GO Transit Fleet Equipment and other

[cplchanb]

Well if we're looking at the used market, there are actually the 10 EXO F59s (that coincidentally are ex GO), that would be up for retirement by 2024 due to them being displaced by the Charger locomotives.

Metrolink also has their own list of F59s that they are retiring and putting up for sale, so you never know.

please god no. we cant be ghetto enough to purchase old surplus equipment that we sold off ourselves for being old and obsolete!

 

[T3G]

please god no. we cant be ghetto enough to purchase old surplus equipment that we sold off ourselves for being old and obsolete!

Why do you care so much about what kind of locomotives are running?

I'd get it if it were rolling stock you'd be riding on, even if I'd disagree, but a locomotive? Close your eyes and don't look when a loco is passing you.

As someone who presently uses the Milton line, I can assure you that GO trains will be far behind even a mediocre European operation until such time as we get serious about introducing 2 way, all day service to the corridor, even if the measly amount of trains the line runs today were electrified with the newest state of the art European EMUs. These fancy new toys you keep hyping up are mere window dressing. Where's the usable service?

 

[Krypto98]

please god no. we cant be ghetto enough to purchase old surplus equipment that we sold off ourselves for being old and obsolete!

The crews I've talked to perfer the cab layout of the f59 over the mp40. (Probably Due to sightlines out the window), they also like the CEM cabs. Having operated wide cabs on a certain class 1 railway, I think I would much perfer running a f40 over the Siemens which I've heard have very tiny front windows. The VIA crews I've talked to also share that opinion.

Personally as a customer I couldn't care less as long as my seat is comfortable and the service is reliable.

As a railroader, I want to see out the front window so I can do my job properly

 

[Bojaxs]

As someone who presently uses the Milton line, I can assure you that GO trains will be far behind even a mediocre European operation until such time as we get serious about introducing 2 way, all day service to the corridor, even if the measly amount of trains the line runs today were electrified with the newest state of the art European EMUs. These fancy new toys you keep hyping up are mere window dressing. Where's the usable service?

Agreed. As long as the stations and trains are kept clean, and service is reliable, then what does it matter how old the equipment is? If the trains are kept in a state of good repair and get the job done, why replace them? Run them into the ground. Get as much money out of them as you would a Toyota Tacoma.

 

[cplchanb]

Why do you care so much about what kind of locomotives are running?

I'd get it if it were rolling stock you'd be riding on, even if I'd disagree, but a locomotive? Close your eyes and don't look when a loco is passing you.

As someone who presently uses the Milton line, I can assure you that GO trains will be far behind even a mediocre European operation until such time as we get serious about introducing 2 way, all day service to the corridor, even if the measly amount of trains the line runs today were electrified with the newest state of the art European EMUs. These fancy new toys you keep hyping up are mere window dressing. Where's the usable service?

i dont care about looks. i care that we are wasting money on 40 year old equipment that we declared obsolete just to grovel back to them because we are cheap and desperate. i would rather invest on new equipment that can last for decades more than to continually waste money on life support for almost walking deads.

 

[crs1026]

i dont care about looks. i care that we are wasting money on 40 year old equipment that we declared obsolete just to grovel back to them because we are cheap and desperate. i would rather invest on new equipment that can last for decades more than to continually waste money on life support for almost walking deads.

Obsolete? If you open the throttle and it moves, it isn't obsolete. The waste is in dashing to buy something new when the old something is still in good working order.

You sound like the type that camps out in front of an Apple store before the next model of iPhone launches. My old iPhone seems to still do the job.

- Paul

 

[cplchanb]

Obsolete? If you open the throttle and it moves, it isn't obsolete. The waste is in dashing to buy something new when the old something is still in good working order.

You sound like the type that camps out in front of an Apple store before the next model of iPhone launches. My old iPhone seems to still do the job.

- Paul

when it comes to fuel efficiency, emissions and maintenance costs, yes it is. not to mention corrosion and structural longevity. will there still be ample product support in 5 years time? not to mention what is the value of spending millions of dollars training techs to work on dinosaurs when they the are far and few and dwindling? by the time you do a rebuild you might as well buy a new loco since youve already sunk over 1/2 the cost of a new one just to keep the walking dead moving.

you are only considering the product on its own but fail to recognise everything that is required to support it and the lifecycle costs of uphold those. theres a reason why after 5 years they pull support for your iphone 6. and oyea i hate apple with a passion so your last statement is categorically false

 

[T3G]

when it comes to fuel efficiency, emissions and maintenance costs, yes it is. not to mention corrosion and structural longevity. by the time you do a rebuild you might as well buy a new loco since youve already sunk over 1/2 the cost of a new one just to keep the walking dead moving.

First of all, what is a 'walking dead'? Trains don't walk, so maybe let's use some terminology that makes sense instead of something that seems like a populist soundbite to get people riled up? "Old train" is fine, it's clear, and you don't sound like you have a personal conflict against it.

