NMRA

[santfenobby]

Do you think that the NMRA is still in touch with todays modelers

[dknelson]

Well any modeler who does not have an NMRA standards guage is missing out (of course they do not make them in all scales that is true).
I belong to the NMRA because it is still the only national organization devoted to a hobby which means quite a bit to me. Most of my closest friends are model railroad friends; my most enjoyable evenings out are model railroad operating sessions, my most enjoyable spare time moments are spent with model railroading. While I could do all those things I suppose without being an NMRA member, to me it makes sense that if the hobby means that much to you, you join and support its one national organization. Obiously only a minority of us feel that way. Where I live, Milwaukee, the local division is very active and involved and sponsors free monthly meets. Our region by contrast is not that active. Others I have talked to tell me their divisions are almost defunct but their regions are active.
That is also why I belong (and am a contributing member) to the Chicago & North Western Historical Society -- that is the prototype railroad that means the most to me so it seems almost automatic that I would support the one organziation devoted to that cause exclusively. But again many others disagree.
The old saying is "all politics is local" and I think the same is true of the NMRA. It almost does not matter how active the national or the regions are -- the local divisions have to be active and create benefits for members for people to feel motivated to join the NMRA. Sometimes I think the NMRA leadership thinks the secret to declining members is to make the national ever more large and elaborate but I think you have to pu***he organization down to the Division and make people grateful for it.
Dave Nelson

[vsmith]

I am doing 1/2" large scale, so I dont think NMRA has anything to offer me, or to anyone working outside on the mainstream of HO, or N.

If you are working in these scales then they have a long history with the manufacturers and hobbiest. This history allowed NMRA to work with makers to produce a fairly universal set of "standards" for new products right from inception to production. Todays model trains reflect that almost universal standardization in almost all product, especially in HO or N. But that was 30 years ago and their lack of connectedness to the average model RRer can be demonstrated by what has happen in large scale.

Large scale has been around now for over 20 years seriously in the US, Longer in Europe. However, the NMRA seam to view large scale for all these years as the orange haired *** child that no one wants to acknowledge. They have been downright belligerent to large scalers in the past, and have shunned us for the longest time as not being "serious" enough for them. Someone there wakes up and realizes that Garden RR's is a booming part of the hobby and that the train has left the station without them.

Now they decide that we are doing things all wrong and have tried to imposed thier new "standards" on large scale and in doing so are trying to break up large scale into 4 or 5 different scales (G,H,F, and Gauge I). It makes me laugh, do think manufacturers will just hop into line behind their new "standards"? Where were they 20 years ago or even 10 years ago when large scale became more popular? To come into an established hobby and impose "standards" when the cat is already way to long out of the bag is ridiculous to me. If they had shown interest in working with large scale makers from the beginning, they might have had an influence on a standardization process. But now its far too late to try imposing thier viewpoint.

Manufacturers in large scale are already doing pretty much what ever they want and I doubt whether the NMRA will hold any sway over them. I can just see an NMRA member trying to tell the LGB Company that they are not in "compliance" with NMRA standards and to please change the way they have been doing things for over 30 years to bring their trains into "compliance". He'd be shot out of that building as if by a cannon.

I recall reading a comment that stated that according to NMRA new large scale standards, LGB 45mm track was not in accordance with their "standard" as it was a few millimeters off to be "true" 3' gauge at 1:20.3 scale, and a few Millimeters off for standard gauge at 1:32 scale. The implication being that ALL 45mm track was "wrong" for any "true scale" and that everything should be redone for "accurate" modeling. Are they insane? No manufacturer is going to produce 3 slightly different track products for 3 differnet scales. Its the NMRA that now needs to show some flexiblity which I doubt they are capable of doing.

NMRA is to me too rigid for its own good. That is why they are not having much influence over the majority of modelers at any scales, at least to me. I would like to see better standardization in large sclae but I feel its far too late for NMRA to have an influence. They were too self focused for far too many years and they still are. those mew standards were met with a hugely hostile reation from the majority of large scalers, many who resented the blunt way in which the "standards" were presented.

[DSchmitt]

The NMRA is what the members make it. If they offer little for your scale its because not many people in your scale joined and work to develope standards and information.

