mlehman gregc you may be interested in reading the section on the NMRA in The Sociology of Model Railroading. There is a review on the Charles Copper's Railway Pages. Whoa there...is it just me or does that person obsess much? It's an interesting read, but I think it says more about the author's insecurities than it does about the various institutions he flays at length.
gregc you may be interested in reading the section on the NMRA in The Sociology of Model Railroading. There is a review on the Charles Copper's Railway Pages.
you may be interested in reading the section on the NMRA in The Sociology of Model Railroading. There is a review on the Charles Copper's Railway Pages.
Whoa there...is it just me or does that person obsess much? It's an interesting read, but I think it says more about the author's insecurities than it does about the various institutions he flays at length.
He also gets some key points wrong.
For example, he says, "...since in many other industries (such as the Windows-compatible PC industry), issues of compatibility and interoperability have worked themselves out without a standards-setting body."
Has he never heard of the IEEE, the PCI-SIG, USB.org, etc... ?
It would seem the author has a bone to pick, and is simply slinging accusations without any facts to back them up.
Stevert mlehman gregc you may be interested in reading the section on the NMRA in The Sociology of Model Railroading. There is a review on the Charles Copper's Railway Pages. Whoa there...is it just me or does that person obsess much? It's an interesting read, but I think it says more about the author's insecurities than it does about the various institutions he flays at length. He also gets some key points wrong. For example, he says, "...since in many other industries (such as the Windows-compatible PC industry), issues of compatibility and interoperability have worked themselves out without a standards-setting body." Has he never heard of the IEEE, the PCI-SIG, USB.org, etc... ? It would seem the author has a bone to pick, and is simply slinging accusations without any facts to back them up.
Not to mention his opinion of anyone who goes to swap meets or train shows.
If it weren't for the DCC standards, I would still be using DC. Not only is interoperability important, but committing to a proprietary standard means that you are at the mercy of their pricing and continued existance.
Enjoy
Paul
Stevert betamax gregc rogerhensleySome common questions: Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? A) DCC Standards and RPs you're referring to the extending the protocol ? The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it. i take most of what i read with several grains of salt. just trying to get my facts straight The DCC protocols were developed by the NMRA independently of Lenz. There are no Lenz technologies present, as the NMRA will not endorse a commercial product as a standard. They don't want patents or licensing interfering with adoption. Actually, Lenz donated their DCC protocols to the NMRA, who then adopted them as standards, and yes, over the years has extended them. The important thing is that the NMRA did adopt a standard. Think back to the pre-DCC-as-a-standard days, when there were a number of competing command control protocols. You literally couldn't run your locos on your neighbor's layout unless you both used the same manufacturer's control system. The adoption and acceptance throughout the hobby of the NMRA's DCC standards, no matter where they originated, has pretty much put an end to those incompatibilities.
betamax gregc rogerhensleySome common questions: Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? A) DCC Standards and RPs you're referring to the extending the protocol ? The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it. i take most of what i read with several grains of salt. just trying to get my facts straight The DCC protocols were developed by the NMRA independently of Lenz. There are no Lenz technologies present, as the NMRA will not endorse a commercial product as a standard. They don't want patents or licensing interfering with adoption.
gregc rogerhensleySome common questions: Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? A) DCC Standards and RPs you're referring to the extending the protocol ? The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it. i take most of what i read with several grains of salt. just trying to get my facts straight
rogerhensleySome common questions: Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? A) DCC Standards and RPs
Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately?
A) DCC Standards and RPs
you're referring to the extending the protocol ?
The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it.
i take most of what i read with several grains of salt. just trying to get my facts straight
The DCC protocols were developed by the NMRA independently of Lenz. There are no Lenz technologies present, as the NMRA will not endorse a commercial product as a standard. They don't want patents or licensing interfering with adoption.
Actually, Lenz donated their DCC protocols to the NMRA, who then adopted them as standards, and yes, over the years has extended them.
The important thing is that the NMRA did adopt a standard. Think back to the pre-DCC-as-a-standard days, when there were a number of competing command control protocols. You literally couldn't run your locos on your neighbor's layout unless you both used the same manufacturer's control system.
The adoption and acceptance throughout the hobby of the NMRA's DCC standards, no matter where they originated, has pretty much put an end to those incompatibilities.
