Admiral Beez
Superstar
I’d settle for one end of the GTA to the other. Let’s start by addressing Just in Time logistics, where the private sector offloads their warehouse costs onto the public.
|
|
|
Quebec-Windsor Corridor
- Thread starter kEiThZ
- Start date
dowlingm
Senior Member
The question is surely what are the incentives the market currently lacks to shift to rail. There was a story in the Star this weekend about wildcat construction of trucking facilities in the Brampton area but municipalities don’t have the wherewithal to subsidize rail logistics. As we have seen in Milton, it’s hardly like intermodal rail yards are welcomed with open arms, either.
Ratazana
New Member
Again. The language in this agenda item is looking for solution without first understanding the root cause.
It’s gonna be a waste of time and energy.
micheal_can
Senior Member
To get rid of that, you need all the plants to be able to warehouse things.With J-I-T the highway is the warehouse.
They could designate the 401 to be a local truck route only between the 115 and the 407, forcing all thru trucks to use the 407. This could help build the case to spend billions to buy back the 407. Or, just expropriate it.
crs1026
Superstar
It may mostly be a "noise motion", but it will be interesting to see who on Council is willing to declare the Premier's idea a dumb one, versus who will declare "cars, cars, cars"..
Might be a good discussion to watch on Youtube!
- Paul
Bojaxs
Active Member
Now that I'm back home from work;
We already take reefer trucks off the road via reefer containers on trains. We don't need to race goods to their destination to keep them fresh when we can maintain their freshness throughout the entire trip via reefers and a generator setup.
We put a generator, which is in the shape of a 40ft container into the railcar, and can plug up to 16 reefers to it. 8 40ft reefers on one side, and 8 on the other side of the gen.
The gen would typically be put into the bottom of the rail car. In this photo, the gen is probably "deadheading" to it's destination. Hence why no reefers plugged into it. But you can see 8 plugs on one side of it, and there are 8 pugs on the other side of the gen.
Time stamped for 4:19, The very end of the train.
10ft containers are not profitable and make loading trains more difficult. You would have to put 4 of them in the bottom of a railcar. Plus most railcars in N.A. are not designed for 10ft containers. I've never seen a 10ft container come through the Brampton yard. It would make more sense for the customer to just purchase a 20ft container. You can't use a forklift to get a container out of a railcar. It's physically impossible. You need a crane to do it. Which brings another point about 10ft containers. All the cranes in CN's network are not designed to handle 10ft containers. So they won't move any.
Like what? Heavy equipment? They move military tanks/ equipment on trains with special railcars.
Car thieves have shown us we can cram 2 SUV's into a single 40ft containers.
Steel cages/ frames are built around tankers to make them fit in the same railcars as containers. Both 20ft and 40ft
Also here's a crane in an intermodal yard moving a boat that wouldn't typically fit in a container. So long as the freight isn't wider than the railcar, they can move it by train.
This might come as a shock to you. But N.A. is more efficient at moving goods/ freight via rail than Europe. Larger trains, double stack containers. Europe doesn't even have 53ft containers like we do in N.A.. Hell! Canadian Tire has 60ft containers which they run across Canada by train. They built special chassis for their trucks. And urbanists wonder why our roads and overpasses in Canada are so large and not small like in Europe.
Europe have us beat when it comes to passenger rail.
Why is Europe so absurdly backward compared to the U.S. in rail freight transport
For decades, the European freight rail system has had no major upgrades with regard to axle load capacity, train length or car vertical height.
www.freightwaves.com
There really is no more efficient way to move goods across the country. I've loaded containers in Edmonton, flew back to Toronto the next day, and 2 days later offloaded those same containers off the train in Brampton.
No. Getting CPKC trains off the Midtown line is the solution. Unfortunately the only way to do this is to get them to construct their own CN style "York sub" that goes around Toronto. We would also have to give them land for a new marshaling yard since they would be losing access to Lambton and Agincourt. Once constructed they would then sell the Midtown line to Metrolinx. Obviously easier said than done.
