VIA Rail

[crs1026]

NRE is more of a dirty word in some places than others. There's nothing wrong with Project Engineering, which is just a sensible modification of something that has been amortised over a past life and can be life extended to meet new and forecast needs. A great deal of the engineering needed to refocus VIA's activities, or move to HFR, falls in this category.

However if you are building Littoral warships and before they are commissioned you already need to modify them because their mission has been rewritten, then yes NRE is a bad thing.

A rail example would be having built infrastructure to accommodate a train or service, and now you have decided not to run that service and you decide to pull the signalling or crossovers out. There are a few of those around.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

I would think it is well understood what DND is. As for NRE, as an engineer, I was a little surprised that its use isn't common knowledge. It certainly is used by more than those in military or public procurement. It is also widely used in private industry.

You should know your audience and stick to abbreviations which are commonly used in this forum. I invite you and @kEiThZ to search the 1152 pages of comments in this thread to find any mentions of DND and NRE prior to this week…
(And yes, the search function absolutely sucks for three-letter acronyms)

 

[drum118]

Not everyone understands abbreviations and have come upon a number that I had no clue what they were. Even after searching, no idea what a few were.

The 22xx I saw at TMC yesterday is still there and I got a closer look at it today. It is 2208 and the only one in the yard at the far east-south area.

The foundation wall for the new TMC complex for the new trainsets is poured at the far west-south end with forming moving east

 

[kEiThZ]

NRE is more of a dirty word in some places than others. There's nothing wrong with Project Engineering, which is just a sensible modification of something that has been amortised over a past life and can be life extended to meet new and forecast needs. A great deal of the engineering needed to refocus VIA's activities, or move to HFR, falls in this category.

However if you are building Littoral warships and before they are commissioned you already need to modify them because their mission has been rewritten, then yes NRE is a bad thing.

A rail example would be having built infrastructure to accommodate a train or service, and now you have decided not to run that service and you decide to pull the signalling or crossovers out. There are a few of those around.

- Paul

And it's becoming more of dirty word as time goes by. I'm just pointing out that in general, there's both preference and policy in place to avoid modification of anything, to the maximum extent possible. And the only times, it's generally permitted these days, is for reasons of improving safety, supporting the industrial base in Canada, etc. There's no way Cabinet approves an NRE project that basically amounts to a business venture that increasing VIA's operating costs and reducing reliability, all to the benefit of a foreign company that is not even building these coaches in Canada.

 

[kEiThZ]

You should know your audience and stick to abbreviations which are commonly used in this forum. I invite you and @kEiThZ to search the 1152 pages of comments in this thread to find any mentions of DND and NRE prior to this week…
(And yes, the search function absolutely sucks for three-letter acronyms)

Fair point that is a rail forum. But this is a good opportunity for you railnerds to learn a few things. The largest operational ministry in the federal government is DND. And its also the place where most of the federal government's project management practices come from (nobody else routinely manages multi-billion dollar projects in the GoC (Government of Canada for those who don't know)). I guarantee you any manager leading any sort of acquisition effort knows what NRE means. If they don't, you should probably get away from them as fast as possible.

 

[Urban Sky]

Fair point that is a rail forum. But this is a good opportunity for you railnerds to learn a few things. The largest operational ministry in the federal government is DND. And its also the place where most of the federal government's project management practices come from (nobody else routinely manages multi-billion dollar projects in the GoC (Government of Canada for those who don't know)). I guarantee you any manager leading any sort of acquisition effort knows what NRE means. If they don't, you should probably get away from them as fast as possible.

