|
Post by packer on Jan 28, 2022 16:10:08 GMT -8
Wonder if they’re making up for the debacle with the last run of Gp18s? (which resulted in me returning mine) What was the issue with those again? The BN Gp18s where they were advertised with the extra step in the wells (GN/BN); but then it was changed to the normal step configuration
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 28, 2022 16:32:37 GMT -8
What was the issue with those again? The BN Gp18s where they were advertised with the extra step in the wells (GN/BN); but then it was changed to the normal step configuration Uff da. That's a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by cera2254 on Jan 28, 2022 16:35:55 GMT -8
304 they left out because it got the Paducah nose around 1972. Fairly certain I'm going to have to build one of those myself. That’s one I’d have to have if they did the Conrail repaint.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Jan 28, 2022 18:13:33 GMT -8
The BN Gp18s where they were advertised with the extra step in the wells (GN/BN); but then it was changed to the normal step configuration Uff da. That's a big deal. Athearn's GP18's BN 1992 and BN 1993 are actually correct, as modeled, for those locomotives up until about 1978. It was around then that BN changed the steps to the GN-style, and changed the cut levers to the later style. The fail is with BN 1996. It's got the later cut levers and a roof flasher, which place it as post 1978. But those steps are pre-1978. The artwork currently on the website for BN 1996 shows it having the proper GN-style steps. But they didn't end up that way. The artwork for the other two DOES match the models. It appears that the plan was to build two 1972-1978 models, and one 1978-later model. And it was drawn so. It also appears that someone somewhere assumed that all the steps were the same. And missed that they weren't. Ed
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Jan 28, 2022 19:39:13 GMT -8
Doing an image search, it appears the MP GP18s received short hoods in the 1970s. For the MP experts here, did all units receive short hoods and over what timeframe did this occur? I find sometimes it's faster to research using RRpicturearchives or Fallen Flags to try to determine when engines got major changes. One nice thing on RRpicturearchives is you can search results by order number, so if say it doesn't show every MP GP18 as an MP engine, it may show them for subsequent owners, if there are any.
|
|
|
Post by ChessieFan1978 on Jan 28, 2022 19:54:43 GMT -8
What year did UPS introduce the 28' Pup Trailers in this announcement? Not sure why Athearn puts Era's on some things and not others.
|
|
|
Post by SOMECALLMETIM on Jan 28, 2022 20:04:55 GMT -8
The appearance of the Genesis model Mopac GP18 is the as-built without modifications after they were repainted in Dark Eagle Blue paint (Jenk’s). Starting in the mid-60s the Mopac replaced the stock 1700 gallon fuel tank with a 2000 gallon fuel tank to match the 100 AAR-B trucked, low-nose GP18s in the fleet. Also in the mid-60s the Mopac added factory low-hoods, also to match the rest of the GP18 fleet. Only one GP18 did not receive a low nose however it did receive a large fuel tank. The road numbers chosen are good for about 1964 to 1967-70 depending on road number prior to receiving the mentioned modifications. Only Mopac had the 2000 gallon fuel tank size and it is not the same, larger one used on the GP20. The fuel tank is shorter due to the longer wheelbase of the AAR-B truck - even though these had EMD trucks. After the fuel tank modification, a large percentage of the GP18s received roof mounted air tanks. So to summarize, good for 1964-67/70 depending on road number. Doing an image search, it appears the MP GP18s received short hoods in the 1970s. For the MP experts here, did all units receive short hoods and over what timeframe did this occur?
|
|
|
Post by MILWmodeler on Jan 29, 2022 8:31:58 GMT -8
The BN Gp18s where they were advertised with the extra step in the wells (GN/BN); but then it was changed to the normal step configuration Uff da. That's a big deal. 1996 shells are being remade and will be replaced.
