MOROP (European Union of Model Railroad and Railroad Fans)

The links from the English version of the standards page

Don't they just!! The overall zip link does work. although I wonder why they did an English version, as they don't appear to acknowledge the existence of OO gauge, and 4mm/ft barely gets a passing mention. I was quite amused by the "mandatory" standards though. Sez who???

Paul

Worked Ok for me.

Probably because a few of us who realise there's a world outside that fence at the bottom of the garden asked them to.

Doubtless if DOGA, The EM Gauge Society, Scalefour, etc. would care to expend a little effort their published standards could be incorporated.

As for the NMRA it's mandatory to apply these standards for a product or item to be deemed compliant. Such compliance allows the purchaser to have confidence equipment from different manufacturers will work together, e.g. the NEM coupler pocket, NMRA RP25 profile wheels, etc. as opposed to Modern PECO track and early Triang wheel flanges.

The links work now - they didn't work when myself and at least one other person had a look - in my case a couple of attempts several hours apart.

I happen to be a member of two of the three societies you mention, and both expend a great deal of effort in publicising their standards, and I have seen an awful lot of publicity for the third. Were any of the societies actually asked if they would like their standards to be included? Probably, like most people I suspect, they had never heard of MOROP until this post, and probably still haven't. Why have none of the varied magazines, such as Railway Modeller, Model Rail, MRJ, BRM, or the society newsletters apparently had any mention that I've seen? If they have, I would like to know where and when, please. As you should have gathered, I was interested enough in this "new-to-me" standard to have a couple of goes at the website, and to actually download and read the one zip file where the link did work at the time I looked. Nothing in there applied to British model railways, so personally speaking these "norms" have no relevance to me. At least now I have heard of them and am aware of them.

I think the point I was flippantly making is that for a standard to be accepted, it has to be known about! I should think most people in the UK have heard of BRMSB, NEM and NMRA standards, but MOROP???? Perhaps a survey should be commisioned :-)

Don't take life too seriously!!

Paul

MOROP is simply the organization issuing the NEM standards.

As far as model railways goes, Europe does not include UK. You have always gone your own weird ways ;-)

And just to cap it all on the bottom of every "standard" (sic) can be found the following disclaimer ...

"This English translation is not authoritative and is provided as a courtesy only. Only the French and German versions of the norms are original source documents."

Think we know where this is coming from don't we ...

As already mentioned the "standards" (sic) entirely ignore 4mm, there's no provision for Bullhead rail and no mention whatsoever of British prototype standards and how they can be modelled.

IOW the whole thing's pants, mind anyone every heard of anything out of yourope that wasn't?

And just to cap it all on the bottom of every "standard" (sic) can be found the following disclaimer ...

"This English translation is not authoritative and is provided as a courtesy only. Only the French and German versions of the norms are original source documents."

Think we know where this is coming from don't we ...

As already mentioned the "standards" (sic) entirely ignore 4mm, there's no provision for Bullhead rail and no mention whatsoever of British prototype standards and how they can be modelled.

IOW the whole thing's pants, mind you anyone ever heard of anything out of yourope that wasn't?

That is pretty common on technical and legal documentation. I guess it makes maintenace of the standards easier, and might help prevent things getting bogged down in eternal arguments about misunderstood terminology, water-sheep and a cow (or was it a horse?) with a pantograph.

I've seen "sleeper" go badly wrong in translation at least once (a reinforced concrete schlafwagen?)

Perhaps with 304.8 mm/ft railways moving towards common standards the models might converge as well.

Also, don't forget that English is a common second language, close to universal in much of Europe. Having an English translation will help (say) Finns, Dutch and Poles read it as well as the British.

Assume that's a typo for Europe, there are lots of very nice German plastic kits for a start.

Hi "Paul Boyd" ,

Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:28:03 -0000 you wrote about Re: MOROP (European Union of Model Railroad and Railroad Fans) :

First of all, sorry for the broken links: it was a mistake in the name of the linked files (use of an "-" instead of an "_")

Many thanks to the people who've sended me an e-mail about this problem.

The links are, of course, fixed by now.

Did I read correctly ? Did You say "most of the people in the UK have heard of BRMSB, ***NEM*** and NMRA standards" ?

This, just to let you know that NEM ***are*** issued by the MOROP; NEM are the Morop's standards !

