Large Scale Central

NMRA Panel Discussion

General Discussion
#11

I too remember several rounds of NMRA Standards being proposed (and ultimately adopted) with the LS forums quite united in a “we don’t need no stinkin’ standards” refrain. In fact, we did need standards. Unfortunately, with very low NMRA membership in the large scales, NMRA didn’t have the teeth to lean on the manufacturers to get their standards implemented.

Can this change in the future? I don’t think so. For no reason other then a widespread disdain for the Enema Ray as it was so fondly refereed to be the aforementioned TOC.

Personally, I don’t think there is really much else the NMRA can offer large scale until such time as they have recruited a significant number of LS members. I don’t see that ever happening. I’m not a member and have no reason to join.

As Fred mentioned, the standards are out there for anyone to use for free. I follow some of them, but since I use commercially made track, I’m only following wheel standards. Even then I can only come close since many of the wheels produced in LS are non-standard as well.

So does the NMRA have a role? Sure. They can continue to maintain, and update the standards documents and provide those standards to manufacturers. Whether or not they follow them will probably depend on cost and convenience.

#12

You forgot that the NMRA can possibly find manufacturer’s that can still spit out “models” like they do in other scales!

#13

Following up: Why do you think that the NMRA treats Large Scale as the red-headed step child?

Have you experienced any kind of feedback from the NMRA directly, or is it “I heard that…?”

Have any of you ever submitted an article about LS to Model Railroader, or any other non-LS magazine and had it rejected?

Is it because there is no LS content in magazines in general?

#14

Bob,
I’ve chatted back and forth with Joe Fugate of Model Railroad Hobbyist about article ideas that he would be interested in. He flat out said to me, not interested in a large scale article, they are the lowest rated ones. The only way he would be semi interested in one is if the article was focused on methods that could be used in smaller scales. Whatever that means.

I have really no desire now to try and pursue writing an article for a hobby magazine after that. Large scale is just seen as the toy train crowd. I posted this years MIK build over at MRH and got crickets in terms of responses. Apparently scratch building in large scale is not of anyone’s interest.

#15

A few years ago, Can’t remember how many, Garden Railways came out with a contest about LS railroads that run diesel locomotives… I figure, why not, so I submitted mine… Got notified that I was in the top 5 or 6 whatever, then within 24 hours was notified that, ohhh, we made a mistake and you didn’t place… After that, I had absolutely no desire to try it again…

#16

Bob, I’ve had quite a few articles accepted, but only one rejected (by NG&SL Gazette.) I don’t see why that is relevant to this discussion?

Well, the coupler standards was discussed here on LSC or MLS, I think. The NMRA guy who ran 1/29th participated in the thread.

There are several threads on MLS where Kevin and others discuss the need or lack of standards. They tend to ask for help from people involved, like you and Kevin!

In looking for the thread, I did find this (a bit long but interesting attitudes):
https://largescalecentral.com/t/new-article-posted-on-the-naming-of-scales-and-gauges/66210/10?page=2

1 Like
#17

No-one said you had to become a member the benefit from the NMRA. If the major 1/29th (and 1/32nd MTH) manufacturers adopted the same wheel standards and the same coupler type than you wouldn’t have to make ANY modifications to run them together.

1 Like
#18

I’m trying to find out if anyone has submitted an article on Large Scale to what otherwise is a traditionally HO and N scale magazine like MR, or the NMRA monthly magazine, and had it rejected because “we don’t do that here”.

There seems to be a widespread belief that “they just dont like LS” and I’m trying to find any evidence of that.

#19

Andy,
I’m sorry they didn’t see the wisdom of giving you a prize, but it was a contest, and they don’t always tell you what they are looking for when they start judging.
I wouldn’t think that should keep you from participating in the future.

#20

Considering the abuse they got from TOC, I suspect the NMRA believes the opposite: LS just don’t like NMRA ! Quite a few people (@rooster, TOC, etc.,) clearly don’t like NMRA, which I find surprising as they never really did anything for LS. Aristo did more by labeling boxes “LS29” or similar.

#21

I was a member of the Little Rhody Division of the NMRA back in the 80’s when I was modeling in HO and N scales. I think the NMRA has little to do with Large scales as from what I’ve seen, The majority of large scale modelers are mixing scales or are not concerned with scale. This contradicts the NMRA by-laws.

image
image706×253 58 KB

I believe if there is to be any involvement of the NMRA in large scale it should be limited to the “correct” scales like 1:32, 1:20.3 and 1:13.7. Certainly not 1:24 or 1:29. My 2 cents.