My above remark will probably bring out a lot of critisism of the NMRA. I've been in N scale over 30 years and an NMRA member most of that time, and have often heard it called the "HO Model Railroad Association"

I know that the organization sometimes gets bogged down in politics and personality conflicts and that there have been people in positions of power who look with distain on anyone who does not model their way and have treated others badly. But, overall I have found good fellowship in the organization and I believe that the organization has been a benefit to the hobby.

The majority of the people running the organization are trying to determine the members wants and needs and make the organzation relevant. They can't do it if you are not amember or even as a member do not participate.

[IRONROOSTER]

I have been a member for over 30 years. While it has changed over time, it still is the one organization trying to establish standards in all the scales, although they have have defered part of that to the NASG (to which I also belong) in S scale. Frankly, looking at the mess the manufacturers have made of large scale what with 1:20.3, 1:22.5, 1:24, 1:29, 1:32 all running on the same track and all called G gauge or Large scale, I think their efforts are needed. If they concentrate on HO, well that's where most of the modelers are. I'm sure they would love to have someone join and work on the other scales.
Enjoy
Paul

[Anonymous]

My one and only year as a member of NMRA, was not what you would classify as a landmark year with that organization. It started off as any membership year does, you're wondering what they have to offer and you can hardly wait to get some access to the library. So I had a question about a locomotive and was wondering if they had some info, I called, explained what I was after, and was promptly informed that there was no one there that could get this info for me. I asked when there would be. The answer, yep you got it, they didn't have the time to do that, and likely wouldn't in the near future. Soooooo, with that I got to wondering, what good is an organization like the NMRA, if they don't have time to help their membership with their modeling questions???[?]

[Anonymous]

Yes, they serve a purpose, and I am a member. That purpose should be more directed towards promoting the hobby in a frirendly, helpful manner. Of course, the standards in the smaller scales are a blessing in terms of equipment interoperability.

However, the NMRA needs to stay out of where it is not welcome. This clearly is in the large scale community. This community, in my observation does not desire to have its varied scales regulated or catagorized, and the attempt to do so, I think, will only serve to alienate that part of the hobby. Let those folks come to the NMRA if and when they want such 'guidence'.

[Anonymous]

New to the hobby I recently joined NMRA. I don't have a lot of history on the organization so can't speak on that. I joined NMRA to support the organization that sets the standards for our hobby. I model in HO so don't do research on other scales and hadn't realized that they don't support all scales.

For those that model in a scale other than the popular scales supported by NMRA what would it take to start the ball rolling and set a standard for your scale?

NMRA - the 'A' stands for association. Merriam-Webster defines association as "an organization of persons having a common interest ". Is NMRA divided into groups or committees that you could join? Have you checked to see what you could do to help set the standard?

It really irritates me when I hear people complain about an organization when they haven't gotten off their derriere and tried to help themselves.

[vsmith]

IRONROOSTER wrote:
I have been a member for over 30 years. While it has changed over time, it still is the one organization trying to establish standards in all the scales, although they have have defered part of that to the NASG (to which I also belong) in S scale. Frankly, looking at the mess the manufacturers have made of large scale what with 1:20.3, 1:22.5, 1:24, 1:29, 1:32 all running on the same track and all called G gauge or Large scale, I think their efforts are needed. If they concentrate on HO, well that's where most of the modelers are. I'm sure they would love to have someone join and work on the other scales.
Enjoy
Paul

and Globnik wrote:
However, the NMRA needs to stay out of where it is not welcome. This clearly is in the large scale community. This community, in my observation does not desire to have its varied scales regulated or catagorized, and the attempt to do so, I think, will only serve to alienate that part of the hobby. Let those folks come to the NMRA if and when they want such 'guidence'.

Gentlemen,

The problem isn't that the large scale community doesnt need the standardization,
It does!

The trouble is that NMRA IGNORED the large scale community for 20 years, allowing Manufacturers to go every which way regarding scale. Now that the genie is out of the bottle they come along with ther standards and say "get in line". Is it any wonder they got a mighty rebuke from the LS community.

It NMRA's own fault for the LS debacle. If they had shown an interest and acceptance of LS years ago, even just 10 years ago when Bachmann's "Big Haulers" started most peoples interest in the big trains. They could have influenced the development of the hobby in a positive direction, we SHOULD have only two scales in LS, 1:32 standard guage and 1:20.3 narrow gauge. We dont have that. Why? because the NMRA has had a bad habit of marginalizing anything outside of HO, N gaugers know this, but N has been around since the 60's when the NMRA was more actively involved with manufacturers.

