News   May 02, 2024
 738     1 
News   May 02, 2024
 213     0 
News   May 02, 2024
 287     0 

New GO Train Control+Signalling (PTC, CBTC, ETC) -- Safety & Subway-Like Frequency

And on the railroad everyone has to take responsibility for there own safety first and foremost. It's a very unforgiving industry when it comes to mistakes.
This raises a point I've often wondered about: Unless crossing a provincial border, a railroad can be incorporated *provincially* in Canada (I think there are two, one being the Guelph Junction, the other a Winnipeg Water one IIRC). Would that then put the workers under a much stricter provincial Occupational Safety Act?

Best I reference this:
Federal regulations apply only to certain railways which meet one or more of the following conditions:
  • They operate in more than one province.[4]
  • They operate from the United States and cross the Canada – United States border.[5]
  • They are owned, controlled, leased or operated by a person who operates a railway that is within the jurisdiction of parliament.[5]
  • They are declared by the Canadian Parliament to be a work for the general advantage of Canada or of two or more provinces.
Curiously absent from that list is either GO, Metrolinx or UPX! (Source is pre-UPX: Retrieved 24 April 2011.) I'll Google deeper on that, various acts may have changed that federally or provincially since. As worded, that list presents further curious questions.

Just got a clue here:
Shortline Railways Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c. 2
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/95s02

So under which Act are GO and UPX regulated? And what are the implications for working on Federally regulated lines?
 
Last edited:
None of those entities are directly analogous to CDPQ.

One of the common misconceptions about La Caisse is that it is a "pension plan"....if it were it would like OMERS and OTPP but it is not. It is a depository for other pension funds (and some non pension funds investors)...it is a collective, if you will, bringing together (I think) 19 different funds under one umbrella to give them power/strength/size that they otherwise could not have on their own. So, they act like a pension plan but they are really a fund of pension plans.

One area where I would think Nfitz is absolutely correct (and that would make you absolutely incorrect, I guess) is that CDPQ is a crown corp. Not sure why that is so hard to understand....what makes a company a crown corp is an act in parliament (or in this case the National Assembly of Quebec) creating the company and describing its rules of engagement and mandate......the Caisse has one (http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/C_2/C2_A.html )....OMERS and OTPP do not.

Excellent. So it wasn't a Quebec Gov't announcement today then, was it? No more than a VIA one being the Federal Government.
 
Excellent. So it wasn't a Quebec Gov't announcement today then, was it? No more than a VIA one being the Federal Government.
Not directly, this project will be handled by the entity created in June of 2015 called CDPQ Infra. Last June when it was created/unveiled I described it as, essentially, the Quebec government sole-sourcing future Public Private Partnerships with the Caisse.

They have a predefined model where the government identifies the project - cdp propose the solution (ie we'll put in X and the public purse is responsible for Y) - the government approves it and cdpqinfra designs/builds/operates it.

So the announcement may have come out of the Caisse H.O. but the model shows clearly to get that far the government had to identify the project and approve it. Her is the model in graphic form from the CDPQ Infra web page

upload_2016-4-22_22-39-39.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-4-22_22-39-39.png
    upload_2016-4-22_22-39-39.png
    163.4 KB · Views: 866
Do some reading yourself. I lived in Quebec for a long time. I know exactly what the caisse is.

Metrolinx is a government agency.
And the Caisse is a crown corporation.
Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan: Home is the Ontario equivalent, not Metrolinx.
The Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan is independent. The caisse isn't.

So is OMERS a "provincial crown corporation" too?
I'm not overly familiar with OMERS to tell the truth - I don't know how it's governed.

All I'm saying is that various versions of this project have been announced many times over the last half-century, and I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not sure your focusing on that, than freaking out about the ownership structure of the entity that is partnering with the province.
 
Last edited:
Metrolinx said:
Technical Standards: GO currently voluntarily complies with US FRA and American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) standards which are optimized for mixed operation with freight.
I've been digging on where the Federal Acts leave off (Railway, Transportation and others) and provincial regs take over for jurisdiction, and so far, unable to find *definitive* demarcation. The Short Line definition (provincial) precludes Metrolinx due to being a passenger operation, and indicates the jurisdiction being under the various transportation acts. Unlike US jurisdiction, spelled out much more clearly...*apparently* "GO currently voluntarily complies with..." seems to cover a number of situations of shared track complying with Federal Regs, whether detailed in the Federal Railway Act or others besides.

If TC doesn't change tack, and soon, it appears from many points, that Metrolinx is determined to make changes, Feds willing or not. That may require almost complete separation of freight from passenger, with CBTC being one of the many aspects (structural requirements being another, couplers, etc) affected. The form of CBTC can be far more optimized to efficient passenger operation without freight sharing the same track.

Not mentioned in most of the written descriptions, domestically anyway, is the *variable* minimum distance kept under CBTC that changes with speed. Obviously, the faster vehicles are travelling, the greater the distance that must be kept between trains to stop in time. With freight separated, even if temporally, then the parameters and type of CBTC can be optimized for passenger trains, and the newest electro-pneumatic brakes can also be directly controlled from CBTC, making stopping time shorter, and by central control, determining almost every aspect of the train's operation. including optimizing speed to eliminate the need for complete stops, and to better time meeting passing sidings.

