News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.4K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 399     0 

VIA Rail

Here's the proposal to permanently change the regs for the Ft Lauderdale bridge: (and from the articles Urban linked, and those I've further read, this appears to have been approved. I'm still looking for the official notice)

Note the reference to "Modifying the bridge operating schedule will allow the bridge owner to operate the bridge remotely with assistance from the onsite bridge tender." That will be a point of discussion if and when a draw or otherwise movable bridge is used over the Trent.
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New River, Fort Lauderdale, FL
A Proposed Rule by the Coast Guard on 11/03/2015
[...]Publication Date:
Tuesday, November 03, 2015
Agencies:
Coast Guard
Department of Homeland Security
[...]Docket Name
Drawbridge Operation Regulation: New River, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Action
Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking.

Summary
The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that governs the Florida East Coast Railway (FEC) Railroad Bridge across the New River, mile 2.5, at Fort Lauderdale, FL. This proposed rule implements requirements for the operator designed to ensure that adequate notice of bridge closure times are available to the waterway traffic. It also changes the on demand schedule to an operating regulation requiring the bridge to be open at least 60 minutes in every 2 hour period. Modifying the bridge operating schedule will allow the bridge owner to operate the bridge remotely with assistance from the onsite bridge tender.
[...continues at great length and detail...]
https://www.federalregister.gov/art...ation-regulation-new-river-fort-lauderdale-fl

What is of interest as per the Trent crossing is whether it even has to be manned by Law, and by whom? It might well come up for discussion that the Lift Lock operator could/would assume that role. It might not even be the purview of the railway operator.

Edit to Add, Mon. May 16:
Here is a pdf of the technical drawings of the Ft Lauderdale bridge, dimensions, fabrication, theory of operation and how it was erected not interrupting the use of the previous bridge:
http://heavymovablestructures.org/assets/technical_papers/17.pdf

For those using Google Map with satellite view to study the bridge and the ritzy residential area, the New River is incorrectly labeled the 'Tarpon River', which actually flows south from the New River from west of the bridge.
 
Last edited:
Interesting read. He's standing up for CN, which is fair, but I hope this doesn't become a finger-pointing exercise between VIA and CN.

He appears to be holding the door open to keeping VIA on CN in the corridor, albeit with appropriate costing and investment towards protection of freight operation. This is revealing and in line with earlier comments here (yeah, I'm not-so-subtly saying I told ya so) that CN might be conscious of the impact if VIA builds its own line.....CN may be better off with VIA on its rails than without it.

He makes a valid point about the western transcon. The Canada Transportation Act Review Panel recommendation to stop subsidizing the western transcon, while retaining the eastern one, had a somewhat flimsy rationale based on regional development rather than economics. The more direct reality may be that the eastern line has abundant spare capacity, but the western line does not. CN might justifiably expect money from VIA to add capacity to retain the Canadian.

This is the first time I have seen CN put forward a figure of what it charges VIA for the Canadian - $25,000 per train. That's an interesting figure to dissect against ridership on any given day.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
The article isn't surprising. What is surprising is the sensitivity, feigned or otherwise. of being blamed for VIAs woes. In the event, VIA never did blame CN completely, CP also comes in for some too, proportionate to the amount their trackage is used, but the lowest common denominator remains that VIA must have dedicated trackage in their main corridor wherever possible, if not the entire route, or be part of a consortium with a freight carrier that clearly denotes precedence given to passenger.
This is the first time I have seen CN put forward a figure of what it charges VIA for the Canadian - $25,000 per train. That's an interesting figure to dissect against ridership on any given day.
Yeah. that is interesting. I wonder what comment will ensue on that figure, as CN has outright refused to state one before.

The PostMedia newpspapers had a Frekete (sp?) article very similar to this a few days earlier than this one even. I'll see if I can locate it and post a link.