No, instead they scoffed at the "plastic in the petunia's" toy trains. They get so wrapped up in the petty politics and power stuggles that make up an organization like that today, they cant see the forest because there too busy aurguing over who's tree is more accurate. I hope the LS community can create its own organizing body, that will work with manufacturers to standardize to hobby. Bachmann has already commited to 1:20.3, Aristo Craft, MTH, and USA are commited to 1:32. So the standarization has begun, but its voluntary. HLW still makes its stuff around 1:26 (?) and LGB will always be 1:22.5 till the end of time.

[Anonymous]

Years ago they were great, but today I wonder. When do scales and standardization become stiffling to the industry and modeler? I kinda feel they have become rivet counters, but what do I know? Today it's seems like all organzations are in decline. Driving down the interstate there is a sign with an 800 number asking people to join the Masons. When I grew up that was like an exclusive by invatation only club, now they advertise for members? FRED

[BRAKIE]

I was a member and got tired of the "Good old boys Club"..That last local meeting I went to I walk in with a buddy of mine..Nobody even bothered to ask if we was members.My friend is(his first local meeting) and I was not and had not been a member for years.You see to many of the good old boys was in clicks to pay any attention..The meeting turn out to be a more of a general discussion of rivet counting and how we can get more modelers to become members..Never mind who the 2 new guys were or if they was members..

I recall when the NMRA was good and it was FUN to be a member..I will not pretend to know what happen..

[rogerhensley]

What has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? DCC.

Yes, we still set Standards and make recommendations.
Yes, we can still be fun. The Central Indiana Division http://cid.railfan.net/ is a good example.
Yes, we still care about new modelers (in any scale) http://www.nmra.org/beginner/
Yes, we will promote modelers and their layouts whether NMRA members or not. Check out the Webmaster's Choice (and past choices) on the NMRA home page of http://www.nmra.org/
Yes, I joined in 1980 to support the hobby and was delighted to find a great group of modelers in the local division that I didn't even know existed. In my estimation, that is where the 'Rubber meets the road', from modeler to modeler, from member to member.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rogerhensley

What has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? DCC.

Um, excuse me sir, but I remember a 1972 electronics symposium article in Model Railroader that defined the new developments in pulse modulated control of trains. It wasn't even yet named DCC, but that's what it became. So the NMRA invented DCC and consider 1972 recent? The DCC we use today is over 10 years old. Did the NMRA invent the internet too? FRED

[coalminer3]

I was a member for several years, but got burned out on NMRA with their "insider" stuff and "toilet cars." Haven't seen a Bulletin in years.

work safe

[bruce22]

I'm in HO and a member. If u think the association is redundant think of what options u would have without their efforts on universal standardization. It's very evident today in the large scales.

[rogerhensley]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: A quote form flee307

Um, excuse me sir, but I remember a 1972 electronics symposium article in Model Railroader that defined the new developments in pulse modulated control of trains. It wasn't even yet named DCC, but that's what it became. So the NMRA invented DCC and consider 1972 recent? The DCC we use today is over 10 years old. Did the NMRA invent the internet too? FRED

Originally posted by rogerhensley
Pulse is not DCC. Pulse was a good way to burn out locomotive motors.
The DCC that is open to all manufacturers was a donation by Lenz to the hobby. It is the NMRA that made it onto a Standard with Recommended Practices.
Today's DCC is now capable of sending information back to the control unit from the decoder. Was that available 10 years ago? Of course not.
You can ba***he NMRA all your wish, but don't try to mislead the reader. Keep your facts straight.

I will not be into a flame war designed to poison modelers against the NMRA, but I am more than willing to set the record straight.

Model Railroading is FUN! (It used to say that right there on the cover.)

