HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fraserf@bnr.ca (Fraser Fulford)
Subject: Re: Denatured Alcohol (Re: Experiences with Greenway Products?)
Keywords: denatured alcohol
Reply-To: fraserf@bnr.ca
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd, Ottawa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:20:26 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.212859.2765@CS.ORST.EDU>, larsons@mundania.CS.ORST.EDU (Larson Shawn Michael) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug11.230455.25400@cid.aes.doe.CA> afsidgb@cid.aes.doe.CA
|> writes:
|> 
|> >Is there another name for denatured alcohol?  Every hardware or
|> >drugstore where I inquire about it does not know anything by THAT
|> >particular name. I have been to.d that it cannot be rubbing alcohol
|> >because this is not pure, but has had oil added.
|> >I can get alcohol at the liquor store for mixes. Could this be the
|> >same stuff?

No, I think you are talking about Alcool (sp?).  Denatured Alcohol
is poisonous!

|> >-- 
|> > Gerry Burridge                        afsidgb@cid.aes.doe.ca
|> > Canadian Meteorological Centre        Tel.: 514-421-4646
|> > 2121 North Service Road - #404        Fax.: 514-421-4639
|> > Dorval, Que.  -  H9P 1J3                             
|> 
|> To find denatured alcohol, you should try the hardware stores again and
|> look at the shellac thinners for their contents.  Also, drop by your
|> sporting goods stores and check around the camping stoves.  I picked up
|> my bottle at my local Bi-Mart store.

I believe in Canada it is a little harder to obtain.  I had to call
around to drug stores to find one that did carry it, and when I got
it, I had to sing the "Poison Book" stating that I knew I was buying
a poison.  Somehow I doubt you'll find it in a hardware store in
Canada.  Try calling some of the bigger drugstores listed in the
yellow pages that are oriented more towards chemists as opposed to
your local corner drugstore.

-- 
...fraser                           Fraser.Fulford@x400gate.bnr.ca

Basically, a tool is an object that enables you to take advantage of 
the laws of physics and mechanics in such a way that you can seriously
injure yourself.
                    - Dave Barry

These are _my_ views and are not necessarily the views of BNR.
From: muth@a.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Wayne A Muth)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Homosote <- paint it ??
Date: 19 Aug 92 13:38:17 GMT


  Covered some months ago -- but have forgotten answer !

  My roadbed will be plywood, with homosote atop that, with G-guage
  track on top.  I SEEM TO RECALL SOME PREVIOUS DIALOG THAT ONE
  NEEDS TO PAINT THE HOMOSOTE RIGHT AWAY WITH A LATEX PAINT --
  seemingly to "seal" it against moisture.

  IS THIS CORRECT ??   Or your ideas appreciated..  Thanks.
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: jtthorp@hubcap.clemson.edu (J. T. Thorpe)
Subject: Thanks for the help on the Docksider!
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:42:50 GMT

I just wanted to thank everyone who responded to my post on dressing up
a docksider.  I did manage to put Kadee couplers on it, and they seem to
work OK.  (The frame looks a little ugly now, but it is well hidden :) )

Thanks again!

JT Thorpe
-- 
JT Thorpe____________________________________  	      ===+==___()__o_][ c
Clemson	   |[][][][][][]|    |[][][] |[]| |   _/-----| |=|=|   |    |  ]}
 Univ. 	 [_|____________|_][_|_______|__|_|_]|_______|=|___|-----------___
 x2841	   oVo        oVo    oVo        oVo  oVo   oVo   (o) (o) (o)  oo \\
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: backway@dion.trl.oz.au
Subject: Comment on sound
Organization: Telecom Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:30:05 GMT

Comment on sound systems:

	If my 5 year old can have a Troll that says in perfect (american)
english "Kiss me for luck" and various other niceties for around $A8.00, using
a custom digital sound reproduction chip, I feel it is about time that real
sounding train sounds should be available at a low cost large volume price.
	When is somebody going to do it?

	Of course us down here will need the "record it yourself option" for
an extra $5.00 but it would be worth it to here a real NA class chugging up a
valley!

