News   Mar 31, 2026
City Council March, 2026: Plenty of Rental, Mutli-Phase Redevelopments Approved
 1.2K     2 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Building Toronto’s Skyline Podcast Event to Feature Brad Bradford in Concord
 214     3 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Glittering Forma Rises Higher in the Entertainment District
 1.1K     0 

VIA Rail

CapitalSeven said:
Think how much fun a snowstorm like this would be on a mostly single-track right of way through forest, rock, and bog with no parallel or intersecting roads or settlements for most of the way.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, it’s rather unlikely that the dispatching of a rescue train onto the Havelock Sub would be impeded by a freight derailment…
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
Yeah…. ecxept one person’s willingness to lead may be another person’s “hold my beer” folly. A prerequisite for local initiative is to understand the risks, evaluate the available options, and to stay within some general lines of prudence and common sense.
Click to expand...

No question.

crs1026 said:
In this case, there are things that would have clearly been the wrong thing to attempt (such as climbing atop a railcar in icy conditions with an axe and attempting to work without fall arrest) but clearly other things that might have been prudent and possible (find passengers a bathroom, find food, find an off-train shelter, request community support ).
Click to expand...

Total Agreement.

crs1026 said:
I am taken aback that the severity of the passengers’ plight - which did exceed mere inconvenience, imho - either was not communicated or was not considered worthy of action. We don’t know enough about the situation - which was not an easy one, under the circumstances) to be able to say where the weakest link lay.

- Paul
Click to expand...

This is key. Do something, appropriate to the situation, including, if possible, bringing in field experts in emergencies (by phoning 911, when all else has failed).
 
This sign has needed replacing for quite some time.
Screenshot_2022-12-27_172449.jpg
 
Northern Light said:
In complete agreement here; but would then add; another VIA trail crew did bring out axes to clear on track debris, and did so successfully and then proceeded. I am not using that example to suggest this was the appropriate course of action here, it surely was not. Rather, I like the initiative shown by the the other crew and that same initiative can be shown any number of other ways, including just phoning 911 from the head end if RTC or VIA HQ aren't being helpful, and you have passengers at risk of diabetic shock, and no working bathrooms. At some point, you just have to own a situation and say; if no one else will lead, I will.
Click to expand...
Which proves at least one thing: that the axes carried on VIA trains can cut wood. The ones we carried in our cruisers I'm not sure would cut butter.
 
APTA-2048 said:
Pretty sure this sign is only 12 years old. I dunno how long these things are supposed to last, but that seems young.
Click to expand...
There are also several new signs above the ticket wickets. I think the central sign (over the Help Desk) will be replaced when the desk (and floor) are replaced/repaired. 2023??
 
roger1818 said:
There is a user on SSP that thinks VIA should have canceled all corridor trains due to the storm. I tend to disagree but am curious what do people here think?
Click to expand...
Hindsight is always 20/20. If they had cancelled all trains and CN freights had kept running there would have been outrage. If they ran them and they got blocked .......
 
I would have expected more defense in depth, but I would say yes the trains should have run. Some of the delays were clearly the result of extraordinary circumstances.

I have not heard anything that implies that either VIA or CN did inadequate winterization this year. Things are already returning to normal operationally (detailment site aside). So the railway was basically ready for winter.

What I question is, CN does clearly plan to go into “quiet mode” around the holiday. So the question is, should that be allowed when passenger continues to operate.

And how much of a “storm readiness” plan dies VIA have, and did it mobilise as designed this time? The storm’s approach was widely predicted and forewarned, VIA should not have been caught unprepared.

The combination of Christmas peak and winter storm approach is the one scenario where I can see VIA asking commuter agencies to make spare trains available as a contingency. It’s not clear to me whether today’s trains were j-trained because of crew shortage, delay protection, or lack of confidence in the operability of the route. At the very least, using commuter cars for a couple of shorter runs might have given VIA a few more degrees of freedom.

The whole airport meltdown we saw this week mostly puts VIA in an opportunity mode. I would not expect VIA to be bulletproof under storm conditions, but I would hope they would attempt to provide service under rough weather constraints, solving whatever problems that poses.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I would have expected more defense in depth, but I would say yes the trains should have run. Some of the delays were clearly the result of extraordinary circumstances.

I have not heard anything that implies that either VIA or CN did inadequate winterization this year. Things are already returning to normal operationally (detailment site aside). So the railway was basically ready for winter.

What I question is, CN does clearly plan to go into “quiet mode” around the holiday. So the question is, should that be allowed when passenger continues to operate.

And how much of a “storm readiness” plan dies VIA have, and did it mobilise as designed this time? The storm’s approach was widely predicted and forewarned, VIA should not have been caught unprepared.

The combination of Christmas peak and winter storm approach is the one scenario where I can see VIA asking commuter agencies to make spare trains available as a contingency. It’s not clear to me whether today’s trains were j-trained because of crew shortage, delay protection, or lack of confidence in the operability of the route. At the very least, using commuter cars for a couple of shorter runs might have given VIA a few more degrees of freedom.

The whole airport meltdown we saw this week mostly puts VIA in an opportunity mode. I would not expect VIA to be bulletproof under storm conditions, but I would hope they would attempt to provide service under rough weather constraints, solving whatever problems that poses.

- Paul
Click to expand...
This is a good idea to use commuter cars for excess capacity. Should be done more often. Any train during a storm is better than driving or taking the bus.
 
I was not intending to mean that GO cars would be intermingled with VIA trainsets. But if VIA borrowed an intact trainset, it could be used for Toronto-Windsor or Toronto-Sarnia or Toronto-London, which might have let VIA use its own equipment differently. Same with AMT and an Ottawa-Montreal or Montreal - Quebec Citytrainset.

Or, at minimum, have a GO trainset available on standby in case a VIA trainset was immobilised. (as we saw)

There would be issues of crew familiarity, perhaps a GO employee would have to co-pilot or ride along as a technician. But this is a period where GO service is curtailed a bit.

- Paul
 
lenaitch said:
Can GO bi-levels be inserted into a train that easily? I thought it was a bit of a process. An entire GO trainset perhaps, but then do you have crew issues? I doubt you can take a crew that normally runs to Barrie and tell them to go the Montreal.
Click to expand...
The HEP is not compatible but they could tow one another. You would need to train Alstom crews on the corridor or qualified VIA engineer's to drive a VIA train.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top