I think you were the one misleading people by claiming DCC was a product of the NMRA. YOU EXACT WORDS WERE "What has the NMRA done for the hobby lately? DCC." It's a direct quote from you.
I stand by what I said about the article in 1972, it was dcc with each loco having a module with an digital address just like today. It was being developed at the time and names such as decoder and DCC had yet to be given to it. And DCC has been around and for sale to the modeler for over 10 years. Current advancements don't make the older dcc not dcc no more than pentium 4 computers don't make 386 not computers. I'm not out to ruin the NMRA, but it appears to me you are. You claim you are the NRMA with your constant use of "we". You are twisting and spining the truth. If you are one of the wheels of the NMRA maybe you should quit spinning and posturing and do something positive to make the hobby fun. I think I'll drop them a email right now. FRED

[dknelson]

As I recall the 1972 innovation was command control but analog, not "digital" command control. Surely the NMRA did not invent command control or DCC. But it is worth remembering that in the early days of true DCC there was a variety of rival proprietary systems out there that were not compatible. Maybe eventually compatability would have come anyway but surely the NMRA helped here, although much credit has to go to Lenz.
They took a page from Columbia records book. Back in 1948 Columbia invented the 12" 33 rpm LP. RCA countered with its 7" 45 rpm records (essentially improving the 78 rpm record). Columbia "gave away" its exclusive rights, to the ultimate benefit of all including Columbia, and eventually RCA switched over too. Lenz benefited from havings its system become the standard, for who knows what system (if any) would have prevailed if they had all just been duking it out?
Dave Nelson

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dknelson

As I recall the 1972 innovation was command control but analog, not "digital" command control. Surely the NMRA did not invent command control or DCC. But it is worth remembering that in the early days of true DCC there was a variety of rival proprietary systems out there that were not compatible. Maybe eventually compatability would have come anyway but surely the NMRA helped here, although much credit has to go to Lenz.
They took a page from Columbia records book. Back in 1948 Columbia invented the 12" 33 rpm LP. RCA countered with its 7" 45 rpm records (essentially improving the 78 rpm record). Columbia "gave away" its exclusive rights, to the ultimate benefit of all including Columbia, and eventually RCA switched over too. Lenz benefited from havings its system become the standard, for who knows what system (if any) would have prevailed if they had all just been duking it out?
Dave Nelson

I agree with this and also point out that over time setting a standard and "giving it away" by releasing it to public domain or charging a very nominal licences free has worked great. VHS v Beta and IBM PC v Apple are a couple of other times the standard product won out over the superior product due to easy licencing of technology. Today Linux is trying to do it to Microsoft. Futhermore I submitt that the NMRA charges way to much for their stamped standards gauge.
I'm not an expert on digital or analog electronics by no means, but the 1972 article sure looks like DCC to me yet, be that as it may DCC is not a new 21st century technology or idea, or even from the 1990's and wasn't invented by the NMRA or even Lenz I dare say. It's like most people thinks Ford invented cars, Edison invented the light bulbs, Einstein invented Atom Bombs, and the Wright brothers were the first to leave the ground in a machine. All are false, but most people will argue you to death on the subject. It's this spin which I object to. It appears to me that letting people get away with lies or false information is wrong and they should be challanged and held accountable. If you want to call it flaming maybe it is, but that depends on what the definition of is is. Where are the WMD? Where are my flying cars? I'm tired of being lied to, er, mislead... FRED

[Anonymous]

NO.......................they're too busy living in the past and promoting their conventions to be of any use. I'm grateful for them getting HO and other manufacturers to cooperate with couplers, track and a few other things but besides DCC what have they done since the 1940's? Look how they screwed up the Bulletin!

They want way too much for dues and for those of us who do not attend or want to attend the conventions we get very little for that large amount of money.

I prefer to support the railroad historical societies. More bang for the buck!!

[rogerhensley]

QUOTE: Originally posted by huber25

NO.......................they're too busy living in the past and promoting their conventions to be of any use. I'm grateful for them getting HO and other manufacturers to cooperate with couplers, track and a few other things but besides DCC what have they done since the 1940's?

Spoken like someone who knows little about the NMRA today. Visit their web site at: http://www.nmra.org/ to see what they are doing in both Standards and in modernizing the organization itself.

Dues too high? Not really. You can join for as little as about $23. Most historical societies are higher.

You get out what you put in.

[cacole]

I feel like I'm a real outsider because I'm the only NMRA member out of the 23 people in the Cochise & Western Model Railroad Club, I have never met any other NMRA members in my part of the country, and I have never seen a NMRA presence at a train show or swap meet in Tucson, Arizona, the nearest city within 70 miles of here that ever has such an event.