|
|
|
Post by packer on Jan 29, 2022 9:51:24 GMT -8
Uff da. That's a big deal. 1996 shells are being remade and will be replaced. I never heard about that one. Guess I need to find a BN 1996 again
|
|
|
Post by bnsfes44c4 on Feb 1, 2022 7:28:24 GMT -8
Uff da. That's a big deal. 1996 shells are being remade and will be replaced. First off, I really don’t mean to come off as piling on Athearn and I reply to this specific comment b/c Milwmodeler has referenced being an Athearn employee in past posts. Where is the official notice from Athearn about the replacement shells? This is the first I’ve seen it mentioned. It sounds great that they’re trying to rectify the situation now, but this is the reply that was emailed in response in June 2021. [Per product development: “Every effort is made to ensure announcement artwork and information regarding production models on the Athearn website is as accurate possible, sometimes our team will make changes to produce a more precise replica based on research material including photographs in our achieves or received post announcement. Though the BN 1996 is advertised having the five-step walkway, the decision was made to produce it with the four-step walkway”. We apologize if this modification is disappointing. Best Wishes, Horizon Hobby - Athearn] Essentially the same response to the SD60M trucks, various incorrect shells, incorrect colors, missing details etc. over the years. Once again, I’m not simply piling on, but Athearn as a company could improve their reputation immensely with no added cost with a little communication. The customer service emails are answered anonymously, if at all, which is a huge part of the problem as that person seems to be giving completely different responses than what is offered when speaking with company employees in person at a show or watching them on videos. They spent a few weeks telling customers to simply return their SD60M’s to the retailer and that it was the only solution they could offer, until the rest of Athearn finally admitted a problem with the trucks and devised a solution, produced a video- essentially just communicating with the customers. For free. Without arguments. It costs nothing to be honest. We all know the difficulties in producing complex models between multiple parties across different countries and languages. There’s nothing wrong with admitting a mistake instead of ignoring or arguing with customers, denying any problem and finally telling them ‘just return it’. I say this as someone just like a lot of others here- I’ve had tens of thousands of dollars worth of Athearn product through my basement over the years. But when high end models show up with significant problems and the manufacturer’s response is essentially- “tough”, well my spending with that company comes to an abrupt stop. I appreciate the update and the fix being offered for the GP18. I’d hope to hear more through official channels as it becomes available.
|
|
|
Post by middledivision on Feb 1, 2022 9:08:41 GMT -8
^^^ You're getting a head's up that a fix is in the works. Athearn won't announce it until the shells are ready, like they did with the SD60M truck repair kits. I do agree that Athearn's Customer Service is woefully inadequate. When I first contacted them about the 60M trucks, I was told they had no fix for it and I could return the engine for refund/replacement. A couple weeks later, it was mentioned here that a fix was under developement. All CS had to say was, "we are aware of the problem and are working on a solution". It seems as though there is a serious lack of communication between departments at Horizon.
|
|
|
Post by sd80mac on Feb 1, 2022 9:09:00 GMT -8
^ I kind of agree with the above. A simple "Hey guys, we screwed up this model, we acknowledge it, and here's what we're going to do to fix it (or not)" post would go a long way, from any manufacturer.
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Feb 1, 2022 9:23:14 GMT -8
All CS had to say was, "we are aware of the problem and are working on a solution". It seems as though there is a serious lack of communication between departments at Horizon. I think that is the main problem here. It is not necessarily the Athearn people's fault. When you email 'customer service' you are probably getting someone at Horizon who knows nothing about trains or what Athearn happens to be up to at the moment, so you get the standard 'well if you are not satisfied just return it' line. Whenever I have had an issue and actually been able to get in touch with someone from Athearn about it, generally I get real answers.
|
|
|
Post by MILWmodeler on Feb 2, 2022 14:24:36 GMT -8
Yes, there is definitely room for Athearn to improve. We're aware and working on it. The crux of the issue is COVID. Why? Well Athearn like most manufacturers, are working over a year in advance so when COVID hit, things looked normal for a while but time is catching up. Now we're well into the "new normal" and those projects that were being worked on when offices were shut down scattering employees to kitchen counters, basement corners, or bedroom annex's are being delivered. There's been a lot of change happening in how model manufacturers work. We're not all in the same place with a resource room accessible to all. We're figuring out how to do this and mistakes have been made. It's painful to find a mistake a year after it happened. But we, along with many other companies are figuring out how to operate with remote employees, so much so, that Athearn officially closed it's California office and transitioned to a permanently remote workforce. This is why customer service was moved from California to Illinois, and it was during this time that customer service communications was lacking. It's generally the mantra of Customer Service folks to do something now, instead of promise something in the future. When they didn't get timely information, their default answer is to encourage a return for refund. It's frustrating as a customer and we understand. We also don't want to fall into the trap of over-promising and under-delivering. Some "fixes" are not being announced publicly until we get them far enough along that we can provide definitive answers and a timeline. Our factory production is planned over a year in advance so inserting a re-make into the line isn't an easy task as it shuts down production on another product. That has huge financial consequences which affect Athearn's ability to operate. We'll often try to piggyback those re-makes onto a similar project like this month's GP18 announcements; the BN 1996 shells will be built at the same time.
