GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[drum118]

I have stated in the past that having both lines in the same corridor is asking for trouble, especial if a train derail. More so is the dangerous good explosion. Its the same thing running next to the 407 hwy or 407 BRT.

Since CN has running rights along the Lakeshore corridor, CN can move trains off their main corridor if there is a major derailment or an explosion of dangerous good, but don't think CP has the same right.

If ML going to have platforms on the south/west side of the Galt sub, going to have to rebuild most stations, since they are on the north side in the first place. It would eliminate the need for the flyunder at the Humber. Is it cheaper to rebuild the platforms/station than built the flyunder?? I don't think so.

To deal with the Milton yard issue, have a longer lead track west of the Milton Station to hold 3 trains with one at the station. GO would bring out 4 trains at a time to reduce the blocking of CP lines compare to bring one out at a time. You only need 2 windows to do the 8 moves or 3 with more trains.

As for the MacTier Sub, it can handle 2 tracks easy, since the ROW is wide enough as well there was 2 tracks at one time in many locations. By having 2 track, you have one for southbound and the other for northbound. Up around the Finch area, the line will be come 3 tracks to allow the new west/east route trains to use 2 of them for both direction, well keeping the east #1 rack for Western Canada route like they do today.

Milton line will out pace all the lines except Lakeshore west and therefore need the extra tracks to provide the service it will need overtime.

 

[smallspy]

My understanding was that CP was fully for it, but CN wasn't game for having CP along the York and Halton subs, which leaves a problem of how to get them between Halwest, the MacTier sub, their yard in Scarborough, and the Belleville sub.

CP has no great opinion on the matter, provided that they are able to at least maintain their current capacity. With only about 8 or 10 trains a day on the Galt Sub right now, that shouldn't be too hard....

As for CN they are a lot more petty, and while I haven't heard anything specific, it wouldn't surprise me if there were factions inside that are against the sharing of the ROW. But considering that the planning on the corridor is being made with the full knowledge and assistance of CN, they are certainly onside.

Since CN has running rights along the Lakeshore corridor, CN can move trains off their main corridor if there is a major derailment or an explosion of dangerous good, but don't think CP has the same right.

It has nothing to do with running rights - CP has detoured many times over CN, and vice versa. As long as the track connections exist, and the crews are available, detours can be easily managed.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I don't think so, I believe the proposal taken to them involved making separate tracks for CP. It seems to me that CN doesn't want to grant CP access to a corridor in which they believe they have a competitive advantage, and they are also risk-adverse to a potential scenario where CP has an accident that interferes with them. Additional trackage is going to solve it, not willingly anyway.

The only alternative is putting CP along the hydro corridor, and I think discussion here has concluded that would be difficult.

I have stated in the past that having both lines in the same corridor is asking for trouble, especial if a train derail. More so is the dangerous good explosion. Its the same thing running next to the 407 hwy or 407 BRT.

Since CN has running rights along the Lakeshore corridor, CN can move trains off their main corridor if there is a major derailment or an explosion of dangerous good, but don't think CP has the same right.

If ML going to have platforms on the south/west side of the Galt sub, going to have to rebuild most stations, since they are on the north side in the first place. It would eliminate the need for the flyunder at the Humber. Is it cheaper to rebuild the platforms/station than built the flyunder?? I don't think so.

To deal with the Milton yard issue, have a longer lead track west of the Milton Station to hold 3 trains with one at the station. GO would bring out 4 trains at a time to reduce the blocking of CP lines compare to bring one out at a time. You only need 2 windows to do the 8 moves or 3 with more trains.

As for the MacTier Sub, it can handle 2 tracks easy, since the ROW is wide enough as well there was 2 tracks at one time in many locations. By having 2 track, you have one for southbound and the other for northbound. Up around the Finch area, the line will be come 3 tracks to allow the new west/east route trains to use 2 of them for both direction, well keeping the east #1 rack for Western Canada route like they do today.

Milton line will out pace all the lines except Lakeshore west and therefore need the extra tracks to provide the service it will need overtime.

CP has no great opinion on the matter, provided that they are able to at least maintain their current capacity. With only about 8 or 10 trains a day on the Galt Sub right now, that shouldn't be too hard....

As for CN they are a lot more petty, and while I haven't heard anything specific, it wouldn't surprise me if there were factions inside that are against the sharing of the ROW. But considering that the planning on the corridor is being made with the full knowledge and assistance of CN, they are certainly onside.



It has nothing to do with running rights - CP has detoured many times over CN, and vice versa. As long as the track connections exist, and the crews are available, detours can be easily managed.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Sounds like CN is being ridiculous here. Maybe give them an incentive to share. But I like that I got all this info here, without this place I would not have found out.

 

[Allandale25]

CP has no great opinion on the matter, provided that they are able to at least maintain their current capacity. With only about 8 or 10 trains a day on the Galt Sub right now, that shouldn't be too hard....

