Ontario Northland/Northern Ontario Transportation

[lenaitch]

Is there any reason they couldn't take one the older coaches and make it into a cab car? I don't feel the bilevels will be a good fit with the current track conditions. The other solution they could do is disconnect in Timmins and reposition them to the opposite end. Not ideal, but it may work.

To the first part - no clue. If I recall, when GO operated single levels, some were cab-cars. I don't know if any in ONR's fleet were originally and what it would take to convert them back to current standards.

As far as re-positioning, what "them"? The locomotive? That entails two locos so one wouldn't run 'long hood forward'. Two wouldn't be needed from a power requirement. Again, the business case at this point speaks to "a locomotive and a cab car".

 

[UrbanJon]

With all the hoopla about the Huron Central, I would like to point out an obvious solution that nobody seems to consider. Why not abandon the line west of McKerrow? You cover Domtar and Eacom and get rid of the money pit segment to the Soo. Industries will still have rail in the Soo. Anything going south can go through the states and if something needs to go east, it can jog up to Franz or Oba on the Algoma Central.

Easy solution, minimal disruption and solves the root problem. Hopefully next time Huron Central comes to the government for funding, because they will as this latest round of funding will solve nothing, this is the solution they pick. There is still a lot of room for rationalization and right-sizing on our rail network.

 

[micheal_can]

To the first part - no clue. If I recall, when GO operated single levels, some were cab-cars. I don't know if any in ONR's fleet were originally and what it would take to convert them back to current standards.

As far as re-positioning, what "them"? The locomotive? That entails two locos so one wouldn't run 'long hood forward'. Two wouldn't be needed from a power requirement. Again, the business case at this point speaks to "a locomotive and a cab car".

IIRC when the Northlander was running they had 2 engines. So, to have them facing opposite ways, and switch them around as needed, it would work. It is also a simple solution to a big problem.

With all the hoopla about the Huron Central, I would like to point out an obvious solution that nobody seems to consider. Why not abandon the line west of McKerrow? You cover Domtar and Eacom and get rid of the money pit segment to the Soo. Industries will still have rail in the Soo. Anything going south can go through the states and if something needs to go east, it can jog up to Franz or Oba on the Algoma Central.

Easy solution, minimal disruption and solves the root problem. Hopefully next time Huron Central comes to the government for funding, because they will as this latest round of funding will solve nothing, this is the solution they pick. There is still a lot of room for rationalization and right-sizing on our rail network.

There are other businesses along the way that still may use it, including LaFarge and a nuclear processing plant, both of which are near Blind River.

A better solution is to be absorbed into the ONR next time.

 

[ShonTron]

IIRC when the Northlander was running they had 2 engines. So, to have them facing opposite ways, and switch them around as needed, it would work. It is also a simple solution to a big problem.

No, it had a freight locomotive and an APU to provide power to the passenger cars.

 

[micheal_can]

No, it had a freight locomotive and an APU to provide power to the passenger cars.

View attachment 323461View attachment 323460

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/northlander-north-bay-cochrane-1.5952194

Well, this was their test.....

 

[lenaitch]

There are other businesses along the way that still may use it, including LaFarge and a nuclear processing plant, both of which are near Blind River.

A better solution is to be absorbed into the ONR next time.

It may be instructive that enroute businesses chose not to use rail, even when the line was in arguably better shape under CP. I doubt Caminco outputs enough volume to justify moving away from truck, and probably wouldn't be thrilled having its radioactive product sitting around in yards waiting to be marshalled onto into other trains to reach Port Hope. If you mean Ontario Trap Rock at Bruce Mines, they ship primarily by ship.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/northlander-north-bay-cochrane-1.5952194

Well, this was their test.....

I suspect that was a standard freight lash-up pair borrowed for the run. I suppose we may know for certain - one day - whether the infrastructure drives the consist or the other way around.

 

[lenaitch]

With all the hoopla about the Huron Central, I would like to point out an obvious solution that nobody seems to consider. Why not abandon the line west of McKerrow? You cover Domtar and Eacom and get rid of the money pit segment to the Soo. Industries will still have rail in the Soo. Anything going south can go through the states and if something needs to go east, it can jog up to Franz or Oba on the Algoma Central.

Easy solution, minimal disruption and solves the root problem. Hopefully next time Huron Central comes to the government for funding, because they will as this latest round of funding will solve nothing, this is the solution they pick. There is still a lot of room for rationalization and right-sizing on our rail network.

I hate to say it and hate to lose rail network, but it might be a solution, assuming the former Wisconsin Central lines are suitable. I don't know who Algoma Steel's customers are, and there are other rail customers in the Soo, petroleum comes to mind. Anything e/b would have to go to Oba. Although I'm wondering if it would be trading one shortline looking for a handout for another.

 

[micheal_can]

It may be instructive that enroute businesses chose not to use rail, even when the line was in arguably better shape under CP. I doubt Caminco outputs enough volume to justify moving away from truck, and probably wouldn't be thrilled having its radioactive product sitting around in yards waiting to be marshalled onto into other trains to reach Port Hope. If you mean Ontario Trap Rock at Bruce Mines, they ship primarily by ship.

That is why I feel ONR should take it over.
Caminco is the nuclear facility I was thinking of. If they are using rail, my thinking would be that they have an agreement to keep it moving.
Carmeuse Lime and Stone Northern Operation was the other one, but it appears they don't have a spur to it.

I suspect that was a standard freight lash-up pair borrowed for the run. I suppose we may know for certain - one day - whether the infrastructure drives the consist or the other way around.

If they did it that way for a test, they might be planning to just do it like that for the actual train.