The NMRA committee working on a standard for command control had already settled on digital as the signalling method before they saw any actual examples. They liked the Marklin submission which used a pure digital signal. They also examined a system from Keller Engineering.
After that all comparisons end. The NMRA created a digital, packet based coammand control system which became the DCC standard.
Even the NMRA will tell you they have no documentation or agreements regarding DCC with Lenz, or anyone else.
betamax Stevert betamax gregc rogerhensleySome common questions: Q) I know about the history of the NMRA, but what has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? A) DCC Standards and RPs you're referring to the extending the protocol ? The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it. i take most of what i read with several grains of salt. just trying to get my facts straight The DCC protocols were developed by the NMRA independently of Lenz. There are no Lenz technologies present, as the NMRA will not endorse a commercial product as a standard. They don't want patents or licensing interfering with adoption. Actually, Lenz donated their DCC protocols to the NMRA, who then adopted them as standards, and yes, over the years has extended them. The important thing is that the NMRA did adopt a standard. Think back to the pre-DCC-as-a-standard days, when there were a number of competing command control protocols. You literally couldn't run your locos on your neighbor's layout unless you both used the same manufacturer's control system. The adoption and acceptance throughout the hobby of the NMRA's DCC standards, no matter where they originated, has pretty much put an end to those incompatibilities. The NMRA committee working on a standard for command control had already settled on digital as the signalling method before they saw any actual examples. They liked the Marklin submission which used a pure digital signal. They also examined a system from Keller Engineering. After that all comparisons end. The NMRA created a digital, packet based coammand control system which became the DCC standard. Even the NMRA will tell you they have no documentation or agreements regarding DCC with Lenz, or anyone else.
From the NMRA Web site:
"Rather than re-invent the wheel, the DCC Working Group studied all of the commercially available command control systems. Proposals were received from Keller and Mrklin. The Working Group found that the best system to base the new standard on was a system invented by Lenz Elektronik, which was used at that time by Mrklin for their 2-rail sets. This system offered the best signaling method electrically, and offered the fewest limitations on expansion.
The NMRA Working Group expanded the design, allowing for control of ten thousand possible locomotives, turnouts, and multiple-unit lash-ups. The DCC Working Group continues to clarify and expand the existing Standards and Recommended Practices as the need arises."
From Wikipedia:
"A digital command control system was developed (under contract) by Lenz Elektronik GmbH of Germany in the 1980s for two German model railway manufacturers, Märklin and Arnold (models). The first digital decoders that Lenz produced appeared on the market early 1989 for Arnold (N) and mid 1990 for Märklin (Z, H0 and 1; Digital=).[1] Märklin and Arnold exited the agreement over patent issues, but Lenz has continued to develop the system. In 1992 Stan Ames, who later chaired the NMRA/DCC Working Group, investigated the Märklin/Lenz system as possible candidate for the NMRA/DCC standards. When the NMRA Command Control committee requested submissions from manufacturers for its proposed command control standard in the 1990s, Märklin and Keller Engineering submitted their systems for evaluation.[2] The committee was impressed by the Märklin/Lenz system and had settled on digital early in the process. The NMRA eventually licensed the protocol from Lenz and extended it. The system was later named Digital Command Control. The proposed standard was published in the October 1993 issue of Model Railroader magazine prior to its adoption."
Regarding a discussion that wants to revolve around the notion that the NMRA simply adopted what Lenz previously created, the implication that whatever the NMRA was of little consequence miscasts the situation fundamentally. Why?
Think of your computer. How does it work? There's hardware, true enough. But try running it without software. Anyone who's ever had a virus or buggy software knows you won't get far if you're counting on just the hardware to make it run.
That is essentially the dividing line in this conversation people are stumbling over. And this is a great simplification in the way I'm framing it also, so don't nitpick the presentation for the facts. Lenz provided what was essentially the hardware implementation. How do you make the signal and forward it to the locomotive to tell it what to do?
