The problem is, it is the dealer who gets stuck. The manufacturer has been paid. The distributor has been paid. Neither will take the product back. The customer who pre-ordered declines to take it.

All of this attention to tank car placards begs some similar attention to placards for other cars. I have examples of placards used on the C&S for "Explosives," and for "Heated Car" (for reefers with

Tom, Wrong! (Gosh, I miss the Gong Show) First "inflammable" is absolutely correct English. Check your dictionary. Second, the derivation is from Latin inflammare. The "in" is not the negative

I've used Detail Associates' .010" x .018" brass wire for the stirrups on CN STMFC's. The ladder stirrups are made overlength, and attached to the sides of the ladder stiles with CA. As the real

I wrote: Further checking shows I was wrong on this; the Old English word has a Latin root, inflammare. And to further contradict Mr. Houle, the Latin prefix in- can indeed mean "not," but its

Tom Houle wrote: Just two points, Tom. Incorrect Latin does not make incorrect English. Correct English is what is in use. Moreover, you apparently don't recall the word "inflame," which means

For many years at least through the fifties, the term "Inflammable" was used to indicate combustionable material. It was and still is incorrect English. Inflammable literally means non-flammable.

Al, For most of the period of this list, "inflammable" was the preferred usage for something that could catch fire and burn. However, there was the problem that folks began to equate "in" with "not"

Al Campbell wrote: By regulatory decision, "flammable." The two terms were essentially interchangeable in the 1950s, leading to obvious possibilities for misinterpretation of one or the other

Not that I'm an English major but, I can speak the language. A question that I have often wondered about, what is the difference between "Flammable" and "Inflammable"? Seems like an oxymoron. What

Bruce, I've been staying out of this discussion, as it seems to me largely pointless, but I will add one additional observation to Brianna's sage advice. If you decide not to reserve but to "wait

Chuck and all, From where I sit this is a Catch-22 thing. The importer of the loco doesn't want to 'risk' a lot of money. So he goes to pre-order (essentially zero risk) ... but -lots- of

Folks, Wow... I thought this was all off topic as business practices... but since it isn't and I have a get out of jail card hidden somewhere around here... (found it!) Brianna says that it is all

Rich Orr wrote: But notice the problem here. The locomotive comes in, it's panned by somebody somewhere (rightly or wrongly), and the prospective buyer, who of course had no way to know what

As a small vendor (not a LHS), I buy directly from two manufacturers and through distributors for everything else. None of them with the exception of brass have ever required a deposit. That being

Stuart Forsyth wrote: Jack Burgess replied: I would make two points. First, in my blog post about prototype placards, there is a photo of an explosives placard from the mid-1950s and it is

Andy, The only K-type brake cylinder I am aware of in N scale is one that was (is?) made by Detail Associates. Try Marshall Thomson at Republic Locomotive Works. They are shown in his on-line

Funaro & Camerlengo Just posted this on their Website: SEE US AT THE PHILADELPHIA DIVISION NMRA MEET at the Desmond Great Valley Hotel & Conference Center in Malverne, PA March 23- March 25,

<I no longer have the source material in my possession, but as I recall, <at least for explosives, the pertinent Interstate Commerce Commission <regulations during World War II (Par. 909) specified