Edit to Add: Whoa! Looking for the article I mentioned above, and this pops up:
TORONTO — Via Rail was in talks with Quebec’s pension fund about building a dedicated set of passenger tracks between Quebec City and Toronto, but that fell apart after the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec proposed a $5.5-billion commuter line for Montreal instead.

Via chief executive Yves Desjardins-Siciliano said the development is a mixed blessing, as it shows that there’s investor appetite for rail projects but appears to eliminate a major contender for his own plan.

“The Caisse announcement is somewhat bittersweet,” Desjardins-Siciliano said in an interview Wednesday at Via’s offices near Toronto’s Union Station.

“On the one hand, it supports our suggestion; on the other hand, their people will now be focused on delivering a very aggressive project on a very aggressive timeline, so it makes our project less of a possibility for them.” [...]
http://business.financialpost.com/n...ils-vias-pitch-for-dedicated-passenger-tracks

I've got to dig deeper on this and digest before further comment...

Quick Edit to Add:
“We’re getting unsolicited approaches by parties who want to discuss this project and see how they could be involved in it.”
- Desjardins-Siciliano

Here's fingers crossed that one of them is CP. Both the Big Two Cdns are hurting from freight downturn, and so perhaps this might be very propitious for CP to 'grab CN's cookies' on this. There would be a massive advantage in the Markets on this if CP spearheaded a consortium: Investors would be far more ready to participate in a consortium if CP were the lead entity....and all by using a line they're on the verge of selling-off anyway.

Interesting....that *might* be one of the factors for CN starting to play 'innocent and hurt'.
 
Last edited:
The article isn't surprising. What is surprising is the sensitivity, feigned or otherwise. of being blamed for VIAs woes. In the event, VIA never did blame CN completely, CP also comes in for some too, proportionate to the amount their trackage is used, but the lowest common denominator remains that VIA must have dedicated trackage in their main corridor wherever possible, if not the entire route, or be part of a consortium with a freight carrier that clearly denotes precedence given to passenger.
Yeah. that is interesting. I wonder what comment will ensue on that figure, as CN has outright refused to state one before.

The PostMedia newpspapers had a Frekete (sp?) article very similar to this a few days earlier than this one even. I'll see if I can locate it and post a link.

Edit to Add: Whoa! Looking for the article I mentioned above, and this pops up:

http://business.financialpost.com/n...ils-vias-pitch-for-dedicated-passenger-tracks

I've got to dig deeper on this and digest before further comment...

Quick Edit to Add:
- Desjardins-Siciliano

Here's fingers crossed that one of them is CP. Both the Big Two Cdns are hurting from freight downturn, and so perhaps this might be very propitious for CP to 'grab CN's cookies' on this. There would be a massive advantage in the Markets on this if CP spearheaded a consortium: Investors would be far more ready to participate in a consortium if CP were the lead entity....and all by using a line they're on the verge of selling-off anyway.

Interesting....that *might* be one of the factors for CN starting to play 'innocent and hurt'.

CP would be interesting, but they really do not seem interested in passenger rail.

I have always wondered if any alleviation to the slow down of VIA trains on the current Corridor due to being stuck behind freight would be possible by creating crossovers from CN to CP trackage at certain points. The two companies tracks often closely parallel each other in the areas East of Windsor and again East of Toronto to Kingston.

Basically create crossovers at various points along the lines where VIA trains could take use of available trackage on CP or CN depending on freight traffic. If a freight train was causing issue on the CN line, then route VIA around it on the CP track, and vice versa.

It would require some planning and network scheduling as well as some form of transit control system that could make quick changes depending on track usage.

I think this could be beneficial even if the Peterborough routing turns out to be the HFR route: there will still need to be trains on the existing corridor serving those communities.
 
CP would be interesting, but they really do not seem interested in passenger rail.

Yeah, CP is in its own ideological and economic altered-state-of-consciousness just now. Until Harrison and Ackman move on, they will be solely focussed on stock price, with totally short term thinking. Until those guys cash in, and the remaining stockholders pick up the pieces, CP will be opposed. But that won't take forever. Ackman has already divested some stock, I'm told.

What was so refreshing about Mongeau's commentary was - if other credible investors (e.g. pension plans) agree that passenger rail can run in the black, why would CN not want in on the action? The only question would be whether the rate of return meets CN's expectations, but that depends a lot on the state of the economy and how well the freight business is doing. Why let other people mow your lawn and eat your lunch?

I have always wondered if any alleviation to the slow down of VIA trains on the current Corridor due to being stuck behind freight would be possible by creating crossovers from CN to CP trackage at certain points. The two companies tracks often closely parallel each other in the areas East of Windsor and again East of Toronto to Kingston.

I did some amateurish computer modelling recently, and was astounded at just how well the recent VIA tripletracking positions the Kingston Sub for expanded passenger. If all freight conflicts could be removed from just the north track, the small sections of triple track that are already in place are all that's needed to run an hourly 2-way service between Kingston and Toronto (with just an additional platform at Kingston to permit trains to pass there). Even at just 95 mph, that's a very time competitive proposition. Some minimal investment east of Kingston (there is a third track west of Brockville) would fix things east of there. That makes the recent investment in the line very compelling as the right routing.

The simplest way to clear the conflicts would be directional running, putting freight on the CN south track in one direction (so no need for crossovers or sidings) and using the CP line in the other direction. (I wonder if this is one reason why CP has not singletracked the Winchester Sub.....why invest in new CTC and siding configurations, when if a DRZ were created, the existing block signalling would suffice and no need for any sidings or CTC).

I would still like to see some track redundancy, as opposed to relying on a single track line, but it's so close to doable that one salivates. There is demonstrably unused capacity on the CP-CN lines. If it could be leveraged without harming the freight operation, this has to be lower cost than reactivating another route. The challenge is how to make CP and CN into partners, instead of reluctant landlords.

- Paul
 
CP would be interesting, but they really do not seem interested in passenger rail.

Yeah, CP is in its own ideological and economic altered-state-of-consciousness just now. Until Harrison and Ackman move on, they will be solely focussed on stock price, with totally short term thinking. Until those guys cash in, and the remaining stockholders pick up the pieces, CP will be opposed. But that won't take forever. Ackman has already divested some stock, I'm told.
Yeah, there's a much bigger picture than just the mechanics of freight operation. The more I think about CN now crying uncle, the more I think something is up, and that 'something' is investment opportunity. There's been no shortage of scathing critiques in the business press about the management (musical chairs done to train music?) of both CN and CP (and that's just Canada!).

Rob stated: "...but they really do not seem interested in passenger rail". If you're a shareholder, and an active and informed one, you'd be thinking: "You know what? There's a real opportunity to use our underutilized assets as freight volume drops, the Feds are flashing money, and VIA is getting bites from interested investors, but none big enough to swing this, and we can steal CN's jewels too! Look how much they're paying CN! Let's form an entirely new division to build a consortium, a Ltd Company to protect us, and *showcase* that we're *Back in the Game* with partners and people".

That's exactly how today's most successful companies get that way. And it's not from fossilized management at the top. *Someone* with a big clout behind them is going to propose this at some point. To be blunt, it might not involve VIA either, if "someone" is big enough, they'll want to eat VIA's lunch too, and offer them a junior stake to run the sales side of the operation. CP (or whomever) would run the track and infrastructure side, albeit lots of room for other investors to own, say, bridges and stations.

D-S most likely has a job as COO or CEO in this new consortium. The man has vision and experience in exactly the area to make this work in an operating capacity. Btw: On Caisse. There's a sub-text to this not appearing in print. It was deemed by the Province that things would be much 'sweeter' if the Caisse kept the money in Quebec. I can fully understand that....which leaves a huge opportunity for Ontario and Ontario Pension Plans to pick this up. It is, after-all, almost overwhelmingly in Ontario. Metrolinx taking close note? Glen Murray is obviously off on a bender ( I favour his gist, I'm petrified of the details) so perhaps he'd best come down to earth and put the green where his mouth is?

The simplest way to clear the conflicts would be directional running, putting freight on the CN south track in one direction (so no need for crossovers or sidings) and using the CP line in the other direction. (I wonder if this is one reason why CP has not singletracked the Winchester Sub.....why invest in new CTC and siding configurations, when if a DRZ were created, the existing block signalling would suffice and no need for any sidings or CTC).

That would solve *many* really poor situations, not the least the 'Missing Link'. If I were CP though (or someone waiting for the top job) I'd be thinking "Screw CN...we'll take this indirectly in-house and do it ourselves with co-operative investors and partners".

I think there's more shoes to drop on this, and perhaps some real surprises. CN's suddenly snivelling is more than curious. Something's up, and it's not just hurt feelings...
 
New VIA timetable takes effect next Wednesday (June 1st):
VIA Rail ready to welcome more passengers this summer!
  • Increased train capacity in the Québec-Windsor Corridor
  • Customers offered more flexibility
MONTREAL, May 26, 2016 /CNW Telbec/ - Starting on June 1st, the number of departures offered by VIA Rail Canada (VIA Rail) between Quebec City – Montréal – Ottawa will increase from 10 to 40 per week, with a new added feature: direct connections on weekends. These changes will enable VIA Rail to reduce average trip times in this market. The new, direct connections will make planning a round trip between Ottawa and Quebec City easier than ever before.

With summer just around the corner, VIA Rail will make several improvements to its Québec-Windsor corridor schedule so passengers can enjoy greater flexibility. Starting on June 1st, these changes will come in the form of new direct trips between Quebec City andOttawa, and a marked increase in train capacity in areas where demand is especially high during the summer season. VIA Rail is expecting a 5.7% increase overall in the number of available seat miles for the next few months, compared to 2015.

"VIA Rail is proud to offer increased flexibility to travellers who plan to spend their vacation enjoying events around Ontario andQuebec this summer," said Yves Desjardins-Siciliano, President and Chief Executive Officer of VIA Rail. "These changes reflect our willingness to act on every opportunity to improve our service offerings and increase traffic in the Corridor."

TORONTO - OTTAWAThe successful additional frequencies introduced between Toronto and Ottawa last fall will remain in place. Customers will be offered a choice of six more departures per week compared to the Summer 2015 schedule. This translates to a 15.9% increase over last summer in the number of available seat miles.

TORONTO - MONTRÉAL The overall capacity for trips between Toronto and Montréal will increase by 4.7% and trains running on Sundays will be able to carry 13.7% more passengers.

Two new daily stops between Toronto and Oshawa have been added, bringing the number of departures in each direction to 12.

VIA Rail will make an additional westbound stop in Casselman from Monday to Friday which will allow travellers to arrive in Ottawaaround 8:00 a.m. and make same-day return trips easier.

These improvements have resulted in schedule changes for several trains. Travellers who would like to know how these changes could affect their reservation should consult page viarail.ca/newschedule.


15$ FOR KIDS ALL SUMMER
This summer VIA Rail is offering a $15 kids fare for families wishing to discover the beauty of Canada. This offer applies to children aged 2-11 travelling in Economy class to any destination in Canada from June 20 to August 31. Infants 24 months and under travel free at all times. For more details viarail.ca/en/fares-and-packages/children

[...]
Source: http://www.newswire.ca/news-release...me-more-passengers-this-summer-581037601.html



A second press release was published today by VIA Rail, regarding the Victoria Day weekend:
More Canadians chose VIA Rail during the Victoria Day weekend

HIGHLIGHTS


From Thursday, May 19th to Tuesday, May 24th:

Québec City – Windsor Corridor
  • More than 63,000 passengers on-board
  • Increase in ridership of 10.9% compared to 2015
  • Increase in revenues of 12.4% compared to 2015
Coast-to-coast VIA Rail Network
  • More than 68,000 passengers on-board
  • Increase in ridership of 10.2% compared to 2015
  • Increase in revenues of 17% compared to 2015
MONTRÉAL, May 27, 2016 /CNW Telbec/ - Seeking to travel efficiently and seamlessly, more travellers chose to get on board VIA Rail Canada (VIA Rail) trains during the Victoria Day weekend, compared to last year. Between May 19th and 24th, 68,011 passengers travelled on trains throughout the country, an increase of 10.2% compared to 2015.

"We're very pleased that passengers choose to reduce their carbon foot print by taking the train instead of their cars over the long weekend," said Yves Desjardins-Siciliano, VIA Rail's President and Chief Executive Officer. "These results, the best in the past seven years, prove that more and more people recognize that the train is a smarter way to move people."

Dynamism | Performance | Customer Centric Approach

On the coast-to-coast network, the busiest day was Friday, May 20th, when some 15,233 passengers boarded our trains. Several trains showed a load factor of over 85%. VIA Rail customers in Ontario made good use of trains, which proved the most popular over the long weekend, registering an increase of 11.4% in ridership and 10.7% in revenues compared to the same period in 2015.

Performance on VIA Rail's longer-distance services like the Canadian (Toronto-Vancouver) and the Ocean (Halifax-Montréal) also improved. The introduction of Prestige Class on the Canadian continues to be a major contributing factor to revenue increase.

[...]
Source: http://www.newswire.ca/news-release...uring-the-victoria-day-weekend-581096801.html
 
Last edited:
Note the inclusion of Desjardins-Siciliano promoting "dedicated tracks":
VIA Rail continues strong performance

May 31, 2016
During the first quarter of 2016, VIA Rail Canada (VIA Rail) saw another increase in ridership and reported the best results for revenues since 2008. While snow and freezing rain made travel challenging throughout the quarter, more travellers trusted VIA Rail to help them "outsmart winter" by leaving their cars at home and taking the train during winter storms.

More travellers, increased revenues, less funding required
From January to March, VIA Rail welcomed 3,000 more passengers than the first quarter of last year and Canadians travelled 3.5 million more miles on our trains, up by some 2%. As a result, VIA Rail increased its passenger revenues by 10.6% during the period and reduced its requirement for government funding by 10.9% compared to the previous year.

"We are continuing the pattern of growth that began in 2015, and once again we are reporting increases in revenues and ridership," said VIA Rail's President and CEO, Yves Desjardins-Siciliano. As a matter of fact, this is our eighth consecutive quarter of increased revenues. These results signal that our customer-centric strategy and passengers-first mission have been effective in drawing more people to our trains. People are starting to recognize that VIA Rail is a smarter way to travel."

"There have been improvements in our On-Time Performance across our entire network this quarter. Our OTP reached 79.2% compared to 63.3% for the same quarter last year. This significant improvement reflects the cooperation and support VIA Rail gets from its freight railway partners. However, these improvements are bittersweet as they result from a noticeable reduction in freight traffic on the shared rails, especially in western Canada, which in turn meant fewer delays for VIA Rail trains," Desjardins-Siciliano continued. OTP on infrastructure owned and operated by VIA Rail was 95.7%. This supports the proposition of our Dedicated Tracks project: with our own dedicated passenger rails, both VIA Rail and its freight railway partners would be more efficient for Canadian passengers and shippers and thus, jointly support Canada's economic growth.
[...]
logo.jpg

http://www.eturbonews.com/71644/rail-continues-strong-performance
 
Haven't heard much if anything from Desjardins-Siciliano, but make no mistake, he still holds a powerful hand full of cards:
about 2 hours ago by: Canadian Press
Updated about 2 hours ago
OTTAWA — Major public assets like airports, ports and highways would offer some the most intriguing opportunities for private investment should stakes in such assets ever go on the block, says one of the country's biggest potential investors.

The federal Liberals are considering a system that could see Ottawa — as well as other levels of government — sell infrastructure assets under their jurisdiction.

Mature Canadian infrastructure is still mostly owned by governments and putting a "For Sale" sign on it would offer a tantalizing opportunity for large players such as the massive Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan.

Andrew Claerhout, who leads the pension plan's infrastructure group, said he's encouraged by Ottawa's recent signals it could make more public infrastructure available.

Claerhout said the organization, which holds net assets of about $170 billion worldwide, is on the lookout for "relatively large" investment opportunities — from the "hundreds of millions to the billions."

It's looking for projects that would produce returns through user fees — everything from snack bar sales in an airport to a highway toll booth.

The pension plan already holds about $17 billion worth of infrastructure investments internationally, but just $3 billion — less than 20 per cent — in Canada.

That's the conundrum — there's a limited number of federal assets with a lot of investment potential, Claerhout said in an interview.

"If there were enough high-quality infrastructure projects to invest in Canada, we would have a program that was predominantly Canadian," he said.

"I can assure you I don't need any more Air Miles."

The Trudeau government wants to engage institutional investors, such as pension funds, to help raise money for long-term infrastructure projects.

The Liberals have pointed to "asset recycling," which could eventually see different levels of government lease or sell parts of mature public assets.

"The key difference between asset recycling and divestiture (or privatization) is that funds generated are explicitly spent on new infrastructure," reads an internal, "secret" briefing note to deputy finance minister Paul Rochon.

The February document, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act, provides Rochon with background on Australia's asset recycling program, one of the best-known, large-scale examples.

Australia's federal government aims to attract billions of dollars in capital by offering incentives to states and territories that sell stakes in public assets.

The note to Rochon said the Australian government is offering to pay states and territories the equivalent of 15 per cent of the sale price of an existing asset — as long as all the proceeds are allocated to a new investment.

The $5-billion, five-year program is expected to leverage close to $40 billion in new infrastructure investments in Australia, it noted.

Asset recycling was mentioned in a recent review of the Canadian Transportation Act, which recommended Ottawa seek more private-sector cash by privatizing infrastructure like ports and airports.

The report, tabled in February and led by former Conservative cabinet minister David Emerson, said privatization would create a "source of new funding required for strategic investment in the system."

The privatization of infrastructure assets, however, has created concerns.

The federal New Democrats have warned that asset recycling will enable the Liberals to take credit for the extra infrastructure money, even though Canadians will be paying for it via new user fees and tolls.

Labour unions, meanwhile, have cautioned that the model could eventually mean lower wages for workers.

Last week, Finance Minister Bill Morneau acknowledged the government was looking at the "possibility of asset recycling."

"We would do so in places where we think it might be in the public interest to do so, such as mature assets that might possibly be able to be recycled, so that we could, in fact, enhance the long-term growth of our country," Morneau told parliamentarians.

Claerhout said he believes such an initiative could work in the Canadian federation, adding the pension plan was "thrilled" to see asset recycling mentioned in the budget.

He strongly encouraged Ottawa to entice the provincial and municipal governments to get involved in attracting private capital.

Except for airport and port authorities, he said the federal government has little jurisdiction over large infrastructure with sizable, reliable returns.

Airports and ports, however, are still intriguing.

For example, Claerhout said an airport investment has potential to generate big returns if an investor can improve how it's managed and lure more airlines to its runways.

"We can also make more non-aeronautical revenue, in terms of selling more lattes and selling more duty-free goods and whatnot," said Claerhout, whose fund already has investments in five European airports.

He said some types of provincial and municipal infrastructure, like wastewater, utilities and highways, can also be attractive investments for the pension fund.

Highways can interest investors as long as they can install tolls — something he acknowledged could be a tough sell.

Claerhout added that putting a price on roads might also encourage more people to choose the greener option of public transit over cars.

"If you took a road that used to be free and you tolled it, I think consumers are right to say, 'Hey, that used to be free and now it's being tolled, that's unfair,'" he said.

"But let's remember that governments need to balance their books somehow... I don't think they can raise taxes too much more. I don't think any of us want that."
https://www.guelphtoday.com/nationa...assets-like-airports-highways-investor-312033

I've stretched etiquette by posting the entire article, so please click on the link anyway just to give the source the 'hit' so they get paid.
 
Did VIA ever put the RDCs in service to Sarnia, or is this happening in the new timetable? Apologies if I missed a page where this was said already.
 
Did VIA ever put the RDCs in service to Sarnia, or is this happening in the new timetable? Apologies if I missed a page where this was said already.

There are no official reports of this actually happening anytime soon, just rumours and Mr. Desjardin-Siciliano's public musings.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Further to replacing the swing bridge in Peterborough on the O&Q line: (SMART is the doppleganger of UPX in Sonoma County, California)
[...]
SMART purchased the 30-year-old bridge from a railroad in Galveston, Texas for $4 million and shipped it to Mare Island, where it was partially reassembled and painted in SMART’s trademark McGlashan green. It will replace the 111-year-old Haystack Bridge, which will be sold for scrap after SMART received no offers to preserve the historic span.

In recent years, rail traffic on the North Coast has been light with only a few freight trains per week, and the old bridge sat mostly in the open position allowing unfettered river passage for boaters. But once SMART begins commuter rail service between Santa Rosa and San Rafael, which is expected to start late next year, trains will cross the bridge every 15 minutes during the morning and evening commute times, and the span will need to remain closed for most of the day, Stevens said.

The Petaluma River is the only spot on SMART’s 42-mile route where the tracks cross a navigable waterway, which is controlled by the Coast Guard. Under Coast Guard regulations, any boat can ask for the bridge to be raised. Stevens said SMART was working with commercial river operators to coordinate schedules so as not to disrupt the train service. Small craft and rowers can pass under the bridge, even in the down position.

The new span will be able to open in two minutes, instead of the seven that the current bridge takes. It will also allow for a 33-foot wider river channel, a benefit for commercial boat traffic, said John Riley, the bridge project leader for SMART. [...]
http://www.petaluma360.com/news/4494765-181/new-rail-bridge-spans-petaluma
 
Further to replacing the swing bridge in Peterborough on the O&Q line: (SMART is the doppleganger of UPX in Sonoma County, California)

http://www.petaluma360.com/news/4494765-181/new-rail-bridge-spans-petaluma

Some interesting insights into the relative cost and flexibility (or lack thereof) of movable bridges.

It dawned on me recently that any new VIA route bypassing Brockville would need a new crossing of the Rideau at Smiths Falls, also.

I still wonder why any new route would choose a movable bridge over a fixed structure....why design in a conflict that can be avoided. Penny wise but pound foolish.

- Paul
 
It dawned on me recently that any new VIA route bypassing Brockville would need a new crossing of the Rideau at Smiths Falls, also.
And massive bridges in Port Hope, Belleville and other spots if you take the southern route. But at Smiths Falls, the plan is to parallel the CP line, so the crossing would be the extant one in Ottawa, already well used daily.
I still wonder why any new route would choose a movable bridge over a fixed structure.
To replace swing bridges in the fastest time, without an EA, and the lowest cost option in those cases. The whole idea of re-using existing corridors is to avoid EAs, and re-utilize what's already extant. In the case of Peterborough, the track bed could be raised a few feet too, just to minimize the depth the counterweight would need to clear and allow more small traffic underneath when it would be down (one area where Cdn legislation is much more favourable to rail operators). Bascules also use a smaller footprint in the area a swing-bridge it replaces takes.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top