Do you think that the NMRA is still in touch with todays modelers
Well any modeler who does not have an NMRA standards guage is missing out (of course they do not make them in all scales that is true).
I belong to the NMRA because it is still the only national organization devoted to a hobby which means quite a bit to me. Most of my closest friends are model railroad friends; my most enjoyable evenings out are model railroad operating sessions, my most enjoyable spare time moments are spent with model railroading. While I could do all those things I suppose without being an NMRA member, to me it makes sense that if the hobby means that much to you, you join and support its one national organization. Obiously only a minority of us feel that way. Where I live, Milwaukee, the local division is very active and involved and sponsors free monthly meets. Our region by contrast is not that active. Others I have talked to tell me their divisions are almost defunct but their regions are active.
That is also why I belong (and am a contributing member) to the Chicago & North Western Historical Society – that is the prototype railroad that means the most to me so it seems almost automatic that I would support the one organziation devoted to that cause exclusively. But again many others disagree.
The old saying is “all politics is local” and I think the same is true of the NMRA. It almost does not matter how active the national or the regions are – the local divisions have to be active and create benefits for members for people to feel motivated to join the NMRA. Sometimes I think the NMRA leadership thinks the secret to declining members is to make the national ever more large and elaborate but I think you have to pu***he organization down to the Division and make people grateful for it.
Dave Nelson
I am doing 1/2" large scale, so I dont think NMRA has anything to offer me, or to anyone working outside on the mainstream of HO, or N.
If you are working in these scales then they have a long history with the manufacturers and hobbiest. This history allowed NMRA to work with makers to produce a fairly universal set of “standards” for new products right from inception to production. Todays model trains reflect that almost universal standardization in almost all product, especially in HO or N. But that was 30 years ago and their lack of connectedness to the average model RRer can be demonstrated by what has happen in large scale.
Large scale has been around now for over 20 years seriously in the US, Longer in Europe. However, the NMRA seam to view large scale for all these years as the orange haired *** child that no one wants to acknowledge. They have been downright belligerent to large scalers in the past, and have shunned us for the longest time as not being “serious” enough for them. Someone there wakes up and realizes that Garden RR’s is a booming part of the hobby and that the train has left the station without them.
Now they decide that we are doing things all wrong and have tried to imposed thier new “standards” on large scale and in doing so are trying to break up large scale into 4 or 5 different scales (G,H,F, and Gauge I). It makes me laugh, do think manufacturers will just hop into line behind their new “standards”? Where were they 20 years ago or even 10 years ago when large scale became more popular? To come into an established hobby and impose “standards” when the cat is already way to long out of the bag is ridiculous to me. If they had shown interest in working with large scale makers from the beginning, they might have had an influence on a standardization process. But now its far too late to try imposing thier viewpoint.
Manufacturers in large scale are already doing pretty much what ever they want and I doubt whether the NMRA will hold any s
The NMRA is what the members make it. If they offer little for your scale its because not many people in your scale joined and work to develope standards and information.
My above remark will probably bring out a lot of critisism of the NMRA. I’ve been in N scale over 30 years and an NMRA member most of that time, and have often heard it called the “HO Model Railroad Association”
I know that the organization sometimes gets bogged down in politics and personality conflicts and that there have been people in positions of power who look with distain on anyone who does not model their way and have treated others badly. But, overall I have found good fellowship in the organization and I believe that the organization has been a benefit to the hobby.
The majority of the people running the organization are trying to determine the members wants and needs and make the organzation relevant. They can’t do it if you are not amember or even as a member do not participate.
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
My one and only year as a member of NMRA, was not what you would classify as a landmark year with that organization. It started off as any membership year does, you’re wondering what they have to offer and you can hardly wait to get some access to the library. So I had a question about a locomotive and was wondering if they had some info, I called, explained what I was after, and was promptly informed that there was no one there that could get this info for me. I asked when there would be. The answer, yep you got it, they didn’t have the time to do that, and likely wouldn’t in the near future. Soooooo, with that I got to wondering, what good is an organization like the NMRA, if they don’t have time to help their membership with their modeling questions???[?]
Yes, they serve a purpose, and I am a member. That purpose should be more directed towards promoting the hobby in a frirendly, helpful manner. Of course, the standards in the smaller scales are a blessing in terms of equipment interoperability.
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’.
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.
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 sin
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
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…
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.
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
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
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.
[/quote]
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
[/quote]
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 sh
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
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!!