Subject:
|
Re: Train Purity (was Got NMRA? (was....
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:59:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1754 times
|
| |
|
|
I may well be a unique voice within PNLTC but one never knows..... Actually,
PNLTC is nearly 30 members now and thus many opinions are represented.
We concur on many issues. Btw, I view it as currently convenient to model 6-
wides (maybe it's the traditional thing). My end goal is a full-on garden
pike with brick trains on LGB running gear and track -- you've made a foray
here, yes? Hopefully, I can begin a few protos along with simple lineside
structures next year. Btw2, I recall seeing a pic of a (14?)-wide caboose you
did that impressed many PNLTCers.
I, too, would probably never lust for greener pastures if TLG "offered it
all". But that's exactly the paradox: can a company building an open-ended
toy ever hope to offer it all?
dan parker
In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
<snip>pleased and surprised by your response. For some reason, I got
> the feeling that the PNLTC would be "pure" to the end, no matter what the • outcome
> (or perhaps yours is a minority voice?).
>
> I have a feeling that the sentiments of AFOLTs will be mixed-- half • considering
> LEGO trains just "toys" and therefore the pursuit of components and • capabilities
> beyond the production of TLC unnecessary. I would feel that way as well, if • we
> were talking about, say, Duplo trains. Now, *that's* a toy in my mind (BTW I
> find it ironic that the coolest train hood ever made by TLC came out this • year in
> *Duplo*-- 8 wide, too;-)
>
> The other half are probably either AFOLTs who have been involved in some way • in
> model railroading, or AFOLTs who have been turned on by the MOCs of these • AFOLTs
> over the past few years. These folks know how cool trains can be and the • joys of
> prototype modeling. These people are attempting to creatively combine 2 • distinct
> and separate hobbies, and the results are very pleasing, IMO.
>
> It's too bad in my mind that TLC cannot recognize the potential here, because • all
> things being equal, I'd certainly opt to stay "pure" (meaning if TLC produced • the
> things we wanted and other companies produced the things we wanted, I'd buy
> TLC's). But I'm afraid this will not be the case (that TLC will produce the
> things we want, or even continue producing at all).
>
> -John
>
>
> >
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Train Purity (was Got NMRA? (was....
|
| (...) Wow, Dan, I am pleased and surprised by your response. For some reason, I got the feeling that the PNLTC would be "pure" to the end, no matter what the outcome (or perhaps yours is a minority voice?). I have a feeling that the sentiments of (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
70 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
