Atlas VO-1000 question

[Hamaker]

Pretty sure I recently read a post by Cory in which he stated he was leaving Atlas to pursue other interests.

[tom mann]

Yes, hopefully @Atlas Paul sees this request.

[Chris333]

Wouldn't the roadname or road number be the thing to tell them apart?

[Dave Schneider]

Wouldn't the roadname or road number be the thing to tell them apart?

Yes. That is how I started, but I was looking for a way to quickly scan listings. I think I have come up with a pattern that works pretty well for this and then verify the name and number.

Best wishes, Dave

[Dave Schneider]

Pretty sure I recently read a post by Cory in which he stated he was leaving Atlas to pursue other interests.

Oh, right. Thanks.

Best wishes, Dave

[Atlas Paul]

Yes, Cory has left us  but the request for FMs has been noted.

[Cory Rothlisberger]

Yes, Cory has left us  but the request for FMs has been noted.

Stop it with the  face. Y'all had a party when I left! 

[jdcolombo]

Yes, Cory has left us  but the request for FMs has been noted.

Let me add a vote for the FM H10/44 and H12/44.  Most of the Class 1's (including the main usual suspects, like the UP, Santa Fe, SP, Pennsy (a LOT of 'em), Milwaukee, NYC, B&O, etc.) had them, and they enjoyed a long life after Class 1 operation on shortlines and in industrial switching duty.   There are still many of them preserved, and I think a few run on tourist railroads.  I'd be happy to have them with the VO-1000 mechanism, although I think the truck center spacing is about 3 scale feet off (30' 8" for the Baldwin  VO; 33' 6" for the FM).  With the production of the Alco S-2 and S-4, the FM units are really the last "iconic" widely-used transition-era switcher that we don't have in N.  Don't know how S-2 sales have been, but I suspect there's a similar-sized market for the FM, although you'd probably need 3 shells: one for the H/10, one for the original Lowry version of the H12, and one for the "simplified" H12.  So that's a bit of a tooling complication.

John C.

[tom mann]

Can anyone explain why the move from the Lowry design to the boxy, simplified design? Did it just cost more and the simplified design was a way to save production costs? Or did crews not like the cab overhang?

[Atlas Paul]

Stop it with the  face. Y'all had a party when I left! 

Maybe if you wouldn't have left in the middle of the catalog we would have had a party.

[wazzou]

I'm sure it was just a typo, but do you mean "Loewy"?

And, yes  , it was due to the higher cost of production.

[Missaberoad]

Can anyone explain why the move from the Lowry design to the boxy, simplified design? Did it just cost more and the simplified design was a way to save production costs? Or did crews not like the cab overhang?

Both the Wiki and American Rails articles claim it was a cost saving measure. Can't see crew's caring, and the visor was probably appreciated...

The wiki article notes one practical design change the following year
"the fairing over the battery box was removed and louvers added to reduce the possibility of battery explosions"

the change can be noted ahead of the cab in these two photos...

http://urhs.org/pictures/nyc_9121.jpg

http://www.railarchive.net/vintagediesel/images/milw2314.jpg

[Dave Schneider]

Let me add a vote for the FM H10/44 and H12/44.  Most of the Class 1's (including the main usual suspects, like the UP, Santa Fe, SP, Pennsy (a LOT of 'em), Milwaukee, NYC, B&O, etc.) had them, and they enjoyed a long life after Class 1 operation on shortlines and in industrial switching duty.   There are still many of them preserved, and I think a few run on tourist railroads.  I'd be happy to have them with the VO-1000 mechanism, although I think the truck center spacing is about 3 scale feet off (30' 8" for the Baldwin  VO; 33' 6" for the FM).  With the production of the Alco S-2 and S-4, the FM units are really the last "iconic" widely-used transition-era switcher that we don't have in N.  Don't know how S-2 sales have been, but I suspect there's a similar-sized market for the FM, although you'd probably need 3 shells: one for the H/10, one for the original Lowry version of the H12, and one for the "simplified" H12.  So that's a bit of a tooling complication.

John C.

Good points John. Personally, I would be happy with one body style and have no idea what the incremental cost would be to produce different versions (not that I am holding my breath on this).
I recall looking into the truck center spacing in the past and thought that they were closers.  Maybe different versions? I don't have those resources in front of me. From what source did you get those numbers John?

Best wishes, Dave

[Missaberoad]

Truck Centers Edit: outer wheelbase see below for truck centers 

VO-1000                        - 30'-08"
H-10-44                       - 33'-06"
H-12-44 (early/mid)     - 33'-06"
H-12-44 (Late)            - 30'-06" (not confirmed based on 3' reduction in length being noted in many sources)


source: Wikipedia & http://www.thedieselshop.us

[AlbertSpor]

Ryan

Those wheelbase figures are 8 feet too long. According to the PRR.railfan.net website the  outer truck wheelbase numbers are close to what your website stated.
The VO-1000 and FMs should be 25'6" center of truck wheelbase, and 33'6" at the outer axles.
This would also put the other measurements at 22'6" and 30'6" as well, which would be more in line with our model dimensions

Albert Spor