VIA Rail

[micheal_can]

^The time required to dictate and confirm a single "pass-stop" instruction by radio is a matter of a minute or more, not a few seconds. Far more difficult when done by paper and pen rather than by the computer system.

Add up all the time needed to issue pass-stops to every train out there, for every control point they must pass, over a limited number of radio channels....

Plus, trains can only pass red signals at restricted speed... so they will at best creep along.

The safest course of action is to bring every train to a stop and wait. Just getting trains to the next station platform was a ton of challenge.

- Paul

Sorry,what I meant was after they all got to the nearest station, trains are given clearance to the next station and under a slow order. They definitely wouldn't be moving at their normal speed. We saw about 2 decades ago about how dead signals due to a massive power outage can cripple the system. Until we transition to electric trains, there should be a way to keep things moving, albeit, not as fast.

 

[Urban Sky]

Sorry,what I meant was after they all got to the nearest station, trains are given clearance to the next station and under a slow order. They definitely wouldn't be moving at their normal speed. We saw about 2 decades ago about how dead signals due to a massive power outage can cripple the system. Until we transition to electric trains, there should be a way to keep things moving, albeit, not as fast.

My (admitedly limited) understanding is that dispatchers were unable to see where the trains are and to set any signals (which were all red as a fail safe). It would be irresponsible to operate under such unsafe circumstances beyond what is absolutely necessary to allow passengers on board to safely evacuate their trains…

 

[Admiral Beez]

Sorry,what I meant was after they all got to the nearest station, trains are given clearance to the next station and under a slow order.

My train last night, #67 from Montreal to Toronto arrived without much delay at 6:55pm, minus a stop of perhaps 10 mins to let a westbound GoTrain to pass around 6pm. Why did my train get through?

 

[crs1026]

My (admitedly limited) understanding is that dispatchers were unable to see where the trains are and to set any signals (which were all red as a fail safe). It would be irresponsible to operate under such unsafe circumstances beyond what is necessary to allow passengers on board to safely evacuate their trains…

For a single train to proceed from Burlington GO station to John Street, there would be 13 control points encountered and therefore 13 pass-stop instructions to be transacted. Each one taking a minute or more of the RTC's time. Never mind the mental effort to keep straight where the trains all were.... and deal with differing routes. I can't imagine the effort just to manage the flow of trains to and from Willowbrook and the TMC using local control.

My train last night, #67 from Montreal to Toronto arrived without much delay at 6:55pm, minus a stop of perhaps 10 mins to let a westbound GoTrain to pass around 6pm. Why did my train get through?

The telecom problem was cleared by about 4:30. There were no logistical or technical issues for VIA trains approaching Toronto - once the signal control was reestablished, the trains could proceed without problem.

The issue for GO was more complicated - once service came to a halt, trains were often out of position for their runs later in the day, so these later runs had to be cancelled or rescheduled based on whatever equipment was on hand. And many on-duty GO crews on those stopped trains reached their limits of hours of work before they could bring their trainsets to the starting point for those later trains. For GO, the problem was partly "rescuing" the crews, and the trains themselves - to say nothing of the passengers.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

Sorry,what I meant was after they all got to the nearest station, trains are given clearance to the next station and under a slow order. They definitely wouldn't be moving at their normal speed. We saw about 2 decades ago about how dead signals due to a massive power outage can cripple the system. Until we transition to electric trains, there should be a way to keep things moving, albeit, not as fast.

There are rules around these kinds of things.

If the signal is an intermediate - any signal not protecting an interlocking - than the crew is allowed to pass by it provided they meet certain conditions.

But once they get to an interlocking, they're stuck there. The clearances required to pass those are laborious, as the others have indicated above. And they need to deal with the 50 or so GO trains on the go.

Oh, and because of the way the failure occurred, it wasn't GO's own dispatchers who had to deal with the issues in the cleanup, but CN's dispatchers. Who may not know the territories, trains and routing nearly as well. And still have to deal with their own territories on top of this other traffic that's been dumped on them.

Electric trains won't fix any of this.

Dan

 

[micheal_can]

There are rules around these kinds of things.

If the signal is an intermediate - any signal not protecting an interlocking - than the crew is allowed to pass by it provided they meet certain conditions.

But once they get to an interlocking, they're stuck there. The clearances required to pass those are laborious, as the others have indicated above. And they need to deal with the 50 or so GO trains on the go.

Oh, and because of the way the failure occurred, it wasn't GO's own dispatchers who had to deal with the issues in the cleanup, but CN's dispatchers. Who may not know the territories, trains and routing nearly as well. And still have to deal with their own territories on top of this other traffic that's been dumped on them.

