|
Re: ADMIN: Order in the STMFC!
destron@...
Perhaps various limitations might also be kept in mind, be they financial
or whatever else. Some things aren't available to some people. I try to model as accurately as possible... but so far, I haven't figured out how to scratchbuild an Equipco brake wheel, so I use what's available: either the wheel found on MicroTrains HOn3 cars, or some Ajax wheels I found, nominally for N scale, but which are a bit oversized. If someone were to look at one of my scratchbuilt cars and then say it has the wrong brakewheel, I'd likely punch them in the nose. And then tell him to build the wheel for me - to micrometer precision, of course. With whatever wording is stamped on them, to *precise* scale size, and legibly! ;) Frank Valoczy
|
|
|
|
Re: ADMIN: Order in the STMFC!
rfederle@...
Well said,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I model as accurately as I want to. Where I stop is where I feel it is good enough. I have not "shown" model and might never show. I enjoy this group for the information and help it provides. A favorite period for me is the 50's in to the early 60's. Those final days of steam and the coming proliferation of first generation diesels. This group has spark interest for me and led to wider web searches. If I want to hear arguements I could stay at work or turn on the news. Robert Federle ---- Mike Brock <brockm@...> wrote:
Bang! Bang! Bang! [ Most judges seem to bang their gavel three times when
|
|
|
|
ADMIN: Order in the STMFC!
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
Bang! Bang! Bang! [ Most judges seem to bang their gavel three times when they want order in the court room ]. There WILL be order in the STMFC.
I see messages referring to the terms "elitist", "bozo", "rivet counter", etc., etc. in messages that are clearly out of scope. If you happen to know of an elitist box car, by all means tell us. If you happen to know of a member or non member whom you believe to be a "bozo", "elitist", "vestie" or "rivet counter" and you just have to announce it to the world, find another group in which to do it. Note the STMFC rules: "The purpose of the group is to discuss all aspects of North American standard gauge freight cars of the steam era [ 1900-1960 ]. The objectives include the sharing of information about railroad freight cars including their operation, cargos, distribution and the various techniques of building models of them. Emphasis is to be placed on the study of the prototype with a goal of producing models of them with as great a degree of accuracy as possible." Obviously, the objective of the STMFC is to produce models with as great a degree of accuracy as possible. If others complain about this...too bad. Personally, I could not care less and I would suggest the same attitude to the members. So far as I know...I have not suffered from any blows from those not striving for accuracy. Obviously, we all won't reach the same level of accuracy with our models regardless of whether or not we build them or buy them. Hence, even though we may strive for more accuracy, others may strive harder and reach a higher degree of accuracy. And, of course, some of our models may reach a higher degree than others. I have two Bowser covered hoppers of the same RR, one with replaced grabs, one with thicker factory grabs. Horrors! Actually, I don't care. Someone noted this recently and pointed it out. My response was..."And?" Did I take offense? Of course not. Why should I? During Prototype Rails this last year I displayed some resin cars. Only when I was returning them to the layout did I realize that some lacked coupler levers. OHMYGOSH! I was stunned...for 3 seconds...after which I forgot about it. The point is, the STMFC pursues accuracy in models of steam era frt cars. At no time does it demean those who do not. At the same time, accuracy IS an objective...although not a requirement. If you are not interested in pursuing accuracy, the STMFC is probably not the place for you. OTOH, just because others might achieve more accuracy than you is no reason to be disturbed, upset or bothered. We are all in that boat in that regard. So...let us get back within scope...steam era frt cars. BTW, I DID find the keys to Moderate Jail. Mike Brock STMFC Owner
|
|
|
|
Re: Houser Collection
Mike Fortney
Charlie sells his prints shot by him or his father only via eBay. He
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
does sell repeat prints once in a while, again only on eBay. FWIW, he gave the Illinois Traction Society permission to publish his IT shots in "The Flyer" with, of course, proper credit given. Mike Fortney ITS
--- In STMFC@..., "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Houser Collection
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Larry Kline wrote:
"I wrote to Charles Houser offering to buy a print of a photo that had just been sold on ebay. He replied that he is not willing to sell prints to order. Has anyone else had a similar exchange with him?" At least you got an answer out of him. I tried writing to obtain permission to publish a photo in an article and never got a reply. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Re: Houser Collection
Larry Kline
Frank Valoczy asked:
Does anyone know what/who the "Houser collection" is, and how one might contact the owner of this collection of photos? Tim O'Connor replied: Charles Houser P.O. Box 314 Macungie, PA 18062-0314 United States Charlie almost always has auctions on Ebay, mostly prints from his negative/slide collection. His handle is "windsor74". I wrote to Charles Houser offering to buy a print of a photo that had just been sold on ebay. He replied that he is not willing to sell prints to order. Has anyone else had a similar exchange with him? Larry Kline Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
|
|
Re: Levels of Bozosity
Paul <buygone@...>
Tom:
Very well stated, thank you. Paul C. Koehler _____ From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of pullmanboss Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 8:10 PM To: STMFC@... Subject: [STMFC] Levels of Bozosity Ray has said he wished all this would stop and/or go away. Unfortunately, there are people I know and respect flailing away at each other because the original point has become confused. Maybe we need a definition of terms because, Yea, We Are All Bozos at some level. (Not all of what follows is tongue in cheek.) I. The Entry Level Bozo: This fellow has many questions and little knowledge. Everyone was an entry level bozo at some point, so they should be treated with respect. They are the future of our hobby. Treat them kindly. Answer their questions as if they've never been asked before. II. The Internet Bozo: Now we're getting into less likeable characters. The internet bozo expects every question to be answered instantly and will complain if it isn't. He will complain if the response isn't a direct answer but a reference to another information source. He will complain bitterly if the referenced source isn't instantly available, and free. III. The Secretive Bozo: Takes great satisfaction in knowing or having something that others don't. Operates from the philosophy of "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you've lost a customer." Will dispense his pearls of wisdom only when it serves to demonstrate his superiority. IV. The Herd Bozo: A dormant characteristic that surfaces when in the presence of other herd bozos. Typically found at conventions, public shows and on fan trips. Also known as "Vestie", the herd bozo indulges in dress and behavior that would embarrass him were he not in the presence of others of similar persuasion. For better or for worse, for most of the general public the herd bozo is the public face of our hobby. V. The IgnorAnus (not an original term): The über bozo, the ignoranus is both stupid and an.... well, you can figure it out. In general terms, the ignoranus is someone who, through ignorance, envy or malice, seeks to demean, diminish or destroy that which others value but he neither values nor understands. Think of Turkish gunners using the sphinx for target practice. Scorns advice, views it as criticism. Is proud of his ignorance. Downplays the accomplishments of others and would rather tear others down than build himself up. In the entire craftsman vs. RTR discussion we've paid little heed to the fact that everyone who participates in this hobby deserves to enjoy it however and at whatever level they wish. And to acknowledge that as high-end modelers we will find ourselves on the fringe of the market that results. Even so, our cadre of almost 1300 STMFC souls encompasses manufacturers, importers, designers, consultants, dealers, authors, editors and publishers, and we wield an influence in the hobby way out of proportion to our numbers. We should take pride in that and not be so concerned with the bozos. When it comes right down to it, the second, third and fourth categories of bozos are just annoying. It's only the fifth category, the ignoranus, that can do damage. I'm done now. Tom Madden [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
|
|
Re: Levels of Bozosity
pullmanboss <tgmadden@...>
Tim, staying up late on Saturday night, asked:
So... which one am I, Tom?Ah, grasshopper, do you seek information, or confirmation? Look deeply into the mirror of bozosity... What see you?? A bozo? Perhaps not. Perhaps.....a Clarabelle!? We are all Bozo. Tom Mmmmmmmmmmmm, who just scored a 3-pack of unbuilt Red Caboose L&NE boxcar kits and is muy happy!
