Subject:
|
Got NMRA? (was Re: New Interurban/Trolley model, perfect for those downtown scenes)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:36:06 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswest.net/AvoidSpam/
|
Viewed:
|
1814 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> To your point about the NMRA and AFOL sentiment, I think you may be on to
> something. I don't think John Neal was a model railroader, although I could be
> wrong. Or Mike Poindexter either, and those are the names that come to mind as
> thought leaders in the "we don't need the NMRA" camp.
I was never formally associated with the NMRA, although I grew up with model
trains (my dad had a Marklin table layout) along side of LEGO. Never really
remember seeing a LEGO train until about 1986.
But as far as the NMRA goes, here is my feeling. If TLC decides to step up to
the bat and invest some serious effort into the Trains theme, then I think that
we would be okay on our own and wouldn't need the NMRA. We could become a SIG I
guess, but would keep to ourselves and continue to show at NMRA and
other model railroad shows.
BUT, if TLC bails on Trains, then I think we should kiss the NMRA on the lips!
If TLC refuses to produce the basic elements needed to sustain a LEGO train
hobby, then I'd be the first one on the horn to Kadee to try and convince them to
produce LEGO compatible trucks, couplers, and track. I would lobby heavily to
all Train AFOLs to adopt "0" scale, which would instantly make it easier for
manufacturers to produce components for us.
For instance, Kadee could modify an existing O scale truck to accept a 2x2 plate
with pin on top-- no need to worry about tubes and studs and patents and all--
we would just superglue it and viola!- new LEGO element. It would then behoove
us to toss around any influence we have as a group to convince manufacturers who
normally cater to model railroaders that we are a viable market-- we're dealing
with a toy, kids will be drawn to the hobby, the NMRA is graying, blah, blah,
blah, etc.
Of course, this would be a huge step in a very different direction from where
most of us are now, especially with respect to purity issues.
> Hm... wonder if we could get Kevin L to make it a survey topic.
Yeah, that's a great idea-- poll whether or not someone would accept non-LEGO
components designed to be used with LEGO if TLC discontinued the Trains
theme, or would they continue to remain "pure".
<pause> And the real crime here is the TLC could do all of the things we want
*so* easily! I'm thinking, what if all of the time and energy that was expended
on ZNAP had been directed into Trains.... {:~^(
-John
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Train Purity (was Got NMRA? (was....
|
| In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes: ....whether or not someone would accept non-LEGO (...) Hey, the concept of 'purity' itself could be greatly debated. What's the difference between string supplied in the Pirate sets and track used for train (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
70 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
