Good morning Lew,

 Just a few slight corrections to your first article.  The original MMB was Jim Hughes, Garry Cerrone, John Weigel, you,  Jim Barcus, and myself.  The others Roger Cutter, Bill and Mary Miller, and Bruce Saylor were all On3 model railroaders and it was the first three that I joined up with to host the all narrow gauge module meets in Maryland.  Later on we handed the meet over to Bruce, which is now the Kimberton NG Module meet.

  The Heisler that is featured in a couple of the photos was in fact a Rivorissi HO Heisler.  We had three of them and operated them to the point that we replaced the drivers three times and the motors twice.  They are now worn out and have become either scenery detail or on a few occassions the second loco in a double headed train.  The motors and gears have been pulled out to allow free wheeling.

   Finally the mottto of the MMB was, "we're not just cheap, we're also particular".  When the MMB was established the idea was to have fun and let our modeling speak for us and so it still is today.  Good luck with the magazine, who knows maybe some day I will write something for you.

Steve, MD Railbaron, Fisher

Just a quick note to tell you that as long as you have this or any column dedicated to On30 or any Narrow Gauge, I'll be a reader.  Personally, I'm building my version of Maine's  WW&F RY in my Pennsylvania basement using a lot of the Bachmann offerings.  It's great feeling like a kid again at 54.  John Tumolo  Britcarfan@aol.com

Just saying how much I like the Narrow Gauge column and indeed the whole magazine. I'm really looking forward to future issues. The production values in particular are excellent.

I do have to say I detest your use of the spelling "gage". Have never seen it used before in print, and only by the odd American on internet groups, which I put down to either a mis-typing or laziness. Had no idea Websters endorses gage - thank goodness that from here I can safely ignore that obviously misguided publication.

And thanks for putting in a link to my site on 30" gauge railways. It is sadly in need of updating, and I was thinking of converting it into a wiki, how I've got no idea.

Anyway good luck and good forture to you.

Cheers,

Michael Johnson

(safely away in Australia where he is gagging on the spelling of gage, ooops, GAUGE!)

This section will be one of my favorites as I am in the process of building an On30 empire in the basement. It is based on a facticious defunct NG road in the Appalacians using a lot of "guest" locos and rolling stock. The premis is therefore giving new life to the RR as a tourist/museum line. At present I have power from Bachmann, BLI and Precision Craft. Everything is sound equipped and DCC. The Shay and Climax by Bachmann are my favorites. I graduated from N scale because of the sound offerings in the larger scale and have found this to be a good decision at my age (65).

Most of my structures are craftsman kits from various manufacturers. And yes I have been influenced by the pioneers in narrow gage modeling, especially those found often in the Gazette and now hopefully here.

Lew's brief history is informative and I look forward to more good reading and information from him. And to think this is all free too! Wow, what a bargain!

Pete

Thanks for the column on ON30.  I just began a layout in my basement in ON30 and look foward to reading your column.  I would like to see some columns on layout out planning of scenery and scratch building so my layout doesn't look like everyone elses.  I went to the S symposium last year and looking at all those narrow gauge layouts were like looking at the same thing everywhere you went.

Thanks again

Rob

I really enjoyed your artical on On30. I am a fan of it myself. I belong to a group that does modules for shows.  Our web address is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/On30CCVMod. I found that by building modules I can mix up my railroad at home and take it to show for others to look at. I just love building the scenery. I build most everything from scratch. What a trill to see the shots in the artical.

I am looking forward to future atricals from you.

Thanks Boz

They're all doing Colorado NG.

I might suggest the East Broad Top for something different.

I do the EBT in Sn3.

Roy

I concur with the spelling of gage--it makes me gag! I much prefer narrow gauge! This is part of the continuing dumbing down of the English language, which the USGS is actively participating in by removing the possessive from place names so it is now Pikes Peak instead of Pike's Peak. Then again, folks are taking away the more colorful (and Spanish) canon too.