|
|
|
|
Re: Houser Collection
Charles Houser
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
P.O. Box 314 Macungie, PA 18062-0314 United States Charlie almost always has auctions on Ebay, mostly prints from his negative/slide collection. His handle is "windsor74". Tim O'Connor ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone know what/who the "Houser collection" is, and how one might
|
|
|
|
Re: Levels of Bozosity
Tom Madden wrote
and recently also wroteI. The Entry Level Bozo B, in this case, obviously stands for Bozo.Tim B. o'Connor So... which one am I, Tom? Tim
|
|
|
|
Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian and questions
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
Needless to say, the thread of subject "[STMFC] Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian and questions" is also terminated. While there may be multiple different sub groups within the "hobby" of model railroading, that fact has nothing to do with the goals of the STMFC except from perhaps a curiosity point of view. Various views have been expressed regarding the merits of craftsmanship models and RTR in this thread. Both are perfectly acceptable means of acquiring models as far as the STMFC is concerned. Thus, unless someone can demonstrate off group that there is more value to be added, the thread is terminated.
Mike Brock STMFC Owner
|
|
|
|
ADMIN: Termination of Re: Re: Preweathered Model Comment
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
There have been quite a few messages today which are only remotely within scope of the STMFC. Ray Meyer writes:
"Selling what hobby? Collecting toy trains? If that's someone's bag, so be it. But I guess I belong to a different hobby, one that prizes craftsmanship (as I suspect you do). I never understood how someone can take pride in something they bought." Ray and others are certainly welcome to this view. I don't see any reason to continue to argue its merits since the thread merely points out that one can either build or purchase a model of a frt car. Both techniques are perfectly within the scope and goals of the STMFC. Therefore, this thread is now terminated. Members are, of course, welcome to contact me off group to argue in favor of continuing the thread. Tom Madden speaks rather eloquently in message 21170 and I think I'll fall back on that message and his post of tonight. If there is one thing to be taken from his messages it is: "Respect mine, and I'll respect yours." It would not be a mistake to apply that to other model railroaders. Mike Brock STMFC Owner
|
|
|
|
Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian and questions
Here's my take on -all- of this ...
If someone claims that his/her approach to modeling is "better" than someone else's approach - whether or not they use terms that talk about groups or individuals - that statement is "elitist". To me you can promote your viewpoint - but if you do that in any manner that smacks of "I'm better than you because ... " or "Our way is the true way" ... then that statement is a form of elitism. Furthermore - if you use terms such as "bozo" when you post you are often either crossing the boundary or at best flirting with it. And it doesn't matter much if you are labelling an individual or a group - because most of the time it seems like those who are referring to a group are doing so simply because they don't want to get sent directly moderate hell. None of the prior posts on this topic have helped me in any way to be motivated to do more modelling, to be more or less 'accurate' when I do so, have advanced my knowledge of railroading or how to model same, or have ... in any way ... contributed to what I understand as the reason for the existence of this group. This is not fun and is not helping me to be a better modeler. - Jim Betz in San Jose -- ***************************************************************** ***** Too Many Trains, Not Enough Brains!!! *****************************************************************
|
|
|
|
Levels of Bozosity
pullmanboss <tgmadden@...>
Ray has said he wished all this would stop and/or go away.
