Charlie Vlk writes: Yes. My point was that, in 2000, some including myself, were advocating a scale AND realistically looking coupler. As with track and wheel RP's, an additional RP for couplers and

Pat, There has been concern with assembly of the couplers in larger scales, however, the HO are listed as being sold assembled. Haven't used them, just seen them on one of our Chapter member's

the sales scale draft be in the into Charlie and Denny (and others), I remember the scathing editorial in the first issue of RPC where they blasted the HO coupler mfgrs. about the non-scale size

I just received the latest Gazette, and there is an ad by Cimarron (www.cimarronworks.com) for a "Crystal River Ingoldsby Dump Gon" in Sn3 and On30 (that won't help HO scale modelers much), which is

MicroTrains is not a "defacto" standard..... to be a standard it has to be followed by more than one manufactuer. No one has attempted to produce sharp-edged deep flanges. Arnold Rapidos, bad as

The current NMRA Coupler Box was designed to accomodate the Devoe, Baker and Mantua couplers. These couplers were off the market by the time the "universal" box was published. While I was at Kato I

new issue of Sunshine's Sante about three near Witt, concern who else say 1930 Gerard, Pacific Fruit Express also had cars specifically assigned to transport dry ice. Beginning in 1937 they

All; To relate this topic to something that we can all relate to (?), I would like to pass on the feedback we get at both the PRRT&HS annual and the WPM, on what people would like to get at a

and Tim, I miss years when MRIA and Naperville were on the same weekend as well - - except when Andy stuck me with booth duty on Saturday<g>. Oh well, rank does, as they say, hath its priviledges.

My friend Marty McGuirk wrote: "The Kadee #5 box doesn't need to be the size it is, it is that size to accommodate an NMRA Standard or RP (I don't recall which) that itself was intended to satisfy all

"Brian J Carlson asked: Brian, Any freight car whose CAPY was more than three times its LT WT was "required" to have empty/load brakes, where a valve lowered the braking effort when the car was

Gerald, I'm not aware of any other railroads that owned dry ice cars, but there were several private owners: Mathieson, Liquid Carbonic Corp., Merchants Despatch (DCIX), and perhaps others that don't

I agree with you Marty, but I sure do miss the Rosemont MRIA show when it coincided with the Naperville show... that was a lot of fun and it seemed like -everyone- was there. And not just model rr

Whereas, JP's coupler (at least his BIG one) had a working prototypical pin, that could be made to work with uncoupling levers! No more magnets or sticks -- just uncouple them like the real thing.

There's an interesting correlation between this discussion and the situation some N scalers see with Atlas code 55 track. Micro-Trains, a defacto "standard" in N scale, has extra deep flanges

For whatever it's worth, my own current preference is to use Kadee no. 78 couplers wherever I can, especially on resin kits, and Kadee no. 58 couplers when I have to accept a wide no. 5-size box.

I have posted information on freight deliveries to Rochester IN in January of 1954. This information is taken from Delivery Advices/Cashier's Memoradum. Any feed back or discussion of this

Now that I don't have to go to an NMRA national convention for "work" I find I have no interest in going and, frankly, don't miss them. Naperville, and focused historical society conventions, have

Denny, I was somewhat appalled when JP said at Cocoa Beach that he was going to produce his beautiful scale couplers with Kadee #5 style shanks! I thought to myself "What's the point?" -- but JP is

Denny- The greater market is for the Kadee #5 box. I would imagine that the sales of the Sargeant coupler in the gross box might support tooling a scale draft gear and coupler head, but the vast