Another info: what is called NMRA-DCC used to be (and will be in the future) called NMRA-MOROP-DCC; because the MOROP worked together with the NMRA on this topic !

Why should we ? ;-)

PS: sorry for my poor english as this language is not my mother tongue ! ;-)

Hi "Paul Boyd" ,

Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:28:03 -0000 you wrote about Re: MOROP (European Union of Model Railroad and Railroad Fans) :

First of all, sorry for the broken links: it was a mistake in the name of the linked files (use of an "-" instead of an "_")

Many thanks to the people who've sended me an e-mail about this problem.

The links are, of course, fixed by now.

Did I read correctly ? Did You say "most of the people in the UK have heard of BRMSB, ***NEM*** and NMRA standards" ?

This, just to let you know that NEM ***are*** issued by the MOROP; NEM are the Morop's standards !

Another info: what is called NMRA-DCC used to be (and will be in the future) called NMRA-MOROP-DCC; because the MOROP worked together with the NMRA on this topic !

Why should we ? ;-)

PS: sorry for my poor english as this language is not my mother tongue ! ;-)

Bonjour ou bonsoir "Chris Wilson" ,

Le Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:42:15 -0000 dernier, confondant clavier et VACMA, tu écrivais 32 lignes à propos de Re: MOROP (European Union of Model Railroad and Railroad Fans) :

People asked the Morop to have the possibilities to have the NEM's tranlated in English; so it is on the way; where is the problem ?

As I'm new in this forum, would you mind to explain me ?

Why (sic) ? While I'm looking in my french-english wordbook, the english translation for the french word "normes" is "standards". But to pleased everybody (btw, is this possible ?) We're using the word "Norms"...

Give a man a fish, he'll be feeded for one day; teach him angling.... ;-)

If there is a need (I'm sure there is one) for creating norms for the

Bonjour ou bonsoir "Paul Boyd" ,

Le Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:34:02 -0000 dernier, confondant clavier et VACMA, tu écrivais 13 lignes à propos de Re: MOROP (European Union of Model Railroad and Railroad Fans) :

Perhaps because people asked for it ?

Feel free to join the work session of the Morop. We'll be happy to work with your cooperation...

Mandatory for the manufacturers who are using the norms ...

???

"Erik Olsen" wrote,

Lol

"Erik Olsen" wrote,

Lol

Well, after trying to straighten our Cucumbers, and bend our Bananas, that was enough to put me off Europe for life....

The Sausage War was the final straw, though!

David. ;-))

...

It must have been about five years ago when NEM coupler pockets were mentioned I first started to ask what 'NEM' was. After spending some time trawling the web I eventually came across the MOROP site. A friend had already directed me to the NMRA site where it's standards where published. I became curious as to what the commonalities and differences might be both between these two and the oft mentioned BRMSB standards. As my German language skills are non existent and my French not much better it was at this point I started enquiring if an English version could be provided. I have tried running the pages through Bable Fish but it doesn't cope to well with technical subjects.

The BRMSB standards have proved the hardest to find. It wasn't until I recently purchased a copy of 'New Developments in Railway Modelling' by Edward Beal that I finally had hold of these.

Digressing for a moment I must mention my surprise at the number of methods and ideas in the book which I had always considered recent trends (i.e. the last ten to fifteen years), the copy I have was published in 1962.

...

Don't worry I don't, in fact most people would probably say I take too little seriously in life :-)

None of the standards are compatible, however there is a overlap between the NEM and NMRA HO standards. My web page describes the solution for compatibility using HO track. The NEM on track and wheels is still to coarse and is a left over from the tin plate era. The NMRA have a difficult to make and sloppy result. The NMRA wheels are unnecessarily wide just like the NEM wheels. Both HO standards on wheel and track need to be changed to be any use to the UK OO scale 16.5mm gauge modeller. The one NORM the UK OO modeller will find useful at is the one that defines wagon weight. For HO they use 4g/mm minimum with a + 30% tolerance.

I do not have the BRMSB standards but I suspect they to have problems or are coarser than necessary for RTR.

The problem is the manufacturers deliberately did not want true interchange. Where is the communication standard for radio controlled controllers or controllers generally? These standards would have been of greater benefit to the modeller, because they could be applied to all methods of control. Instead of compatibility, we now have incompatibility between not just DC and DCC but between each DCC system. If this standard was developed my friend could use his Digitrax controller on another friends Wangrove system, saving Everone money.

They didn't work.