Write us a letter at: letters@modelrailroadnews.com

An Open Letter to UP You have my permission to print the attached letter that I have mailed to Union Pacific Railroad about their new model railroad licensing program, which I feel is wrong for the industry. I believe modelers and publishers need to address this problem before it grows and kills the model railroad industry. Mr. Dick Davidson, CEO Union Pacific Railroad 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, Nebraska 68179 RE: Licensing of Union Pacific Railroad trademarks Dear Mr. Davidson: As a collector of Union Pacific Railroad books, collectibles and scale trains (I model in N-Scale and 2-Rail O-Scale), I am really taken back by your company’s approach to licensing your current trademarks and logos, plus ALL those of previous corporate lines, which you have taken over in the past years. You will hurt a struggling group of small companies beyond any amount of meager income that UP will earn and hurt the bottom line of those larger companies who supply us hobbyists with the high quality models that we desire for our collections or layouts. I work with the airline industry supplying models since 1964 and I have read your company's terms and conditions and NONE of these companies put the kind of financial strain on me that you want to put on the model railroad industry. Since the airlines buy about 80% of my product for their own corporate use, maybe that is why they are more reasonable and understanding, but I can still sell to the public whatever I produce for them. I understand you (Union Pacific) may not buy much model railroad products — scale boxcars, engines, etc. from these suppliers, but many of your direct or indirect customers of your railroad services may be purchasers of these products. The new additional costs may price these products out of their hobby budgets and at the same time you are losing “free” advertising to a larger group of people than you can imagine. Bottom line, I think Union Pacific Railroad needs to totally rethink your licensing policies towards the hobby industry. You need to think long term about advertising and good public relations that you get from the model railroad hobbyists and manufacturers. You can still protect your logos and trademarks, but take the cost issue out of the picture. Respectfully: Frederick J. Tyson Replicas by Tyson, Inc.

Thanks for sharing, Fred. I recently went on UP’s web site www.uprr.com and found that they had just one company signed up at that point, yet thousands of companies are still producing products with their logos. We’ve tackled this issue editorially in recent months and have learned that the industry is working quietly with UP, behind the scenes. Perhaps the most important thing to note is that UP has not taken any action against any model railroad companies and probably won’t. Let’s hope it stays that way. — Ed.

BL2 sighting report There is another BL-2 in use at Honesdale, PA. It is used by the Stourbridge Line to haul freight between Honesdale, PA and Lackawaxen, PA where it connects with the Norfolk Southern on the old Erie line. It is also used to pull excursions between Honesdale and Hawley and Honesdale and Lackawaxen on a fairly regular basis. It is #54, originally #54 of the Bangor and Aroostook. Dan Smith Hawley, PA

Thanks for the sighting report, Dan. When we ran a review of a BL2 a couple of years back, I tried to come up with a count of the number of BL2s still in existence and which ones ran. I’ve gotten several letters updating me, and yours is another. Only 59 were built and it’s just amazing how many of them are still around and operating, especially for a model which many considered to be the “Edsel” of EMD. — Ed.

Decorating an Atlas Caboose To Dave Otte: The review of Atlas cabooses in the May issue closes with laudatory comments regarding Atlas’ “accuracy” and “details.” I agree that this is true within certain parameters. It is not true with regard to the Northern Pacific version of their International caboose. The NP version has the end ladders on the wrong side, the end platform and steps the wrong color, some of the grab rails the wrong color and the wrong number of windows. I know the usual arguments at this point, and they do have some limited validity, but to create the impression in the mind of the less sophisticated reader that Atlas has put an accurate NP caboose on the market is just wrong. What I would like to see made a part of the list of expectations for any product review is that some sort of effort be made to point out significant differences between the prototype and the model wearing the prototype’s paint job, or a portion thereof! Verne Alexander Petaluma, CA

Hello Mr. Alexander! It was my original intention to present Atlas’ Standard Cupola Caboose as a general representation of the International Car design and comment on Atlas’ ability to manufacture it in multiple scales. After reading your e-mail I realized I should have elaborated more on the “liberties” Atlas took in modeling their prototype selections. The fact is that none of the decorations/details on these models are completely accurate for the prototype cars. Thanks for the information on the NP caboose and the reminder that not all of our readers are knowledgeable about these details. I will add your very valid point to my list of review parameters. — David Otte

Improved track soldering To John Sipple, Let me point out a potential problem and thereafter a cure for it. Your article (Digitrax Zephyr review, June 2003 and other places) referenced the cold temperature in your garage which in turn caused your rail length to become slightly less than manufactured length. If you install 3 foot lengths of rail in forty-five degree room temperature, at 80 degrees it will be (I never measured or calculated this) at least 25 to 40 thousands of an inch longer than installed. If all this is soldered together, as you stated you do, 10 pieces down the line you will have over a quarter of a inch of buckled track. What my friend and I did when we built his layout was to solder two pieces of rail together and then leave a floating rail joiner unsoldered and two more soldered lengths and a floater, etc. Between the the unsoldered joint we left about .025 inch gap (check the thickness of your thumb nail) and dropped a feeder wire down to the bus wires installed under the layout the entire length of the layout from each soldered section. This ensures no buckling as there is room for expansion, and there is power to all segments of track with no oxidized rail joiner problems. Bob Canody via the Internet