Transport Canada had best adapt to change, and do it quickly, or the provinces will be forced to no longer "voluntarily" comply with anything they're not legally bound to do.
 
Last edited:
what makes a company a crown corp is an act in parliament (or in this case the National Assembly of Quebec) creating the company and describing its rules of engagement and mandate......the Caisse has one (http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/C_2/C2_A.html )....OMERS and OTPP do not.
Teachers' Pension Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.1
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90t01

Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 2
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06o02

The Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan is independent. The caisse isn't.
Bill 38 Assented to 12 June 2015
AN ACT TO ALLOW THE CAISSE DE DÉPÔT ET PLACEMENT DU QUÉBEC TO CARRY OUT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

THE PARLIAMENT OF QUÉBEC ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
Section 4 of the Act respecting the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec
(chapter C‑2) is amended by adding the following sentence at the end of the
third paragraph: “It acts with full independence in accordance with this Act.”
[...]
http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=5&file=2015C17A.PDF

Thus statements by Sabia:
...“How do you guarantee that independence when the government will constantly be demanding new infrastructure?” Parti Québécois opposition critic Nicolas Marceau said. In shifting investment risk for such big projects from taxpayers to retirees, the government is putting that independence in peril, he said.

Mr. Sabia insisted the Caisse is currently independent from the government and will continue to be so. He said the traditional belief in Quebec that government should control such infrastructure is changing.

“People in Quebec are realizing that there are limits to what governments are going to be able to afford,” Mr. Sabia said. “These are projects that I suppose might not get done if it weren’t for something like this.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...-link-under-deal-with-quebec/article22424171/

More background here, including the nature of that "independence": http://cdpq.com/en/news-media/press...nt-quebec-government-carry-out-infrastructure
 
Last edited:
well, there you go...learn something new every day....will have to give those a read.

From a Caisse news release prior to the National Assembly's Bill 38 amendments:
The launch of this business model depends upon the adoption of legislative amendments allowing for, among other things, the creation of a new infrastructure subsidiary for la Caisse. The Québec government has committed to introduce these amendments to the National Assembly as soon as possible.
http://cdpq.com/en/news-media/press...nt-quebec-government-carry-out-infrastructure

The relevance of all of this to this particular thread is Sabia's proudly stating: (gist)(I don't have the link handy, will find if challenged): "We can export this model to others", 'Others' meaning other nations, but it also applies to other provinces, and especially Ontario as that pertains to this thread.

Some posters are deriding this announcement. I'm also a skeptic, but this *is not Government*...it is *Enterprise* that will work in partnership with both the Feds and the Province of PQ. Notably missing in comment on this is Desjardins-Siciliano, and Urban-Sky. Hopefully that's because they're finally seeing the green shoots of Spring, and Desjardins is in his own garden of joy in seeing the first signs of enterprise taking root.

I've been digging on CBTC quietly, come across some fascinating papers and reports, but suffice to say for now that Bombardier is at the forefront of the technology. They screwed up an installation in the London Underground, got unceremoniously dumped but have been very successful in many other places. More on that later...

Edit to Add:
January 13, 2015 — 5:20 PM EST
The Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec will seek to replicate the expansion of its Ivanhoe Cambridge property unit by developing and operating infrastructure assets globally over the next decade.

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard today appointed the Caisse to plan, finance and manage new infrastructure projects in Canada’s second-most populous province in a bid to ease the financial burden on the government. Quebec has identified two key projects, including a transit link from downtown Montreal to the city’s main airport, which the Caisse will study before deciding whether to take on responsibilities such as project planning and financing.

“It’s a start in the home market, to demonstrate some capability to the global market,” Caisse Chief Executive Officer Michael Sabia said in a telephone interview from Montreal. “On the basis of that, we will take the model to the global market, where we are convinced there is going to be substantial demand to work with a large, financially stable global investor who has this kind of expertise.”

Under the Caisse’s ownership, Ivanhoe Cambridge has expanded from about C$1 billion ($837 million) of shopping center assets in 1990 to more than C$40 billion of office buildings, malls and residential properties across the globe. That’s the model for CDPQ Infra, as the new Caisse infrastructure unit will be called.

Already an owner of about C$10 billion of assets such as ports, power transmission in countries including Australia, France and the U.S., the Caisse is convinced operating new infrastructure will allow it to bolster returns, Sabia said. Infrastructure returned about 11 percent for the Caisse in 2013, taking its four-year return to 17 percent.

In the U.K., the Caisse is a shareholder in Heathrow Express, the rail service that links London’s Paddington Station to Heathrow Airport.

