![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Peter Dohm" wrote: Clearly, however, if a "full size" copy of one of the smaller aircraft was built, then the larger craft must be the "model"... Just my 2¢ Peter Joshua Lionel Cowen, of Lionel Trains fame, was a master of marketing euphemisms. Shortly after the turn of the century (uh, not *this* century) when all toy train makers used their own track sizes, he named his "Standard Gauge." It became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Still, I think the most audacious thing he did was to refer to the 1:1 scale engines (real trains) as "prototypes" for his models. Uh, toys. Nevertheless, in that hobby, "model railroaders" take great pains to distinguish themselves and their equipment from the "toy trains" that Lionel and others manufactured. Lionel did put out some semi-scale stuff of exceptional quality before the second big war, but most of his stuff was always just a rough approximation, proportionally speaking. And then that damn third rail just never did look right, although it sure makes sense from an engineering standpoint. This *is* RAH, right? SInce we're flying our butts around in big TOYS, my ego isn't compromised by the idea of calling the little ones TOYS either, regardless of their sophistication. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|