|
|
Post by el3637 on May 17, 2012 20:39:56 GMT -8
Again, not rocket science. Maybe they need to have a staff meeting at the cust service dept, put coffee in a grinder and say "if it sounds like this, it's rejected", then find a decent running loco and say, it is at least this good, send it out. There, problem solved. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Well we disagree that it's a customer service problem. The best customer service rep in the world is powerless to help if he can't put his hands on decent product. It's a QC problem at the manufacturing level - customer service can only send out more of what they've got. If QC starts rejecting growlers as you and I would define them, 60% would get sent back and Athearn would have to find a better motor quick. That's why they don't do that. Andy |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2012 4:46:16 GMT -8
Again, not rocket science. Maybe they need to have a staff meeting at the cust service dept, put coffee in a grinder and say "if it sounds like this, it's rejected", then find a decent running loco and say, it is at least this good, send it out. There, problem solved. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Well we disagree that it's a customer service problem. The best customer service rep in the world is powerless to help if he can't put his hands on decent product. It's a QC problem at the manufacturing level - customer service can only send out more of what they've got. If QC starts rejecting growlers as you and I would define them, 60% would get sent back and Athearn would have to find a better motor quick. That's why they don't do that. Andy Andy is right on this one. My LHS tests ALL locomotives when they arrive regardless of manufacturer. About a year or two ago they received their shipment of the latest RS3 from Athearn. They rejected and sent back over 60% of the units. Some were DOA, some were bound up, some screamed and some had broken parts. As the sign in the hobby shop says "After we reject them, we don't know what happens to them". If a dealer like mine has 60 models come in and 40 are returned, what does Athearn do? Athearn now has to come up with another 40 units or try to repair and return the rejected models. The amount of money spent by Athearn on labor and spare parts has to add up.....or at least you'd think it has to add up. I'm going to go out on a limb and say I doubt that Athearn with the volume they sell is testing every model. My guess it may be something like examining and testing every tenth unit or an even greater number. As far as an Atheran employee testing a unit before returning it, I'm going to again say it may depend on the volume of rejected models coming back to the company. It may be cheaper to just grab an untested model from the shell and send out in the hope that this unit is defect free. I believe that Athearn's biggest hurdle in the quality control department is the VOLUME of new product. No other manufacturer puts out the product that Athearn is currently producing. Couple volume with a bare bones number of employees engaged in QC, I believe they only have one QC person in Long Beach, you can't test all the products. Again, I'm sure it is cheaper to pay shipping than hire employees. |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on May 18, 2012 5:46:53 GMT -8
Jim,
What you describe is a quality assurance, quality control problem - with the high failure rate or bad rate of tested loco's. If anyone has paid attention to my comments about Athearn over the past 15 years or so, its that Athearn has always had QAQC issues. The customer service things was just a bonus.
|
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on May 18, 2012 6:13:08 GMT -8
Again, not rocket science. Maybe they need to have a staff meeting at the cust service dept, put coffee in a grinder and say "if it sounds like this, it's rejected", then find a decent running loco and say, it is at least this good, send it out. There, problem solved. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Well we disagree that it's a customer service problem. The best customer service rep in the world is powerless to help if he can't put his hands on decent product. It's a QC problem at the manufacturing level - customer service can only send out more of what they've got. If QC starts rejecting growlers as you and I would define them, 60% would get sent back and Athearn would have to find a better motor quick. That's why they don't do that. Andy Andy I agree, it is a Quality Control problem at the manufacturer and probably a total lack of it except in rare cases. The unit is probably placed on a short piece of track and it if moves, it ships. I doubt that Athearn spends any major time in China checking the work while a product is being built since the cost of travel to China is expensive and might not be that productive. I get the idea that you get what they build there like it or not, you own it once the product is shipped. As to the motor problems, Athearn needs to upgrade their specifications to a level that Kato or Atlas has their motors built to correct that problem. It would be interesting to know how the interaction between any of our importers and the China builders actually takes place. If the product was built here in the states, the manufacturer might provide a test sample out of the production to verify Quality Control durning the production. This is done with products that I work with. Each production run is tested with samples from the first, middle and finally the end of the run to ensure quality. Larry |
|
|
|
Post by el3637 on May 18, 2012 8:14:38 GMT -8
