Re: Out of Scope messages

Rossiter, Mark W <Mark.Rossiter@...>

Yes but . . . while I understand it is out of scope to comment on Mr. Hundman as a person, Mainline Modeler was his product.  If one of the purposes of this list is to share the information necessary to build accurate freight car models, I think it’s important to share information about which reference materials are accurate and which are not.  If not for this list, I would not have known how much liberty was taken with the drawings and commentary in a publication I counted on as being ‘the gospel’ for accurate modeling for many years.  I have every issue of MM published and have often used it as my ‘go to’ resource for a number of modeling projects. 


I am reminded of how disappointed I was in finding out that the drawings provided in Model Railroader and in the instructions for some Reading passenger car kits were drawn not based on the study of actual cars (of which many still exist), but on ‘typical’ practices of the era.  In other words, they were almost worthless. 


Again, I’m not sure that ‘making stuff up’ qualifies as a business practice, but the consumer should at least be warned that not everything shown in drawings of the type under discussion is based on good solid evidence.  I don’t see much difference between being critical of inaccurate drawings (whose primary purpose was for encouraging the building of accurate models) versus pointing out that a manufacturer used the wrong trucks or paint job on a freight car offering.


Mark Rossiter 





Join to automatically receive all group messages.