As of June 30, the Caisse had net assets of C$214.7 billion. It ranks as Canada’s second-largest pension fund manager.[...]
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...plans-to-export-quebec-s-infrastructure-model
 
Last edited:
The question arises as to whether MTA are going to keep their present Bombardier MR-90s, or re-equip them with the latest moving block control which will be absolutely essential for running 3 minute headways? [...]
If I may ask you for a favour, please don't translate acronyms. Refering to AMT as MTA is as needlessly confusing as francophone transit enthusiasts referring to the TTC as CTT. Being provincial (or municipal) entities, the relevant languages are French for Montreal-based AMT and English for Toronto-based TTC and to the best of my knowledge, both entities have only uni-lingual names. Thank you! :)

PS: There is of course no problem with translating the full name, e.g. "in Montreal, the Metropolitan Transport Agency (AMT) has announced plans..."
 
If I may ask you for a favour, please don't translate acronyms.
lol...your very sentence is 'lysdexic'. You mean 'transpose'. It's a case of TMI. With all the computer set-up I've been doing the last few weeks, you're lucky I didn't state 'AMD'.

MTA is, of course, New York...and I get flashbacks whenever I'm running under catenary.
Notably missing in comment on this is Desjardins-Siciliano, and Urban-Sky.
You've made my point! So do we have to discuss acronyms in lieu of the embargo on information that appears to be happening? I just pray you've got something really good on the burner.
 
Last edited:
Help!!! It is the feared Acronymzilla!!!

Thats why I occasionally repeat "Positive Train Control" whenever I say PTC, especially if the last disambiguation was on a previous page.

It keeps the Acronymzilla away. Otherwise if MIA, it TKO's the NIMBYs next to a CBTC ROW causing frequent 911's on code 964...
 
Last edited:
Help!!! It is the feared Acronymzilla!!!
You know, the only way I can get CBTC right (it seems like Cdn Broadcasting Television Corp) is to say "Communications Based" and then the "Train Control" comes easily. Well...lol...most days.

I often wonder if "Acronym" isn't derived from 'Acrid'?

Something not much discussed in what I'm reading on CBTC is that it is a natural progression from having such intense and wide-ranging communications systems now, for a very reasonable cost, that to *not* have CBTC would be a glaring omission of logic. It renders costs far lower, it's almost instantaneous in action, allows for complete train control is need be (unmanned in some instances, which is what the Caisse system renders, albeit staff for security on trains) and it offers much more efficient use of the system and vehicles. Braking will be far more gradual and timed...just a litany of advantages.

Still digging on this, as there are competing systems available. Getting back to serendipity with the VIA HFR proposal, the AMT inception really should be complementary with VIA's plans for Montreal.

Btw: Is it just my internet connection, or is the Urban Toronto server acting intermittently recently?
Edit to Add: RE: Internet problems, Rogers *yet again* are having system-wide outages, that might be DNS problems, as some sites load OK, others, like the Globe and Mail and Urban Toronto are very problematic today. For those computer savvy, you might want to switch to 'Open DNS' (Google for it) to get around Rogers' enduring problem with theirs.
 
Last edited:
This is not quite on topic, but relevant indirectly as per CBTC on the Deux Montagnes line in Montreal if the Caisse plan of "fully automated" is implemented. I'd mentioned the Bombardier MR-90s in an earlier post, and whether they'd be cascaded to another line or sold. It might be neither, albiet there's some talk of NJTransit looking them over:
More train cars for Deux-Montagnes line
Posted on 3/4/2016 3:40 AM by Sean McKeogh

The most crowded AMT train line will be getting more trains...eventually.

The Deux-Montagnes line will get more but according to the Montreal Gazette they won't be on the tracks for at least two and a half years. They won't even be new, as the AMT will instead move the older 3000-series double-decker trains to the Deux Montagnes line, and retire the aging MR-90 cars.

A call for tenders has been issued and bids are expected later this month. Should everything go according to plan, the trains will be delivered by fall 2018.
http://www.cjad.com/cjad-news-community/2016/03/04/more-train-cars-for-deux-montagnes-line

La Caisse' announcement on going "fully automatic light rail" is opportune in a number of ways. I had no idea the MR-90s were showing that much age. I know they had a few technical issues earlier (inverters, and some mechanical issues) but I suspect that can be bought and refurbished.
 
This raises a point I've often wondered about: Unless crossing a provincial border, a railroad can be incorporated *provincially* in Canada (I think there are two, one being the Guelph Junction, the other a Winnipeg Water one IIRC). Would that then put the workers under a much stricter provincial Occupational Safety Act?

Best I reference this:

Curiously absent from that list is either GO, Metrolinx or UPX! (Source is pre-UPX: Retrieved 24 April 2011.) I'll Google deeper on that, various acts may have changed that federally or provincially since. As worded, that list presents further curious questions.

Just got a clue here:
Shortline Railways Act, 1995, S.O. 1995, c. 2
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/95s02

So under which Act are GO and UPX regulated? And what are the implications for working on Federally regulated lines?

Incorporation is not the same thing as regulation.

There are a number of provincially incorporated railways in Canada - ONR for instance is one, as was BCR before its purchase - but because they are connected to the North American railway grid, they are required to follow the same federal regulations.

There are a very small handful of railways that don't require federal regulation, and those are primarily the ore railways of north-eastern Quebec.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 

Back
Top