VIA Rail

[KevinT]

A technical question..... is the shunt resistance threshold for crossing gates different from the shunt resistance threshold that determines "occupancy" for CTC?
I'm not aware of any incidents where Venture trains disappeared altogether from RTC screens, if there were, one might have heard mention of these in the grapevine.
Granted, crossing protection is a more demanding scenario as even a few seconds disappearance might make the passage over a crossing unsafe....where a train disaapearing and then reappearing from the RTC console might simply trigger a nuisance alarm for the RTC.... I'm just wondering if the technology is identical or not. If similar, one would think CN would have data on any such disappearances also..... if in fact these disappearances do happen.

To the best of my knowledge (this isn't my field), the block signal systems work on an "Is a train there or isn't it?" basis, essentially digital, whereas the crossing gates do speed prediction based on the rate of change of an inductive signature, essentially analog. The shunt resistance could be low enough for digital to still work, but too high for the analog prediction to be accurate enough to meet the regulated protection time requirements. I design electronics for a living, and it's all cut-and-dried when the signals are clean, but messy as hell out in the real world. I don't envy the folks that have to work this one out...

Edit to add: Think of the rate of change of the inductive signature like plucking a note on a guitar string, then sliding your finger down the fret board to change the note. The shunt resistance is like the pressure you apply with your finger; not enough, and the pitch won't change.

 

[Natika33]

Train capacity requirements and trainset cycling is what determines where the Ventures are slotted. The KW route is not marketable, I agree - but the rails are 4 feet 8.5 inches apart, so it makes as much sense to use Venture there as anywhere else, given the need to cycle the equipment and the need to have an empty seat for each ticket sold.

- Paul

Just to add, the conductor let me know they are slowly replacing older trains with new ones as they come out. For the Sarnia, that means the new trains complete the trip twice a week.

 

[Bordercollie]

Just to add, the conductor let me know they are slowly replacing older trains with new ones as they come out. For the Sarnia, that means the new trains complete the trip twice a week.

I don't know if they are pulling LRC cars first or not but if they can stay a bit longer taking 2 cars from a new consist and adding them to existing ones could make 3 consists be able to run at full speed. I guess VIA really wants to retire those LRC's.

 

[crs1026]

I don't know if they are pulling LRC cars first or not but if they can stay a bit longer taking 2 cars from a new consist and adding them to existing ones could make 3 consists be able to run at full speed. I guess VIA really wants to retire those LRC's.

I would expect VIA will not lengthen its consists, as a) costly and unproductive but more importantly b) that would effectively be caving to CN's position, which would undermine the legal arguments and probably remove any sense of urgency to resolving the dispute. It's more important to rebut CN's whole position once and for all than to appear to validate it, even at short term pain.
As for the LRC's, the conspiracy theorist in me imagines that there is a beancounter somewhere (more likely in Ottawa than in Montreal) insisting that VIA expedite LRC retirements...on the premise that VIA was "permitted" to renew its fleet but not to enlarge it, and maintaining both sets of assets is an unauthorised manipulation of the asset side of VIA's balance sheet (I know, the asset value for the LRC fleet must be pretty low, but these are bureaucrats I'm talking about).
Most importantly, I suspect that VIA's operating people are crossing more fingers every day as they dispatch LRC consists....and maybe Transport Canada folks are breathing down their necks..... but I'm happy to see VIA squeezing every last drop of juice out of the grapefruit. The more seats sold, and the more proof that demand exists, the better the case for buying more Ventures.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

I think they can't change the size of the Venture sets right? The Sarnia train often runs with 2 or 3 car sets. Way less than the Ventures ...6?

The Venture sets can be lengthened and shortened as needed, but there are also specific car types that preclude their easy use elsewhere in the trainsets should they try to reform them.

The 2/3 car Sarnia trains that you're thinking of are trains 85/88, which haven't run since 2018 or so. The current Sarnia trains use trainsets that come to/from Ottawa (usually), and are generally 5 or 6 car trainsets.

Dan

 

[robmausser]

I don't know if they are pulling LRC cars first or not but if they can stay a bit longer taking 2 cars from a new consist and adding them to existing ones could make 3 consists be able to run at full speed. I guess VIA really wants to retire those LRC's.

Its my understanding that the Venture sets are 100% incompatible with the LRC ones. You can't add the LRC or Budd cars to the Venture trains. It can only be done with that Ottawa/Montreal train that splits off. Because its a completely separate consist with its own prime mover and HEP

 

[Urban Sky]

Yeah my point was just that it's not good to act incredulous in response to a post that is totally reasonable (regardless of who the post is from).

Sorry, I just stumbled across this again and you are right, I hastily read his post and therefore wrote an unnecessarily annoyed post which became superfluous the second I fully read his post. My apologies and best wishes for the new year to @Bojaxs!

I would expect VIA will not lengthen its consists, as a) costly and unproductive but more importantly b) that would effectively be caving to CN's position, which would undermine the legal arguments and probably remove any sense of urgency to resolving the dispute. It's more important to rebut CN's whole position once and for all than to appear to validate it, even at short term pain.

Agreed, if VIA were to extend the Siemens trainsets to 7 car consists, they would just invite CN to suddenly realize that 36 or 40 and not just 32 axles are required to ensure safe operations at full track speed. Either CN has valid reasons they so far successfully hid from public scrutiny or they deserve a very public slap in the face. Only a court decision can provide the necessary clarity and I‘m glad that VIA calls what so far seems to be a rather audacious bluff.