Unfortunately, there are people I know and respect flailing away at each other because the original point has become confused. Maybe we need a definition of terms because, Yea, We Are All Bozos at some level. (Not all of what follows is tongue in cheek.) I. The Entry Level Bozo: This fellow has many questions and little knowledge. Everyone was an entry level bozo at some point, so they should be treated with respect. They are the future of our hobby. Treat them kindly. Answer their questions as if they've never been asked before. II. The Internet Bozo: Now we're getting into less likeable characters. The internet bozo expects every question to be answered instantly and will complain if it isn't. He will complain if the response isn't a direct answer but a reference to another information source. He will complain bitterly if the referenced source isn't instantly available, and free. III. The Secretive Bozo: Takes great satisfaction in knowing or having something that others don't. Operates from the philosophy of "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you've lost a customer." Will dispense his pearls of wisdom only when it serves to demonstrate his superiority. IV. The Herd Bozo: A dormant characteristic that surfaces when in the presence of other herd bozos. Typically found at conventions, public shows and on fan trips. Also known as "Vestie", the herd bozo indulges in dress and behavior that would embarrass him were he not in the presence of others of similar persuasion. For better or for worse, for most of the general public the herd bozo is the public face of our hobby. V. The IgnorAnus (not an original term): The über bozo, the ignoranus is both stupid and an.... well, you can figure it out. In general terms, the ignoranus is someone who, through ignorance, envy or malice, seeks to demean, diminish or destroy that which others value but he neither values nor understands. Think of Turkish gunners using the sphinx for target practice. Scorns advice, views it as criticism. Is proud of his ignorance. Downplays the accomplishments of others and would rather tear others down than build himself up. In the entire craftsman vs. RTR discussion we've paid little heed to the fact that everyone who participates in this hobby deserves to enjoy it however and at whatever level they wish. And to acknowledge that as high-end modelers we will find ourselves on the fringe of the market that results. Even so, our cadre of almost 1300 STMFC souls encompasses manufacturers, importers, designers, consultants, dealers, authors, editors and publishers, and we wield an influence in the hobby way out of proportion to our numbers. We should take pride in that and not be so concerned with the bozos. When it comes right down to it, the second, third and fourth categories of bozos are just annoying. It's only the fifth category, the ignoranus, that can do damage. I'm done now. Tom Madden
|
|
|
|
Car Classes (Was: Re: Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian)
destron@...
Hope this little hop over the Pond will still be considered on-topic...
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
(it *is* steam era...) Car classes existed on the Hungarian State Railways, too, as well as on all manifestations of railways in Germany. Most other railroads in Europe had them, too; during the "steam era", each road had its own system (pre-1968 or so, though steam ran in some places until rather later; in Europe they more refer to this dividing point in time as pre-computerization and post-computerization of road numbers). After that change date, the old numbering systems for freight and passenger equipment were abolished, and a standardized system still in use today was introduced, both numeric (for actual road numbers) and alphabetic, for classifying cars by type. The guy working in the yard is more interested in the numbers; the engineering or mech division type will understand at once what is meant by "Eas" (gondola, 4-axle, cleared for 120km/h+), but will be able to begin little if you tell him the road number. I have a number of official railway documents of the former Yugoslavian State Railways, and all of these refer to car types by classes, and list the road numbers simply in a small table at the end of the entry, almost as an afterthought. I would think that such a division of "who needs to know what" would have applied on our side of the puddle as well, on roads that did use a car classification system. Certainly I understand the utility of such a system, especially with roads like the Pennsy, who had the same type of car scattered all over the map with the road numbers allotted them. For roads like the Seaboard, they were more systematic, it seems to me, that a certain series of numbers was identical to a certain car class. Frank Valoczy
Tony,
|
|
|
|
Re: Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian
Russ Strodtz <sheridan@...>
Tony,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I think you already know my "Jackman List" and while it does include Engineering it does not include Mechanical. First time I saw any indication that the CB&Q had car classes was via BRHS publications and I did not take them seriously. Thought they were just another manifestation of the same logic that applies names to paint schemes. GN,NP, and BN did not use car classes at all and they got by just fine. BNSF does not have any such system. Russ
