[toddalin]

Today we received an acceptance letter and request for Copyright Authorization for an article, Tortoise and Lizard Bash RR, and pictures submitted to Scale Rails Magazine.  We would be paid at the standard rate.  Thing is, I don't recall ever writing such an article or sending in any pics???  /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif

Best I can figure is that they received my write-up and pictures that I submitted for our open house at the NMRA National Convention to be held in Anaheim this year.     Still, until we get to the bottom of this, I can't sign an authorization or take any $$$ with a clear conscience. /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue2.gif

Now one of you guys didn't send in an article on our behalf did you??? 

 

[Madman]

Take the money and run............Forget your concience........................And for pete's sake, don't sign anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif

 

[thekollector]

What or who is "Scale Rails Magazine"? New one to me. Jack

 

[Semper Vaporo]

What is the "Standard Rate"?

I have heard of the magazine, but never seen one. What is its major focus (scale wise)?

Have them send you the article that they intend to print to make sure it is "yours", then decide if you want to share it at the rate they quote.

 

[Road Foreman]

Guys,

"Scale Rails Magazine" is the NMRA's magazine..

BulletBob

 

[Dr Rivet]

Bullet Bob is correct.

Scale Rails is the mag that replaced the old NMRA Bulletin. It is a slick cover, full color magazine full of useless advertizing [in that I can see it in the commercial TRAIN RAGS] that sucks money out of your NMRA membership $$$. You probably sent the stuff to the Convention Committee, or maybe the NMRA HQ because you wanted to plug the layout tours. THe laqwyers probably told them they needed the form even if your intent was clear to any baboon swinging through the forest. Remember, buracracracies exist for their own sake, not because they serve useful functions.

I can not believe you even made reference to that EVIL organization in the land of "WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING STANDARDS". After all, it is my right to buy large amonts of equipment and then complain on this site that it won't stay on the track, run through switches, couple together [or stay coupled], or even run in the same direction with track power. OR NOT.

Cheers

Dr Rivet

 

[chooch]

Jim,
  Please, don't hold back. /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif  We wan't to know exactly how you feel.  Very good!

 

[ohioriverrailway]

Way to go Jim. I see no redeeming social values for us large scalers in the aforementioned organization.

Similarly, the NRHS is has turned into a real money vacuum. The national lnow gets more money than the chapters from the annual dues.

 

[Dr Rivet]

Rick / Fred

I guess I should have mentioned that I am a life member of NMRA and three of its regions and served several years as the Assistant Superintendant of the Potomac Division in Eastern Region. I only bash organizations I belong to.

Lest you be confused, I believe we only need two kind of standards for Large Scale in general; track and wheel dimensions, and coupler centerline height. NEM in continental Europe and G1MRA [Gauge One Model Railway Association] in the UK have had reasonably compatible standards for probably close to 40 years. NMRA has persisted in trying to create a different standard that makes them "irrelavent" in this context.

In short:

Track gauge: 44.85 to 45 mm [1.75in] +/-
Wheel set back to back: MIN 40mm [sorry, Mr Polk and your SD-45s] so it fits in the guard rails on pointwork [switches] and crossings
coupler height for 1:29 knuckle couplers: 1.125 in [current Kadee standard]
coupler height for 1:32 knuckle couplers: 1.0625 in [current Kadee standard]

After that, ,everything else is optional. You don't even have to use the above if you don't want to be sure you can play on other people's railroads or exchange rolling stock.

Recommended practices for other track and wheel standards might be nice, and G1MRA has very good ones, but they are not necessary for us to play together.

That's it. Hardly a set of EVIL STANDARDS as one would think of in the NMRA context of standards. I will say that I have been amused [in this light] that as folks grow their equipment rosters to larger [read more prototypically dimensioned], move from LGB 1:22.5 "G" into 1:20.32 "F", or just buy K-37s instead of C-16s, they are faced with major track realignments of radius and especially center to center track spacing. Just suppose someone had already published a set od "standards and recommended practices" on what would be the MINIMUM required to allow all this equipment to operate BEFORE they put down 600 feet of track.

Many folks in the large scale community are rightly of the "do your own thing" mind set. Those of us who favor the existence of "standards and RPs" believe that they represent , for the most part, guidelines that represent either prototype engineering practice reduced to practical limits for a given scale, or practice that represents designs and implementation that will result in sound operational practice and interoperability of infrastructure [ track] and equipment. Those who think that these standards should be "imposed" on anyone are just NUTS!

