Re: New Standards for Freight Cars Models

Pieter Roos

Hi Larry;

Granted, some thought should be given to possible adaptation. Your
example, however, is just one possible case. In the current "open
market" case, how does someone like Tahoe Model Works who plans to
design a truck that could run under a number of manufacturers cars
decide on the bolster height? Or if the same resin manufacturer
designs a car and there are two or more trucks that are appropriate,
but each was designed with a different height? For that matter, the
same manufacturer today may choose to match his car to the best
available truck, only to have a better but incompatible truck offered
shortly after his kit is released! Is that really a better situation?

In fact, for many years the Athearn/MDC and Kadee truck designs served
as somewhat defacto standards, although most of us became accustomed
to adding washers raise the car floor even on Athearn cars with
Athearn trucks to meet the standard coupler height. Surely working
with the current mixture of components is no worse than trying to deal
with standard and legacy non-standard components? At least a standard
gives reason to hope the situation will eventually clear up.


--- In STMFC@..., Larry Grubb <larry450sl@...> wrote:

I'm not kidding, but I guess I'm not explaining myself well.
By implementation I am not referring to the policing of the
standard, I'm referring to the difficulty of making the transition in
real time. Here's an example:
A resin kit manufacturer wants to produce a kit with bolster
height & details that conform to the new standard. But he knows the
best available trucks to use for this model do not conform to the
standard. Does he violate the standard so the car sits at the correct
height above the rail when using the best available trucks? Does he
comply with the standard knowing that no accurate models of the
correct truck exist that will allow the modeler to build the kit to
the proper height above the rail?
I certainly am not trying to discourage anyone from working on new
standards, what I am trying to do is show that developing the standard
is only phase one of the process, and if you have not also worked on a
plan for phase two, you may find all of your good work was for nothing.
Larry Grubb

Mike Brock <brockm@...> wrote:

"I understand the desire for these kinds of standards, and how much
would simplify both designing products and the modeler's ability to
easily. What prevents them from becoming reality is not coming up
with a
good standard, it is the complexity of implementing the standard."

I'm not so sure. Who decides what the standard is? Implementing it?

Mike Brock

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

Join to automatically receive all group messages.