Getting CPKC to construct a freight bypass running parallel with the 413 would be the start of this massive undertaking. This new sub would continue north of Vaughan and Richmond Hill and eventually reconnect with the existing mainline somewhere north of Pickering.
Last edited:
just east of the creek
Active Member
In a former world I spent quite a bit of time working on continental logistics. And we were frequently disappointed by the rail lines in terms of service times and service attitude - too much Hunter Harrison and not enough interest in grabbing a share of the multiples of containers we moved around. But thats been awhile.Now that I'm back home from work;
We already take reefer trucks off the road via reefer containers on trains. We don't need to race goods to their destination to keep them fresh when we can maintain their freshness throughout the entire trip via reefers and a generator setup.
We put a generator, which is in the shape of a 40ft container into the railcar, and can plug up to 16 reefers to it. 8 40ft reefers on one side, and 8 on the other side of the gen.
View attachment 602250
The gen would typically be put into the bottom of the rail car. In this photo, the gen is probably "deadheading" to it's destination. Hence why no reefers plugged into it. But you can see 8 plugs on one side of it, and there are 8 pugs on the other side of the gen.
This railfan video shows an exact "gen & reefer" setup we use to move temp. sensitive goods across the country. The gen is located at the bottom of the rail car in the middle of the setup. You can see all the cables from each reefer plugged into the gen.
Time stamped for 4:19, The very end of the train.
10ft containers are not profitable and make loading trains more difficult. You would have to put 4 of them in the bottom of a railcar. Plus most railcars in N.A. are not designed for 10ft containers. I've never seen a 10ft container come through the Brampton yard. It would make more sense for the customer to just purchase a 20ft container. You can't use a forklift to get a container out of a railcar. It's physically impossible. You need a crane to do it. Which brings another point about 10ft containers. All the cranes in CN's network are not designed to handle 10ft containers. So they won't move any.
Like what? Heavy equipment? They move military tanks/ equipment on trains with special railcars.
Car thieves have shown us we can cram 2 SUV's into a single 40ft containers.
Steel cages/ frames are built around tankers to make them fit in the same railcars as containers. Both 20ft and 40ft
View attachment 602255
Also here's a crane in an intermodal yard moving a boat that wouldn't typically fit in a container. So long as the freight isn't wider than the railcar, they can move it by train.
View attachment 602256
This might come as a shock to you. But N.A. is more efficient at moving goods/ freight via rail than Europe. Larger trains, double stack containers. Europe doesn't even have 53ft containers like we do in N.A.. Hell! Canadian Tire has 60ft containers which they run across Canada by train. They built special chassis for their trucks. And urbanists wonder why our roads and overpasses in Canada are so large and not small like in Europe.
Europe have us beat when it comes to passenger rail.
Why is Europe so absurdly backward compared to the U.S. in rail freight transport
For decades, the European freight rail system has had no major upgrades with regard to axle load capacity, train length or car vertical height.
There really is no more efficient way to move goods across the country. I've loaded containers in Edmonton, flew back to Toronto the next day, and 2 days later offloaded those same containers off the train in Brampton.
No. Getting CPKC trains off the Midtown line is the solution. Unfortunately the only way to do this is to get them to construct their own CN style "York sub" that goes around Toronto. We would also have to give them land for a new marshaling yard since they would be losing access to Lambton and Agincourt. Once constructed they would then sell the Midtown line to Metrolinx. Obviously easier said than done.
Getting CPKC to construct a freight bypass running parallel with the 413 would be the start of this massive undertaking. This new sub would continue north of Vaughan and Richmond Hill and eventually reconnect with the existing mainline somewhere north of Pickering.
View attachment 602254
Out of curiosity, if I was moving containers from the GTA to Edmonton, Vancouver, Moncton, is it possible for you to give us some general ides of the time frames required from the point at which my carrier shows up at your yard with the container, until is is ready for the last mile carrier at the destination yard? You have noted two days or so from Edmonton, but is that just rail transit time?