The language that's done in is what the NMRA did. Essentially the "software" that commands the hardware what to do, although it's technically firmware, as the decoders are not user-writeable. So I don't want to take the analogy too far. Another way to look at it would be our telecommunication infrastructure, or plain old telephone service. There are hardwired phones, cell phones, VOIP, etc. All kinds of different hardware, but it all works together, even when mixed on the same call to provide a way to talk between two points, because of a common standard. Imagine if it didn't? Fortunately there is a common standard everyone agrees to follow to make that work. Thus folks can argue about who, when and why DCC was created, but that's really not the point as it's a far more complex question than simply one or the other, Lenz or NMRA.
Unless the NMRA did what it did, the flexibility, potential for expansion, and interoperability of DCC as we know it would not have come into being. Sure, there would be a range of choices in hardware available to buy for more sophisticated control beyond simple DC, but only some of it, if we were lucky, would actually work together. The NMRA created a common language for all the devices we rely on to work together. They adopted the hardware side of its implementation based on the definition and capabilities provided by Lenz. Nothing mysterious about this nor does it imply that the NMRA simply went shopping for something like DCC and just decided they liked the pretty box that Lenz came in once it was all assembled. DCC as the universal system we know today did not exist until it was defined by the NMRA.
Note what is quoted by stevert from the NMRA:
"Rather than re-invent the wheel, the DCC Working Group studied all of the commercially available command control systems."
Then what wikipedia says:
"A digital command control system was developed (under contract) by Lenz Elektronik GmbH of Germany in the 1980s for two German model railway manufacturers..."
While DCC as a concept and even implementation wasn't new, there was no standard and a variety of hardware implementations of far less flexibility, scope, and potential for future expansion than what existed before. And it's true that these methods included some patented inventions. The NMRA didn't simply adopt Lenz from among that pool of candidates and have DCC as we now know it. They used it as a starting point for a far more comprehensive project. The telling point, if one wants to get all legal about it was that, even though Lenz was amenable to the way things turned out, the NMRA did not need to patent DCC nor does anyone else have a claim to it. Ask some guy named Mike about that.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehmanAnother way to look at it would be our telecommunication infrastructure, or plain old telephone service. There are hardwired phones, cell phones, VOIP, etc. All kinds of different hardware, but it all works together, even when mixed on the same call to provide a way to talk between two points, because of a common standard. Imagine if it didn't? Fortunately there is a common standard everyone agrees to follow to make that work. Thus folks can argue about who, when and why DCC was created, but that's really not the point as it's a far more complex question than simply one or the other, Lenz or NMRA.
I had an interesting conversation about standards with my department head at AT&T Bell Labs, the entity that developed Bell System standards that allowed the United States to have reliable voice and data communications.
There are several reasons why standards come about:
I'm sure each company with competing dcc approaches would prefer their approach were selected as the standard, which would make their products immediately compatible and force other manufactures to redesign their hardware if they choose to remain compatible.
That's good for us, as consumers, and good for Lenz.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
gregc I'm sure each company with competing dcc approaches would prefer their approach were selected as the standard, which would make their products immediately compatible and force other manufactures to redesign their hardware if they choose to remain compatible. That's good for us, as consumers, and good for Lenz.
Bell Labs is always an interesting place. My advisor has done work there in the history of science and technology. That's one of my minor fields, although my focus in the area is more tied directly to the Cold War.
Once again, there's an assumption in your statement that the NMRA just took something Lenz made and slapped a NMRA label on it. That's simply not true.
But I'll agree that DCC standardization is good for everyone -- and not just for Lenz among the manufacturers. Lenz had no particular advantage over the other manufacturers once DCC was standardized by the NMRA beyond having familiarity with their existing hardware implementation.
BrianinBuffalo Betamax; I love your avatar (Julian). Where is Ricky and Bubbles? Brian
Betamax;
I love your avatar (Julian). Where is Ricky and Bubbles?
Brian
Probably doing the Community Service tour...
Okay, I signed up for my rail pass (6 month membership). The next meet is in Flagstaff next weekend. I looked at the pictures on line from the last meeting and couldn't see a single woman in any of the pictures. My wife is going to attend; is she going to stick out like a woman at Augusta National?
Richard
Richard,
No, there are female model railroaders. We have several in our division. Like other members, their participation varies, but I'd hope that any division is glad to welcome members no matter what their gender.
At the National (do you mean Atlanta?), there will be women, but mostly wives travelling with their husbands. The convention will have some clinics, etc. that will cater to wives that have no interest in trains.
