Bordercollie
Senior Member
But when increasing the service to Windsor it would help ontime performance by upgrading the infrastructure to allow for faster speeds.
I think the turnouts are only rated for 50mph which also slows the train down.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
I think the turnouts are only rated for 50mph which also slows the train down.
nfitz
Superstar
How does CWR allow for higher speeds? VIA and CN used to run Montreal to Toronto in under 4 hours on jointed rail back in the 1970s.
(definitely makes for a better ride - I have an essay somewhere I wrote on a Sunday evening in the early 1980s on a train to Montreal - you can tell which pieces were written on jointed rail versus CWR!)
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Again: you would have only 8 trains per day benefitting from this and only passengers going all the way to Windsor (or Glencoe) - which is considerably less busy than Ottawa...
kEiThZ
Superstar
I didn't follow this. Why would upgrading the physical track reduce capacity?
crs1026
Superstar
The question is, what would the ridership be if there were 16 trains a day on the line instead of 8. And could that be done with a line that has less than full double track.
I'm sure someone at VIA knows exactly what the remaining life in that jointed rail is. Installing CWR is not like repainting your kitchen. One doesn't replace the rail just because one is tired of the old stuff. Sure, jointed rail is a dated technology and CWR has benefits - but it's a huge cost. Any remaining life in the existing plant needs to be wrung out before upgrading. Maybe the rail can be cascaded to other use, but we don't know if that's possible, or at what cost.
It would be nice if the rail just happened to be worn out, and Ottawa had no choice but to replace.... but it's a big ticket capital item, not something one finds in the annual budget.
Realistically, there will have to be a HFR-level business case to redo the whole line to a higher standard. Like HFR, start with some reasonable initial state with an eye to incremental upgrades. Single track with more sidings is a credible starting point.
One has to believe that the business case for HFR to Windsor would be favourable, and we ought to be putting shovels in the ground quickly....but here we sit.
- Paul
littlewill1166
Active Member
^ Apparently they already did, but it's still bumpier than the Dundas/Oakville subs. I guess it's because the limit is 90 mph, vs 75 mph on Dundas/Oakville since I've noticed something similar on the Kingston sub where trains also travel at 90 mph.
At Glencoe, 76 often has to double stop because the passing siding ends just south of the station platform and 73 is constantly delayed. By the time 76 arrives in London, it's often 20 minutes late. Since it missed its slot, it's put behind a slow-moving freight train from Sarnia until Woodstock adding another 10-minute delay. By the time it gets to Aldershot it's 30 minutes late and has to wait for a GO Train to pull into the station. Since it missed its slot, 76 gets put behind another GO train until it reaches the quad-track section of the Oakville-sub where it arrives at Union Station 40-minutes late chronically. Train 76 then turns into 48. If 76 is delayed enough, 48 to Ottawa gets delayed as well.
If Glencoe was twin-tracked, it could easily save 5 minutes and reduce the possibility of downstream delays.
To sum things up, seemingly short delays in one part of the network can easily cascade into much larger delays downstream. Thus, you must look at the big picture when making decisions regarding network improvements.
Below is a satellite image of Glencoe station and the surrounding area.
Red = Existing Track
Green = Existing Platform
Blue = Siding Extension
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Agreed, but as your analysis shows, the delays of 73 (and its cascading effects on 76 and 48) have little to nothing to do with the track quality of the VIA-owned segment of the Chatham Sub...
I was talking about the challenges of justifying the expenses of track upgrades with so few trains and passengers benefitting, not about how these upgrades would affect capacity...
Bordercollie
Senior Member
By having a locomotive on each end saves time for not having to wye the train but by doing that have they increased the mileage and wear and tear on the locomotives?
When the P42's where ordered to replace the LRC locomotives, did they do a 1 to 1 ratio?
But I guess also that not every LRC trainset had two locomotives either.
When the P42's where ordered to replace the LRC locomotives, did they do a 1 to 1 ratio?
But I guess also that not every LRC trainset had two locomotives either.
littlewill1166
Active Member
"These locomotives replaced the 7 LRC locomotives still in service and the 7 FP9Au's left on the roster. The 7 remaining P42DC's were used to replace some of the F40PH's that had been retired due to accidents."
nfitz
Superstar
I wouldn't think the track and railbed is currently built for that. But if you built it for it, you could use jointed rail.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
It's great that the Union station construction is finished but the VIA departure area is still a disaster. The way that we board trains needs to change. There should be a check in counter and then you should go to your gate to board.
The washrooms are always broken and there are homeless people living in there.
The washrooms smell like pee, and it is not a good reflection of our flagship station.
The GO concourse is much nicer, and is much more customer friendly.
The washrooms are always broken and there are homeless people living in there.
The washrooms smell like pee, and it is not a good reflection of our flagship station.
The GO concourse is much nicer, and is much more customer friendly.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
I rode train 71 to windsor and there was a person taking notes about the train speaking with the train service master.
The service master was telling the lady taking notes that the non rebuilt coaches are not cleaned properly and that the washrooms are in horrible condition.
He said that the rebuild HEP coaches make a world of difference, but he mentioned that the maintenance people are not taking steps to properly clean the cars while they are parked overnight.
She must be doing some kind of audit and taking feedback from the crew on how to improve the service.
Interesting that they do that. I guess direct feedback from the crew to maintenance doesn't get passed on?
Are we about half way through on rebuilding the HEP corridor fleet? They also updated the digital number boards on both rebuilt and non rebuilt HEP II cars while they were parked during covid it looks like.
The service master was telling the lady taking notes that the non rebuilt coaches are not cleaned properly and that the washrooms are in horrible condition.
He said that the rebuild HEP coaches make a world of difference, but he mentioned that the maintenance people are not taking steps to properly clean the cars while they are parked overnight.
She must be doing some kind of audit and taking feedback from the crew on how to improve the service.
Interesting that they do that. I guess direct feedback from the crew to maintenance doesn't get passed on?
Are we about half way through on rebuilding the HEP corridor fleet? They also updated the digital number boards on both rebuilt and non rebuilt HEP II cars while they were parked during covid it looks like.
kEiThZ
Superstar
TerryJohnson
New Member
The ridership from Chatham and Windsor is constrained by frequency and schedule as much as anything. If we had five or six round trips per day and got the running time down below 4h again, there would be a commensurate rise in ridership. As things stood before the pandemic, ridership was good and growing, even though you could either get up before the crack of dawn for #70, or take #72 which arrives in Toronto late enough in the day that it is not really helpful for day-trip purposes and misses first pitch if you're going to the ball game. Coming west, the huge schedule gaps between 71, 73 and 75 means its really important to plan a journey around the train, rather than plan a journey and take the train.
The analysis above of the Glencoe siding situation is good, although complicated if we want both trains to make a station stop. Starting from the principle that investments should be designed to make CN dispatchers happy by improving freight fluidity and keeping VIA trains on-time and in their slots is a good way to keep passengers happy. In my experience, 73 is also often held out on the Strathroy Sub main track at Komoka awaiting 76, thereby tying up both tracks until 76 shows up. That causes avoidable inconvenience to both freight and passengers. A siding at the old Komoka station location would at least allow a late-running 73 to get out of the way of CN without going all the way to Glencoe and delaying 76.