As for CN they are a lot more petty, and while I haven't heard anything specific, it wouldn't surprise me if there were factions inside that are against the sharing of the ROW. But considering that the planning on the corridor is being made with the full knowledge and assistance of CN, they are certainly onside.



It has nothing to do with running rights - CP has detoured many times over CN, and vice versa. As long as the track connections exist, and the crews are available, detours can be easily managed.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Helpful perspective Dan.

 

[smallspy]

Sounds like CN is being ridiculous here. Maybe give them an incentive to share. But I like that I got all this info here, without this place I would not have found out.

They aren't being ridiculous, though, at least not at the top levels. They are fully working with the various companies planning the bypass, and have been for several years.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[steveintoronto]

They aren't being ridiculous, though, at least not at the top levels. They are fully working with the various companies planning the bypass, and have been for several years.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

You mentioned one of the company's name some months back in one of these forums, a known consultancy, but any idea who is funding this? Any dribs of info on this study still ongoing is comfort, btw, even if minimal.

 

[crs1026]

CN has good reason to sound oppositional just at the moment, although they are likely not truly laying down in opposition. Every aspect of this is currently a negotiation for them. If they point to their competitive advantage over CP as a barrier to sharing the ROW, it's possibly just a leadin to a request for compensation. Nothing wrong with making your case compelling. Everything may have a price.

As to work being done by whom, we know that GO already has lots of paper collected on this, some of it from the same engineering and construction firms that are active on other GO projects. I'm not an expert at searching tendering sites so I don't know if this work was open tendered or done confidentially. But as that Inspector once said, the usual suspects.

- Paul

 

[mdrejhon]

It has nothing to do with running rights - CP has detoured many times over CN, and vice versa. As long as the track connections exist, and the crews are available, detours can be easily managed.

Yes.

And money.

aka "Is it worth it?"!

As we all know, CN and CP will co-operate if there's a huge benefit for both of them simultaneously (and their shareholders!) -- like their track-sharing deal between BC and Alberta.

They'll nitpick over asymmetry (as a negotiation problem) like if it helps CN more than CP or vice-versa, but if they both agree on the extent of asymmetry, then that's becomes a simpler matter of compensation (in kind, funds, etc) to balance the competitive playing field.

Now if they disagree on nitpicky details and won't sign even the best agreements made available, then bigger carrots elsewhere (shiny track already laid, government incentives, regulation changes, lawyers, etc) ends up being the kick in the proverbial rear needed to get the boardrooms agreeing, paper being signed & getting things moving again.

 

[steveintoronto]

Yes.

And money.

aka "Is it worth it?"!

As we all know, CN and CP will co-operate if there's a huge benefit for both of them simultaneously (and their shareholders!) -- like their track-sharing deal between BC and Alberta.

They'll nitpick over asymmetry (as a negotiation problem) like if it helps CN more than CP or vice-versa, but if they both agree on the extent of asymmetry, then that's becomes a simpler matter of compensation (in kind, funds, etc) to balance the competitive playing field.

Now if they disagree on nitpicky details and won't sign even the best agreements made available, then bigger carrots elsewhere (shiny track already laid, government incentives, regulation changes, lawyers, etc) ends up being the kick in the proverbial rear needed to get the boardrooms agreeing, paper being signed & getting things moving again.

I was just re-reading the IBI reports on The Missing Link after Paul's post, and found some references to funding. May or may not post them later, there are hints of who is paying the tab (it's multiple and not clearly delineated as to who pays what/most), but your post makes re-posting this section of the report very apt:

http://www7.mississauga.ca/documents/agendas/committees/general/2015/09_09_15_GC_Agenda.pdf#page=42

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Someone pointed out this discussion should be happening in the bypass thread, so I'm moving over there to talk about why CN has reason to distrust CP.

 

[smallspy]

Yes.

And money.

aka "Is it worth it?"!

As we all know, CN and CP will co-operate if there's a huge benefit for both of them simultaneously (and their shareholders!) -- like their track-sharing deal between BC and Alberta.

They'll nitpick over asymmetry (as a negotiation problem) like if it helps CN more than CP or vice-versa, but if they both agree on the extent of asymmetry, then that's becomes a simpler matter of compensation (in kind, funds, etc) to balance the competitive playing field.

Now if they disagree on nitpicky details and won't sign even the best agreements made available, then bigger carrots elsewhere (shiny track already laid, government incentives, regulation changes, lawyers, etc) ends up being the kick in the proverbial rear needed to get the boardrooms agreeing, paper being signed & getting things moving again.

I think that you're confusing long-term service planning and route optimization with a more short-term, temporary solution to getting around a blockage.