As near as I have been able to determine, the NMRA doesn't sponsor any events closer than Phoenix, 250 miles from me, and may not even have any other members other than me in all of SE Arizona. My "local chapter" is the Pacific Southwest Region, which includes California, so the majority of members and nearly every event is held there. So do I really need NMRA membership when I would have to travel 5 or 6 hours or more to attend an event? Hardly.

My impression of the NMRA, now that I have been a member for over 10 years, is that I can do without it. Sure, the NMRA takes credit for establishing "standards" that most HO, and maybe N scale, manufacturers comply with, and the NMRA jumped in and set standards for DCC manufacturers to comply with, which has most definitely been of benefit to everyone who uses DCC, but that's about all they have accomplished. Those standards would probably have evolved on their own without NMRA involvement through market demand over the years -- the NMRA just hastened the evolution of standards.

My only contact with the NMRA has been through their Bulletin, now called Scale Rails (only the name has been changed to protect the guilty). I can get information faster through Model Railroader, Model Railroad Craftsman, or the Internet than I do through the NMRA. Their monthly publication has become little more than a weak attempt at self glorification than having any really useful information. We have a collection at the Cochise & Western of NMRA Bulletins going back to January 1967 that were donated by a former NMRA member who retired and moved to Arizona, and those older copies have 10 times the amount of real modeling news in them than today's publication. The NMRA itself keeps saying that they can only publish what members submit, which is certainly true; however, this lack of material is also indicative of the fact that NMRA members don't really support the organization.

My last direct contact with the NMRA was the most disappointing. I renewed my membership. Suddenly, my copies of the Bulletin stopped arriving. When I contacted them by e-mail, their response was, "Well, one of the copies was returned by the post office, so we thought you had moved and we cancelled your membership because you didn't send us a change of address."

If their paid employees have no more initiative than this, it's easy to understand why they can't recruit volunteers to write articles for Scale Rails. Goodbye, NMRA. I will not renew and I don't think I will miss you.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cacole

I
As near as I have been able to determine, the NMRA doesn't sponsor any events closer than Phoenix, 250 miles from me, and may not even have any other members other than me in all of SE Arizona.

For accuracy, the NMRA does not sponsor events anywhere other than the annual national convention. Local regions or districts often sponsor events. Here in eastern North America the NorthEastern Region (NER) of the NMRA sponsors two shows in the region annually.

You used to be able to contact NMRA HQ and request a list of members in your state or Region; I don't know if this is still available.

I've been in the NMRA since 1983, and remain more or less by momemtum. I changed my membership to sustaining a few years ago to get a cheaper price, and no longer get the Bulletin/Scale Rails. And I don't miss it.

I'm within shooting distance of achieving Master Model Railroader status, but haven't had the interest to complete the last few requirements (I have to complete the 10 hours as a dispatcher and scratchbuild a loco). I would like to get this level sometime, so I am staying a member, although not a very enthusiastic one. In the last Scale Rails that I saw it shows the membership was down to 20,493 last July. That's about a 4K drop since I last received the Bulletin, so it doesn't look too good.

Bob Boudreau
Canada

[RhB_HJ]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

Gentlemen,

The problem isn't that the large scale community doesnt need the standardization,
It does!

The trouble is that NMRA IGNORED the large scale community for 20 years, allowing Manufacturers to go every which way regarding scale. Now that the genie is out of the bottle they come along with ther standards and say "get in line". Is it any wonder they got a mighty rebuke from the LS community.

It NMRA's own fault for the LS debacle. If they had shown an interest and acceptance of LS years ago, even just 10 years ago when Bachmann's "Big Haulers" started most peoples interest in the big trains. They could have influenced the development of the hobby in a positive direction, we SHOULD have only two scales in LS, 1:32 standard guage and 1:20.3 narrow gauge. We dont have that. Why? because the NMRA has had a bad habit of marginalizing anything outside of HO, N gaugers know this, but N has been around since the 60's when the NMRA was more actively involved with manufacturers.

No, instead they scoffed at the "plastic in the petunia's" toy trains. They get so wrapped up in the petty politics and power stuggles that make up an organization like that today, they cant see the forest because there too busy aurguing over who's tree is more accurate. I hope the LS community can create its own organizing body, that will work with manufacturers to standardize to hobby. Bachmann has already commited to 1:20.3, Aristo Craft, MTH, and USA are commited to 1:32. So the standarization has begun, but its voluntary. HLW still makes its stuff around 1:26 (?) and LGB will always be 1:22.5 till the end of time.