tl;dr: Athearn made mistakes a while ago, they are being noticed now, we're learning and improving. We're open to the feedback and want to do what's right.
|
|
|
Post by dti406 on Feb 2, 2022 17:45:19 GMT -8
tl;dr: Athearn made mistakes a while ago, they are being noticed now, we're learning and improving. We're open to the feedback and want to do what's right. One of your biggest mistakes was discontinuing the undecorated kits of all your models along with your sellers not even showing they were available to preorder and then not even fulfilling the preorders that were placed. And don’t tell me they don’t sell Tangent sells out their kits on short order. Rick Jesionowski
|
|
|
Post by sd80mac on Feb 3, 2022 9:05:05 GMT -8
tl;dr: Athearn made mistakes a while ago, they are being noticed now, we're learning and improving. We're open to the feedback and want to do what's right. One of your biggest mistakes was discontinuing the undecorated kits of all your models along with your sellers not even showing they were available to preorder and then not even fulfilling the preorders that were placed. And don’t tell me they don’t sell Tangent sells out their kits on short order. Rick Jesionowski I'll tell you they don't sell, not in the amounts Athearn would need them to. Comparing Tangent to Athearn is apples and oranges.
|
|
|
Post by snootie3257 on Feb 3, 2022 9:14:33 GMT -8
One of your biggest mistakes was discontinuing the undecorated kits of all your models along with your sellers not even showing they were available to preorder and then not even fulfilling the preorders that were placed. And don’t tell me they don’t sell Tangent sells out their kits on short order. Rick Jesionowski I'll tell you they don't sell, not in the amounts Athearn would need them to. Comparing Tangent to Athearn is apples and oranges. The reason could be that Athearn doesn’t give you any assembly instructions like Tangent does. That’s why I don’t buy Athearns or ST undecorated kits. Steve
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Feb 3, 2022 9:38:58 GMT -8
Athearn used to supply a blow up of the model/parts diagram. I imagine that would be a big help.
|
|
|
Post by snootie3257 on Feb 3, 2022 9:54:07 GMT -8
Athearn used to supply a blow up of the model/parts diagram. I imagine that would be a big help. Yes they did, and maybe still do and it was helpful. You could at least figure out if you had all the parts, unlike ST which gives you zip. The difficult part was figuring out where all the under frame details went because there were a lot of holes. A decorated unit solved that little issue. Steve
|
|
|
Post by NS4122 on Feb 4, 2022 7:55:01 GMT -8
Just because Tangent sells them out doesn't mean they sell a lot of them. And don’t tell me they don’t sell Tangent sells out their kits on short order. Rick Jesionowski
|
|
|
Post by lars on Feb 4, 2022 7:58:51 GMT -8
Just because Tangent sells them out doesn't mean they sell a lot of them. And don’t tell me they don’t sell Tangent sells out their kits on short order. Rick Jesionowski Also, how much of that is Tangent selling them out of their own shop vs dealers? I imagine moving undecs is a lot harder if you’re scattering them to the winds and having one here and there in Athearn’s dealer-focused sales model. At that point you’re also relying on the dealers desire to stock and move undecs, too.
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Feb 6, 2022 16:47:50 GMT -8
I actually save undec shells and assemble as needed undec Athearn blue box engines because they'll bring close to what the RTR engines do online. The old kits undec doesn't bring near the premium but a lot of them will sell fairly easily compared to decorated cars.