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
     Bob Backway                           Telephone: +61 (03) 253 6359
     Telecom Australia           *         Facsimile: +61 (03) 253 6362
     Research Laboratories     *  .*       Email: b.backway@dion.trl.oz.au
     PO Box 249                            Insert usual disclaimer here
     770 Blackburn Rd            *
     Clayton  3168                         My thought for today would only
     Victoria, Australia                         get me into trouble
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: cwebster@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Chris Webster)
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 12:08:40 EDT

In article <1992Aug12.183506.26698@mksol.dseg.ti.com> sdejour@mksol.dseg.ti.com (stewart l dejournett) writes:
>
>The CTC-16000 is Keith Gutierrez's (father of CTC-16) new system.  The new
>system retains compatibility with old receiver's a plus in my book but allows
>more channels and does some error correcting to give better performance on
>dirty track.
>
>stewart

Is it a commercial system, or is it going to be something you can build 
yourself, as the original CTC-16 system was?
From: priddle@ace.acadiau.ca (PETER RIDDLE)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Toy Trains
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:23:34 GMT
Organization: Acadia University

Greenberg author welcomes inquiries about any phase of toy train collecting, 
restoration and operation.  Especially interested in pre-World War II, all 
manufacturers.  If you have any questions or problems, maybe I can help.  
Also interested in trades and buys.  Pete Riddle
From: nickels@berlioz.nsc.com (Bill Nickels)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Great Western Train Show
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:32:03 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation

The Great Western Train Show will be held Aug 16 and Sept 13 at the Solano County
Fairgrounds in Vallejo. Time is 10am-4pm, costs $4, 300 tables.

Be sure to check your TV guide for the Great Railway Journeys of the World each
Monday at 9PM on Channel 9.


-- 
    I'd rather be on THE TRAIN!          ___i----i________________     
Bill Nickels (credit to Warren Brill   =|___|[][]|  UNION PACIFIC |=
  for the engine graphics)            i_|__/|____|\_______________|_i
  National Semiconductor Corp.        =++ O==O  ===========  O==O ++=
From: 31ochs@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Re: McKean Open Beam Car Questions/Comments
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:40:51 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <1992Aug19.163109.25674@linus.mitre.org>, sboyle@mbunix.mitre.org (Boyle) writes:
> [some text deleted]
>
> The trucks that come with the car are about the worst I've ever seen
> packed with a kit.  The sideframe moldings have a lot of flash, as do
> the wheelsets themselves.  As mentioned, the included wheelsets rub the
> bottom of the car, as well as the underframe.  Just for grins, I
> assembled the car with an MKD-5 and the stock trucks.  According to the
> Kadee coupler height guage, the coupler was about an eighth of an inch
> high (so much for shimming the trucks away from the underframe :-).
> 
> I'd suggest McKean either put decent trucks in with the kit, or skip
> them and tell you what else to use.  It'd also be a big help if they
> added a couple of prototype photos and dimensional data.  Other than
> that, it's a nice kit.  Put it this way; I'm heading back to the
> hobbyshop to grab the remaining kit :-)

I don't know how they do it, but they can really SCREW up trucks more than 
anyone else I've seen(including Tyco,Bachmann,Life Like,etc)
I bought one of their insulated boxcars that have the "SOLID GOLD" logo on
it and the trucks in that one were atrocious(sp)
They seem to be the same ones that are in the Con Cor coal hopper, which are
also just as bad.(I have the Chessie 12-car set, and almost every truck
was unusable)

Lets hope they get their aact together.....
just my .02 cents worth,


Fred Ochs
31ochs@gw.wmich.edu  (vax)
ochs@sol.cs.wmich.edu (unix)
_______________________________________________________
      _____________         __________   
     _[ ] |[=] [=]|-----++-/\________/|  
    /     |                  [][][][] |  
  |_|_____|___________________________|_|
___H_O--O--O_`---------------'_O--O--O_H_______________


A DASH 8-40CW with a little imagination ;^)

Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: bill@soil.Princeton.EDU (Bill Wichser)
Subject: K-Line engines: Worth buying?
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: O27 guage
Reply-To: bill@soil.Princeton.EDU
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 13:00:32 GMT

There is a local store selling KLine switchers (NY Central markings) for $70.
Since I am in the market for a diesel engine, this looked like a very good price.
The question is whether I should spend about twice this amount for a Lionel RS3
type or buy this one.