P.S. Oops! I see you don't mean the NMRA Peachtree Express National Convention, which is in Atlanta.
oldline1Enemaray...............Tried in for several years in the early 1970's.......didn't care for it much. They were in their "Biffy Period". I like trains! I wasn't (still not) into outhouses and the space wasted on them for several years. Tried it again for a few years in the early 1990's......still didn't care for it. They didn't have anything worth reading in the Bulletin and then they did away with that. While I don't find much there for me I know others that enjoy the fellowship of the members. I didn't care for the snobbish folks I've met at the Division meets. I spend my money on railroad historical societies and get a return for my dollars that way. My 2¢, Roger Huber
If you are looking for a return on investment, you are in the wrong place. The NMRA is not a business, it is a volunteer organization. You only get out of it what you put into it. If you expect to get $20 back for every $10 you put in, well, that is not going to happen.
People join the NMRA because they want to participate in the hobby, be it division meets, regional conventions, or the annual convention. It's about meeting people, learning new skills, and comparing your efforts to others, be it on the display table or in a contest. It is about community.
If you are looking for returns that can be measured in dollar value, well, it isn't for you.
oldline1They didn't have anything worth reading in the Bulletin and then they did away with that.
Roger,
The NMRA Bulletin changed its name about 10 years ago to Scale Rails, although technically the Bulletin is now incorporated into Scale Rails. In any case, it's been published monthly all along. Now it's on slick paper and mostly in color. Lots of good stuff consistently appears. I've been pleased by the improvements myself, as it's one of the main returns on your investment, if you must think of it that way.
There is an option to not receive Scale Rails, too.
Betamax has a point. It's an association of model railroaders in service to the hobby, not a service to do your model railroading for you. However, part of the mission is to help each other to the best of our ability, so there are ways in which you can get a "return on investment." In our division, we help with advice and even actual labor when necessary. It doesn't take much of that to get your money's worth when that short you can't find gets fixed, when folks with operating layouts can go over a trackplan before you make hundred dollar mistakes, and are willing to teach you how to install a decoder by using one of your locos as a training aid for hands on experience. Maybe none of that's needed right now, but it's good to know it's there, along with many other services and connections to fellow model railroaders.
mlehman oldline1They didn't have anything worth reading in the Bulletin and then they did away with that. Roger, The NMRA Bulletin changed its name about 10 years ago to Scale Rails, although technically the Bulletin is now incorporated into Scale Rails. In any case, it's been published monthly all along. Now it's on slick paper and mostly in color. Lots of good stuff consistently appears. I've been pleased by the improvements myself, as it's one of the main returns on your investment, if you must think of it that way. ...
...
It's no longer Scale Rails. It's now NMRA Magazine. They changed it last year or the year before.
Personally, I thought the so called "Biffy" period when Whit Towers was editor were the best years it ever had.
Tony Koester recently stated on a podcast that one of the biggest mistakes the NMRA made was to allow members to opt out of the magazine. A lot of people chose the cheaper membership rate because they didn't want to spend any more than that, and in the process voluntarily made the decision to cut themselves off from the organization they are members of.
The NMRA Magazine is the main tool of communication. Sure, you can argue that the internet has replaced that, but the internet is a buffet, not a meal. Every month you don't get the magazine you are out of the loop. You don't know what is going on, events that are coming up, or who has earned an MMR. You also don't get the latest news or communications from the NMRA board. If a well known member passes away, you may learn about it in the NMRA magazine.
That is what the NMRA is all about: sharing your passion with others.
Paul,
Thanks for the correction. I can't keep up these days, but I still enjoy reading, errr, whatever they send me...
betamax,
I definitely agree with your assessment. The magazine is worth it and members will be missing out on things if they don't receive it. I just wanted people to know that no one is going to force them to pay for it.
It's hard to believe these "elitist" and "snobbish clique" tags. Perhaps you are a little too uptight in everyday life.
Any charity that wants to survive, has to run their charity like a business. That's a fact.