And then, I was wondering if you could expand on your assertion that moving CPKC off the midtown line is a better choice. Setting aside any money or land issues with a new rail bypass (and the fact that a large % of the population would have heart failure at the thought of a major railyard in the West Humber Valley watershed), what benefits would CPKC gain from such a move (and selling the midtown line to VIA or Metrolinx) as opposed to incremental improvements to the existing rail lines and supporting infrastructure.
And if you have the time.....there is a thought that railways have been hamstrung for some time now with the need to produce steady and improving dividend results in the face of activist investor groups with very short time scales. This has hampered rails ability to invest in technologies and infrastructure that would and could improve service times and increase market shares. Norfolk Southern is the current and latest example. If CPKC and CN were not subject to such pressures, and you were the CEO, where do you see the need for improvements and innovation that would or could lead to a greater share of longer distance freight traffic (not including bulk commodities such as coal, potash etc etc).
My late grandfather,who was a section foreman out of Smiths Falls, would be stunned at the length and tonnage of the trains rolling through these days. It continues to be an intersting and evolving industry with opportunities for growth.
Thanks for you input.
Bojaxs
Active Member
Apologies, don't take my word for it. It was a guesstimate. It was more like 4 days (rail transit time). Loaded train in Edmonton, flew out the next day, and then 2 days after flying back to Toronto.
The CN website I believe offers up rail transit times.
This article from the CN website offers a list of rail transit times to and from St. John, New Brunswick.
Port Saint John: Unlocking East Coast Potential |cn.ca
Port Saint John is the largest Atlantic Canadian port by cargo volume and one of the fastest-growing container ports on the East Coast of North America!
www.cn.ca
Potential benefit would be allowing CPKC to construct a new, more modern marshaling yard on land that is given to them for free in return for access to the Midtown line. PLus allowing CPKC run their mainline parallel with the 407 (or north of Vaughan/ Richmond Hill) would create as more direct connection to their intermodal yard. No more Montreal trains running through DT Toronto, travelling up the Mactier sub and then eventually backtracking down Mactier in order to continue on to Chicago.
What the people of West Humber think? All I can say is "too bad". Milton couldn't stop CN, Vaughan won't stop CPKC. Them's the breaks.
What sort of technological break throughs are we looking for from the freight rail companies? Believe me when I say people in management at CN are pressured to think creatively to existing problems. The freight rail operators just need to do a better job on upkeeping their tracks so as to not have trains slow down. CPKC just had their first hydrogen powered locomotive perform a revenue run. What do you expect? Bullet trains moving cargo? CN and CPKC are beta testing a lot of innovative stuff, but progress within the freight rail industry is incremental. Break through's rarely happen. The board representing the share holders at CN is always willing to listen to CEO's who have bold ideas and think's outside the box.
It truly is. The urbanist community doesn't appreciate Canada's fright trains enough. Their focus is always fixated on the efficient movement of people. Rarely if ever, on the efficient movement of goods. Europe can't compete with Canada when it come to freight trains.
Also for Canadian urbanists complaining about freight companies privatizing and owning the tracks in N.A.. Here's the complete opposite end of the spectrum where government controlled tracks in Europe are hamstringing freight companies and leading to more trucks on the road.
European rail freight to see major changes in 2024 - Trains
Europe’s biggest rail freight companies are facing major challenges in 2024, despite efforts by politicians to encourage more freight movement by rail and less by road. In some countries, new ownership or new companies are challenging established operators and providing business opportunities...
www.trains.com
EU ‘giving up’ on 2030 rail freight target: industry groups | Journal of Commerce
Meeting the European Union emissions reduction targets for transportation will require a significant modal shift in freight from road to the rails over the next few years, but that is being undermined by EU regulations, according to industry groups.
Last edited:
just east of the creek
Active Member
Thanks for your reply.Apologies, don't take my word for it. It was a guesstimate. It was more like 4 days (rail transit time). Loaded train in Edmonton, flew out the next day, and then 2 days after flying back to Toronto.
The CN website I believe offers up rail transit times.
This article from the CN website offers a list of rail transit times to and from St. John, New Brunswick.