I believe they only have one QC person in Long Beach Two QC people in China could do more for them than 50 QC people in Long Beach. QC is about detecting problems in the process, before they become pandemic to the product. By the time the container is cracked open in Long Beach, the factory in China has already been making Barbie doll Corvettes for two weeks. Rejecting product is extremely costly, not just because tangible product is being discarded but because orders can't be filled, revenue can't be generated, and the entire process has to be disrupted to remake the failed items. I can't blame them for not doing it. It's costly even when you have your own factory, but far worse when you have to pay someone for the do-over. Which is likely what the terms are with China. If the importers are going to continue with the China business model, they need to have better control over the product somehow. Some manufacturers do better than others, I don't know if it's because their factories are better, their communication is better, or because their contracts define a quality standard that has to be met. Some combination of all of the above. I totally understand that once the container is cracked open, Athearn doesn't really have the option of a 50% rejection. That doesn't mean 50% defective product is acceptable however. Either the product quality has to be stepped up, or the business model has to change. I've been saying that the increasing price / decreasing QC double helix will reach a limit at some point. At which point, Athearn can't say they weren't warned. Perhaps the closing of the RTR factory is a blessing in disguise - to get back to the original topic of this thread. There will be costs and other issues with moving production to a new facility, but it's a chance to fix some of the problems, write new contracts, and get a fresh start. We'll see. As to this: Oh I have a pretty good idea. Andy |
|
|
|
Post by el3637 on May 18, 2012 8:24:53 GMT -8
I agree, it is a Quality Control problem at the manufacturer and probably a total lack of it except in rare cases. The unit is probably placed on a short piece of track and it if moves, it ships. And this is EXACTLY how QC was done in Compton, I've actually witnessed it. I'm still astonished at how well the Athearn process and inconsistency has been ported to China. Actually this process is quite involved and intense, especially in preproduction and evaluating the tooling, fit, finish, etc. I've seen the preproduction GP38-2s up close and heard some of the story - the amount of work required by a few individuals is staggering. I wouldn't want the job if for no other reason than I wouldn't want to spend weeks at a time in China, multiple times per year. I would think the longer the importer and factory work together, the better they would get at communicating - but every project is new. Let's not forget that this stuff is somewhat pushing the limits of mass production in terms of refinement and assembly. When Athearn announced the acquisition of the Highliners tooling and that they would be producing it RTR in China, I said NFW - too many parts, mixed media, too many complexities, how will they paint it... they did it, and by and large have done it fairly well much to my surprise. As well as I could do it myself? With the exception of complex multicolor paint schemes, no. I can't paint a warbonnet or WP passenger or NP Loewy as nicely as they've done it. But in terms of assembly - yep, I can do better. My beef with Athearn though, is with the motors. Motors don't have issues with glue smears, paint and lettering, or even packaging damage or delrin warping or anything like that. They are extremely straight forward mass produced components, that are more or less the same in every product. The specs and tolerances need to be tightened up considerably. Andy |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on May 18, 2012 11:52:09 GMT -8
So, Athearn actually used to run their locos before shipping. An interesting contrast to PFM/Fujiyama in 1975, when they didn't. Otherwise an NP L-9 with one driver insulated on the right never would have made it out the door.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by alco539 on May 18, 2012 15:43:32 GMT -8
My other love, rebuilding machine tools "Old American Iron", like South Bend, Clausing, Bridgeport, and Hardinge, lead me to machines made in China. Most, if not all, low end, hobby grade machine tools are made in China. Industrial machines, like 5 axis CNC machining centers are made there also, or their castings are. The business model is very much like model trains. A US company that at one time produced in US, like Athearn, finds labor too costly, etc. What to do, become an importer, move production to a country with lower labor. Copies other companies that have already moved. Grizzly Industrial (the founder also owns the assets of the South Bend Lathe Co. but they're made in Taiwan) has engineers (people?) on site in the factories that they buy from in China. Smaller importers "hire" agents to look over their production, are they any good? Beats me! OK, your saying apples and oranges, totaly different businesses. To China, it's "just business" they don't care what they make as long as it's money. Today I make metal lathes for Micro-Mark, tomorrow, model trains for Athearn, next week, IPODS for Apple. They do seem however, to stay close to their original core business, but factories that make castings of iron can also do diecasting. Anyway, Grizzly is big time in the hobby craft, "hey guys look what I just got in the garage" side of machine tools. They can afford to have a full time factory rep. on site. I don't know what Athearn (Horizon) makes in a year, but if the tooling for the Rivarossi Big Boy cost $500,000 in the 1980's, WOW! How many models are currently being produced by Athearn in HO and N at today's costs? Mind bending, I think. I would want to keep an eye on that tooling and production. I'll bet the model train importers can afford to have someone there on site to watch and test their product too. Regards Charley.