If someone doesn't want to belong to the NMRA, that's fine with me.
oldline1Well, I have read the responses to my response with interest. First, I never expected a $20 return for a $10 investment. That's just stupid! However, I DID EXPECT to get SOMETHING worth the dues money though. I don't think that's too much to expect. I also never expected the NMRA or it's members to build my railroad. Where did you come up with that comment? As a dues paying member I just felt there should be something for me and others like me who couldn't devote their meager vacation every year and budget to the National Conventions. I attended a couple Regional events and found them to be snobbish and if one weren't part of the clicque then you were a definite "outsider" as far as they acted. I also stand by the the fact that I never found the great comradiere touted by all the vocal members here. When building my layouts I asked for help and never received any help or offers of help. I also have to disagree with the statement that "the NMRA isn't a business". Is it a charity? It seems more of a business than anything else. This topic really has no answer, as IF one doesn't love the NMRA and states their opinion the loyalists find it necessary to attack those people. Maybe that was why many of us tried it and decided not to stay. I am a modeler, have been for over 55 years and will continue to be as long as I'm alive. I just don't see the need for or the need to participate in the NMRA. I know many non-NMRA member modelers who are every bit the "Master Model Railroader" without playing the eletist games necessary for a number. I appreciate the Standards and organization they developed many, many years ago when the hobby was in kaos during its infancy but don't feel I should have to pay them back for the past any more than I should apologize to Yankees because my Confederate ancestors shot at them. What are the numbers for total model railroaders compared to NMRA membership? I'd be interested to see those statistics. I don't think I'm alone with my thoughts. The original post said "What are the advantages to joining the National Model Railroad Association? Is it worth it for the lone wolf? Richard" I was just trying to answer him honestly and then he could make a decision based on those of us who "don't" and those of us who "do". Just my 2¢, Roger Huber
betamax oldline1Enemaray...............Tried in for several years in the early 1970's.......didn't care for it much. They were in their "Biffy Period". I like trains! I wasn't (still not) into outhouses and the space wasted on them for several years. Tried it again for a few years in the early 1990's......still didn't care for it. They didn't have anything worth reading in the Bulletin and then they did away with that. While I don't find much there for me I know others that enjoy the fellowship of the members. I didn't care for the snobbish folks I've met at the Division meets. I spend my money on railroad historical societies and get a return for my dollars that way. My 2¢, Roger Huber If you are looking for a return on investment, you are in the wrong place. The NMRA is not a business, it is a volunteer organization. You only get out of it what you put into it. If you expect to get $20 back for every $10 you put in, well, that is not going to happen. People join the NMRA because they want to participate in the hobby, be it division meets, regional conventions, or the annual convention. It's about meeting people, learning new skills, and comparing your efforts to others, be it on the display table or in a contest. It is about community. If you are looking for returns that can be measured in dollar value, well, it isn't for you.
In view of some of the recent comments in this thread, I'm going to restate a few of my thoughts.
Betamax suggests that the NMRA's biggest value is in the social side of their events, yet some of the recent negative comments suggest some have had less than positive experiences at NMRA events.
Yet I am a 40 plus year, life long member and have never been to a function of any kind. I did not join for the "social" life. I do help with NMRA projects via e-mail/web when I have time. I pay my dues to support the activities of those who have more time than me to volunteer.
My personal and family life has never afforded me the free time, at the right times, to take part in conventions or events. And to be honest, while I believe in and support the goals of the NMRA, I have never been motivated to travel to some distant city, stay in a hotel, and attend a convention - just not my thing - nor does it interest my wife.
I would suggest that those who had bad experiences at events may simply not really be the "social" type - neither am I. I don't see a crowd of people as possible new friends - even if they are all modelers.
But that does not reduce the value of NMRA membership in my view. As stated earlier:
I too have been a member for over 40 years. The NMRA provides lots of useful info in the form of the STANDARDS and RECOMMENDED PRACTICES, as well as the DATA SHEETS which are being revised and improved as we speak.
It has always been my view that the membership was well worth it, and I'm not even a convention goer.
It is because of the NMRA that all the different products work so well together, especially in HO and N scale, so the price of membership is a small "give back" for that, even if you don't "get" a whole lot directly the "minute" you join.
Many new guys don't realize, but many times when older modelers like myself answer questions on these forums, those answers came from stuff learned via the NMRA in one way or another - like the old data sheets I still have that came in my membership packet in 1969, or convention clinics, or through doing stuff for the achievement program.
