Maybe questions/comments should be directed to Jerry Kimble (who is also a Santa Fe modeler) at Atlas O?
Might also be nice if Mr. Kimble responded here too.
already done 
but I know he reads this forum too
I sincerely hope some of the (former) manufacturers will keep looking into the economics and technologies to again have all production back in the States. Things are constantly changing in industry. I just returned from a regional real estate luncheon where I heard an interesting quote - "The best way to predict the future is to create it".
Look at the recent problems we're seeing dealing with the China factories. For the most part, it is highly unlikely that they care about our trains for other than as a customer. From the start over 100 years ago, Lionel had people in the company who genuinely liked trains. Jerry Williams, Mike Wolf, Richard Kuhn, Dick Mattox, Jim Weaver, and many others all had a strong interest and love for the trains.
At some point, someone will make it happen here again and they and we will certainly reap the rewards...
Rocky Mountaineer posted:No dealer or importer should send invoices requesting payment until the product arrives at THEIR doorstep and is ready to ship to the customer.David
I'm on board there. If I have already waited months for the product to be produced and shipped to the dealer, I will gladly wait another week while payment is made. I like the way Scott Mann does it, collecting the payment information and then charging the card when he ships.
Atlas is doing the right thing. Good for them.
645 posted:We all know Atlas wants to be correct as possible to the prototype so I know what is happening here. Like the 1:1 ATSF F-units Atlas is going to run these O-scale versions thru Cleburne and they will come back as CF7's!
So this >
will become this >
After all, the CF7 has not been done yet in O-scale, right?
Just kidding here - I'm sure Atlas will make 'em right - the F7's that is!
This post wins!
The truth is in the details. Guys, I just finished watching the video (link attached) that Atlas sent to the dealers yesterday. This time I viewed in in FULL screen and advanced 1 second at a time from 13-34 so that I could focus and concentrate on the details and the paint. I my opinion this the the BEST paint job on a model train that I have ever seen and I have been on this planet for nearly 70 years.
As for the remark that somebody said about the "orange peel effect" on the SS plating. I see what you are talking about, however, I am viewing it at a magnification of 16x I am NOT at all concerned about how it will appear on the units. 
SEE FOR YOURSELF
What's with those double side nose grabs on these units? Also, too bad these pilots are more appropriate for F3's.
This is why I place all of my Atlas preorders with Caboose Stop Hobbies - Merlyn does not require a deposit or down payment. I have 4 SD40's preordered and I don't get charged until (if?) they ship. Atlas says 2nd Quarter 2017 but I'll be surprised if they are delivered at all this year.
I think these F7's were more than a year behind schedule and Atlas probably made every effort in 2016 to get these delivered ASAP. Also, I'm guessing these models have QSI sound based on the Doppler effect as heard in the video. I emailed Jerry Kimble awhile ago and he said that Atlas is probably going to use LokSound decoders in future releases. That is what I'm putting in my GP35's.
SANTIAGOP23 posted:What's with those double side nose grabs on these units? Also, too bad these pilots are more appropriate for F3's.
There is no such thing as an F3 or F7 pilot. There were the so-called "passenger pilot" (the smooth one) and the "freight pilot" (the indented one.) The same applies for E7's 8's and 9's.
The railroads ordered whichever ones they wanted. The Santa Fe specified the freight pilot on their F-units, be they freight or passenger units.
Where as the Pennsy seemed to favor the passenger pilot:
Rusty
Attachments
Images (2)
Hot Water posted:SPSF posted:The problem with Not pre-ordering is, if they do not receive enough orders they will take that as a lack of interest and not make the item.
THAT is exactly how Sunset/3rd Rail/Golden Gate Depot works! Many different "projects/proposals" get announced, but some never make it into production due to lack of reservations/orders (the C&O K class 2-8-2s and NYC H9/10 2-8-2 models are prime examples).
But I've never had Sunset, or any of their dealers, ask for money before the product was shipping.
The "orange peel" comment is speculation as Atlas did not indicate specifically why they were rejecting the Santa Fe shells although that may well be the cause, in any case it puts a serious delay on delivery of these models and probably backs up the next motive power project at the factory. It will be interesting to see what the Jan-June catalog shows, with this glitch the catalog may be a while. JMO
Whew ! ! !
Rusty Traque posted:SANTIAGOP23 posted:What's with those double side nose grabs on these units? Also, too bad these pilots are more appropriate for F3's.
