Wasn't passenger service essentialy abandoned by the time S came along.
Remember we always wait for years after a new product is announced , to get
it??? I think, or wonder, or forget (what's that?)
John Armstrong
----- Original Message -----
From: Roy Inman
To: S-Scale
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} MTH in S
Which shows to go ya that one man's scale is another man's non-scale.
In this email lies the tale of why we can't have passenger cars in S as they
do in O, G, N, HO, On30.
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rance Velapoldi <[email protected]>
Reply-To: S-Scale <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:53:27 +0100
To: S-Scale <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} MTH in S
Hi:
Were the AM PA's and PB's so far off the mark?? I thought they weren't too
"non-scale"???
I do have the ATSF and another??
What were the basic problems (besides hi-rail wheels and couplers)?
Tx.
Rance Velapoldi (Tranby, Norway)
On 3/1/2012 13:27, Robert Frascella wrote:
A third PA-1? That assumes that we've already had two. Of the two PA's
out there neither are scale nor that great. The best of the two is the Flyer
version, with the flat roof being the biggest problem. So to answer the
question, yes we need a scale PA. I'd certainly welcome one.
Bob Frascella
Wenham, MA
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6930 (20120301) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6930 (20120301) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