Personally I do believe that if most modelers belonged to the NMRA, our products would be even better and the industry would be stronger, which would benefit us all.
From where I sit, if you can afford this hobby, you can afford an NMRA membership, and it is worth every penny.
Sheldon
Those of you who don't think that is reason enough to belong, that's fine, I doubt you will be missed.
Just like I am likely not missed much here now that I spend a lot less time here.
I am very much a lone wolf modeler, yet very much a believer in the NMRA.
Well stated, Sheldon. The NMRA is a lot of different things to a lot of different people. That's one of it's strengths. As you've noted, it's biggest strength is simply the way it represents model railroaders as a whole. It doesn't mean we all agree, but it does help remind us of the importance of our common, shared heritage and interest in standards, practices, and interoperability. These seem like simple or obvious things, but it really does take people to make them happen.
For people who don't see the value, well, some people get a computer and use it for email -- period. Do they need all that expense? Probably not. You can do email on your phone these days (so they tell me.) So some people really won't benefit from any of the wide range of things being a member can help with. Certainly no one forces anyone to be a member. Fortunately, the NMRA is still way cheaper than a computer. for those who find value in membership..
One thing I learn years ago for every snobbish clique there's many more friendlier members.I also learn by being standoffish I appeared to be unfriendly and a loner..I was neither..I was just shy and wasn't sure how to break the ice..I ended up meeting a lot of good folks and even got to operate on 4 layouts as a guest engineer.
If I was in better health I would rejoin just to attend the monthly meetings.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE One thing I learn years ago for every snobbish clique there's many more friendlier members.I also learn by being standoffish I appeared to be unfriendly and a loner..I was neither..I was just shy and wasn't sure how to break the ice..I ended up meeting a lot of good folks and even got to operate on 4 layouts as a guest engineer.
pirate BRAKIE One thing I learn years ago for every snobbish clique there's many more friendlier members.I also learn by being standoffish I appeared to be unfriendly and a loner..I was neither..I was just shy and wasn't sure how to break the ice..I ended up meeting a lot of good folks and even got to operate on 4 layouts as a guest engineer. Great post!
Agreed!
"Ladies and gentlemen, I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that both engines have failed, and we will be stuck here for some time. The good news is that you decided to take the train and not fly."
BRAKIEOne thing I learn years ago for every snobbish clique there's many more friendlier members.I also learn by being standoffish I appeared to be unfriendly and a loner..I was neither..I was just shy and wasn't sure how to break the ice..
Larry,
That's an important insight.I remember attending my very first NMRA event, a meet in Indianapolis in the early 1970s. I was maybe 14 or 15 and had to have my mom drive me up there from Bloomington. I knew no one and, well, was a pretty shy kid. It was clear that many folks knew each other -- or so it seemed -- and were chatting with their buddies. Eventually one old fellow came up and engaged in conversation to find out what I was up to -- maybe because old folks worried a lot about what young folks were up in those days... So it seemed like the sort of experience that a few have related, but I think it was more about me than them.
It's always hard to find a way into an established group. But the idea that the organization as a whole, in the main, or even quite a bit spends its time and resources trying to be cliquish doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's about making connections with others in the hobby, not obstructing them. Not that we're perfect as an organization, but I think we're also only human. We may fail at some things , sometimes, but generally we'd like to here it from you if we do and we'd like to fix it. Because there's little point in what we do unless we create a positive model railroading experience for each other.
I'm sure there are a few cliquish NMRA members, every organization has a few. That's life. But I'd almost bet many of those folks perceived that way are actually desperately trying to start up a conversation like Larry and me. Many people would assume I'm a gregarious outgoing fellow who know me from my model rail activities and in some other aspects of my life (I was deeply involved in non-profit management for about a decade.)
Fact of the matter is I push myself to do that even today well into middle age, because I know I need the push. And it works well. So I'd more than likely be the fellow who'd try to start up a conversation with some folks who might be sitting to the side waiting to see what their interest is. Doesn't mean I'm comfortable doing that or that I think everyone else should be comfortable doing it, either. When someone organizes the perfect model railroad organization I'll join that. In the meantime, being a member of the NMRA and helping it toward that goal when I can is the best I can do.