VIA Rail

[nfitz]

But one thing that we have always had is a collective memory that only goes back far enough to complain about what is happening now. A lot of people don't remember how drawn-out the introduction of the LRCs and Rens were, nor how problematic they were for the first quarter of their service lives. Most people don't realize how much trouble VIA had to get the P42s into service.

LRC drawn out? Not compared to the Turbo! It took about 7 years to get reliable service (or any service, other than a few weeks here and there) - which then only lasted another 8 years.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

So as someone who seems knowledgeable and close to the issue, do you know what seems to be cause of the Venture's reliability woes?

Dan knows. Social media are full of so many red herrings...snow in the intakes, cover up the side panel on the locomotive, thank goodness we are past the broken windshields, but there are still reports of x% of the fleet out of service, the new trains are s***! The end of the world as we know it!!

The windshields were definitely an issue, and VIA has found an in-house workaround with Siemens assistance to install them differently.

This post compares the LRC/Venture implementations:

Comparing VIA's LRC and Venture Implementation

November 15, 1981 Alternate post title: When Life Gives You Lemons? There is much justified concern about the implementation of VIA Rail Can...

tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com

While I wait, and wait, for ATI information from VIA on Venture serviceability, I have been able to citizen-science my way into the past year of set availability, and the percentage is hovering at 80%:

VIA Venture Sets' Serviceability in 2025

For the last year, I've been doing some 'citizen science' to find out what VIA couldn't or wouldn't share - Siemens Venture serviceability d...

tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com

And while I wait for the end of Facebook suspension (!) I am doing more citizen-science over the next month to increase observations of Venture serviceability (I'd dropped from 60-80 observations per week to 20-30 which makes it easy to say a set isn't out there in use when it actually is). So this difficult winter notwithstanding, data is being gathered on an ongoing basis.

Not to mention the increased interest and whatever creative stopgaps VIA comes up with...F40's 'riding shotgun' and something no-one has reported on - the XSJ set is no longer 4 units each from Sets 7 and 25. It's now the four units from Set 25 and a full six-unit trainset (Set 22) at least over the last two days!

Who said VIA-watching is boring?

 

[Bordercollie]

So I'm terms of the LD fleet what are the odds that they are going to a different manufacturer requiring different parts and different maintenance facilities?

I feel like that alone makes Siemens the default winner of the LD fleet.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

LRC drawn out? Not compared to the Turbo! It took about 7 years to get reliable service (or any service, other than a few weeks here and there) - which then only lasted another 8 years.

So the Ventures are the best of the worst! They win the race to the bottom, the quest for mediocrity.

 

[Bordercollie]

So the Ventures are the best of the worst! They win the race to the bottom, the quest for mediocrity.

Considering that there are no other heavy rail passenger cars certified in North America currently in production, that was the fastest way to get a new fleet up and running.

Even for the LD fleet, having to spin up an assembly line for an unproven product is also risky.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

Considering that there are no other heavy rail passenger cars certified in North America currently in production, that was the fastest way to get a new fleet up and running.

Even for the LD fleet, having to spin up an assembly line for an unproven product is also risky.

My comment was intended as a coy comparison of North-American-built passenger rail products of the 1960s, 1980s and today. I come not to praise current foreign passenger rail production, nor to pine for resurgent North America builders today, because we all know those just do not co-exist. I have studied the implementation of the Ventures pretty extensively, and except for occasional dabble in wry humour (maybe rye would help more, actually) I consider the Venture fleet implementation while not anywhere near perfect, perfectly adequate. Furthermore, we're stuck with them. We know that, VIA knows that, the public is coming to learn that, and being sentimental about VIA's Legacy fleet living on just won't get us there, literally. Go Ventures!

 

[dowlingm]

Hopefully this will teach VIA not to simply "piggyback" off of whatever Amtrak procures for their own fleet.

VIA probably should have gotten their locomotives from Wabtec (former MotivePower). GO's locomotives appear to have fewer issues in the colder weather.

I'm not suggesting VIA should have gotten MP54AC's, but I'm sure Wabtec could have worked with them to develop something more suited to their needs and would have held up much better in the colder temperatures.

First of all, VIA tendered for trainsets - power and coaches together. Wabtec (or EMD with F125) would have had to partner with a coach builder. Bombardier could have put forward a diesel only ALP45 but they didn't have a ready to go coach model (and their ones for CTDOT were quite expensive I believe). On the power side, HSP46 was rated to 110 but I think the tender asked for 125.

On the other hand, VIA could have written their tender to produce an actual Brightline setup - forget the cab car, but add a plain coach and a second loco - rather than what was at the time an innovation. I wonder if the QSK95 goes on the DXS trainset lead locomotive, can the trainset switch to the rear one and operate satisfactorily for the rest of the trip without rescue?

 

[dowlingm]

So I'm terms of the LD fleet what are the odds that they are going to a different manufacturer requiring different parts and different maintenance facilities?