While I am learning to enjoy reading about other narrow gauge lines, I am still a Colorado/ New Mexico/ Utah guy. I model in Sn3, and try to build models that reflect the prototype, even if my layout will be somewhat freelanced.

Keith

I know as I'm British that I struggle with English as it is spoken in the former Commonwealth, but I have to tell you that gauge is the space between the rails and gage is a small juicy fruit. For the benefit of the motors in your models and their delicate innards it is important to know the difference.

There is a fine line between plain English and dumbing down.

Gud - I'm glad we've got that str8!

Eric

England

I thought Gage was a general...and a pretty bad one at that!!!

Wasn't he the guy who ran around American with a twenty wagons or so behind his Army for just his personal living arrangements?

I've been in and out of standard gauge modeling for over 4 decades; the older I get the more I gravitate towards the quite and peaceful attributes that modeling narrow gauge provides me.  I am into both HOn3 and Fn3, the HOn3 is very recent and is intended to add more interest to my indoor empire. The Fn3 is still in the planning stage, but is now finally at the 'about to begin' stage.  Like another John up thread, I too will be a constant fan of MRH as long as some aspect of realistic narrow gauge (be it prototype or freelance), is included in its pages.

Overall, I really like the look of this new endeavor, and am looking forward to the next issue.  If you chose to misspell gauge in the interest of being modern, well, I can live with that.    John Huey

I have to agree with "Gauge" as the correct spelling of Gauge. One of your reasons for using "Gage" was that it was simpler to read. I don't know how, as every time I read it I had to remember to translate it into "Gauge". It pretty much stopped me reading the article for a while.

That being said:

I thing that a Narrow Gauge article is an excellent idea for your magazine and when I get over the "Gagging" I will go back and reread it. :-)

 I think having articles on narrow gauge is very good. It is a very hot item in the hobby, especially On30. This is on sector of the hobby that is running like a forest fire. It is the best of both world...HO and O scale. There are a lot of modeler kitbashing HO into On30 and like the prototype..."anything goes" which makes it attractive.

There are a lot of modeler kitbashing HO into On30 and like the prototype..."anything goes" which makes it attractive.

I find this especially interesting.  You see, we are currently being told everywhere that if it is not exactly prototype, then it's junk.  And yet..."anything goes" is so attractive On30 is going like a wild fire.

This suggests to me at the least that the PRM tangent is not as mainstream as it might like to proclaim...

I think most model railraoders just like building and playing with trains!!

 As I have search and looked at photos of odd railroad equipment in the world of narrow gage and small railroads, I know if I would've model some of the stuff that I have seen many modelers would've said under their breath that can't be real or very unprototype.

Mick...I think that applies for Small railroads ingeneral.  When you see the forest, you miss the small bushes.

I don't see where we're being "told everywhere that if it isn't exactly prototype, its junk."  Maybe I'm not reading everything you are, but I can't recall reading anything that told me if it wasn't prototype it was junk.  In my opinion that's quite an exaggerated statement, bordering on inflammatory.

Perhaps I've been online too long watching the threads that come out around the time of new releases.

My vote goes for 'Gauge" lets not murder yet another word in our language. I agree with Keith this is yet another example of the great dumbing down of our society today.  I realise this is a hobby but hey, words are like trains they are fun and when you look at their roots and derivatives, as interesting as all the research we do on our trains - model and prototype.

Mind you I am refraining from blowing a fuse at the other magazine contributor here who referred to 0n30 as a 'non' scale.

The scale is an old and respected one: '0' scale 1:48. We simply choose to use track with a gauge of 16.5mm. (Forget it's known as HO elsewhere.)

Sure its freelance, but is that any different to those who chose to freelance an HO standard gauge railway and call it the "Buffalo Canyon and Southern" or some such. I think not, and feel the writer owes 0n30 modellers an apology.

Great e - magazine though, none the less.

Well done to all concerned.