Agreed, but the problem is that it is much more difficult to confidently decipher what DND and NRE stand for if it‘s not really clear that we are talking about governmental departments or Engineering/Procurements. Context matters and I believe that the reactions to my inititial post show that accessibility suffers if we use acronyms out of the blue:

For what it‘s worth, I‘m currently revising technical documents which will only be read by people who are involved in the design and construction of Subways and I‘ve still been asked to avoid the use of most acronyms to keep the document accessible for a non-technical audience (and to avoid unnecessary confusion as with „Project Agreement“ and „Public Address“ being both plausible explanations for the „PA“ acronym)…

 

[lenaitch]

I kind of figured DND out, but it didn‘t make any sense to me since I had never come across NRE (not just as an acronym, but also as a concept). Maybe keep in mind in the future that this is an urbanist and not a military or public procurement forum and that not commonly-used and widely understood or intuitive abbreviations are best avoided…

It's in their DNA

 

[Frank_Lee]

And it's becoming more of dirty word as time goes by. I'm just pointing out that in general, there's both preference and policy in place to avoid modification of anything, to the maximum extent possible. And the only times, it's generally permitted these days, is for reasons of improving safety, supporting the industrial base in Canada, etc. There's no way Cabinet approves an NRE project that basically amounts to a business venture that increasing VIA's operating costs and reducing reliability, all to the benefit of a foreign company that is not even building these coaches in Canada.

It's becoming a bad word for good reason: look at the disaster the Cyclone helicopters have been.

 

[kEiThZ]

It's becoming a bad word for good reason: look at the disaster the Cyclone helicopters have been.

Not the only project. And not the only government department. Look at Phoenix pay system. Or the ArriveCan scandal. We're learning very quickly that we don't have the competence to manage customization well. And given the lack of experience outside DND, the rest of government is actually worse with this stuff.

 

[dowlingm]

Has anyone got any new info on White River? Groups.io Canadian Passenger Rail rumours are talking about (a) RDCs being switched out for F40 plus HEP and/or (b) no baggage car as of this month, possibly from May 14

 

[micheal_can]

A slow-moving overnight train that has much slack in the schedule may be much easier for CN to handle, and they might even appreciate VIA burning (wasting?) one of its rationed slots on this schedule as opposed to adding one fast train during daylight.

The impediment to an overnight train is the amount of overhead it demands - stations that need to stay open all night, yarding and turning, operations oversight, etc - for a very small number of passengers. Three full sleeping cars (which is about as much as VIA ever ran Montreal-Toronto) equates to one car of riders on that early morning day train, and only a partial load for a Dash-8 with an 06:00 departure.

Should HFR appear, the challenge will be even greater, since VIA will need the overnight lull to do track maintenance.

- Paul

I understand all of that. If a night train is to return, in whatever form it does, all of those factors will be looked at.

Has anyone got any new info on White River? Groups.io Canadian Passenger Rail rumours are talking about (a) RDCs being switched out for F40 plus HEP and/or (b) no baggage car as of this month, possibly from May 14

Funny you mention that. I heard the same thing about it may be gone sooner than later.

 

[Bordercollie]

Has anyone got any new info on White River? Groups.io Canadian Passenger Rail rumours are talking about (a) RDCs being switched out for F40 plus HEP and/or (b) no baggage car as of this month, possibly from May 14

A baggage car is definitely a requirement on this route.

 

[dowlingm]

A baggage car is definitely a requirement on this route.

I would agree having seen TVO’s documentary, but it seems that in April 2023 baggage was previously suspended when not enough RDC4s were serviceable.

Re: Tripping train185

groups.io

 

[micheal_can]

I would agree having seen TVO’s documentary, but it seems that in April 2023 baggage was previously suspended when not enough RDC4s were serviceable.

Re: Tripping train185

groups.io

Just a quick check, as I am planning a trip in the fall, those warnings are not listed on my planned trip. Interestingly, they are offering food on board. So, that tells me that by then there may be a change in equipment. Looking at the May long weekend, it seems the same, so not sure.

 

[Bordercollie]

Just a quick check, as I am planning a trip in the fall, those warnings are not listed on my planned trip. Interestingly, they are offering food on board. So, that tells me that by then there may be a change in equipment. Looking at the May long weekend, it seems the same, so not sure.

Maybe there is some heavy maintenance planned for the RDC's?