Maybe they wouldn't sell dozens of them, but they'd certainly sell as many as some of the more obscure roads they've offered painted. There is always a couple guys looking for something they can't get and will paint and detail it themselves.
|
|
|
Post by wagnersteve on Mar 9, 2022 17:37:06 GMT -8
Wednesday, March 9, 2022 7:33 p.m., EST
Late this afternoon I was able to watch most of Athearn's March 8 Train Tuesday on YouTube, having not even known it was being held yesterday evening. I was watching a different Zoom program from local libraries then anyway. For what it's worth, I'll summarize my impressions.
Jim Wiggins was the only Athearn person on screen. He said at the outset that it would mostly be about the firm's recently announced HO runs of Ready To Roll Alco series RS-3s and Roundhouse series arch roof passenger cars, and it was. I learned very little that I hadn't seen in the PDF pages the firm posted early in the morning of February 25.
JW echoed the PDF in saying that the Canadian Pacific repainted its RS-3s in the Action Red livery with large MultiMarks "for improved visibility". If I'd been attending the virtual session "live" I would have posted that this was not simply for increased safety. CP's Omer Lavallee told me as we were eating in the dining car of the Delaware & Hudson's Laurentian in April 1970 that the railway had shown people -- not railfans but apparently members of the general public -- a video or film of CN trains in that railway's "new look" liveries adopted ca. 1960 and CP trains with their locos in wine red (maroon) and gray and asked which railway's trains were shown more often. An overwhelming majority said CN's. The numbers were actually equal. This helped convince CP management to go with the CP Rail name, the MultiMark and new color schemes.
JW said people interested in the Green Bay & Western RS-3's responded with a lot of comments about the original PDF posting for GB&W RS-3's and that some sort of correction had been made (either to the artwork or to the posted information); I'm not sure which.
I did post some comments on YouTube about the Harriman-style arch roof heavyweight cars, but I doubt many others have seen them. First, the scale length of the models are probably shorter than most full-sized Harriman cars. (At least a few head end cars were even shorter, notably one on the Yosemite Railroad.). The models are listed as 8.5" long -- I'm not sure what exactly was measured, but in HO that's just under 63' scale feet. Second, I don't believe the PRR had any such cars. I didn't mention that I'm skeptical that the SP ever painted them in its Daylight livery, but I'll leave that to people who know that line much better. I noted that SP, UP and IC did have Harriman-style cars. Also that I'd find the IC baggage car tempting; I have fond memories of the IC between Chicago and Champaign/Urbana from 1970. I already have a Walthers IC heavyweight baggage car about 70 scale feet long; the shorter car would fit my small model railroad better. I didn't note that I'm skeptical about the spacing of its doors. I'd actually really like to see HO versions of the beautiful 60' arch-roofed CN and IC baggage cars Wheels of Time has produced in N scale.
JW responded to some comments and questions. Some highlights:
The RS-3's are not designed to accommodate smoke units.
There were several questions about railings. The handrails and stanchions on the Alcos are a special plastic that are much closer to scale size than the old metal ones in Athearn "blue box" locos, which he seriously doubts will be run again. If they warp a bit he recommends using a hair dryer on a LOW setting to soften them enough to straighten them. Grab irons are wire.
He says it's unlikely Athearn will sell paint in the colors used on its models for modelers to use in "touching up" their cars and locos. There was some discussion about the colors of recent Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo GP units: JW said the firm had consulted closely with the TH&B group about them. But he cautioned that the apparent color of both a full-sized loco and a model of it is heavily dependent on lighting and that color perception is very subjective.
JW thinks it's likely a new run of rotary snowplows will be coming fairly soon. He warned that they're not based one a particular plow but said the mechanism that spins the plow blade is much improved over the old rubber-band drive version.
He showed photos of several recent Athearn HO's on the layouts of modelers who submitted them. I'd seen a number of those and others on the Facebook part of Athearn's website a few evenings ago, discovering that I could see them and Zoom in on them even though I don't use Facebook, giving me a much better look at their lettering than by using a magnifier or zooming in on the PDF pages. The problem is that the pictures are presented in a random order!
He says more CP armed services and Heritage locos will be coming, but not too many at a time.
