NOTE: This test also posted in BNSF forum:
I was just paging through my copy of the book "Classic Trains", by Hans Halberstadt, c 2001 by Michael Friedman Publishing (owned by Barnes & Noble) and came across a photo "OOPS".
On page 100, the caption reads, "It was a sensational train in many ways and changed railroading in the United States forever, the Pinoeer Zephyr in all its 1934 Glory".
But in fact the photo is of # 9901, one of the two (along ith 9902)subsequent , and not quite identical (to the 9900) Zephyr units originally built for the Chicago-Twin Cities route that were soon replaced by the higher capacity 9904 and 9905 led Zephyr trains.
I suppose the questions here are:
Does this misprint matter?
Should the author & publisher be contacted? and how?
What other errors are in this book?
Is there enough money to be made with RR books that pumping out these kind of books for $ is more important than accuracy? i.e. are there too many train books?
I was just paging through my copy of the book "Classic Trains", by Hans Halberstadt, c 2001 by Michael Friedman Publishing (owned by Barnes & Noble) and came across a photo "OOPS". On page 100, the caption reads, "It was a sensational train in many ways and changed railroading in the United States forever, the Pinoeer Zephyr in all its 1934 Glory".
But in fact the photo is of # 9901, one of the two (along ith 9902)subsequent , and not quite identical (to the 9900) Zephyr units originally built for the Chicago-Twin Cities route that were soon replaced by the higher capacity 9904 and 9905 led Zephyr trains.
I suppose the questions here are:
Does this misprint matter?
Should the author & publisher be contacted? and how?
What other errors are in this book?
Is there enough money to be made with RR books that pumping out these kind of books for $ is more important than accuracy? i.e. are there too many train books?