----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson To: STMFC@... Sent: Saturday, 12 May, 2007 18:26 Subject: Re: [STMFC] Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian Russ Strodtz wrote: > One of my problems with these lists is that while I've spent my > entire adult life working for a Railroad the jargon used on this, (and > many other), groups just goes right by me. My pet peeve is referring > to cars by "classes" instead of number series or car type. Well, Russ, most people in the Mechanical Department would say the opposite; so would many people in the shops, who knew which spare parts went with which class. But it's certainly true that train crews tended to think of cars (and locomotives) in number series terms, not by class, and I can believe switchmen, yard clerks, agents, and other people directly connected with operations might have the same view. (Now you can give us your "Jackman list" of the jobs you've held, and we'll see if my guess is right.) Personally, for those roads which did use classes, and letter them on the cars, I find it most helpful. 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 Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
Re: Tichy underframe/Kadee 58s
Dean,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
As I prepare my fleet of Steam era cars for each show I examine them for broken detail parts and mechanical failures. When I sopt errant couplers I replace them with #78s if I have the time. If it's possible I'll redo the draft gear mounting or to accept the narrower profile of the 78. The Kato covered hopper is a good example of a car that needs a total replacement as that draft gear only works for thier non-prototypic coupler. I'm not trying to make the perfect freight car every time but I think my cars deserve it. Rob Manley
----- Original Message -----
From: Dean Payne To: STMFC@... Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 4:52 PM Subject: [STMFC] Tichy underframe/Kadee 58s The Tichy underframe that comes with the USRA SS kit has a bit more play in the coupler box pivot pin than I think it should. I found some sleeves that came with some other Kadee couplers, but they don't quite fit over the pin. One option is to replace the coupler box with the Kadee box, but I thought the Tichy box looked better. Had I known, I might have gone with the Kadee 78 box/coupler. Or, does the Kadee work fine without any modification? I can't be the first to have stumbled into this. I used the McHenry scale coupler on my PMcK&Y rebuild, and the McHenry has a different spring setup. I think the Kadee spring would require a more precise coupler mounting, but I could be wrong. Doe the Kadees work fine, or do I need to modify/replace the coupler box? Dean Payne
|
|
|
|
Re: Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian
red_gate_rover
OK, I thought I was being very, very civil and just conversing.
Apologies to all if it didn't come across that way. I truly never expected that sharing of a difference of opinion was generating anger. --Jim Pasquill --- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote: the most helpful. I'm sorry that your experience seems to been
|
|
|
|
Re: Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Russ Strodtz wrote:
One of my problems with these lists is that while I've spent my entire adult life working for a Railroad the jargon used on this, (and many other), groups just goes right by me. My pet peeve is referring to cars by "classes" instead of number series or car type.Well, Russ, most people in the Mechanical Department would say the opposite; so would many people in the shops, who knew which spare parts went with which class. But it's certainly true that train crews tended to think of cars (and locomotives) in number series terms, not by class, and I can believe switchmen, yard clerks, agents, and other people directly connected with operations might have the same view. (Now you can give us your "Jackman list" of the jobs you've held, and we'll see if my guess is right.) Personally, for those roads which did use classes, and letter them on the cars, I find it most helpful. 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
|
|
|
|
Re: Modeler/Craftsman/ Modeler Historian
Richard Hendrickson
On May 12, 2007, at 3:52 AM, Russ Strodtz wrote:
....One of myRuss, in the steam era a number of railroads assigned class designations to their freight cars because it was a simpler way to inventory them than by number series. The Pennsy, especially, needed to identify cars by classes because of their crazy numbering system(?) in which cars of the same design were scattered all through their number series (though, making it easy for all of us, the PRR provided the class designations in their ORER entries). Among other major railroads with systematic car classification systems were the Southern Pacific, Union Pacific, Santa Fe, Baltimore & Ohio, Seaboard, and Burlington. In almost all cases, the class symbols were stenciled on the cars and the railroads' live lists, freight car folios, and other documentation were organized by class, not by car number. In those cases, it's sort of perverse not to use the class designations when referring to particular cars or groups of cars owned by those RRs. As a Santa Fe modeler, a class symbol tells me instantly which Santa Fe car is under discussion, whereas I'm far from being able to identify most of them by number series. Richard Hendrickson
|
|
|