There is no such thing as an F3 or F7 pilot. There were the so-called "passenger pilot" (the smooth one) and the "freight pilot" (the indented one.) The same applies for E7's 8's and 9's.
The railroads ordered whichever ones they wanted. The Santa Fe specified the freight pilot on their F-units, be they freight or passenger units.
Where as the Pennsy seemed to favor the passenger pilot:
Rusty
I never said there was one for this or that, I said "more appropriate". The tooling Atlas used has the holes for the coupler lift bars as seen in most F3's, not F7's. Hence that pilot is more appropriate for F3's.
F3's:
F7's:
Attachments
Images (5)
Something to notice that Atlas hasn't addressed.
There seems to be a slight difference in the tooling of some trucks, particularly the front ones of A units. The difference makes the trucks sit lower than the trailing trucks.
See the following pictures, notice how the leading truck is lower and makes the high water pants even more conspicuous:
I measured the and they sit 1mm too low, some may choose to ignore it, but the difference is apparent.
Attachments
Images (2)
Darn, I thought Williams diesels pretty much had the corner on 'high-water' engines!
Oh, wait - so did Lionel on their scale F7s and E7s awhile back....
All kidding aside, I see what you mean in the Burlington photo but in looking at the video again, at 12 and at 16 the trucks appear to me to be just fine whereas the chassis sits fairly low doesn't it?
Atlas will be at the "Big E" later this month for 2 days, a good time for anybody attending to talk to their people, just saying!
My speculation on the decoration is that the plating must not have come off well. This usually has a very high rejection rate. That and my eyes see lots of imperfections in the plating in that video. But it could just be my eyes. If this is case, funny how Atlas will go through great pains to get the stainless correct on these Fs, but all the manufactures of scale passenger cars give us silver paint jobs.
Rusty Traque posted:SANTIAGOP23 posted:What's with those double side nose grabs on these units? Also, too bad these pilots are more appropriate for F3's.
There is no such thing as an F3 or F7 pilot. There were the so-called "passenger pilot" (the smooth one) and the "freight pilot" (the indented one.) The same applies for E7's 8's and 9's.
The railroads ordered whichever ones they wanted. The Santa Fe specified the freight pilot on their F-units, be they freight or passenger units.
For Santa Fe purists, only, the Company modified the EMD freight pilot on some units and did not on others. At Santa Fe, they were identified as "freight" and "passenger" pilots, although they were actually modified and unmodified EMD freight pilots.
The Santa Fe "freight pilot" was modified by constructing an indented area for the brake pipe and signal pipe hoses to the right of the coupler*, removing the stirrup and welding a triangle of sheet steel into the notch, so that the edge profile was straight. Then, a step which looked like a pedal (the same type used on ATSF steam pilots) was welded onto each side, presumably to make it easier for a Trainman to ride the leading end during switching movements. In my opinion, riding on the pilot of an F-unit modified or not, is an ergonomic nightmare and I am getting a backache just thinking about it. Anyway, Santa Fe applied the freight modifications to all of the blue and yellow F3/F7/F9 units and to the dual-service rednose bobtails 325 through 344. Bobtails 300 through 314 were passenger-only units, as were all the 4-unit F3/F7's 16 through 47, and they did not receive modified pilots.** The photo above shows a Santa Fe "passenger" EMD freight pilot.
And the pilot on the Atlas F7's is the correct type of pilot for the series 37 through 41.
* Santa Fe used dual brake pipe hoses on the front of its F-units, although the one on the left side of the coupler was the one normally used in freight service.
** Late in their lives, Santa Fe no longer worried about what kind of pilot was used on the F-units. Pilots were removed, repaired, and stockpiled for re-use, and the one at the front of the stockpile - "freight" or "passenger" - was applied in exchange for the damaged pilot.
I don't have a dog in this fight......I love the Rio Grande set but out of my comfort zone price wise. BUT......
If you have not headed a project to manufacture a product in China you have no idea just how hard it is. (and scary) Time, distance and language barriers are just the start. All my items were static die cast or plastic models.....much simpler than a O scale diesel......and still very difficult. Having a small issue on one product is not bad. It could be that the 'proof' models were 100% correct.....then a paint mask fails, new one made and creates an issue......all kinds of things like that happen when you manufacture on the other side of the planet. IMHO only.