|
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on May 18, 2012 17:17:58 GMT -8
My other love, rebuilding machine tools "Old American Iron", like South Bend, Clausing, Bridgeport, and Hardinge, lead me to machines made in China. Most, if not all, low end, hobby grade machine tools are made in China. Industrial machines, like 5 axis CNC machining centers are made there also, or their castings are. The business model is very much like model trains. A US company that at one time produced in US, like Athearn, finds labor too costly, etc. What to do, become an importer, move production to a country with lower labor. Copies other companies that have already moved. Grizzly Industrial (the founder also owns the assets of the South Bend Lathe Co. but they're made in Taiwan) has engineers (people?) on site in the factories that they buy from in China. Smaller importers "hire" agents to look over their production, are they any good? Beats me! OK, your saying apples and oranges, totaly different businesses. To China, it's "just business" they don't care what they make as long as it's money. Today I make metal lathes for Micro-Mark, tomorrow, model trains for Athearn, next week, IPODS for Apple. They do seem however, to stay close to their original core business, but factories that make castings of iron can also do diecasting. Anyway, Grizzly is big time in the hobby craft, "hey guys look what I just got in the garage" side of machine tools. They can afford to have a full time factory rep. on site. I don't know what Athearn (Horizon) makes in a year, but if the tooling for the Rivarossi Big Boy cost $500,000 in the 1980's, WOW! How many models are currently being produced by Athearn in HO and N at today's costs? Mind bending, I think. I would want to keep an eye on that tooling and production. I'll bet the model train importers can afford to have someone there on site to watch and test their product too. Regards Charley. Charley The Rivarossi Big Boy was on the market selling when I started to get into HO in 1969. AHM was selling it for $25 in the 1970 era so the tooling for that was made much earlier than the 1980's. I have four of those original models withe the 3 pole motor and large flanges on the drivers and they were never used or run. The Challenger came out in 1975 or 76 so its tooling was probably much more than the Big Boy which was on the market many years prior to the Challenger. I had to pay $55 for the Challenger from AHM. It sounded like a good deal at the time, but I had several nice brass ones and never used the Rivarossi Challengers either. I had purchased them to add to a scene based upon Cheyenne with the coaling tower and the many locomotives that would be around the terminal. Tooling is expensive and I have been told that the tooling for most model steam at least is about 400 to 500 thousand in today's money. That figure seems high but this is all second or third hand numbers to me and the numbers might actually be more or less depending on the model. The Overland T55 project for the 8500 HP turbine was dropped since the tooling cost would not justify the less than 1000 reservations they had at the time. The price was said to be over 1000 for the plastic model and at the time, you could purchase the older tank drive brass models for about the same price. A good tool maker should really be rich, but I doubt that they get that much of the money. It would be interesting to know what price Athearn paid for the Highliner tooling. That was first rate tooling but it takes a lot of money to get the project going. Larry |
|
|
|
Post by coaldrag on May 18, 2012 17:48:45 GMT -8
If I recall crorectly, didn't T55 came to the realization that no two Turbines were the same. If that is true, that would have sent the die work into space.
|
|
|
|
Post by alco539 on May 18, 2012 19:47:07 GMT -8
Sorry folks, I forgot what forum I was on. That was for the Rivarossi N scale Big Boy. At the time, that's what Con-Cor said the tooling cost when they first brought it out. The loco sold for $189.00, on eBay today I've seen them go for $300+. Yes, the HO tooling was made years before. Of course, what is not know is how many other parts are made on existing machines and tools, metal gears require hobs, etc. Also, if I may add, the cost of tooling and die work is most likely less per hour than in the 1980's. CNC controlled wire EDM allow working harden steel for the dies in one step. Not like the "old days" using a Moog tracer machine on a master pattern, with many hours of "hand work". However, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that in the recent Athearn "highjacking" that the tooling wasn't worth at least six figures plus. Anyway, my point was, that "if" the importers aren't watching the the "hen house" then eggs will be rotten and stolen. Regards Charley.