Are K Line engines worth purchasing?  Their rolling stock appears very cheaply
made so I hesitate even at this price.  Any insight appreciated.

-Bill

-- 
********************************************************************************
* Internet: bill@soil.princeton.edu  William Wichser                           *
* UUCP:     princeton!soil!bill      Princeton University                      *
* BITNET:   wwichser@PUCC.BITNET     Civil Engineering and Operations Research *
* Phone:    609.258.4612             E114 E-Quad                               *
* FAX:      609.258.1270             Princeton, NJ 08544                       *
********************************************************************************
From: mizener@siemens.siemens.com (Jeff Mizener)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:09:46 GMT
Reply-To: mizener@siemens.UUCP (Jeff Mizener)
Organization: Siemens Corp. Res. Inc., Princeton, NJ

With all this debate about new CTC standards in mind, I asked
my favourite train store owner about the Lenz system and it's pricing.
Given that the store is in Berlin (Vogelbusch Eisenbahnen), I'll give the
prices in dm and then we can convert.

To get started you need a DigitalPlus central unit, a power transformer
(not critical, any 16vac 57VA transformer will do), a hand controller and a
programmer track (notmal piece of track connected to the programmer outpur
on the central unit -- used for programming loco addresses.)

Cost:	Central unit		dm300 (~$200)
	hand controller		dm180 (~$120)
	receivers		dm 95 (~$63) each for N, 79 for HO
				-----
				dm575 (~$383) to run one engine.

This assumes a 1.5 exchange rate, something that is, right now, highly
optimistic.

Add to this:

	RS232 interface 	dm 69
	rcvr for 4 turnouts	dm 80
	'feedback' unit		dm 69 (TO position, block occupation, etc).

I don't think that $63 for one of these N-babies is particularly cheap,
considering that I'm going to need quite a few of them.  But they are
beautiful and tiny.  And in stock.

Oh yes, the system has 64 speed steps, and has five extra function outputs
per locomotive and is compatible with Maerklin digital and Arnold. 

Now all I need to do is to convince all my N-Trak friends to plop
down big bucks for this system and we can remain compatible.  But
until that happens...

Cheers,

Jeff
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff Mizener / Siemens Energy and Automation / Intelligent SwitchGear Systems
             / Raleigh, NC  919-365-2551     / jm@sead.siemens.com
From: ebe+@pitt.edu (Elmer Beachley)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Date: 14 Aug 92 01:17:00 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Bruce:

I think your assessment of the parts cost for the decoder is correct
with the exception of one point:  they don't use an off-the-shelf (i.e.,
high volume = inexpensive) chip for control.  Instead, the chip (which]
admittedly I know very little about) is a custom, specialized one
the incorporates the eeprom, control logic, etc.  So far, there are
maybe one or two sources for this chip, though there is an effort to
independently develop a comparable chip here in the U.S.

From what I know about the economics of the semiconductor business, you
need volumes in the 6 figure range before the costs become reasonable.
I question whether this volume will ever be available in model railroading.

In Europe, where these things have been in use since the mid-eighties,
and where it would appear there was significant market volume, the
decoders still list for around $100 US.  

Most of the competing command-control systems on the market appear to
be designed around off-the-shelf components, though I'm sure Stan,
who has studied this much more than I, will correct me if this is not
true.

Don't misunderstand;  I'd like to see a Marklin-equivalent system
succeed.  I'm just not sure the economies of scale are there to support
it.

Elmer Beachley
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: jsm@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Scott McCauley Jr.)
Subject: N scale digital (Arnold) receivers
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 17:23:55 GMT

[first attempt at posting this may have failed]

Anyone have experience retrofitting N scale equipment with Arnold/Lenz/
Marklin receivers?

For Arnold products (e.g. a GG1), is it just a matter of switching the PC
board inside?

How about retrofitting non-Arnold equipment?