I understand that it would not be easy, however, I don't fully understand just how hard it would be. For all we know, they did do that as best they could till things got restored, but first they had to know where all trains were, hence the stop at next station and hold order.

Electric trains won't fix any of this.

Dan

I more meant that if it was a power to the system issue electric trains would be moot.

 

[Urban Sky]

I understand that it would not be easy, however, I don't fully understand just how hard it would be.

Well, I guess it all depends on whether you prefer to end your shift a) driving home to your family, b) answering awkward questions to which you know only answers which might cost you your job and licenses or c) getting driven to the closest hospital or morgue…

 

[crs1026]

I understand that it would not be easy, however, I don't fully understand just how hard it would be. For all we know, they did do that as best they could till things got restored, but first they had to know where all trains were, hence the stop at next station and hold order.

Well, here's one fictitious example. Suppose you are the RTC, with no console, trying to route UP trains in and out of the Pearson Spur at Wice. You give the UP departing Pearson a clearance to pass the signal at Wice, instructing it to operate power switches manually to line their route. Now you have a GO train from Malton wanting to follow. Did the UP train leave the switches in a position that will allow the GO to proceed? You don't know. Has the UP cleared the plant, to make it safe to clear the GO train through, or is it still entering or exiting? You don't know. Sure, you can verify all this by radio, and you can warn the GO to be sure the UP has departed and to check the switch positions before it proceeds.... but to do all the procedural steps and dictate and confirm correct receipt of all your instructions to the required degree of safety by the rulebook takes time and attention. Both trains will then need another pass-stop at Humberview, and another at Nickle....and they will have to stop and operate switches by hand, which slows everything down....
Meanwhile you have the previous UP needing a pass stop further down the line, and another GO departing Parkdale, and a Barrie GO train needing pass stops at Parkdale...... and the next Pearson bound UP leaving Union.....oh, and you had given a track occupancy permit to a foreman, but without the console you can't be sure if they are still occupying the track..... it melts down very quickly.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

Well, here's one fictitious example. Suppose you are the RTC, with no console, trying to route UP trains in and out of the Pearson Spur at Wice. You give the UP departing Pearson a clearance to pass the signal at Wice, instructing it to operate power switches manually to line their route. Now you have a GO train from Malton wanting to follow. Did the UP train leave the switches in a position that will allow the GO to proceed? You don't know. Has the UP cleared the plant, or is it still entering or exiting? You don't know. Sure, you can verify all this by radio, and you can warn the GO to be sure the UP has departed and to check the switch positions before it proceeds.... but to do all the procedural steps and dictate and confirm correct receipt of all your instructions to the required degree of safety by the rulebook takes time and attention. Both trains will then need another pass-stop at Humberview, and another at Nickle....
Meanwhile you have the previous UP needing a pass stop further down the line, and another GO departing Parkdale, and a Barrie GO train needing pass stops at Parkdale...... and the next Pearson bound UP leaving Union.....oh, and you had given a track occupancy permit to a foreman, but without the console you can't be sure if they are still occupying the track..... it melts down very quickly.

- Paul

Sounds like it was better for all trains to just hold at the stations waiting for the problem to clear. My worry is what would happen if this persisted. I could see a cyber criminal seeing this and now looking for a way to make it happen, but for much longer. My hope is the higher ups take this as a learning opportunity and come up with a method for full manual operation if needed. It could mean GO operates 2 trains at once, hooked to each other.

 

[Islington Express Bus]

Soon with electrification, this will happen during every blackout.

 

[rbt]

Soon with electrification, this will happen during every blackout.

Probably, but perhaps not. A localized blackout which impacts a single supply station may be compensated by the others if they're close enough together.

Also, Eglinton LRT has a ~300MWh battery backup which can provide power for hours during a power failure. I have no idea what the GO electrification contract looks like, but some blackout service provision is probably in the contract as they've clearly shown they understand that type of problem exists and paid to reduce that risk.


Since this is a VIA thread, it would be interesting to see how Metrolinx's electrification setup for non-standard service impacts VIA.

 

[Urban Sky]

Sounds like it was better for all trains to just hold at the stations waiting for the problem to clear. My worry is what would happen if this persisted. I could see a cyber criminal seeing this and now looking for a way to make it happen, but for much longer. My hope is the higher ups take this as a learning opportunity and come up with a method for full manual operation if needed. It could mean GO operates 2 trains at once, hooked to each other.

I’m not aware of any rail transportation system which is designed for a availability of 100%, as the cost of preventing any known failure type would be astronomical.