I hate to say it and hate to lose rail network, but it might be a solution, assuming the former Wisconsin Central lines are suitable. I don't know who Algoma Steel's customers are, and there are other rail customers in the Soo, petroleum comes to mind. Anything e/b would have to go to Oba. Although I'm wondering if it would be trading one shortline looking for a handout for another.

Which only makes more sense to push for ONR to take over the line. Go to the McKerrow yard. They seem to always have coil cars there that get moved both ways on a regular basis. I imagine that all EB traffic would need to be added to a line already not in the greatest shape to begin with.

 

[UrbanJon]

I hate to say it and hate to lose rail network, but it might be a solution, assuming the former Wisconsin Central lines are suitable. I don't know who Algoma Steel's customers are, and there are other rail customers in the Soo, petroleum comes to mind. Anything e/b would have to go to Oba. Although I'm wondering if it would be trading one shortline looking for a handout for another.

I agree. We solved nothing by handing Huron Central more money. We should have basically let Huron Central sink or swim. If it was that valuable to CP, they would have stepped in. But it is highly indicative that they never stepped in. This line isn't important and we have alternatives.

When Huron Central comes back for more funding in 6 or 7 years, we should tell them no.

A better solution is to be absorbed into the ONR next time.

This is a bad idea. If Huron Central can't make money on this line, why would you want ONR to take it? The deficit would put pressure on ONR and in the long term it could even bankrupt it.

 

[micheal_can]

I agree. We solved nothing by handing Huron Central more money. We should have basically let Huron Central sink or swim. If it was that valuable to CP, they would have stepped in. But it is highly indicative that they never stepped in. This line isn't important and we have alternatives.

When Huron Central comes back for more funding in 6 or 7 years, we should tell them no.


This is a bad idea. If Huron Central can't make money on this line, why would you want ONR to take it? The deficit might put pressure on ONR or even lead it to bankruptcy.

Loosing the link to SSM would mean even more loads lost to HCR. That cold cause them to close, which could cause those that use it to be forced to close. Those ~500 jobs are important.
Having ONR take it over makes sense as they can work with the government to get grants for businesses that may want to locate along the line, or switch to rail. I feel the divesting of the ONTC is over, and reconstruction is beginning.

 

[DirectionNorth]

With all the hoopla about the Huron Central, I would like to point out an obvious solution that nobody seems to consider. Why not abandon the line west of McKerrow? You cover Domtar and Eacom and get rid of the money pit segment to the Soo. Industries will still have rail in the Soo. Anything going south can go through the states and if something needs to go east, it can jog up to Franz or Oba on the Algoma Central.

Easy solution, minimal disruption and solves the root problem. Hopefully next time Huron Central comes to the government for funding, because they will as this latest round of funding will solve nothing, this is the solution they pick. There is still a lot of room for rationalization and right-sizing on our rail network.

Because, it's important to maintain a network, for redundancy purpose? Because it's important to plan for the future? Finally, because politics. (wink wink nudge nudge)

We saw CN and CP get rid of routes ("rationalization"), which is coming back to bite us, as we need more capacity on the railroads. We see, in Toronto, that once a railroad is sold, we can't get it back, and now we're paying $6 billion for a tunnel underneath Scarborough.

I agree, that the choices for the HCRY are making a profit, or being sold to the government.

 

[lenaitch]

Caminco is the nuclear facility I was thinking of. If they are using rail, my thinking would be that they have an agreement to keep it moving.
Carmeuse Lime and Stone Northern Operation was the other one, but it appears they don't have a spur to it.

As far as I know they do not. How do they "keep it moving" when it has to move from H|CR to either a s/b CP or CN they to an e/b CP or CN?

If they did it that way for a test, they might be planning to just do it like that for the actual train.

And it may come to that. One of the ways the government can keep the promise and save some bucks is, instead of invest in new trainsets is to use existing power, EPUs and refurbished cars.
[/QUOTE]

 

[crs1026]

Because, it's important to maintain a network, for redundancy purpose? Because it's important to plan for the future? Finally, because politics. (wink wink nudge nudge)

We saw CN and CP get rid of routes ("rationalization"), which is coming back to bite us, as we need more capacity on the railroads. We see, in Toronto, that once a railroad is sold, we can't get it back, and now we're paying $6 billion for a tunnel underneath Scarborough.

I agree, that the choices for the HCRY are making a profit, or being sold to the government.

A good example is the Guelph Sub - it was divested, run into the ground, and now is being restored at considerable expense by ML. The tenant operator walked away from even their contractual maintenance obligation.

The problem with divestiture is that unless there is a long-term life cycle plan to maintain and renew major items (such as bridges, track, signals) the divested owner will defer maintenance. It makes good sense for the province to develop the long term renewal plan, and enforce/enable/subsidise it.

I'm not a fan of big ponderous provincial agencies, which ultimately become inefficient and complacent (cough Metrolinx cough) but a renewed ONTC is preferable to these "two streaks of rust in the weeds" quality operators, passenger rail or not.

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

Seems like we are jumping through a lot of hoops just to have a train, any train.

Because all the folks who live in these parts see trains as a symbol of commitment. They don't actually use the service or legitimately care about provisioning proper public transport. This is the mindset of people who think one train a day beats 5 buses per day.

 

[UrbanJon]

Because all the folks who live in these parts see trains as a symbol of commitment. They don't actually use the service or legitimately care about provisioning proper public transport. This is the mindset of people who think one train a day beats 5 buses per day.

All the time, we see nostalgia for trains getting in the way of proper transport. It is why I oppose the restoration of the Northlander. We don't need a train, we need transport. A train can fill that role, but outside of the larger markets, the significant costs and inefficiencies of train service actually get in the way of access to transport.

This is the same for Huron Central and OBRY. There are much better ways to achieve adequate transport than to support costly marginal rail lines that even at the most optimistic case will provide poor service.