Asked about new runs of Mack dump trucks and cement truck, he said it's a matter of licensing and assured participants that the firm is looking into doing vehicles other than Fords.
|
|
|
Post by hovehicle on Mar 9, 2022 18:13:54 GMT -8
Steve, thanks for the brief summary. If Athearn decides to do GM vehicles it will be more exciting to me than a freight car or diesel for that matter.
Vito L.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 9, 2022 18:30:37 GMT -8
JW thinks it's likely a new run of rotary snowplows will be coming fairly soon. He warned that they're not based one a particular plow... Oh, I think I'll disagree with JW on that particular assertion. Since my plows tend to be resting during the summer months I tend to model, I'll ignore the drive system for the blade. Ed
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Mar 10, 2022 4:17:30 GMT -8
I would presume the Harriman cars are the tooling MDC sold for many years; would have to research just how old it is but I believe dates at least to the 1970s. I believe all were the same length except an RPO, and there were a baggage, combine, coach, diner and obs. I've carried a baggage in two-tone grey lettered UP around for about a year now for $6.
The MDC releases you were more or less on your own for windows and interior and they had some pretty basic plastic trucks, with the couplers truck mounted to help them handle sharp curves.
Then again their RS3 tooling actually dates to MDC as well, I guess that's gone full circle. MDC's final releases used Proto 2000 drives and it appeared to me previous Athearn runs did the same, as they had the same gear issue and upon repair the differences in the P2K clone were apparent. I wonder if they've fixed that issue yet.
The plow is also very old, but as sold as a blue box kit it was just the Lima rotary, and I presume it is based on some prototype. I'm not sure the comments on the rubber band drive because they've run it at least once with a motor inside to run the blade, and they added a tender to it from MDC tooling. I recall one year at a show this old guy asking to buy matching passenger cars for the one he bought because he thought it was a passenger engine. Several of the vendors told him it was a plow, showed him where it said so on the box, and he wasn't going to find oxide red NYC passenger cars to go with it anywhere. I don't think he ever figured that out; it must have been a great disappointment when he put it on the tracks and all it did was spin the blade.
It's probably bad that some of us know the history of this stuff better than the guys making it and trying to sell it to us.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 10, 2022 7:24:45 GMT -8
Two Union Pacific, one Soo, one Rock Island.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by idgara on Mar 10, 2022 12:57:08 GMT -8
I wonder if the NH RS-3’s will have correct steam generator stack and control box on walkway?
|
|
|
Post by wagnersteve on Mar 10, 2022 14:37:22 GMT -8
May 10, about 5:20 p.m., EST The rendering on Athearn's PDF sheet shows the type of steam generator stack Alco itself installed, just ahead of the cab atop the short hood. A black and white photo of NH 539 at George Elwood's great www.rr-fallenflags.org website shows that, too. Some D&H RS-2's used in passenger service had that type, others had steam generators installed later with different sort of steam generator stacks. I don't know about a control box on NH RS-3's used in passenger service. A photo on Elwood's site of an NH RS-2 with dual headlights may show one. Photos of NH RS-2's in passenger service, e.g. NH 0502 and 0509, in David R. Sweetland's New England Rails, 1948-1968 from Morning Sun Book show the same sort of Also-installed steam generator stack as in Athearn's RS-3 announcement. I don't at present have easy access to my rather limited information on the New Haven. Jim Wiggin didn't say that the Athearn's more recent runs of rotary snowplows still used rubber-band drive for the plow, and I didn't mean to imply that. lvrr325, the man who thought an old Athearn rotary plow was a steam loco may have been thrown off by the fact that you can see what looks like the boiler front of a steam loco at the rear of the model. Yes, it was a plow built by Lima. I bought one decades ago thinking it was reasonably close to a New York Central plow. The D&H and B&M didn't use rotary snowplows. The B&M had a lot of wedge plows, both single- and double-track types. In relatively recent decades the D&H used the big plows on its Jordan spreaders. The D&H had very interesting flangers it either built itself or converted from other types of cars.
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Mar 10, 2022 14:49:07 GMT -8
No, you couldn't see that in the box. It was packed in a window box with the tender behind it. He just either didn't know trains or needed glasses.
The NYC rotaries were much older than the one the Athearn model represents.
|
|