Also, Eglinton LRT has a ~300MWh battery backup which can provide power for hours during a power failure. I have no idea what the GO electrification contract looks like, but some blackout service provision is probably in the contract as they've clearly shown they understand that type of problem exists and paid to reduce that risk.

Thank you, I didn’t know that! I recall that the Montréal Métro had outages during major power outages, so I assume this is not the case here (and again: the cost of ensuring an Uninterrupted Power Supply would be astronomical…

Since this is a VIA thread, it would be interesting to see how Metrolinx's electrification setup for non-standard service impacts VIA.

Until VIA operates over enough fully-electrified corridors to justify the acquisition of fully electric trainsets, a power loss should not stop them from simply switching to diesel power (provided that the signalling system is protected through UPS systems, of course)…

 

[lenaitch]

At the end of the day, tax dollars are finite, even for a government that hides behind deficit spending. It's clear that the Northlander has attracted some degree of political support from folks like Michael. Rightly or wrongly, this is how the North has asked QP to spend a fixed envelope on their behalf. The choice may puzzle some of us, and I don't accept his specific arguments, but one has to let the North be itself. Just so long as it's clear that the North has chosen this train over more doctors and nurses and teachers for example that could have been bought with the same investment. Eventually Ontario will say no to some other Northern need because we said yes to the Northlander. (Maybe that is the train of thought that one might better use to kill the train... compare the train to cost benefit of an expanded hospital in say North Bay?)

I'm not sure I agree with your equivalencies. Physician shortages in the north (or many rural areas for that matter - the number of ED closures this year in western Ontario has been significant) are not for lack of money; doctors are not government employees. Is government spending in a given part of the province to be considered as a fixed pot, doled out by the grace and favour of Queen's Park? I doubt the people who were advocating for a return of rail service were under the impression that it was an either-or, zero-sum equation. Does one new doctor mean two or three fewer teachers?

'Sorry, no bus service to Owen Sound - we gave the hospital in Teeswater more money. You people should know better.'

My hope is the higher ups take this as a learning opportunity and come up with a method for full manual operation if needed. It could mean GO operates 2 trains at once, hooked to each other.

I can't imagine how any type of manual procedures could operate the density of traffic involved in a safe manner. Perhaps if there is a ticket agent at a station they can go back to hooping up instructions to crews. Consider also that a lot of GO traffic shares space with VIA and freight operations. Lots of players.

 

[micheal_can]

I can't imagine how any type of manual procedures could operate the density of traffic involved in a safe manner. Perhaps if there is a ticket agent at a station they can go back to hooping up instructions to crews. Consider also that a lot of GO traffic shares space with VIA and freight operations. Lots of players.

Lets imagine every CN track within 100km of Union station was affected for a week.
"if I were in charge..."
I would double up the GO trains. So, that 12 car train is now 24. Then, cut the service in half on the routes.You can move the same amount of people.
I would do the same with Via.
I would cut the speed in half or lower. They would all stop at each station and light and before moving, get the clearance to go. It would be much slower, but it would still move.
For freight, Washago would be where freight is handed off to head north/south, not Mac yard. I would then reach out to ONR and just like a few years ago, I would reroute all oversiding trains through Northern ON/QC. They did it before, and they likely could do it again. All freight movements would be done outside of the GO service to prevent the meeting of freight and passenger trains.

All of those things are possible, but would be very resource taxing. It would be tough going, but it would still be moving.

 

[Urban Sky]

Lets imagine every CN track within 100km of Union station was affected for a week.
"if I were in charge..."
I would double up the GO trains. So, that 12 car train is now 24. Then, cut the service in half on the routes.You can move the same amount of people.
I would do the same with Via.
I would cut the speed in half or lower. They would all stop at each station and light and before moving, get the clearance to go. It would be much slower, but it would still move.
For freight, Washago would be where freight is handed off to head north/south, not Mac yard. I would then reach out to ONR and just like a few years ago, I would reroute all oversiding trains through Northern ON/QC. They did it before, and they likely could do it again. All freight movements would be done outside of the GO service to prevent the meeting of freight and passenger trains.

All of those things are possible, but would be very resource taxing. It would be tough going, but it would still be moving.

Micheal, I really appreciate your genuine efforts to provide a solution for a (hopefully: hypothetical) major service disruption, but I can almost guarantee you that you will never come up with any workable solution given that you lack (just like 95% of the commenters here - and that‘s of course totally fine, since this is not your day job!) the operational exposure to a relevant railway network to understand the implications of any of the measures you propose here (both, in isolation and in conjunction with each other)…