Vic,[;)][;)]

Yes, that's more or less the case.

Now as to the details Aristo and USA are (supposedly) committed to 1:29 - for the additional WOW factor! MTH is doing 1:32. HLW is more or less 1:24 as is some of Aristo's Classic stuff
LGB is all over the place i.e. 1:20.3 for the log disconnects to "almost" 1:29 for some of the new NA stuff and everything in between!
1:22.5 for 45mm track is very close to scale (1:22.222) for Meter gauge, but even in that department LGB is "wanting". If you're interested have a look at the PDFs on the RhB Grischun site. I also write reviews for a German LS mag on RhB models and often times it's "What were they thinking!?!" when doing those.

A small illustration on how the NMRA and some of its major advocates work.
The NRHS sponsors a large train show in Toronto. The NFR of the NMRA has usually a Craftsman corner. Many years ago we attended with our sectional layout. It was the only running display at the NFR booth.
A most eager beaver - who writes a column in MR - was pestering me about not belonging to the NMRA (actually that was NO LONGER belonging).
As I never have a problem calling a spade a spade I told him that I was more interested in model railroading than politics, besides being as I model Swiss proto there was not much that they could offer me in regards to inspiration.
Well, it was an interesting discussion which was terminated by the "eager beaver" when the person who organized the NFR exhibit told him in plain language that he was not to bother the exhibitors as it was hard enough to get good people to participate.

BTW we attended for about 6 years - as long as it was organized by a knowledgable person.

Sooooooo the NMRA is like any other organisation, there are those who model, there are those who organize and then there are those who like to play politics. As long as one can ignore the politicos and get on with modelling things are splendid!

Oh before I forget, the proposed NMRA LS standards are lunacy, not only do they confuse things even more than they have been confused already, but from a technical standpoint they are really out to lunch in a major way. Alas since I'm not a member all I can do is mention the discrepancies in the fora and hope that Rutger Friberg trips across one or the other post.

[ClinchValleySD40]

Yes, they do. The new upgraded Bulletin is nice.

[Anonymous]

Many years ago I remember going to several NMRA regional conventions. I was interested in joining but they weren't too interested in high school students so I didn't. I haven't seen any public announcements of regional activities in years and so have no contacts to find out if I would want to join now. When I last attended these events you paid your registration fee and attended, member or not. The last time a national convention was near me and I was interested in going I looked at the registration fee, then looked at the membership fee, and asked a local hobbyshop owner to let me look at a couple of recent issues of the Bulletin. It wasn't hard to figure out that getting in the door was going to cost me way more than I was willing to spend and the publication wasn't even suited to line a birdcage with. Why bother. Then I find that the last "standards" project they were involved in basically was an endorsement of an existing commercial system privately developed and put in the public domain by its inventor. I have been looking at their web site (the only public source of information) for the last year or so and find little evidence of any progress in anything except trying to force all the local areas to submit to greater central control.

NMRA standards that I have seen never addressed magnetic couplers (KaDee created a defact standard and now everybody really has to work with that or be left out), they never addressed the flange issue in N scale, and I could go on. I bought their standards gauge for N scale and now use it merely for quick checks - for serious work I go to my micrometers and digital calipers; it is just way too sloppy. I just saw the articles on track in MR and have started thinking about checking the gauge with my instruments to really see how accurate it is - my gut instinct is that it isn't.

While I have great respect for what the organization did 60+ years ago I agree with those who say "What have you done for me lately?" Not much I can see.

BTW, I never got a reply from an email to them about policies to use their library should I get the chance to travel to HQ and a friend now tells me they charge to get in if you're not a member (can somebody confirm if that's true?) Doesn't seem like a friendly bunch to me.

[MAbruce]

I'm the grandson of a former NMRA president (back in its early years), and the organization today hardly means anything to me. I'd say they have a lot of work to do to prove they continue to have relevance to us "common everyday" modelers.

[AntonioFP45]

Been a modeler since the late 1970s. Never been a member but am going to join, and try it for a year. I've been hearing more "positives" about the NMRA. Many of us that have been critical of it need to remember that this hobby would not have all of the offerings that it does today if it were not for this organization. Even our government has its faults but we still love our country!

Just something to think about.