As for the LRC's, the conspiracy theorist in me imagines that there is a beancounter somewhere (more likely in Ottawa than in Montreal) insisting that VIA expedite LRC retirements...on the premise that VIA was "permitted" to renew its fleet but not to enlarge it, and maintaining both sets of assets is an unauthorised manipulation of the asset side of VIA's balance sheet (I know, the asset value for the LRC fleet must be pretty low, but these are bureaucrats I'm talking about).
Most importantly, I suspect that VIA's operating people are crossing more fingers every day as they dispatch LRC consists....and maybe Transport Canada folks are breathing down their necks..... but I'm happy to see VIA squeezing every last drop of juice out of the grapefruit. The more seats sold, and the more proof that demand exists, the better the case for buying more Ventures.

- Paul

My understanding is that TC is only tolerated the continued operation of the LRC fleet until their replacement is available, which is why they are retired at a similar speed as the deliveries of the Siemens trainsets are accepted.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

There haven't been any more LRC retirements since last March. There seemed to be a push to do it, then the push stopped. (Unless anyone's seen evidence to the contrary.) I understand that the removal from service AND scrapping of the LRC cars is part and parcel of the Venture implementation and both fleets can't exist fully concurrently.

It is amazing to see VIA No 52 J'd with No 62's Legacy consists since December 16. Photo is Dec. 31.

I think it's a good thing that the LRC consists have been lengthened, with a few trains a day cancelled for the holiday period.

Apparently, the normal Venture rotation is plugged into VIA's reservation system effective Jan. 14, 2025.

I'm surprised VIA has not even considered lengthening Venture consists. I agree with Paul that this would be giving in to CN therefore weakening VIA's judicial review case.

CN has no smoking gun for the LOS restrictions. Working on a blog post on The Rest of the Story....

 

[Bordercollie]

Its my understanding that the Venture sets are 100% incompatible with the LRC ones. You can't add the LRC or Budd cars to the Venture trains. It can only be done with that Ottawa/Montreal train that splits off. Because its a completely separate consist with its own prime mover and HEP

I don't mean to add LRC cars to a venture consist but to cannibalize new deliveries and add them to existing ones in service. If at that point CN says oh you need X many axles then you really have a case.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I sometimes wander about realtor.ca looking at homes for sale, and today ended up on this house in Brockville, https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/27456785/64-abbott-street-brockville-810-brockville

It struck me that Brockville might be the perfect, equidistant place to live on the VIA Corridor if you need to fly (or visit the three major cities). If you want to fly from Pearson, it's 4.5 hours by VIA to YYZ (via the UPE). If you want to fly from Montreal, it's 4.5 hours to YUL. If you want to fly from Ottawa it's 2.5 hours by VIA (via OC Transpo). All those times include a 20 min walk from the above address to the Brockville Stn.

 

[robmausser]

There haven't been any more LRC retirements since last March. There seemed to be a push to do it, then the push stopped. (Unless anyone's seen evidence to the contrary.

I believe they just got rid of the LRC cars that were in very bad shape, and the rest need to be retired but they aren't in such dire straits.

Also, they can cannibalize the retired ones for parts now.

 

[Urban Sky]

I don't mean to add LRC cars to a venture consist but to cannibalize new deliveries and add them to existing ones in service. If at that point CN says oh you need X many axles then you really have a case.

My understanding is that the Business car adjacent to the locomotive can only be attached to a locomotive (and the cab car needs to go at the train end, obviously). Therefore, you only have 1 Business car and 2 Economy cars to salvage from any Siemens trainset you break up. This would imply that VIA either has to sacrifze a full Siemens trainset for each trainset they want to upgrade to full speed or accept 3 different configurations (2B3E, 2B5E, 3B4E) where one of the main hopes for the new fleet was fleet standardization like it has already been achieved on the QMOs.

The only place to react to CN‘s seemingly unreasonable demands is in court…

 

[smallspy]

My understanding is that the Business car adjacent to the locomotive can only be attached to a locomotive (and the cab car needs to go at the train end, obviously). Therefore, you only have 1 Business car and 2 Economy cars to salvage from any Siemens trainset you break up. This would imply that VIA either has to sacrifze a full Siemens trainset for each trainset they want to upgrade to full speed or accept 3 different configurations (2B3E, 2B5E, 3B4E) where one of the main hopes for the new fleet was fleet standardization like it has already been achieved on the QMOs.

The car structure on the 1A car is the exact same as all of the other non-cab cars - all that they've done to the exterior is install a stainless steel blanking plate over the gangway opening at the end adjacent to the locomotive. This can be removed, and in fact several of Brightline's additional cars are being shipped with this plate installed. They are then removed once they arrive in Orlando and then get a diaphragm installed to allow them to be inserted into their existing trainsets.

That said.....there are definitely changes to the interior configuration of the 1A cars which would make them very awkward to use marshalled in with an existing trainset.

Dan

 

[Bordercollie]

The car structure on the 1A car is the exact same as all of the other non-cab cars - all that they've done to the exterior is install a stainless steel blanking plate over the gangway opening at the end adjacent to the locomotive. This can be removed, and in fact several of Brightline's additional cars are being shipped with this plate installed. They are then removed once they arrive in Orlando and then get a diaphragm installed to allow them to be inserted into their existing trainsets.

That said.....there are definitely changes to the interior configuration of the 1A cars which would make them very awkward to use marshalled in with an existing trainset.

Dan

Couldn't you put a cab car infront of a cab car and have no passengers in it?

Two locomotives elephant style could provide additional axles.

It would be temporary until they can figure out the low shunt signal issue..

 

[Urban Sky]

Couldn't you put a cab car infront of a cab car and have no passengers in it?

Cab cars have an American coupler attached to their cab side.

Two locomotives elephant style could provide additional axles.

Locomotives also have an American coupler on the cab side.

It would be temporary until they can figure out the low shunt signal issue..

The technical solution is to procure and equip the trains with shunt enhancers. The legal solution is to have a court overturn these speed restrictions. There are no other viable solutions.