I feel like that alone makes Siemens the default winner of the LD fleet.

I believe that even if Siemens wins the LD fleet order, it will be with a Amtrak Midwest config (MU/COMM) rather than Corridor/CAT5 simply because Siemens like the other manufacturers will not want to deliver all of VIA's requested car types at once, and that means being able to interoperate with some parts of the legacy fleet until the remaining phases/car types are delivered.

 

[Bordercollie]

I believe that even if Siemens wins the LD fleet order, it will be with a Amtrak Midwest config (MU/COMM) rather than Corridor/CAT5 simply because Siemens like the other manufacturers will not want to deliver all of VIA's requested car types at once, and that means being able to interoperate with some parts of the legacy fleet until the remaining phases/car types are delivered.

Can you have both?

 

[reaperexpress]

Dan knows. Social media are full of so many red herrings...snow in the intakes, cover up the side panel on the locomotive, thank goodness we are past the broken windshields, but there are still reports of x% of the fleet out of service, the new trains are s***! The end of the world as we know it!!

The windshields were definitely an issue, and VIA has found an in-house workaround with Siemens assistance to install them differently.

This post compares the LRC/Venture implementations:

Comparing VIA's LRC and Venture Implementation

November 15, 1981 Alternate post title: When Life Gives You Lemons? There is much justified concern about the implementation of VIA Rail Can...

tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com

While I wait, and wait, for ATI information from VIA on Venture serviceability, I have been able to citizen-science my way into the past year of set availability, and the percentage is hovering at 80%:

VIA Venture Sets' Serviceability in 2025

For the last year, I've been doing some 'citizen science' to find out what VIA couldn't or wouldn't share - Siemens Venture serviceability d...

tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com

And while I wait for the end of Facebook suspension (!) I am doing more citizen-science over the next month to increase observations of Venture serviceability (I'd dropped from 60-80 observations per week to 20-30 which makes it easy to say a set isn't out there in use when it actually is). So this difficult winter notwithstanding, data is being gathered on an ongoing basis.

Not to mention the increased interest and whatever creative stopgaps VIA comes up with...F40's 'riding shotgun' and something no-one has reported on - the XSJ set is no longer 4 units each from Sets 7 and 25. It's now the four units from Set 25 and a full six-unit trainset (Set 22) at least over the last two days!

Who said VIA-watching is boring?

Those XS-J sets are free from both the crossing restrictions and the F40's 95 mph limit, and they have a crazy good power-to-weight ratio so they must be by far the fastest trains on the network! Any way they could assemble some more?

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

Those XS-J sets are free from both the crossing restrictions and the F40's 95 mph limit, and they have a crazy good power-to-weight ratio so they must be by far the fastest trains on the network! Any way they could assemble some more?

The only thing is...they can't go faster than the scheduled run time. VIA seems to have been reluctant to assemble more than one sets, nor more than two sets of the XL configuration.

 

[smallspy]

First of all, VIA tendered for trainsets - power and coaches together. Wabtec (or EMD with F125) would have had to partner with a coach builder. Bombardier could have put forward a diesel only ALP45 but they didn't have a ready to go coach model (and their ones for CTDOT were quite expensive I believe). On the power side, HSP46 was rated to 110 but I think the tender asked for 125.

My understanding is that Bombardier's tender was for DEMUs, being based on models that they've built elsewhere in the world.

On the other hand, VIA could have written their tender to produce an actual Brightline setup - forget the cab car, but add a plain coach and a second loco - rather than what was at the time an innovation. I wonder if the QSK95 goes on the DXS trainset lead locomotive, can the trainset switch to the rear one and operate satisfactorily for the rest of the trip without rescue?

And where does the whole thing about lowering VIA's costs and becoming "self sustaining" come in? Running two locos when one will suffice seems like the height of waste.

Dan

 

[reaperexpress]

The only thing is...they can't go faster than the scheduled run time. VIA seems to have been reluctant to assemble more than one sets, nor more than two sets of the XL configuration.

It's not a question of going faster than the schedule, it's a question of keeping up with the schedule. Based on your OTP summaries, the basic 5-car sets have been struggling to do that already.
Adding 130 tonnes of dead weight and a 95 mph limit certainly won't help.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

Based on your OTP summaries, the basic 5-car sets have been struggling to do that already.
Adding 130 tonnes of dead weight and a 95 mph limit certainly won't help.

6413-Set14 OTP: Monday No 63 departed 18' late, arrived 56' late. Tuesday No 40 made up 5 minutes between Fallowfield and Ottawa, arrived 17' late.

 

[smallspy]

Adding 130 tonnes of dead weight and a 95 mph limit certainly won't help.

Considering the performance of the trainsets prior to their neutering by CN, there will be no difference in performance with the addition of an F40.

To the contrary, they will find it harder to maintain the schedules when the F40s are providing the motive power to the trainsets as compared to a Charger.

Dan