|
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on May 19, 2012 5:38:28 GMT -8
If I recall crorectly, didn't T55 came to the realization that no two Turbines were the same. If that is true, that would have sent the die work into space. The Overland Brass models do have the variations which could have been incorporated into the plastic version, but at what cost? The Highliner shells incorporate every phase of the F units by having panels that fit into the shell to handle the changes. We were told the 8500 HP was too expensive for the less than 1000 they had on Reservations with the dealers. I think they needed many more for production to recoup the tooling cost. You are right, the tooling would have been very expensive. Larry |
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on May 19, 2012 5:44:10 GMT -8
Sorry folks, I forgot what forum I was on. That was for the Rivarossi N scale Big Boy. At the time, that's what Con-Cor said the tooling cost when they first brought it out. The loco sold for $189.00, on eBay today I've seen them go for $300+. Yes, the HO tooling was made years before. Of course, what is not know is how many other parts are made on existing machines and tools, metal gears require hobs, etc. Also, if I may add, the cost of tooling and die work is most likely less per hour than in the 1980's. CNC controlled wire EDM allow working harden steel for the dies in one step. Not like the "old days" using a Moog tracer machine on a master pattern, with many hours of "hand work". However, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that in the recent Athearn "highjacking" that the tooling wasn't worth at least six figures plus. Anyway, my point was, that "if" the importers aren't watching the the "hen house" then eggs will be rotten and stolen. Regards Charley. Charley Good point about the CNC being used today and the fact that might just reduce the actual cost of tooling today compared to the 80's. The work was done by a person using machines manually. Labor and time is always expensive. Larry |
|
|
|
Post by alco539 on May 19, 2012 6:35:59 GMT -8
Larry of course there were NC/CNC machines back in the 80's, but not like todays machines. If you want to see what a CNC five axis milling machine can do. Look on YouTube for Matsuura Maxia: V8, if this link doesn't work: ,The mill, machines a V8 engine from a solid block (billet) of aluminum. Also, besides EDM the modern die shop can use Lasers too. However, to be clear, I don't know what can be done in China. I think a lot of the die work is still done in the US or Europe. I just don't know. To go back to machine tools. The largest maker of hobby size machines in China, Sieg, only had one CNC machine a few years ago. Most machining is/was done on manual lathes, mills, grinders, and they still use metal shapers. They make all of their motors (universal and brushless DC) plus the PWM control boards for their machines. CNC machines cost money, people cost less, but that's changing even in China. They could make trains if they wanted to. I'm sorry if this has gone off topic. Regards Charley.
|
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on May 19, 2012 8:10:56 GMT -8
Larry of course there were NC/CNC machines back in the 80's, but not like todays machines. If you want to see what a CNC five axis milling machine can do. Look on YouTube for Matsuura Maxia: V8, if this link doesn't work: ,The mill, machines a V8 engine from a solid block (billet) of aluminum. Also, besides EDM the a modern die shop can use Lasers too. However, to be clear, I don't know what can be done in China. I think a lot of the die work is still done in the US or Europe. I just don't know. To go back to machine tools. The largest maker of hobby size machines in China, Sieg, only had one CNC machine a few years ago. Most machining is/was done on manual lathes, mills, grinders, and they still use metal shapers. They make all of their motors (universal and brushless DC) plus the PWM control boards for their machines. CNC machines cost money, people cost less, but that's changing even in China. They could make trains if they wanted to. I'm sorry if this has gone off topic. Regards Charley. Charley Thanks for the information as I find this very interesting. Yes, I am aware of some of the automated use of early CNC type machines thirty years ago, but that was prior to the processing power that has become available with the PC and software. I worked on SCADA systems using large mainframes from 1968 to almost the present time and the PC has changed the world of processing. We used to use large mainframes to control Automated Generation of Power at Dams and for all of the simulators in the aircraft field, but that was always limited to large scale contracts and Government type work. I guess I was thinking about the use of CNC systems now for model train products. I am not aware where the actual tooling is done for most of the train products being made now, but probably a lot of it is in the states so it can be verified as the work progresses. Thanks for the information. Larry |
|
