News   Dec 22, 2025
City Council December, 2025 Zoning Refusals: Towers Turned Back
 1K     0 
News   Dec 22, 2025
Aluminum vs Concrete: Weighing Long-Term Value in Balcony Design
 296     0 
News   Dec 22, 2025
4800 Yonge Pushes Above Grade at Sheppard
 752     0 

GO Transit Fleet Equipment and other

RS3488 said:
Honestly I feel like when GO gets EMUs they won’t be double decker.
Click to expand...
You will still need DD equipment as well single level to meet future needs like Europe.

Seen 4 set of 3 cars of DD making up at as well 3 sets of 5 cars that were pure EMU duel ends. Then seen locomotive at one end with a cab car and 9 DD. Then there was an DD train about 9 cars long with 5 single levels cars.

You get both single level and DD on all 9 systems I saw a few weeks ago and it depends on the lines they are running on as well speed.

Since DB is running GO now, they will most likely do what they do in Germany where they are using both types of cars and makeup of trains. Most likely will add and remove sets of cars along the route to meet the needs at each end. Why send a 12 car train to NF and London when you only need a 3 car train? Same can be said for KW, Barrie and X.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
what's your source on this I thought they we only part of the group that is doing the electrification?.
Click to expand...
There is no “electrification” contract. The contract is OnCorr and includes electrification, new grade separations, new track, electric locomotives, signalling, and taking over operations (including proposing service levels) for GO. It’s a whole package in one.
 
SaugeenJunction said:
There is no “electrification” contract. The contract is OnCorr and includes electrification, new grade separations, new track, electric locomotives, signalling, and taking over operations (including proposing service levels) for GO. It’s a whole package in one.
Click to expand...
TossYourJacket said:
DB is the operator of the trains as per the contract.

As an aside, the URL references the old name of GO RER lol.
Click to expand...
I get that but that's not what i was talking about drum implied that DB was in charge of Go which is not the case at all. Operating the trains is what bombardier/ Alstom do now i don't see how they are in charge of anything other than the crew and the maintenance of the train and has nothing to do with the day to day running.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
I get that but that's not what i was talking about drum implied that DB was in charge of Go which is not the case at all. Operating the trains is what bombardier/ Alstom do now i don't see how they are in charge of anything other than the crew and the maintenance of the train and has nothing to do with the day to day running.
Click to expand...
I think what was inferred was that DB (DB representing ONxpress) is in charge of (the) GO (Expansion), i.e. OnCorr. That much is true. I'm not familiar with the contract conditions, but I assume the proponent will also - or at least eventually - take charge of train crew and maintenance operations.

Does anyone know how ONxpress will remove conflicts of interest between their operational part of the business and the construction/maintenance side? I recall Network Rail's (UK) public mandate was that they are not allowed to operate trains due to past catastrophic failures between operation (revenue generating entity) and construction/maintenance (revenue spending). What safeguards are in place to stop ONxpress on capitalizing financially while inducing unbeknown risk to public safety? I generally trust that this won't happen, and reputationally there is a lot on the line, but where is the line between risk and reward?
 
TopOfRail said:
What safeguards are in place to stop ONxpress on capitalizing financially while inducing unbeknown risk to public safety? I generally trust that this won't happen, and reputationally there is a lot on the line, but where is the line between risk and reward?
Click to expand...

I’m confident that the contract will have lots of legalese to address this. And they are subject to both federal and provincial regulation and inspection. As for construction, anything they do will have the usual due diligence, stamped drawings, etc..

There is always the temptation for a for-profit business to cut corners, but I would be more concerned about life cycle maintenance than the original construction effort. The proponent will not only build but then have to operate for a lengthy period. They have a self interest in making sure that anything they design and construct is operable and maintenance free. The question will be, how well is it maintained and what shape is the plant in after the contract ends and the infrastructure is handed back to the province for the next contract term. By then, the fleet will likely need replacement anyways - but bridges and structures and track need to be kept in good repair for the decades to come.

Also, note that DB is only one member of the consortium. The engineering and construction partners are local.

- Paul
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
I get that but that's not what i was talking about drum implied that DB was in charge of Go which is not the case at all. Operating the trains is what bombardier/ Alstom do now i don't see how they are in charge of anything other than the crew and the maintenance of the train and has nothing to do with the day to day running.
Click to expand...
DB, along with its consortium team members, is literally designing the infrastructure based around the service levels it is proposing. While GO is not being taken over, the core network will essentially be managed, designed, built, and run at service levels set by DB (I’m sure GO has to okay them). GO will essentially be the branding for the DB managed core network.
 
cplchanb said:
any info on who bid and why they need to delay? perhaps one of the bidders asked for more time.
Click to expand...
Could be this. Here are some other ideas that are just ideas which could all be wrong: there have been rumblings that Wabtec doesn’t make the MPI passenger locomotives GO has anymore and Siemens is extremely backordered with its Charger orders at its Sacramento plant. According to posts earlier in this thread, MX has delivery dates baked into the tender. That leaves EMD with the F125, and one bidder on a contract is never good.

Alstom/Bombardier doesn’t really make pure North American commuter diesels, but Bombardier did bid on VIA’s new fleet which means maybe they have a shelved design up their sleeve that can be modified for commuter service. Regardless, it’s a slip of less than a month so probably not anything to be worried about.
 
SaugeenJunction said:
Could be this. Here are some other ideas that are just ideas which could all be wrong: there have been rumblings that Wabtec doesn’t make the MPI passenger locomotives GO has anymore and Siemens is extremely backordered with its Charger orders at its Sacramento plant. According to posts earlier in this thread, MX has delivery dates baked into the tender. That leaves EMD with the F125, and one bidder on a contract is never good.

Alstom/Bombardier doesn’t really make pure North American commuter diesels, but Bombardier did bid on VIA’s new fleet which means maybe they have a shelved design up their sleeve that can be modified for commuter service. Regardless, it’s a slip of less than a month so probably not anything to be worried about.
Click to expand...
That's odd for the wabtec rumor considering they spent all that time developing the mp54 just to shelve the entire line ...
 
GO Transit Cab Cars 205 and 206 being refurbished at the ONR Shops.

206 appears to be almost complete at this point.

Credit to Nico Anello for taking both photos.
IMG_4773.jpg
IMG_4779.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top