> > > > It's a forlorn bleat I am sure, but can't we give up these crazy US & Brit > > nomenclatures? > > For any miniature all you need to know is the scale ratio from the prototype > > (correct or incorrect as the manufacturer prefers) & the track gauge in mm, > > e.g. 20.3/45 > >
A system similar to that was proposed a few years ago here in the states as a way to make things a bit clearer. "LS##" where the ## would be the scale; 1:20.3 would be LS20, 1:32 would be LS32, and so on. I don't know where it originated, but for a while Aristocraft was marking their boxes like that. For some reason, the other manufacturers didn't hope on the bandwagon, and the system seems to have died a premature and unfortunate death. Pity, as it's the only system I've seen that actually makes any amount of sense. With more and more players entering the live steam arena, this scale debacle is quickly going to pollute our otherwise distilled waters. There are a good number of days I want to gather each manufacturer in a room and beat them over the head for not getting together and standardizing on at least a clear, easy to understand identification system. While live steam is still primarily a craftsman's hobby, the recent rash of low-cost easy to run locos has the potential of changing that. (Much for the better, though it may make getting a room at DH all the more difficult.) Up to now, we as a niche market have been able to keep close tabs on "our" manufacturers, and make sure they adhere to clearly noting the scale, or at least getting the information out as to what scale/gauge it is. If Aristo's proposed live steam loco comes in a box marked "LS29," I will be both amazed and highly pleased. Not because it's a much needed low-cost standard gauge steamer, but because it shows that they're demonstrating some commitment to segregating and clarifying their large scale offerings which by then will be available in _three_ scales - 1:29, 1:24, and 1:20.3. One can only hope others would follow suit. I think, however, it will take significant pressure from hobbyists, publications, and clubs and organizations to get everyone on one page. That, or a really big sledge hammer. Later, K