Port Saint John: Unlocking East Coast Potential |cn.ca
Port Saint John is the largest Atlantic Canadian port by cargo volume and one of the fastest-growing container ports on the East Coast of North America!
Potential benefit would be allowing CPKC to construct a new, more modern marshaling yard on land that is given to them for free in return for access to the Midtown line. PLus allowing CPKC run their mainline parallel with the 407 (or north of Vaughan/ Richmond Hill) would create as more direct connection to their intermodal yard. No more Montreal trains running through DT Toronto, travelling up the Mactier sub and then eventually backtracking down Mactier in order to continue on to Chicago.
What the people of West Humber think? All I can say is "too bad". Milton couldn't stop CN, Vaughan won't stop CPKC. Them's the breaks.
What sort of technological break throughs are we looking for from the freight rail companies? Believe me when I say people in management at CN are pressured to think creatively to existing problems. The freight rail operators just need to do a better job on upkeeping their tracks so as to not have trains slow down. CPKC just had their first hydrogen powered locomotive perform a revenue run. What do you expect? Bullet trains moving cargo? CN and CPKC are beta testing a lot of innovative stuff, but progress within the freight rail industry is incremental. Break through's rarely happen. The board representing the share holders at CN is always willing to listen to CEO's who have bold ideas and think's outside the box.
It truly is. The urbanist community doesn't appreciate Canada's fright trains enough. Their focus is always fixated on the efficient movement of people. Rarely if ever, on the efficient movement of goods. Europe can't compete with Canada when it come to freight trains.
Thank you for your information on transit times. I'll have a look at that.
I think you took my comment re innovation and change as overt criticism of rail, and maybe that's on me, I was not trying to phrase it so. Your comments are appreciated. Your specific comment re track upkeep and incremental improvements are important.
And I completely agree with you that the urbanist community (by and large, but not always, as there are some very educated comments found in these forums) fixates on the efficient movement of people, often discounting the efficient movement of goods and services, of which freight rail services form a very important part.
Thanks again.
Bojaxs
Active Member
Nah mate, it's all good. I didn't mean to come across as jaded in my response.
If Ontario and the Feds can susccesfully negotiate;
- CPKC to construct some sort of bypass around Toronto. A bypass that would involve running parallel with the proposed 413. Would make constructing the western portion of this bypass much easier.
- Get CN to construct the 407 freight bypass and grade separate the Docaster Diamond,
Then I would argue Toronto would have the most efficient rail network in the country. One that can efficiently move both freight and passengers. A nearly complete reduction in conflict points for both freight and passenger trains.
guavadelic
New Member
This would be such a game changer for regional connectivity. Would you be able to estimate a ballpark figure for what it would cost the government to make this happen? Likely would be massive but benefits could also be just as great.
Thanks for the perspective you've been providing regarding freight operations, much appreciated.
Last edited:
dowlingm
Senior Member
consider whether the developers who have piled into the lands along 413 want mile long diesel trains running past new subdivisions.
It might explain why the province did not take some of the heat off that project by presenting it as a rail as well as road bypass.
It might explain why the province did not take some of the heat off that project by presenting it as a rail as well as road bypass.
Bojaxs
Active Member
That's precisely my concern. Small window to get this achieved. This has to be negotiated and agreed upon with CPKC before the developers start constructing warehouses and homes right up against the 413.
lenaitch
Senior Member
And a freight rail corridor just doesn't have the same developer caché as a highway that the residents of the shiny new homes can use.
I'm not convinced either level of government is willing to spent either the political or financial capital to greenfield a new ROW for a for-profit railroad. The feds would likely say that they are championing HxR, how much more do they want, and the province would likely say they don't have deep enough pockets (oh, and some want them to buy back 407 as well). The land acquisition costs alone would be astronomical let alone the protracted battles about building through what is essentially the spine of the Oak Ridge Moraine. It is unlikely that York and Durham regions and their municipalities would be willing hosts.
micheal_can
Senior Member
What about a land swap? They give up the Midtown Corridor and Milton line to the new junction, and they get the land to lay tracks? If worded right, it could be spun as a deal for the people in the GTA.