Hi All, This thread has been very interesting - in the good way. Stimulating would be another word I think fits. Dennis and others have hit on something key ... the idea that the NMRA should

Thanks John and Robert for taking the time to help rule out the possible GN ownership of the car. I don't suppose anyone has managed to make a positive ID of the car? <More

David North wrote: Nobody is punishing anyone. But some of us are pretty skeptical, and will need some serious convincing. If you ask, "do I distrust the sons because of the fathers'

With reference to the unremarked steam loco minus 1/2 of its frame depicted in a critique , Dennis comments- From one narrow view, you are correct. Most editors do use the artful 3/4 view to

Well...if we want to continue discussions about standards...particularly with regard to frt cars...I think the STMFC can handle that...at least for awhile. Naturally, since the NMRA is the only

I had asked the President of the SP&S Hist. Society this question last fall. This was his reply. I'm sorry I couldn't reply sooner. Hope this helps you, Brian Dick. Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007

Richard Hendrickson wrote: Tony Thompson replied: This is an important point for NMRA apologists to keep in mind. Whatever Mr. Voss's personal qualities and whatever his determination to get a job

I've heard complaints about NMRA folks for fifty years. Those who don't belong <Intended double meaning> complain about what someone has done. They want someone else to do something that

See embedded comments below.

This question has come up as well on the armor sites I mentioned. Although there was - and is from time to time - a good bit of "what if" handwringing, there hasn't been a significant - or notable

The book Trackside Around Duluth 1957-1960 features on pages 77-78 a May, 1957 picture of a Northern Pacific W-5 2-8-2 hauling a coal drag out of Duluth yard with the first car a Southern 2 bay coal

It is an issue and one reason why you are unlikely to see me review any more of Broadway Limited/Precision Craft Models releases in TKM. I believe that the editorial policy of TKM is that no-one who

Richard Hendrickson wrote: This is an important point for NMRA apologists to keep in mind. Whatever Mr. Voss's personal qualities and whatever his determination to get a job done, there are

Dennis Storzek wrote: Sure -- provided the people who make things DO follow some of kind of standard that the buyers are happy with. When the NMRA undertook its standards efforts, around 50

(Among many perceptive observations)... Exactly. The NMRA long ago squandered whatever credibility it may have had with both serious scale modelers and the manufacturers who cater to them. At this

In a message dated 5/25/2008 10:38:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, davenorth@... writes: What Richard is talking about is people, not the organization. What is the organization, if

Dennis Storzek says: "The broadside photo of the steam loco is what makes it an honest review. The editors could just as well have chosen a high � view which would totally hide this visual

Dennis Storzek wrote: Certainly Denny A's original point was primarily about the conformance program, and I agree with both his and Dennis's comments on that. I thought I also detected a thought

Dennis Storzek wrote: Dennis, While I find your ideas well thought out and nicely presented, I think you have overlooked one potentially important part of a review. A good review goes beyond