For those of you that anticpate modeling one of the postwar 65 foot Mill Gondolas, the early 3-bay PS-2, (both Athearn) or Al Westerfield's New York Central stock car with wood roof, I am working on

Ingenious, I polish the tread because most freight cars have sort of shiny treads and they don't look black to me. Glad to know it has another benefit. I always brush paint though, I have a small

Good as far as it goes, Tony, but, as you explained yourself just a couple of messages ago, the point size of printer's type is measured from baseline to baseline. On the other hand modelers usually

So is the use of the word club here also to be seen as a metaphor? At the risk of giving our moderator a headache or continuing a ?discussion? that may best be left alone I feel morally compelled to

Bill Keene wrote: You're forgiven. Now clean the erasers and go home <g>. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705

Tony, SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS SOLID BEARINGS THOSE BRASS THINGS I WILL

I wrote: In addition, I should have repeated what I said earlier: 12-inch high prototype lettering may NOT be exactly the height of ANY type, even in a close point size such as I calculated,

Schuyler Larrabee wrote: Yeah, it's flip. You and I and most of the active people on this list would know immediately if it's "truthful" or not. Whether a completely ignorant member of the public

Prototype points or scale points? Probably the latter, i.e. the point size used in making the decals, which are then alleged to be scale size. So let's do the arithmetic (not "math," notice): 12

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote: Keep in mind that the > point size does NOT tell you the height of letters. is > only an approximate guide to exact letter

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote: Keep in mind that the > point size does NOT tell you the height of letters. is > only an approximate guide to exact letter

From the point of view of a well qualified researcher who has examined all of the available evidence. You know, Schuyler, facts. (Not "truthiness," though that term and concept are currently popular

"Truthful." From whose point of view? That's not a flip question, Tony, or Denny, or anybody else in the Museum biz. But it's an important one. And it's not on topic, and I do NOT need

Bill Keene wrote: Bill, Bill, Bill. Repeat after me: solid bearings. Or if you prefer, plain bearings. Otherwise you are just repeating the propaganda of the roller-bearing companies. Tony

Paul, Weathering effects... but different. Back in the Good Old Days (actually, the good current days for our group) all of those friction bearings resulted in a lot of oil everywhere near the

I just recently noticed the weathering of truck axles as I sat watching a UP freight go through our local grade-crossing. I've seen many articles, etc., about painting/weathering truck-wheels, which

Justin Kahn wrote: You mean such organizations may not be telling the truth about their purposes? I am shocked, SHOCKED to hear this. Regarding the exchange between my friends Richard

I really am not motivated to discuss the issue further, as I have no horse in the race, but simply to observe that with increasing needs for local revenue, a lot of fraternal and hobby organizations

All true, and no one has better credentials than my good friend Denny when it comes to taking a stand for historical authenticity. Here Denny and I are in radical disagreement. Bogus is bogus, and

Somehow >I seriously doubt that they will remove the steel ends and roof before >they repaint it. I bring it up only as a reminder of how worthless >railway museums are for doing prototype research.