Russell

Whilst I found the article to be generally informative, I cannot help but focus on the corruption of the word gauge. Maybe this shows my age, but I do not think we should condone the bastardization of the English language, To use the the gage spelling only seems to pander to the "texting " generation who are too lazy to use the correct spelling because the modern world is in too much of a hurry.

To be technical, a gage is something deposited as a security against the fulfillment of an obligation; or a Gauntlet (or other object) thrown down down as a challenge to combat ( from the Collins English dictionary 21st cent edition ).

As this looks as though this could be a magazine with the potential to reach millions - why not lead the market by using the correct spelling.  After all, we seem to be in a society which is full of dis-information ie: misquotes of misquotes which confuse those that follow us.

So please, let us not see the use of that spelling in the future in what I feel is a good "cyber mag".

So I now throw down my gage to you not to use gage for gauge.

PS   Is this the first use of the term cyber mag???LOL.

I was reading a book that uses "Gage" instead of "Guage."  And the word I saw was "Gaged."  I knew the railraod was narrow, but I didn't know somebody was purposely covering it's mouth...

"Guaged" would have been more plane.

Gage is a correct spelling according to Webster, and some of the more recent NMRA documents use "Narrow Gage" as opposed to "Narrow Gauge". Experts in writing text to be read on the computer screen say "simplify, simplify, simplify".

So putting all these things together, the modern approach for a document to be read on a computer screen is to use gage when referring to track gage. Other uses of "gauge" may still apply, but the MRH style guide standard when referring to track gage is "gage". Advertisers may use other spellings in their ad copy, but in MRH copy, it's "gage" when referring to the distance between the rails. And Webster lists both gauge and gage as correct.

Well, that must be a new computer lingo because I've never seen "gage" used until the past 6 months. It has always been gauge. But the more things changes the more it stays the same.

Joe, if webster lists both Gauge and Gage as correct then use the one that is in most common use - GUAGE - and stop playing this silly semantics war.  Seriously, this is just silliness.

As a professional journalist for 15 years who pays scrupulous attention to matters of grammar and style, I must respectfully disagree with your choice of the alternate spelling "gage." The Associated Press Stylebook -- the journalist's bible -- clearly states that "gage" is a security or pledge while "gauge" is a measuring device, also applicable to railroad usage. True, Webster's says "gage" is acceptable for this use, but it's clearly noted as an alternate spelling, and this spelling's dominant use is for the non-railroad, non-measurement definition.

I agree with those above in feeling that using "gage" is a dumbing down of the language. The different spellings make it clearer that each word has a different meaning. I am dismayed that the NMRA has chosen to stray from proper use. It's up to journalists to maintain and uphold high standards.

And Joe, I don't think your "simplify, simplify" argument holds much water in this case -- maybe if MRH went out on Twitter. But I assume most of your readers, as I do, download the PDF and read it at their leisure. Therefore, this simplification really doesn't make any significant difference. It just looks misspelled. Simplification doesn't have to mean shortening the words themselves -- just write more tightly. Why stop at "gage"? Why not expand that logic to the rest of the language, like what Col. McCormick did at the Chicago Tribune, which for years dropped the final "e" from words like "employee." Want to really simplify? Make it Milwauke Road, or Rio Grand.

Jim Dudlicek, chief editor, Dairy Foods, Deerfield, Ill.

I whole-heartedly concur with Jim Dudlicek's comments.   Please do not distract me from the core content of whatever article, by misspellings.  We're not text-messaging here.  This is a full-fledged mainline publication.  Do it justice.  Thanks.

We need to pick our battles and "gage" isn't one of them. Enough people have expressed their displeasure with us over this issue (including more than a few in person at Hartford) that I've decided we need to focus on other more important issues.

Starting with issue 4, it's to be gauge, not gage. (Now go complain to the NMRA about some of their newer documents that are using "gage" as the spelling ...)

On to more important concerns ...

now I don't have to feel so uncomfortable. Gage always sounded to me like what you would call the action of someone that had a ping pong ball stuck in their throat.

Dan