[CNJ831]

Nscale49er hits a number of NMRA's faults and shortcoming right on the nose. In many, if not most, of the organization's Regions the cost of joining both the Region and the National for a year are included in the Regional convention registration fee for an outsider. This can often amount to $50 and certainly prohibits outsiders from coming in and taking a peek at what NMRA is all about in their area.

Nscale49er's point about the origin of "standards" is also on the mark. Very little of worth has been done in this area for many years. I watched the HO modular standards evolve and was very disappointed in the end as to how they were chosen. You'll also find that the Large Scale standards are not wanted or accepted by the great majority of Large Scale hobbyists. And for a real wakeup call and an insight as to how the NMRA works (or doesn't work!) today I urge any interested hobbyist to checkout who was on the NMRA's DCC standards committee to see why a particular existing commercial system was chosen as THE standard for everyone else to conform to.

Honestly, most of the Regions are fairly good and I was a member for nearly 20 years myself. But the National organization, as it stands today, really needs to be disbanded and reformed with concepts much more in line with what hobbyist's current needs are, not what's best for the NMRA's National plutocrats, if it intends to survive.

CNJ831

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RhB_HJ

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

Gentlemen,

The problem isn't that the large scale community doesnt need the standardization,
It does!

Vic,[;)][;)]

Yes, that's more or less the case.

Now as to the details Aristo and USA are (supposedly) committed to 1:29 - for the additional WOW factor! MTH is doing 1:32. HLW is more or less 1:24 as is some of Aristo's Classic stuff
LGB is all over the place i.e. 1:20.3 for the log disconnects to "almost" 1:29 for some of the new NA stuff and everything in between!
1:22.5 for 45mm track is very close to scale (1:22.222) for Meter gauge, but even in that department LGB is "wanting". If you're interested have a look at the PDFs on the RhB Grischun site. I also write reviews for a German LS mag on RhB models and often times it's "What were they thinking!?!" when doing those.

Very true, and I've heard of other stories of NMRA members sometimes cajoling possible members but also heard stories of them being very rude and mean to outsiders.

Here's why large scale needs a dose of "Standards!" from another thread...[:D][8D]

Time to show you the meaning of the term: CONFUSION....

and a little lesson in SCALE vs GUAGE...

1st. Switch to Large Scale...

2nd. Time to become C-O-N-F-U-S-E-D...!!!!![%-)][D)][%-)][D)]

Almost all trains in Large Scale operate using LGB type 45mm GUAGE track. This is ment to represent European meter gauge railroads at a SCALE of 1:22.5. NowLGB comes to America and they start making US type trains that dont run on meter gauge but did on 3' guage, so they make the US style trains but keep the scale at 1:22.5, even though at this SCALE the GAUGE is now 3'-3". Some modelers complain that they 45mm track used for a 3' narrow gauge track would yield a scale of 1:20.3, but only a few makers cater to this group. Now other makers get into the act, and produce trains that represent standard gauge 4- 8 1/2" gauge track on the same 45 mm track, giving an actual scale of 1:32 but some makers think the trains are too diminuative and "dont quite look right" at 1:32 scale so they bump up the scale of their standard guage trains to 1:29 scale so now the 1:29 SCALE trains trainslate into a roughly 4' scale GAUGE but are expected to be accepted at standard guage 4'-81/2". Now other manufacturers are at the same time making products at 1:24 scale at a scale gauge of 3'-6". Then Bachmann who was making things at 1:22.5 decides that it will make all new products at a scale 1:20.3 but they dont retool and redo their older 1:22.5 offerings, they simply "call them" 1:20.3 which leads to real confusion when you actually put a scale to the older now "upscaled" items. Now add that LGB is also producing standard gauge items at somewhere between 1:22.5 and 1:29 scale, they wont specify a "scale".

And all this runs on the same 45mm track...

Are we C-ON-F-U-S-E-D yet ???????????? [%-)][D)][%-)][D)]

BTW your absolutely right about NMRA large scale standards of confusion as they exist today, they seem to intentionally set on having them rejected by the LS manufacturers. I think Bachmann is the only one who might apply them to their new products, LGB sure doesn't care what the NMRA say's, Aristo and USA damn well wont "downsize" there products after spending buku-dollares $$$ on the tooling for their 1:29 lines. so we'll have to see what happens, only time will tell.[8D]