I believe the "free thinkers" are in fear of the "imposition zealots". My advice [and desire], that the NMRA embrace the current G1MRA standards, add material related to US prototype practice, and publish them. The community will decide on its own over time to adopt those that are pretty much "universally" useful, and ignore anything else that interferes with their interpretation of the hobby.

As I stated at the beginning of this RANT, those items will be a limited set of track and wheel dimemsions, and a standard coupler height. Everything else is NOISE.

I don't even suggest that manufacturers follow this guidance, their egos pretty much prevent it. Too bad.

Cheers

Dr Rivet

 

[toddalin]

I got hold of Scale Rails and Dr. Rivet is almost correct.  We are to be featured in the NMRA National Convention layout tours.  Pics and captions that we had submitted for our layout to the NMRA convention committee to choose from were submitted to Scale Rails by convention staff on our behalf.  They now want to use the pics and captions in the magazine so need permission .

Thanks guys.

 

[Steve Stockham]

Jim,
  If more people in the NMRA had your common sense then I doubt that we would be so distrustful of them! Your ideas and suggestions make a lot of sense! It's too bad that the "standards nazis" seem to be the ones in control right now..../DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/sick.gif

 

[digger]

Having the NMRA dabbling in large scale is like answering the door to find an agent saying, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/hehe.gif

 

[Pete Thornton]

Posted By Dr Rivet on 02/10/2008 8:12 AM
Bullet Bob is correct.

....
 After all, it is my right to buy large amonts of equipment and then complain on this site that it won't stay on the track, run through switches, couple together [or stay coupled], or even run in the same direction with track power. OR NOT.

Cheers

Dr Rivet


Jim,

Was that sarcasm, or just dry english humor?
Either way, it was very succinctly put, and I totally agree with your follow-up post that all we need are a couple of simple standards to ensure interoperability.

I find it fascinating that some folk bash NMRA and castigate the members, when those same members are here, like you, reading the posts.  The NMRA standards body is just a bunch of guys trying to help - even though I have to agree they aren't doing a great job selling their ideas. /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif 

 

[Charles]

Dr. Rivet
"That's it. Hardly a set of EVIL STANDARDS as one would think of in the NMRA context of standards. I will say that I have been amused [in this light] that as folks grow their equipment rosters to larger [read more prototypically dimensioned], move from LGB 1:22.5 "G" into 1:20.32 "F", or just buy K-37s instead of C-16s, they are faced with major track realignments of radius and especially center to center track spacing. Just suppose someone had already published a set od "standards and recommended practices" on what would be the MINIMUM required to allow all this equipment to operate BEFORE they put down 600 feet of track. "

Though I do not have the predicament of a 600 foot layout, we will be investing a lot of time and a bit of green bucks re-laying our portable to allow for the biggeer 1:20 engines (allow us to "play together").  I doubt we will be able to find room for the K37(track hog that it is) to run with another engine relative to center to center track spacing.  Even if there were a third standard adpated by NMRA (relative to adapting G1MRA recommendations) add to the two you expressed are necessary there is no way for us to comply with center to center and the K 27/28 and K36 in a given time slot.

Standards and set procedures are important but I hope it never come to point of having to accommodate:
Cumberland Model Engineering F Scale Standards  71 mm   
other wise a tractor trailer would be required along wtih a production team to set a portable

 

[Torby]

A guy from NMRA was asking me last summer why we garden railroaders didn't follow their nomenclature suggestions. I couldn't remember what the suggestion was, so I answered, "Just hard-headed, I guess."

If you have questions about the copyright, just give them a call. I'm sure they'll answer any question you have. I wouldn't worry about it. You expect to make a bazillion bucks from this article? Won't happen. Say, "Thanks," put a copy of the magazine in a file folder for show-off value and use the money for something fun. I'd be delighted, if I was you.

 

[toddalin]

Posted By Torby on 02/11/2008 9:49 AM
A guy from NMRA was asking me last summer why we garden railroaders didn't follow their nomenclature suggestions. I couldn't remember what the suggestion was, so I answered, "Just hard-headed, I guess."

If you have questions about the copyright, just give them a call. I'm sure they'll answer any question you have. I wouldn't worry about it. You expect to make a bazillion bucks from this article? Won't happen. Say, "Thanks," put a copy of the magazine in a file folder for show-off value and use the money for something fun. I'd be delighted, if I was you.

My sentiments exactly.  I don't expect to make any real coin off of this.  It was just odd that they contacted me to print my article that I never submitted to them.  Just to see my hard work in print for all to enjoy is reward enough (not that I would turn down $$$).

Just goes to show that if you do a really good job, word gets out and they will find you.