I see what Santiago P23 was referring to. EMD changed the "fender edge" profile of its passenger pilot in 1948. Early E7 passenger pilots (and those on F3's when so specified) had the pilot shown on the PRR unit in this thread. Later E7 and F3 passenger pilots, and all E8/E9/F7 passenger pilots used the later design. So, Santiago is right -- The passenger EMD pilot on the Atlas PRR F7 model is the early passenger pilot and, therefore is not the correct one.
AMCDave posted:I don't have a dog in this fight......I love the Rio Grande set but out of my comfort zone price wise. BUT......
If you have not headed a project to manufacture a product in China you have no idea just how hard it is. (and scary)
I have not. However I have proof-read the new Division timetable three times, and have hand-copied orchestral musical arrangements for individual instruments from the master Conductor's copy, and was unable to do a 100% perfect job of either.
I agree, Dave . . . it's a very complex job to bring accurately detailed model locomotives to customers, and there has yet to be one without a single flaw.
"After all, the CF7 has not been done yet in O-scale, right? "
There is at least one O scale (3rail) CF7 out there!
Chris
LVHR
Attachments
Images (1)
Attention Atlas !!!
If the pilot is a problem on the Santa Fe A's, PLEASE ignore, it is okay.
This post has been up for over a day and only one person spotted it.
Me and the over 1,200 other people that read this post do not consider this an issue.
Thanks.
AMCDave posted:... If you have not headed a project to manufacture a product in China you have no idea just how hard it is. (and scary) Time, distance and language barriers are just the start. All my items were static die cast or plastic models.....much simpler than a O scale diesel......and still very difficult. Having a small issue on one product is not bad. It could be that the 'proof' models were 100% correct.....then a paint mask fails, new one made and creates an issue......all kinds of things like that happen when you manufacture on the other side of the planet.
Very good food for thought. And I've often said I don't think I'd have the patience and fortitude to work in those conditions where so much is out of our control.
At the same time, it's very revealing... because this further shows how the "cheap labor mentality" means so much to the spreadsheet wizards when they make their pitch to the executive boardroom when recommending where products should be manufactured for the least possible cost. Despite (1) ALL the negatives listed in the above excerpt, AND (2) the shipping costs to get finished product in the hands of consumers, AND (3) the not-to-insignificant travel costs incurred by importers -- either back-and-forth travel or basing a US employee overseas -- to monitor projects in the Asian factories, corporate powers-at-be here in the States still choose to do business overseas. 
I know it's all in the Math, but can you just how small a number the labor costs need to be in order to offset all these other factors that have gotta weigh heavy in the expense equation. 
David
By the way, I called my dealer today to discuss this situation... and she was more than happy to credit back the charge for my Santa Fe F7's. I agreed to keep the order on the books, and she'll re-invoice me at a future date when the products are ready to ship to consumers... whenever that will be.
For the record, I also have a set of D&RGW F3's (in "yellow-jacket" paint scheme) on order with this dealer... again because I think these will be built very close to actual consumer orders, and I don't expect there to be too many of them lingering in dealer inventory once they hit our shores. But I'm not really thinking too seriously about those F3's now, since I'm uncertain if Atlas-O has even received a firm production date from the Asian factory for those jewels. I thought I read somewhere here that Atlas-O stated the Dash-8's are next up in the production queue. So lord only knows when we'll see the F3's -- originally slated for a 4Q2016 delivery after their March 2016 announcement. 
Challenging times, for sure, to get stuff built right overseas these days.
David
David, I don't know your background. But, it would be ignorant to suggest that there were not, and continue to be, well-founded reasons to move manufacturing operations off-shore.
To believe that manufacturing in USA would avoid the detail errors made by the vendors of our "O scale" (whatever that means) products seems far-fetched.
Whatever Atlas promised their customers, Atlas should deliver nothing less. Anyone who assumed that Atlas would deliver more than what was promised, well, that's on the consumer.
I would think it is quite possible Atlas already had another engine in production [ F3s ? ] since the F7s were already on the water when their rep stated the long awaited GE dash 8s were next on the production schedule.JMO
I will not go into any depth....but search out articles on why many analyst think manufacturing in China may be headed back to USA.....some good reads. Sorry to go off topic but since some see the F-7 issues as a China related issue.
Pingman posted:David, I don't know your background. But, it would be ignorant to suggest that there were not, and continue to be, well-founded reasons to move manufacturing operations off-shore.
To believe that manufacturing in USA would avoid the detail errors made by the vendors of our "O scale" (whatever that means) products seems far-fetched.
...
