with Dave that it's easy for non-draftsmen to criticize errors in drawings. But my real gripe over the years with Mr. Hundman on this topic is that he CANNOT admit errors. He even reprinted many of his drawings, complete with original errors, in his softcover books. Many, many people alerted him to various mistakes, but such corrections were neither run in the magazine nor used to fix the drawings for reprinting. "Prototype accuracy," my foot.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Charlie Vlk wrote:
We miss the POTENTIAL of Mainline Modeler and its overall legacy more than the reality of its recent past . . .
We owe a huge debt to Bob Hundman. His body of work in Mainline Modeler and other publications, as well as his behind-the-scenes work in supporting the Manufacturers has made a tremendous positive impact on the Hobby.
I, for one, miss Mainline Modeler and can only hope a group of people comes along that can continue his work.
Good point, Charlie, and I too would hope that someone might be able to continue with the ORIGINAL vision and accomplishment of MM. I was seriously thinking of dropping my subscription to the last version, and was really only continuing because I have the magazine since Vol. 1, No. 1 and hated to break it off--still remembering the glory days.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Anthony Thompson wrote:
Charlie Vlk wrote:
We miss the POTENTIAL of Mainline Modeler and its overall legacy more
than the reality of its recent past . . .
Good point, Charlie, and I too would hope that someone might
be able to continue with the ORIGINAL vision and accomplishment of
MM.
For my own tastes, Ed and Pat have covered about 85% of what I want with
RPC. The missing 15% or so fall into Bob's own construction articles.

Dave Nelson


Jack Burgess <jack@...>
 

There have been a lot of interesting comments regarding the loss of Mainline
Modeler. I was a subscriber since the first year and have every issue except
one. But I let my subscription lapse around May of last year....no, I didn't
have a premonition of the magazine's demise but the content of the magazine
had shifted to a lot of what I considered "filler" articles and I wasn't
finding anything in the magazine for my modeling.

In addition, prototype modeling has changed enormously since that initial
issue of MM. Back then, I figured that in order to have a fleet of prototype
freight cars, I'd need to scratchbuild them and MM provided the information
that I would need to do that accurately. But the hobby has changed
tremendously in the past 10-15 years. Remember the outstanding article by
Robert Zenk on modeling Pullman underbodies in the early 1980s? Now we have
Branchline Pullman cars with all of the details included in the kit that
Zenk talked about. We have plastic freight cars which are as accurate as the
information available. We have resin kits of hundreds of freight cars,
something that we could not have imagined back when MM started up.

MM most likely contributed to our current riches in both information and
available kits. But those riches could have easily also led to decreased
circulation for the magazine...I don't need an extensive article and plans
for a freight car when I can purchase a kit from Westerfield or Sunshine for
that same car. And the Internet and lists such as this one have made it
easier to find modelers who have information that we need rather than expect
to find that information in a magazine.

We still need information to make our models, even the best kits, accurate
for the time period being modeled. But the information we need, I think, is
not necessarily scale drawings but photos, lettering information, trucks and
brake system changes, etc. Ted's new magazine and other publications have
filled that gap....

Jack Burgess
www.yosemitevalleyrr.com


David Powell <daveydiesel@...>
 

Did I miss something or what????? What is Tedís new magazine?? I just
sent off to RMC for all the back issues I need to have the complete set
of Essential Freight Cars articles.
Dave Powell Iowa

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
Jack Burgess
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 5:32 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Mainline Modeler ?????

There have been a lot of interesting comments regarding the loss of
Mainline
Modeler. I was a subscriber since the first year and have every issue
except
one. But I let my subscription lapse around May of last year....no, I
didn't
have a premonition of the magazine's demise but the content of the
magazine
had shifted to a lot of what I considered "filler" articles and I wasn't
finding anything in the magazine for my modeling.

In addition, prototype modeling has changed enormously since that
initial
issue of MM. Back then, I figured that in order to have a fleet of
prototype
freight cars, I'd need to scratchbuild them and MM provided the
information
that I would need to do that accurately. But the hobby has changed
tremendously in the past 10-15 years. Remember the outstanding article
by
Robert Zenk on modeling Pullman underbodies in the early 1980s? Now we
have
Branchline Pullman cars with all of the details included in the kit that
Zenk talked about. We have plastic freight cars which are as accurate as
the
information available. We have resin kits of hundreds of freight cars,
something that we could not have imagined back when MM started up.

MM most likely contributed to our current riches in both information and
available kits. But those riches could have easily also led to decreased
circulation for the magazine...I don't need an extensive article and
plans
for a freight car when I can purchase a kit from Westerfield or Sunshine
for
that same car. And the Internet and lists such as this one have made it
easier to find modelers who have information that we need rather than
expect
to find that information in a magazine.

We still need information to make our models, even the best kits,
accurate
for the time period being modeled. But the information we need, I think,
is
not necessarily scale drawings but photos, lettering information, trucks
and
brake system changes, etc. Ted's new magazine and other publications
have
filled that gap....

Jack Burgess
www.yosemitevalleyr-r.com


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.19/663 - Release Date:
2/1/2007 2:28 PM


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.19/663 - Release Date:
2/1/2007 2:28 PM



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]