Second of all, and I'm going only by the perimeters of your own argument that you have posted here: if your fleet is in bad shape and you need to either rebuild it or replace it, with the caveat that rebuilding costs only half as much as a new vehicle, and therefore you can rebuild twice as many vehicles as you can outright replace, why on earth would you choose the replacement option? Your clients will not thank you if they suddenly find their trip comes half as often as it did before. But hey, at least we got some shiny new toys that we can show off, right? Obviously in the real world the decision of rebuild vs. replace is often more complex, and differs in every circumstance, and sometimes rebuilding isn't even feasible, but I'm just addressing the argument that you yourself have put forward that is somehow supposed to be an argument in favour of replacement.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

If we have to get used equipment let's get the rebuilt SD70MACHs to be ridiculous.

 

[cplchanb]

First of all, what is a 'walking dead'? Trains don't walk, so maybe let's use some terminology that makes sense instead of something that seems like a populist soundbite to get people riled up? "Old train" is fine, it's clear, and you don't sound like you have a personal conflict against it.

Second of all, and I'm going only by the perimeters of your own argument that you have posted here: if your fleet is in bad shape and you need to either rebuild it or replace it, with the caveat that rebuilding costs only half as much as a new vehicle, and therefore you can rebuild twice as many vehicles as you can outright replace, why on earth would you choose the replacement option? Your clients will not thank you if they suddenly find their trip comes half as often as it did before. But hey, at least we got some shiny new toys that we can show off, right? Obviously in the real world the decision of rebuild vs. replace is often more complex, and differs in every circumstance, and sometimes rebuilding isn't even feasible, but I'm just addressing the argument that you yourself have put forward that is somehow supposed to be an argument in favour of replacement.

sure lets use rolling dead then...

so lets spend 50% of the cost to rebuild just to squeek out another 10 years or pay full cost for another 30. not to mention the training of people to maintain antiques. how well does it sound to the general public that we are spending millions to send people to be trained and maintain certification of equipment from the 70s... its like asking someone to learn how to service and maintain a windows 3.0 computer just because it turns on. where will we buy parts for epa tier 0 engines in 10 years? continue to cannibalise until theres absolutely nothing left? at that time the costs of buying new will go up exponentially and then people would be wondering why we are paying so much for so little....

 

[RU479]

Just saying, apparently in the tender there is a section requiring the locomotives to either be Tier 3 or Tier 4 compliant.

The Tier 4 bit is nothing out of the ordinary, however there hasn’t been any new Tier 3 passenger diesels produced recently, so maybe that indicates GO could look to allow older locomotives either built to, or being rebuilt up to, T3 standards.

 

[T3G]

sure lets use rolling dead then...

Congratulations on completely missing the point.

How about, as I suggested, old trains. Because this is an adult discussion and you want to be taken seriously as an adult.

how well does it sound to the general public that we are spending millions to send people to be trained and maintain certification of equipment from the 70s... its like asking someone to learn how to service and maintain a windows 3.0 computer just because it turns on.

Sounds to me like the general public who doesn't know anything about running trains shouldn't be weighing in on running trains.

The decision whether to refurbish or replace is a complex one, involving many different factors, and many different people from many different areas of train operations weighing in and trying to decide the costs and benefits. Much like decisions in other areas of life, it is rarely black and white, and rightfully and thankfully will not involve anyone who refers to trains as walking deads, or who invokes Windows 3.0, or whose only concern appears to be that our rolling stock looks modern and up to date on the outside, be God damned to the fact that the level of service offered is subpar at best. It's easy to criticize from behind a computer screen when you have no skin in the game, but the real world doesn't work that way.

 

[Bordercollie]

sure lets use rolling dead then...

so lets spend 50% of the cost to rebuild just to squeek out another 10 years or pay full cost for another 30. not to mention the training of people to maintain antiques. how well does it sound to the general public that we are spending millions to send people to be trained and maintain certification of equipment from the 70s... its like asking someone to learn how to service and maintain a windows 3.0 computer just because it turns on. where will we buy parts for epa tier 0 engines in 10 years? continue to cannibalise until theres absolutely nothing left? at that time the costs of buying new will go up exponentially and then people would be wondering why we are paying so much for so little....

Isn't that the same with keeping the F59's around?

 

[drum118]

Isn't that the same with keeping the F59's around?

It is to a point considering what the system will look like when fully built and what is needed to service it. Then, how long will it take to get there as well the cost to do so??

From my experience, have seen a few things that it was worth the cost to rebuild X when there wasn't anything in the market to match the need of an Obsolete item or the cost to buy it wasn't worth it.

An F59 is a better use of motor power than an MP54 doing yard moves or on an 6-8 car train. Why do you see motor power built in the 50's or 60's still in service doing yard work for RR, let alone on the mainline??? The day is coming when equipment older than the 90's will have to be replace to meet the various environment requirement at great cost.

See no need at this time to scrap the F59's

Buy new every x timeframe is to keep Y in business and employ people to make it.

 

[Metroscapes]

Isn't that the same with keeping the F59's around?

Except GO has knowledge and maintenance history with them. The F59s work for now, and there's no learning curve / retooling / restocking of on-hand parts required.

I'm also wondering if repowering a used loco is an option? I note this is a service Progress Rail offers, but I have no idea if this work can achieve Tier 3 or 4 standards.