Bordercollie
Senior Member
Why did they remove the Sanders from the F40's? I guess that computer controlled traction control doesn't help.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
ARG1
Senior Member
If by Correspondance A40 you mean Cote-de-Liesse station (ie, the station that the REM and Mascouche Lines will interchange at), it has a name: Cote-de-Liesse. It was only ever called Correspondance A40 during early planning when all they had was a rough alignment.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Remember kids, IF it costs Ott one hundred billion , it will result in spending ten billion more due to Smith demnding, & rightfully so, the CGY/EDM/BF route be completely funded by Ott.
When it comes to bribing CN/CP, they might be more receptive then you think. Their business is much more geered to getting their products to ports ie BC/Mon/Hfx while the Corridor is not very importnt or not enough tht some nice bribes/coercion would force them to work together on certin routes in the Corridor. It would end up being much more cost/time effective. The line is there & some bribes would let us use it right now while spending pennies on the Loonie then building from scrtch.
When it comes to bribing CN/CP, they might be more receptive then you think. Their business is much more geered to getting their products to ports ie BC/Mon/Hfx while the Corridor is not very importnt or not enough tht some nice bribes/coercion would force them to work together on certin routes in the Corridor. It would end up being much more cost/time effective. The line is there & some bribes would let us use it right now while spending pennies on the Loonie then building from scrtch.
asher__jo
Active Member
This isn’t a Canadian problem, rather a problem many developed western countries face. Property values are higher as cities urbanize, look to NYC with the 2nd ave subway. Not sure how you can avoid compensating people for expropriating land unless you proactively buy land before values have risen
micheal_can
Senior Member
Maybe one of them could even be bribed to reactivate the line through the Ottawa Valley to bypass the Toronto-Montreal section to allow more space for passenger trains. I wouldn't doubt both of them could figure out whether that would be worth operating it again.
Krypto98
Active Member
Yeah 0.6% isn't nothing, yes not at steep as the limehouse hill but it's substantial enough that if you encounter wet rail + fall leaves you are not gonna have a fun time.
It's just rule 42 gbo not a PSO in which everyone would get a bulletin regarding that
smallspy
Senior Member
Not just the F40s, but the P42s as well.
An earlier regime at VIA decided that they didn't need them in an effort to reduce maintenance. And so they were plugged and cut out, and later removed altogether.
And keep in mind that in some ways it's trickier with passenger equipment than with freight equipment. Passenger locos have a far lower starting tractive effort, and a far higher "transition" point than freight locos.
That, coupled with the lack of sanders on the VIA locos, means that they can sometimes get into some pretty hairy situations.
Dan
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Interesting that GO decided to keep sanders but VIA removed them .
crs1026
Superstar
I agree - for a more vanilla HFR, none of this is as critical. It does matter for HSR because if the plan really were to reach 3 hour Toronto-Montreal, the approaches can't have any significant delays that eat up that time.... and even a single 45 mph turnout becomes a significant time waster. The current 15 mph limits on the approach to Montreal Central, and the potential for tight 15 mph curvature from the Uxbridge Sub up to Agincourt, must be avoided in any scenario.
To my mind, those grade separations and added track do need to be a priority even for HFR.... unless CN and CPKC are far more amenable to getting out of the way than I suspect, a conflict every half hour will be problemmatic.
To my mind, HSR ought to have trains up to "moderate" speed (150 km/h-ish) very soon after leaving the terminal, and thereafter not encumbered by slow orders below that point.
A complicating factor may be the desire for "suburban" stops in east end GTA and near Dorval - the leg between the central station and the suburban stop need not be full HSR quality because the time saved is trivial. However, there is a risk that if that fact leads to tolerating the current track and turnout speeds, the first 12-15 miles at each end will be inappropriately slow. It boils down to how much money one would allocate to improve those approaches.
I note that H2 plans a fairly major station in west end London, albeit with dedicated trackage from there to Euston. I recall Heathrow Express reaching 100 mph on its dash to Paddington. That range of speed and dedicated trackage seems like a good model to work from.
- Paul
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Any chance they will get anything other than Chargers?Not sure if this was posted yet
"RFQ- Long Distance Regional and Remote Fleet Replacement Project Locomotives"
dowlingm
Senior Member
Dan, is Sandite application a thing in Canada? Might be a way to work around the lack of locomotive sanders.
cplchanb
Senior Member
Most likely no unless there's some left field bid that surprises us all
robmausser
Senior Member
Is there a chance any north american rail will get anything but Chargers haha.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
It really has become the North American standard locomotive for intercity passenger railroads:
Mr Finish Line
Active Member
I did notice the wealth of space in Agincourt Yard, I wasn't concerned about that, more just about the general co-operation needed from CP to go through Belleville sub and Agincourt Yard. I understand that CP is happy to have us upgrade Havelock for them. I guess you think they're willing to work with the feds to quad track Belleville sub?
Obviously I'm not a railroad guy, but I lurk here and like to stare at maps and wonder what's possible, while trying to stay away from fantasyland.