#22

Bob,
Is the lack of articles on large scale due to the lack of authors submitting said articles to magazines like MR/MRH, RMC or is it due to MR/MRH/RMC not wanting publish submitted articles because they know their audience?

I know Joe F of MRH has said that large scale is a minority scale anyways so HO and N scale articles get more ‘eyeballs’ to the product. I would say based on my response from Joe F of MRH that its a "we don’t do that’ here type of response.

Remember MR/MRH/RMC are business ventures with their magazines. The NMRA is non-profit?

I will say the new NMRA president has been pretty open about the new digital world we live in.

#23

Yea, that I don’t know. Large Scale is a tiny fraction of the model railroad hobby, which in and of itself is a tiny, and shrinking hobby. I think a big part of it is the outside view that LS are toy trains, and I believe we’ve brought that on ourselves in a way when some of us say “I can run my 1:29 and my 1:24 and my LGB stuff together and it looks fine”

1 Like
#24

Bob,
I totally get that. I remember went to my first RPM meet with some large scale stuff I was given some weird looks. Devon and Steve joined in as well in the second year that I attended and Devon blew them away with his project. Folks just thought of large scale as toy trains and hadn’t really seen any scale modeling per say.

I did have a photo of my Snow Dozer scratch build project featured in the RMC summary of the Portland RPM meet and the editor Otto and I had quite the conversation. Sadly that was just before Covid so we haven’t had another meet yet. Having a large scale project highlighted as part of an overall RPM event is saying something.

#25

I don’t know much about NMRA, so I’d be interested in seeing specific things that benefit members in their model RR activities (vs., say, social meetups / conventions), regardless of scale.

After that, I’d wonder if those same benefits apply to LS, and if not, why not?

I’m not referring to standards for, say, small scale couplers, because compliance is (presumably) baked into the products. Ditto for rail profiles, gauge, flange clearance, etc., since the HO switches and track you buy should be reliable.

So, what else is there, for non-manufacturer model railroaders? I’m sure there are tangible benefits, but since I’ve not been involved, I’m not aware. Can someone give an example of how NMRA intervention of some kind specifically informed your model railroad decisions?

Cliff

1 Like
#26

BD,
I personally have not myself but would LOVE TOO I have pretty much all archived what I have done over the years. For me it’s about the time to put an article together. If someone would like to have my archives on a jump drive or something like that then they may.

I was doing toy trains today 15 years myself (played hookie from work and called in sick…my boss would have been pissed if he knew I was lying)

If Rod Stewart is an NMRA member and he is coming to Hersey this August perhaps he could swing buy and give his insight on my “Outdoor Railroad” with Amtrash running on it .

019
0191920×2880 723 KB

1 Like
#27

Dan, may I politely disagree? For a start, the “Bylaws” talk about educating, following prototype practices, and advancing “scale” model railroading. I don’t see running 1/24th trains and 1/29th trains as “contradicting” that.

We are lucky that we can run modern prototype trains on our layouts, and also old-fashioned narrow gauge trains on the same layout. Best not to run both at once - my layout had 1/32nd track on one side and 1/20th scale on the other side. Walk round the 1/32nd side and the modern stuff looked great.

I didn’t run both at the same time, but I don’t see it is any of NMRAs business if we happen to be able to do so. The HO guys can run On30 if they want, but they don’t seem to - maybe outdoors the clearances are easier?

So my 1/20th trains were ‘scale’ and prototypical, and my 1/29th trains also. I would say that NMRA should come to grips with the multi-scale issue and include it in their “Bylaws”. And if a 1/24th scale boxcar happens to be a close match for a small 1/20th scale boxcar, then who’s to say it is not ‘scale’ railroading to run them together?

Now, what I see as NMRA’s area of expertise is promoting consistent and reliable inter-operability. Like coupler standards, wheel standards, etc. But the idea that only “scale model railroading” is to be part of the National Model Railroad Association’s focus is just silly, imho.

#28

Peter; in conversations with TOC over the years, I have never dared to ask that question, as I didn’t want to involve politics in our friendship "
Fred Mills

#29

Bob; hence the arrival of the new GRNews on line magazine, which is proving to be quite popular, and FREE. www.grnews.org

#30

Craig;
Communicate with Clara Breitner, the Editor of GRNews…she is interested…look at the latest edition, it even accepts the idea of actual railroad operations on a LS railroad, out of doors…even the old Garden Railways wouldn’t look at an article on operations…
Fred Mills

1 Like