Ed: hi. Whatever they be called, I think we need to distinguish between this "Buckeye steel end" from the Erie 78000 series http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/frt/erie78249adb.jpg and the one I

Pieter Roos writes: "The way such a standard would be implemented is in the way I expect 99% of all non-safety related standards take hold. The standard becomes expected on new products, old products

Tim O'Connor writes: "We on the other hand, can build our own models to our own standards. Some people detail underframes. Some don't. Some convert everything to scale size Kadees. Some don't. Some

The way such a standard would be implemented is in the way I expect 99% of all non-safety related standards take hold. The standard becomes expected on new products, old products make up a

Kurt Laughlin says: "You are missing my point altogether: If the existing organization won't do what you think is necessary come up with your own "Standards". Why bother with an organization at all?

Larry Grubb writes: "If by "very positive" you mean "a can of worms", I agree. The problem is reverse compatibility. The number of new trucks that come on the market every year is quite small, and if

The NMRA standards revolve around dimensions that are required for different manufacturers' products to operate compatibly. "Standards" are critical to compatibility and Recommended Practices (RPs)

All good information, but I can take it just a bit further. I have a photo from the J. Michael Gruber collection of Rr-7 SFRD 24594 at Waterford, Ont. Feb. 2, 1949. At that time the car had a

cj riley wrote: I have indeed noticed that, but it shouldn't require reading between the lines. The NMRA could certainly get publicity for WITHDRAWING certificates, as I said, but I should

Mid-43 was about the time that the Ordnance Department took over vehicle procurement from the Quartermaster Corps. The QMC was much more tolerant of that than OCO-D. (QMC era parts manuals

They might indeed change, if the NMRA has the guts The standards are being modified and they no longer have to go to the entire membership for approval (a very old fashioned concept) that will make

One must not forget the purpose of standards from a manufacturer's point of view -- to increase their own sales & profits. I fail to see how any of your proposals (whatever merit they may have) would

cj riley wrote (apropos of turnout dimensional issues): They might indeed change, if the NMRA has the guts to modify the standards as you describe, and then PULL any compliance

I dont mean to butt in here however as I see it we pretty much do that now. The thing is my standards may not suit the next guy and vise versa. We already choose what is suitable to our needs and

Larry, I don't know what support Tony needs from me to publish his next book or Richard his next RMJ article. More to the point, I can't see how any sort of standardization document (note the

We are working on a model of one of the dual axle style auto carriers, and have drawings of them. The trailers were used on the Clejan flatcars as Tony Thompson demonstrates. There was a large roster

Kit? Someone still makes kits?

You are missing my point altogether: If the existing organization won't do what you think is necessary come up with your own "Standards". Why bother with an organization at all? I would think there