Knowing the thinking that goes on in Corporate America today, I'd wager big money that the driving reasons to move manufacturing ops off-shore were largely cost-related. So all I'm saying is you can't fight the Math. The component that represents Chinese labor has gotta be one heck of a TINY number to offset all the other expenses associated with moving operations off-shore AND still come out ahead of the former number(s) with everything based here in the US.
We love our trains because we're model train enthusiasts. But I can only imagine the guys and gals who must live with the system as it stands today -- i.e., project managing manufacturing operations half-way around the globe can get old and tiresome rather quickly. Even the best and very talented of folks would experience burn-out over time and walk away. Hint... hint...
Unfortunately, the spreadsheet wizards never factor in those human components. 
David
Many of us have heard of the "Home Town Discount" when reading about established stars in pro sports and the expectation that he/she will take less to stay with the local team rather than go to the highest bidder in free agency--think Tom Brady as an excellent example.
I have had personal experience with large corporations who have done the same--extend a home town discount to a labor force/community rather than move/close a very high cost manufacturing facility to a lower cost domestic or overseas location.
I won't pretend to know what "Corporate America" thinks. But corporations have a duty to their shareholders to use resources wisely. And the additional costs of relocating manufacturing (real estate, construction, capital expense for new equipment, training, etc.) domestically (as happened with factories moving South) or overseas are surely considered by any competent corporate leadership group.
Be pleased that the products we want are being made, errors and all.
SANTIAGOP23 posted:Something to notice that Atlas hasn't addressed.
There seems to be a slight difference in the tooling of some trucks, particularly the front ones of A units. The difference makes the trucks sit lower than the trailing trucks.
See the following pictures, notice how the leading truck is lower and makes the high water pants even more conspicuous:
I measured the and they sit 1mm too low, some may choose to ignore it, but the difference is apparent.
I'm not seeing it.
The only thing that I see that is lower is the piping to the brake cylinders. The Burlington pipe is lower than the PRR pipe.
Next question, how can one truck sit lower than the other? Do you mean to say that the carbody sits higher on one end than the other?
Jim, the posts to which you screw the trucks are lower on the leading trucks, this makes the Blomberg B castings sit lower than they should. Watch the difference in the gap between the car body and the brake cylinders pointed in red here:
Nevermind the brake cylinder lines in the Q unit, I re-did those in my units.
Attachments
Images (2)
SANTIAGOP23 posted:Jim, the posts to which you screw the trucks are lower on the leading trucks, this makes the Blomberg B castings sit lower than they should. Watch the difference in the gap between the car body and the brake cylinders pointed in red here:
Nevermind the brake cylinder lines in the Q unit, I re-did those in my units.
I have to believe that some if not all of that gap can be explained as an optical illusion. The front of the engine is closer to the camera than the rear. On your top picture measure the body height (using your red line) at the point where the letter "i" is printed. Do the same where the "p" is printed. Which line is longer?
We really need a picture that is taken at a "Dead-Nuts" 90 degrees. Then repeat the above at the same letters.
SantaFeJim, I measured my units and you can't argue with a ruler. I already fixed mine by filing down the castings so I can't take pictures of out of the box units.
This is not an illusion, it's a flaw in the design. Whether it plages some or all A units that's a different thing.
Attachments
Images (1)
hey not bashing Atlas, just pointing out something.
Also, I'm thankful for having P&D to fully customize my F units!
Can you imagine a super detailed Atlas O Santa Fe F7 with P&D's wonderful bolt-detailed grabs, chromed headlight housing with lenses, cab interior, incandescent bulbs and brass ATSF pilot? Oh my!
Santiagop23 -
I am not sure what your last picture showing a horizontal one is suppose to illustrate.
I was asking for vertical lines thru the Letters P and I.
SANTIAGOP23 posted:SantaFeJim, I measured my units and you can't argue with a ruler. I already fixed mine by filing down the castings so I can't take pictures of out of the box units.
This is not an illusion, it's a flaw in the design. Whether it plages some or all A units that's a different thing.
I may have missed, but are you saying that you already have your Atlas F7s in hand?
Goshawk posted:SANTIAGOP23 posted:SantaFeJim, I measured my units and you can't argue with a ruler. I already fixed mine by filing down the castings so I can't take pictures of out of the box units.
This is not an illusion, it's a flaw in the design. Whether it plages some or all A units that's a different thing.
I may have missed, but are you saying that you already have your Atlas F7s in hand?
I believe he is referring to a much earlier run of Atlas F Units.
