Athearn January announcements...big yawn

[Bob Bufkin]

I bet Eric220 has already queued up for Pennsy F-59...

I was thinking the same thing.
 

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Why would they do those F59s and not more Airslides or Centerflows? I have been waiting for them to do more eastern roads on both cars.

[Hyperion]

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if some of these Fantasy schemes sell better than some of the prototype schemes people are waiting on.  If selling a few of these helps make some obscure prototype option a viable option, so be it.

And, Doug, is there other TRE scheme than the one they've already done?  And they've done a bunch of Amtrak versions but I guess the Cascades is still missing though.

[Ryan87]

I suppose this is what they're trying to represent with the CP car:
http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=60273
http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATH23904
I suppose it's not the worst foob, but not anywhere near correct.

Mike

CP had cars that were almost exactly like the Athearn cars the 336800-336899 series built in 1958 and still in service.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2253349

[kalbert]

I've been trying to bite my tongue on the forums when news of disappointing release announcements surface. I'm sure no manufacturer likes it when they put up something new they think we'll like and all they see are complaints, but "Fantasy"?!? ugh... How about some "real" GP's and SD's for DM&E or an Alco S from anybody?

[Brakie]

I'm not surprise to see slim monthly pickings.

There's nothing of interest for me from either of the A companies..Money saved I guess.. ;D

[Dave V]

With regard to the F59PH  fantasy schemes I have one question.............."why".......? ???

I can't have an Alco switcher but the PRR fans can be teased and tormented by a Keystone F59...............

I repeat............ "why" ??????????????????????????

I'm neither teased nor tormented.  Not for the 1956 version of Pennsy, anyway.  Eric, OTOH, as was mentioned, would probably be in for a few!

This is kind of a merger of the 5-stripe small keystone scheme and the single-stripe large keystone (but missing the shadow)...  It looks intriguing but doesn't fit my plans.

[CBQ Fan]

DC much cheaper than Atlas,,,,,,,,,

[jnevis]

A waste of a release. ???

I did at one point want to do my own version of the F59 or P42 in California Zephyr CBQ, WP, or DRGW schemes.  More as UP-ish Heritage schemes not straight fantasy "If WP had..."  I was messing with the Paintshop line drawings and they looked OK.

[asarge]

Why would they do those F59s and not more Airslides or Centerflows? I have been waiting for them to do more eastern roads on both cars.

Horizon still has a bunch of roadnames from previous releases still in stock, especially for the Airslides, plus they have the drawbar connected cars coming. That could be one reason. I'm with you, I wish they would do something more.

[Puddington]

I'm neither teased nor tormented.  Not for the 1956 version of Pennsy, anyway.  Eric, OTOH, as was mentioned, would probably be in for a few!

This is kind of a merger of the 5-stripe small keystone scheme and the single-stripe large keystone (but missing the shadow)...  It looks intriguing but doesn't fit my plans.

I find your response interesting Dave; and not specifically because it's from you. At the risk of "thread drift", I wonder how a group of modelers who are so attached to prototype fidelity such as many of our local PRR gang here ( I mean we've had multiple page threads on teeny tiny issues of "foobieness" and "that shadow isn't the right thickeness"...etc...) can be satisified with someone slapping a fallen flag like the PRR on a modern locomotive.... is there a "fine line" or maybe it's more like a a "canyon" between "foobie" and "fantasy" schemes... does all one have to do is say "my XXXXX release is a fantasy car/loco...etc" and be safe from the slings and arrows of any particular road name group of modelers microscopic review of their product.......?

Hmmmmmm.....? I wonder..............

[eric220]

I'm neither teased nor tormented.  Not for the 1956 version of Pennsy, anyway.  Eric, OTOH, as was mentioned, would probably be in for a few!

This is kind of a merger of the 5-stripe small keystone scheme and the single-stripe large keystone (but missing the shadow)...  It looks intriguing but doesn't fit my plans.

All I have to say is "GAH!!! Someone put that thing out of it's misery." I really don't like the idea of just slapping an old scheme on a modern locomotive. I didn't do it with my locomotives, and UP didn't do it with the heritage schemes; it just looks cheap and toy-like. Admittedly, like Dave said, this is not an exact copy of a PRR scheme. When I looked at it, I saw a Tuscan version of the RF-16 scheme with a larger keystone and without the circle around it. I think the thing that gets to me the most about a scheme like this is the cat whiskers. They were designed for the GG-1 and applied to round-nosed diesels in a very different era of industrial design. Shoe-horning them onto a modern locomotive just looks wrong to me. On top of that, I never really liked the Tuscan locomotive schemes. Give me DGLE!

[Dave V]

Pudd,

It's how it's presented.  Athearn isn't trying to convince me this was built from plans found at the real Juniata Shops.  They come right out and call it fantasy.  That's just fine with me.  Sometimes when I'm out along NS on the old Middle Division I like to wonder what those Dash 9s would look like in Brunswick with keystones.

I don't want or need one, though.

The one thing that does give me fits more than anything else is seeing mainline Pennsy equipment on a spindly wooden trestle...  <shudder>

[wm3798]

Ewwww.  Cat Whiskers!  Blecch.

[MichaelWinicki]

I'd pay $$ to sit in on an N-scale product development meeting at Athearn... Just for the laughs.