	Thanks,

		Scott
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: cwebster@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Chris Webster)
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 13:43:44 EDT

In article <2316@tymix.Tymnet.COM> romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac) writes:
>
>The so-far unique sound capability of Keller stuff makes it
>a product that has no competition, in some ways. Thus, the competition
>is not "pure". In any case, having a multi-thousand dollar investment
>in Keller products, I'm not about to change in a casual fashion.
>I suspect that many of the modelers who will have command control
>already have an installation of some kind, and conversion is a
>major issue, not just how good the newer systems are.
>
>Michael Stimac
>
About Onboard's sound: I was at a local serious model rr store (quality
scale and prototype only; no tinplate, large scale layout) a few days
ago.  The other customer (it was a slow day) asked about the Onboard
system's sound quality.  The dealer --one whom sells a lot of these
systems -- commented that he doesn't use it and doesn't plan to.  When
he was pushed farther about the sound, he said "if anything, it sounds
like a GMC bus!" His point was that it didn't sound like the diesels
he models nor does it have any capabilites that allow him to change the
sound on it."

I guess the point is that the "advantage" of it having sound isn't if the
customer isn't satisfied by the sound.

Personally, I've only got a small HO shelf layout, and am using conventional
cab control.  Being young (21) and planning to be around a long time, I'm not
going to invest in a system that's going to be dead when I'm still young
(under 40!).  I suspect most of my equipment will still be usable and
satisfying me then because of the effort I'm putting into it now, such as 
superdetailing and tuning my motive power.
From: macman+@pitt.edu (Dennis H Lippert)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Re: McKean Open Beam Car Questions/Comments
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:44:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: blue.5027
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Aug20.133417.1168@hpmcaa.mcm.hp.com> johnm@hpmcaa (John Mosbarger) writes:
[oops, lost this comment's owner...]
>> The trucks that come with the car are about the worst I've ever seen
>> packed with a kit.
>
>     I'm not sure what McKean is trying to accomplish.  I was looking forward
>to his re-releasing the 3-bay hoppers, and when they came out, the brake gear
>was pure junk, not at all the same that Front Range used.  Although, in his
>defense, I understand that the Front Range dies were aluminum, and not in the
>best of shape when McKean got them.  However, that still doesn't justify sub-
>stituting the kind of shit that has appeared in his kits.

Please be careful in your wording...  Saying "his kits" implies that
you're trashing the name of Bill McKean, who sold the company (and
name :-(  a few years ago.  The current owner/operator is supposedly
the same guy who made FRP [his name escapes me at the moment]. And 
remember that FRP was cheapening up at the end also (cast-on ladders
and such).

FRP was notorious for using cheap aluminum dies (it's the only way
they brought out so many models so fast... try that with real $110k
dies sometime...)  And the truck problems are usually warpage
(which was caused by getting too many "cycles" from the dies... the
part wasn't cool enough before dropping out of the die... Con-Cor
seems to have fixed this, but not all, of the problems.) FRP's
wheelsets (the narrow-tread ones) were a good idea, but a very poor
implementation (wheels not perpendicular to axles, not concentric,
molding sprue on flange, flash, etc).   And remember that FRP's 
trucks were just a "regrouping" after the equalized ones were
chastized (an equalized truck is good, but one that gets stuck in
a "warped" position is not...), and remember that the equalized ones
were a "regrouping" after the ones with the spinning bearing caps
(neat idea, too tough to assemble, didn't roll worth a darn...).

Front Range spent way too much time correcting mistakes.  These 
mistakes eventually cost them their reputation.  So, they had to 
buy a new reputation in long-time partner McKean. (McKean always
used Athearn trucks before FRP came around... they then switched
to FRP's trucks and raised the price by $3. (remember the 100T
hopper with the $3.50 price tag?  I wish I woulda bought more than
one).

-Den


-- 
===============================================================================
Dennis Lippert   -   macman+@pitt.edu or macman@vm2.cis.pitt.edu
The "Mac Maniac" operator at the Hillman Research Lab - Univ. of Pittsburgh
"All comments are mine, you'd look like a fool if *you* used them"
From: ebe@pitt.edu (Elmer Beachley)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: More Command-Control ...
Date: 15 Aug 92 13:00:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: ebe@unix.cis.pitt.edu


To add just a little more on potential decoder costs and such:

Stan mentions that there are $50 decoders on the market, and yes this is
true.  But I am discussing the price of the smallest, two-piece, chip-on-
board decoder, which Rutger tells me sells right now in Europe for $100US
where there is a relatively large market.