If there is a derailment, than the one railway will approach the other railway and attempt to reroute some of their traffic around the blockage. This is what happened in June 2009 - CP put a train on the ground in Oshawa - and with CN's agreement, ran a handful of priority trains from West Toronto to Cobourg (and vice versa). This is the nature of the two railways - in spite of everything else, they will help each other when emergencies arise.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[drum118]

I think that you're confusing long-term service planning and route optimization with a more short-term, temporary solution to getting around a blockage.

If there is a derailment, than the one railway will approach the other railway and attempt to reroute some of their traffic around the blockage. This is what happened in June 2009 - CP put a train on the ground in Oshawa - and with CN's agreement, ran a handful of priority trains from West Toronto to Cobourg (and vice versa). This is the nature of the two railways - in spite of everything else, they will help each other when emergencies arise.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

That is true when lines are separated, but if the combine corridor is shut down, it opens a cans of worms for GO.

Depending on where the issue is, CP could send its trains along the its current corridor, CN would send trains along the Lakeshore/RH Line.

Depending on the length of time and the day of the week the mess takes place and fix unless CN & CP trains run a night, GO service will be effected one way or another with delays taking place.

A few trains is one thing, but 30 plus for each RR is another.

With the new CN complex to be built in Milton, CN will still run some train along the current routing to/from it from the Concord Yard, unless there is a wye built where CN will connect to the existing Halton Sub from the bypass corridor.

Should note if the issue is east of the Concord Yard, CN will have to use the Weston Sub as well the Lakeshore Line unless CP allow CN to use the North Toronto Sub for the eastern section.

 

[crs1026]

The limiting factor in detouring trains is availability of crews who know the territory. The host railway normally assigns 'pilots' to detour trains to guide the visiting crew.

Both railways have cut their people to the point where only a few (if any) pilots can be made available. So only a few detours per day are possible. Everything else sits, or takes very roundabout routes. For example, a serious blockage on either transcontinental line north of Lake Superior will see trains diverted on the home railway's rails through Chicago to Winnipeg.

The railways are pretty adept at just bulldozing a path through a derailment site, to get a temporary track open. In the kind of disaster scenario such as Lac Megantic where the fire, hazmat, investigation and cleanup activities are extensive....there's more at stake than getting trains moving quickly.

So, overall, the issue with putting all traffic on one route is not about detours. It's more about minor mishaps (such as a single car derailing and obstructing the next track over) that might tie one or two trains down for a few hours, maybe forcing a recrew. There isn't an easy solution to this, but the frequency and scope of these incidents isn't a dealbreaker for the bypass concept.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

That is true when lines are separated, but if the combine corridor is shut down, it opens a cans of worms for GO.

How do you figure? It would operate in much the same manner as if it was to happen today, or has happened in the recent past.

Depending on where the issue is, CP could send its trains along the its current corridor, CN would send trains along the Lakeshore/RH Line.

Right. Or CN could run trains over CP. Or CP could run over the Lakeshore Line. None of this is new, and its all been done before.

Depending on the length of time and the day of the week the mess takes place and fix unless CN & CP trains run a night, GO service will be effected one way or another with delays taking place.

Which is how it is generally done today. The one railroad may help the other, but it won't do so at the cost of its own services.

A few trains is one thing, but 30 plus for each RR is another.

Again, one railroad won't sabotage its own service to the benefit of another. What will likely happen is that a couple of high-priority trains will be allowed during the day time, when passenger traffic levels are higher - but the bulk of the traffic will move overnight.

The other thing to consider is that most derailments are cleaned up within 12 hours, and very few require reroutes of more than a couple of days.

With the new CN complex to be built in Milton, CN will still run some train along the current routing to/from it from the Concord Yard, unless there is a wye built where CN will connect to the existing Halton Sub from the bypass corridor.

The to-be-built Milton facility is simply overflow capacity for the current Brampton Intermodal Terminal. There are only a couple of trains each day that will stop there.

Should note if the issue is east of the Concord Yard, CN will have to use the Weston Sub as well the Lakeshore Line unless CP allow CN to use the North Toronto Sub for the eastern section.

That depends on where the derailment occurs, the expected duration of the closure, and what the traffic levels are. There's no point in speculating on a hypothetical, especially one that has so many variables.

The limiting factor in detouring trains is availability of crews who know the territory. The host railway normally assigns 'pilots' to detour trains to guide the visiting crew.

Not normally - pilots must be used, as there needs to be someone onboard who is aware of the territory. On the bright side, only one pilot is needed per train, and the pool of potential pilots is greater than just the number of engineers.

Both railways have cut their people to the point where only a few (if any) pilots can be made available. So only a few detours per day are possible. Everything else sits, or takes very roundabout routes. For example, a serious blockage on either transcontinental line north of Lake Superior will see trains diverted on the home railway's rails through Chicago to Winnipeg.

That depends on where the derailment happens. CN put something on the ground in northern Ontario last year that necessitated detours via Chicago, but something closer to Toronto may have resulted in running a couple of key trains via CP instead.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Oakville GO Transit Control Centre coming along well. Love the speed of steel construction.