Mike Brock wrote:
As far the RPCyc is concerned, I think I would favor a more complete article
as opposed to shorter and simpler. If the article requires more info to
present the subject better...so be it. At the same time, information about
the use of a car, locomotive or whatever might be nice. IOW, simply
presenting more info about construction details might not be the answer but
info about how and why designs occurred or how certain RRs chose this or
that might be interesting. Again, car or locomotive use might be worthy.
Excellent summary, Mike. I'd vote this way too.
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