What will drive the costs down here in the States that has not happened
in Europe?  Well, one answer might the disimmination of complete technical
information, some endorsement by a "standards" body, i.e., what we
computer-folk call an open system.  My understanding is that the situation
in Europe was these chips were proprietary, there was no published
technical information (Rutger essentially reverse-engineered the Lenz
technology) and this leads to high costs.

But, to take things just a bit further, what is *really* going to make
decoders cheap is international agreement on these issues.  Doesn't it
seem strange Kato is very quiet about all this?  (Actually, they do have
a Command-Control system in their catalog, and the boxes bear a strong
resemblance to Marklin, but Stan says this is completely different.)

Second point.  Stan mentions the CTC-16000 which uses custom VLSI.  My
questions are:  what does the decoder cost?  how big is it?  is it on
the market and selling in volume or just introduced?  is it an "open"
system?   (I apologize for asking this but I was only able to be in
Columbus from Thursday-Saturday and missed this clinic.)

Last point.  I will use "Lenz-equivalent" instead of "Marklin-equivalent"
to refer to a complete system, including programmers, control boxes,
computer interfaces, decoders, etc. and "Proposed NMRA standard" to
refer to the wire-protocols (track-protocols) that has been published.
Is this correct?

As a relatively newcommer to this hobby, perhaps someone can educate me
on the attitudes that people have relative to Marklin.  Exactly what is 
it that has offended everyone.  Is it their marketing (they don't sell
through U.S. distributors); is it their relatively high pricing?;  is
it the fact that they model mostly European prototypes? (certainly can
understand that); or what?   Maybe it is an "IBM-like" situation.  
Isn't Marklin the world's largest manufacturer of hobby trains?

Elmer Beachley ebe@unix.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: jsm@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Scott McCauley Jr.)
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:13:12 GMT

[running trains in analog mode]
In article <1992Aug17.215147.4538@ryn.mro4.dec.com> greene@edisto.mro4.dec.com (Michael Greene) writes:

>[ I found out that the lengthening 0 is there so that zeros sent can have a
>  substantial DC component which can be used to run non-C&C locos with open
>  frame motors.  However, there is some possibility of other types of motors
>  would burn out under these conditions, so I still think it a bad idea. ]
>

I would also like to see more specifics on how 'analog' mode works -- e.g.
what the power spectrum looks like in the frequency domain. Is there a simple
low-pass filter that can be installed inside an 'analog' engine that
can protect can motors?  E.g. a filter with a 3db point of 1khz, R=20 ohm,
C=50 uF should be pretty easy to install. If you want the 3db point to
be 5hz, then things are too large.

	Scott

Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
From: stev@vax.ftp.com  (stev knowles)
Subject: Re: Looking for GP30; should have said FP30...
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 09:15:19

In article <1992Aug12.184539.4933@gw.wmich.edu> 31ochs@gw.wmich.edu writes:

>In article <5503@transfer.stratus.com>, btarbox@sw.stratus.com (Brian Tarbox) writes:
>> 
>GP general purpose 
>A a-unit(cab, as opposed to a booster)
>30 3000 HP
>c ??????
>This is only a guess however, I'm not familiar with VIA's classifications.
>I do know that the 30 stands for 3000 HP though.

(*sigh*) GE is quite good about this relationship. EMD doesnt follow this,
tho. as an example, an SD40 is 3000 HP, and an SD60 is 4000 (as i recall).
the SD stands for Special Duty, as i understand it. i am not sure about the
GP30, but i believe that a GP38-2 is only 1800HP, and a GP40X is 3300HP.

life would be much easier if they followed the HP rating like GE did . . . .
From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad
Subject: Re: Experiences with Greenway Products?
Keywords: denatured alcohol
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:50:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.230455.25400@cid.aes.doe.CA>, afsidgb@cidsv07.Berkeley.EDU (Gerard Burridge) writes:
> Is there another name for denatured alcohol?  Every hardware or
> drugstore where I inquire about it does not know anything by THAT
> particular name. I have been to.d that it cannot be rubbing alcohol

Rubbing alcohol is isopropyl alcohol, a.k.a. isopropanol.  Denatured
alcohol is ethanol (i.e., the drinkable stuff) with something added
to make it toxic, unbearably unpleasant to drink, or both.  Candidate
denaturants include methanol (wood alcohol), which is quite bad for you,
and (maybe) other organic solvents.
Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad