Euphoria
Active Member
Fantastic. I say push those speed requirements higher and couple this procurement with full HFR passenger-only lines (with all new rail laid fully HSR compatible).
They basically have to go bi-mode if Metrolinx electrifies their network soon.Really encouraging. It looks like they are thinking carefully about what they need.
The bi-mode power requirement is very interesting.
- Paul
Very interesting. Also curious that the procurement process was outsourced to SNC Lavalin. How that sits with Bombardier remains to be seen in light of previous bidding, albeit Bombardier and SNC have partnered too:·
Flexibility to Operate
-
The intent is to specify trainsets for bi-directional operation (Push-Pull).
-
VIA Rail intends to contract with one supplier. Bidders who only offer motive power or
seated vehicles must partner to offer a complete trainset solution.
·
Performance
-
Trainsets must be able to operate at speeds of up to 100 mph or 161 km/h on shared
Class 5 non-electrified infrastructure, non-grade separated, using diesel power.
-
Trainsets must also be able to operate at a maximum of 125 mph or 201 km/h on
new dedicated Class 7 infrastructure, non-grade separated, using in diesel mode
and electric mode where electrified.
-
Transition between modes of power must be seamless with minimum impact on the
passenger experience.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ked-for-21-billion-ottawa-lrt/article6005657/SNC-Lavalin group picked for $2.1-billion Ottawa LRT
[...]
Alstom SA will provide the rail vehicles for the transit line because Canadian rival Bombardier Inc. was a partner in Ottawa Transit Partners, which along with Rideau Transit Partners were losing consortium bidders. Bombardier was also part of a losing bid against Alstom in South Africa for a $5.8-billion rail contract.
Interesting point, but that's secondary to VIA's bigger picture I think. Bear in mind that GO will be running diesel under catenary too...if and when it finally arrives.They basically have to go bi-mode if Metrolinx electrifies their network soon.
They basically have to go bi-mode if Metrolinx electrifies their network soon.
Because those are CN's tracks. If I own a private road, for example a logging road, and then the gov't says I have to let a public transit bus use it, well I might begrudgingly allow it because I need gov't approval to cut the road through either private or crown land, but I'm not going to make it easy for them.The real question is, if it is, why has CN made life close to impossible with VIA all this time?
Which is why, if you'd quoted my whole answer, and what it was in regard to, this would have been apparent:Because those are CN's tracks. If I own a private road, for example a logging road, and then the gov't says I have to let a public transit bus use it, well I might begrudgingly allow it because I need gov't approval to cut the road through either private or crown land, but I'm not going to make it easy for them.
This is a Montreal requirement where diesels may not operate in the station. They currently coast into the station with the engine turned off and go through some time-killing acrobatics to turn the train around.
Nothing on the Metrolinx network has an electric requirement. If it did, Metrolinx itself would be in trouble since they plan on continuing to run diesels for the foreseeable future on most lines.
VIA hasn't run trains through the Mount Royal tunnel in what, 21 years? That isn't the restriction, either.
No, VIA is trying to hedge its bets that they'll get money not only for their own track, but also to have it electrified.
To tie together some of the earlier comments, Metrolinx just might want to be have an inside ear on how the tendering goes, and perhaps consider piggy-backing an order, at least for the bi-modal locos. It might also add enough size to the order for them to be at least assembled in Canada, or in lieu of that (and Bombardier's famous follies e.g. the Flexity order) an offset of equal value, since the best place to assemble and test is at the originating factory. It would probably reduce the cost for both VIA and Metrolinx, both for purchase and shared servicing. (Other than final drive ratio, the locos could be identical in terms of spare parts and procedures)Of course. I'm just saying even if they don't get any money that it'll still be pretty useful to have mixed-mode engines on trains in/around Quebec.
Not time to delve right now, but the implications, not just of this particular instance, but VIA's mandate altogether is intriquing. I suspect this actually plays into the hands of Desjardins-Siciliano's scheme for VIA, as well it should.Here is another interesting article - This time about a private railway operator wanting to use VIA's tracks and Ottawa/Tremblay station (not the other way around for once!) The proposal seems a bit unlikely in my humble opinion.
Who said anything about the tunnel?
The Montreal train station has very poor ventilation. When you're approaching the station and suddenly the lights go out and the engine goes quiet, it's because they're coasting through until the vent stacks of the engine exit through to the other side of the shed. Occasionally they'll take 30 minutes (on-time in the burbs, now late) to turn around and back into the shed (I assume it's a driver who doesn't want to do the coast trick or a bad-air day or something).
I wonder if it's the VIA HFR proposal in disguise, as I did read in many parts, that the "HFR" part of VIA may actually be a separate company or consortium -- and VIA is possibly actually involved.Here is another interesting article - This time about a private railway operator wanting to use VIA's tracks and Ottawa/Tremblay station (not the other way around for once!) The proposal seems a bit unlikely in my humble opinion. Highlights are below.
Here is another interesting article - This time about a private railway operator wanting to use VIA's tracks and Ottawa/Tremblay station (not the other way around for once!) The proposal seems a bit unlikely in my humble opinion. Highlights are below.