This discussion repeats a theme. I will similarly repeat my suggestion
that S scale and O scale size, space and engineering / modelling
issues are sufficiently similar... while S scale and HO / N are
sufficiently dis-similar that teaming with the O scalers has much to
recommend it as a gain for both parties.
Those who look at this as some sort of "convert them to S scale"
mission miss the point. It's not that this doesn't happen, but if the
focus is simply on helping the average S scaler lift the level of his
modelling to a higher level.... the RESULTS will convert people to S
scale... because it will be seen as worthwhile. But I don't think that
a lone S scale layout article here and there says much to anyone often
enough. Sure, it says something... but I'm not clear what.
For my two cents, as long as publishing competes with the NASG... I
think an S scale only publication faces tough economics. Don's formula
broadens things to include Flyer.... the only other route is to
include more scale of another size where the possibilities of
publication are greater than the RMC and MR offer. Frankly, I doubt
the O scale publications would be interested in S scale unless the
articles were more general in their modelling interest. So I would
think you're back to the 'net... which in truth is a fairly closed
community.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
