NMRA

[Anonymous]

In the EARLY 1960's General Electric developed a system called ASTRAC (Automatic Simulteaneous TRain Control). This was the first true command control system. In the 1930's Lionel had a system called Magic Electrol. This had some of the rudiments of command but was short lived due to (guess what), a PATENT DISPUTE. Those who are familiar with Lionel Trains may have noticed that the 3469 dump car has an empty space in it's design complete with screw bosses that looks like a good place to mount a primitive carrier control receiver.

[Anonymous]

I've been an NMRA Life Member for some 25 years now. I rank membership in the NMRA as the single best investment I have ever made in the hobby--the national conventions and the wonderful friendships made over the years are, in themselves, well worth many times the price paid.

It has been somewhat entertaining to read all the misinformation presented in this thread relating to the organization's purpose and goals in general, and to its involvement with Large Scale in particular (one of my favorite modeling scales), but that sort of thing is common with most all Internet forums and hardly worth fretting over.

I do get a kick out of the "what have you done for me lately?" line of thinking that invariably pops up whenever a topic focuses on organizational membership. The more appropriate question might be: "What have YOU done for your hobby lately?"

[Anonymous]

All in all, the preceding posts are not good advertisement for the NMRA. [V]Perhaps if they could do something relevant soon, that would benefit some members, they could save some face for now.
Hint: Step into the HO MTH, DCS vs DCC brewhaha and cut through the crap and BS , educate about the DCC standards and clear the air.
Then, find something else! Keep going! Be vital, be current, and stop resting on Laurels earned years ago!

[dehusman]

The division in Omaha is pretty active. I have belonged for about 8 years. Stopped subscribing to the Bulletin (Scale Rails) after they "ripped off" pictures I submitted for an article (they kept the all the pictures I submitted with an article, even the ones that were never published, yet the magazine NEVER published that anything you submit, whether used or not, is retained). The organization is horribly inefficient and byzantine. They are forever losing documentation and submissions. I had to submit documentation 4 or 5 times to get my Railroad Author achievement award. It takes months to track down who's in charge of what and then to get somebody to fix or act on what ever the problem or item is. They recently reorganized and I doubt that it will improve. They mostly reorganized the deck chairs instead of plugging any leaks.

If your division isn't very active or well organized, you probably won't get very much out of the NMRA.

Dave H.

[darth9x9]

I have thought about joining for a couple of years now but I haven't made the jump. A fellow club member joined and I have been sitting back and watching what happens to him.

BC

[on30francisco]

I used to belong to the NMRA for over 10 years but let my membership lapse 5 years ago. They have done many good things for this hobby such as set standards for products and promote model railroading. Their bulletins used to be filled with a lot of helpful modeling information pertaining to all scales and levels. I got started in narrow gauge modeling from a series (Narrow Nuggets by Pete Moffett) that appeared in the bulletin during the time I was a member. What discouraged me from renewing my membership was the fact that they started concetrating much more on promoting their conventions, modeling contests, MMRs, personality differences, and politics. Although I have no interest in contests or trying to attain a MMR certificate, I feel there is nothing wrong with these, and people who achieve these goals should be recognized. I believe they have also neglected minority scales and gauges in favor of HO (I model in HO as well as in On30). I attended some regional chapter meetings in the past and found the members to be very cliquish and aloof ("good old boys"). I asked a few members for some information and they acted like "who the h*** are you." They made a few of us newcomers feel like pariahs - especially if our modeling methods or choices of scales happened to be different than theirs. I'm in this hobby to have fun and when a certain aspect of it stops being enjoyable, its time for some changes.

[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]

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[ClinchValleySD40]

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

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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!!

[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

[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: 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

[rogerhensley]

[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.

[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

[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

[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.

[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..

[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

[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]

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.