Thanks for the advice, Bob. Actually, I had gaps on that layout which used jumpers, so my problem wasn’t so much with the track as with the entire layout reacting to the extreme temperature changes. The plywood, the legs, even the concrete floor all shifted around. I now have a layout in a much more climate-controlled situation where the temperature won’t be swinging on an annual basis between 10°F and 125°F. I’ll have it more controlled to between 50°F and 100°F with most of the time spent between 60 and 80 since there is a computer around the layout which is more sensitive than the track. Readers should note that your method guarantees no expansion or electrical problems, so I highly recommend it for either variable voltage block control or DCC. — John

The DCC Plunge To John Sipple: I enjoyed your review of the Digitrax Zephyr DCC system and especially your observations about “taking the plunge” into DCC. I gather that you found the water pleasant. Recently I reread your DCC related editorial of September 2002 and the tone was a bit less than enthusiastic, I thought. When I read that editorial the first time almost a year ago I was puzzled because I had just “discovered” DCC, the greatest thing to happen to model railroading in my lifetime. But I think that I understand now. About 18 months ago my interest in model railroading was peaked, if that’s the word I want, after over 20 years away from the hobby, by my son’s observation that DCC systems were available for less than $200. “DCC? You mean Command Control?” Wow! I had to find out more about this. I started reading model railroad magazines again and my local train store (LTS) was very helpful by demonstrating and discussing the pros and cons of the various “starter” systems that were appearing on the market. I knew that I now had to have a layout and that it had to be DCC. I joined the Atlas Forum and started planning a layout and asking all kinds of questions about DCC, foam, code 83 track, reversing loops, and on and on. I bought the Atlas system on advice from my LTS, even though they use Easy DCC. I “finalized” a track plan and even built a 3-D cardstock model (ala Dave Frary) of the layout from the track plan before I started construction. The track is down, the steamers are running and I owe it all to DCC. I’m sure that I would not have ventured into another layout without the promise of realistic and simple operation made possible by DCC. I have a modest layout and a modest roster but it’s great fun. I’ve started on the scenery and have “rediscovered” many aspects of this great hobby that I haven’t enjoyed in 20 years. I think that I understand why you may have been reluctant to “plunge” into DCC. You have many years of experience using DC block control and no doubt felt comfortable with that venerable method of operation. I was never in the hobby enough to develop or maintain that level of comfort with block control. This has all helped me understand why some longtime modelers resist DCC. I might be right there with them if I had been running DC for the last 20 or so years. I used to read about command control and radio control and computer control, but it was complex and expensive to implement. DCC has changed all of that fairly recently. DCC is not necessarily complicated or expensive in the broad scheme of model railroading. Today, DCC is “magic”. Thanks to you and your staff for a great magazine and all of the insights into modeling and life, Jim Murray Allen, TX

Thanks for the kind words, Jim. You figured me out! I was comfortable, sort of. I thought I was having all the fun I could have. I was wrong. I’m having more fun now, thanks to DCC. Yes, thank you; the water is very pleasant. I may have a job in the industry, but the hobby is just that — something which is supposed to be fun and relaxing. I’m glad you’re back among us, enjoying yourself and unloading some stress. — John

Zephyr DCC Jump Throttle Question To John Sipple: Thank you so much for doing the review on the Zephyr. I have been thinking about the purchase of one of these for some time. Your review sold me on it. The only pictures I have seen on the Internet and in the magazines have been of only a top view of the main unit. Your picture were very helpful. I had never seen the back side of the unit and the connectors on it. I wish you would have had a picture of everything that came with the unit. When I was in a Model RR club in Dallas they used the Onboard system. That was my introduction to Carrier Control. I was hooked on it. It makes for such realistic train operations. I do have some questions. In the photo you showed your connectors hooked up to the command unit. I figured out the rail A and B go to the rails. Program A and B to program track. What does jumper 1 and ground go to? Maybe a quick wiring diagram for the article would have cleared it up. That’s all... grin. Great job on the review. You sure convinced me to make the plunge. I’m 60 yrs. young and like you there was a lot of question in my mind before I read your review. Bob Bartholomew Texarkana, AR

Hi Bob. I didn’t include anything about jump throttles in the review because, as a new DCC convert, I didn’t understand them at the time. I’ve got a handle on it now — In fact, I have two throttles on it! A Jump Throttle is a unique feature to the Digitrax Zephyr; to my knowledge, no other DCC system offers such a thing. In essence, you connect a regular DC power pack with throttle to the Jump 1 and ground terminals. If you have two of them, connect the second one to Jump 2 and ground. These should be good quality power supplies, not the cheapies used in train sets. The variable DC voltage and polarity gives information to the terminals of the Zephyr DCS 50. To use this, you push the [Jump] button once to get to Jump 1, twice for Jump 2. Then press [Loco], enter a loco address, press [Loco] again and you can press [Jump] to get back to the normal throttle. Now, when you advance the power pack throttle connected to Jump 1, the locomotive assigned to it will run. The reverse switch reverses the locomotive and the throttle determines the speed. You can’t control lights or other functions, but that’s minor. Now you can control three locos separately with your Zephyr and use two power packs which are doing nothing else. The current of the power pack is NOT passed through to the rails, it just indicates to the command station what you want that loco to do. — John

We welcome all comments and letters from our readers! e-mail us at: letters@modelrailroadnews.com or send us a letter to: LETTERS c/o Model Railroad News P.O. Box 1080 • Merlin, OR 97532-1080 Fax: 541-955-0346