News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 113     0 
News   Mar 31, 2026
City Council March, 2026: Plenty of Rental, Mutli-Phase Redevelopments Approved
 1.4K     2 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Building Toronto’s Skyline Podcast Event to Feature Brad Bradford in Concord
 234     3 

VIA Rail

andrewmaps said:
What is the cost for a shunt enhancer for one locomotive? Would buying 32(?) of these be a more simple solution? How long would it take to install? I hate the idea of giving in to the CN bullies, but the speed restriction should be lifted asap. Maybe the court could decide that CN pays for them after the fact?
Click to expand...
I don't think cost is the biggest issue at this point. The retrofit would have to be budgeted for. The biggest issue is...they're not designed yet. The onboard shunt enhancers are not an off-the-shelf item. The exemption to have them permitted in the US (a height-above-rail regulation waiver) took a circuitous path to approval. The technology is apparently coming from a European company, bearing in mind onboard shunt enhancers have been in service in the UK for up to five decades. Design, risk assessment, testing, regulatory approval, installation for the 32-set fleet and the usual red-tape involved with all steps would be encountered.

If OSE implementation were to go forward, this would involve testing, regulatory approval and a stepwise implementation process. Any list of standardized protocols for the implementation of OSEs on passenger trains will have to include several key recommendations. Such trains would be light weight consists in passenger and commuter service of less than 400 trailing tons and 32 axles. Antennae would have to be mounted on both the A and B trucks of the leading equipment. Antennae would be of a proper shape for specific truck types, both trucks' OSEs functioning together in parallel with the rail, and centred over the rail. Locomotive engineers would need a visible fault indicator if the antennae or system became faulty. There would have to be inspection at least semi-annually, with records kept.

More to the point, CN has yet to prove loss-of-shunt is even 'a thing' in the Corridor.
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
I don't think cost is the biggest issue at this point. The retrofit would have to be budgeted for. The biggest issue is...they're not designed yet. The onboard shunt enhancers are not an off-the-shelf item. The exemption to have them permitted in the US (a height-above-rail regulation waiver) took a circuitous path to approval. The technology is apparently coming from a European company, bearing in mind onboard shunt enhancers have been in service in the UK for up to five decades. Design, risk assessment, testing, regulatory approval, installation for the 32-set fleet and the usual red-tape involved with all steps would be encountered.

If OSE implementation were to go forward, this would involve testing, regulatory approval and a stepwise implementation process. Any list of standardized protocols for the implementation of OSEs on passenger trains will have to include several key recommendations. Such trains would be light weight consists in passenger and commuter service of less than 400 trailing tons and 32 axles. Antennae would have to be mounted on both the A and B trucks of the leading equipment. Antennae would be of a proper shape for specific truck types, both trucks' OSEs functioning together in parallel with the rail, and centred over the rail. Locomotive engineers would need a visible fault indicator if the antennae or system became faulty. There would have to be inspection at least semi-annually, with records kept.

More to the point, CN has yet to prove loss-of-shunt is even 'a thing' in the Corridor.
Click to expand...
I thought they showed it happened once on the drummondville sub?
 
Bordercollie said:
I thought they showed it happened once on the drummondville sub?
Click to expand...
March 22, 2024 - Ron Bartels, VIA Specialist Director, Engineering emails, "Jacques Luce from CN just called to tell me that they have noticed some potentially inconsistent shunting incidents with some VIA trains. He didn’t have all the details but wants to have a call with VIA next Monday afternoon at 3:00 PM. He mentioned Venture trains and also trains with P42 leading. He said we may need to increase our axle count, but at the moment they don’t have enough info to come to any conclusions." Graphic data from nine crossings had been presented by the National Loss of Shunt Technical Committee: Floating Shunt Phenomenon Overview for VIA Rail dated April 1, 2024. The data was from March 22 (erratic shunt detected) as well as XP-4 grade crossing protection data on March 26 during the passage of VIA No 24 and CN No 121. Importantly, at this time Ventures had been operating on the CN Kingston Subdivision to Coteau since November 2022, and to Toronto since October 2023 without any restrictions from CN. In addition, the restrictions imposed by CN in March, 2024 applied to all VIA trains, not just Venture-equipped trains.

March 28, 2024 - VIA requests additional information regarding restrictions that CN issued for certain grade crossings on the Drummondville Subdivision "DRMV" for all passenger equipment operating with less than 32 axles: at MP 8.16, MP 33.63, MP 40.02, MP 46.07, MP 46.35, MP 51.72, MP 55.66, MP 60.54, MP 60.80, MP 61.83, MP 64.03, MP 74.11 and MP 80.17. A VIA analysis of the CN data subsequently showed that 77 of the 148 occurrences raised as issues by CN were identified at one specific railway crossing on CN’s Drummondville subdivision (MP 40.02). These repetitive occurrences would point to an infrastructure issue that may have been specific to that crossing.

March 29, 2024 - CN responds to a VIA inquiry regarding the Drummondville Subdivision restrictions, stating, “I cannot emphasize enough to you and the rest of VIA Rail this is not a wayside equipment problem. This is a rail-to-wheel interface issue that causes sporadic shunting.”

April 9, 2024 - CN shares a PowerPoint summarizing poor shunting incidents from the Drummondville subdivision and their investigations into loss of shunt incidents in the U.S. as well as data from the Drummondville subdivision documenting 148 short warning events - what CN considered to be short warning times at seven Drummondville Subdivision crossings equipped with XP-4 grade crossing predictors (GCP) from December, 2023 to March, 2024 - the data upon which CN had relied when issuing the 103.1(f) special instructions issued on March 22, 2024. VIA analysis of the data shows that 77 occurred at a single crossing with only one non-compliant. CN did not identify whether warning times were tested for all 49 Drummondville Subdivision crossings or only for the seven identified crossings; compare warning times of VIA trains with those of other rolling stock equipment (such as freight trains), or identify whether warning times involved VIA’s 24-axle Venture trains, its Legacy trains (HEP/LRC), or any other non-VIA trains. This data comprises the only information ever disclosed to VIA relevant to any potential LOS.
 
I wonder if they are having more problems with the Ventures in the USA becasue they operate at lower speeds? My thinking is that when running at higher speeds cleans the wheels more. Just a guess.
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
I don't think cost is the biggest issue at this point. The retrofit would have to be budgeted for. The biggest issue is...they're not designed yet. The onboard shunt enhancers are not an off-the-shelf item. The exemption to have them permitted in the US (a height-above-rail regulation waiver) took a circuitous path to approval. The technology is apparently coming from a European company, bearing in mind onboard shunt enhancers have been in service in the UK for up to five decades. Design, risk assessment, testing, regulatory approval, installation for the 32-set fleet and the usual red-tape involved with all steps would be encountered.

If OSE implementation were to go forward, this would involve testing, regulatory approval and a stepwise implementation process. Any list of standardized protocols for the implementation of OSEs on passenger trains will have to include several key recommendations. Such trains would be light weight consists in passenger and commuter service of less than 400 trailing tons and 32 axles. Antennae would have to be mounted on both the A and B trucks of the leading equipment. Antennae would be of a proper shape for specific truck types, both trucks' OSEs functioning together in parallel with the rail, and centred over the rail. Locomotive engineers would need a visible fault indicator if the antennae or system became faulty. There would have to be inspection at least semi-annually, with records kept.

More to the point, CN has yet to prove loss-of-shunt is even 'a thing' in the Corridor.
Click to expand...
Not to be that guy, but.....

Amtrak is retrofitting shunt enhancers to all of their locomotives and cab cars. Almost $59mil to purchase and fit them to 443 locos and 192 cab cars, which thankfully would mean that it would cost VIA far less than Urban Sky and I projected. (https://media.amtrak.com/2024/10/amtrak-awarded-126m-in-federal-grants/)

The problem is that it took 2 years for Amtrak to find, test, qualify and then have them certified before they got to the point that they could order them. A similar lead time would be extremely detrimental for VIA.

Of course, that doesn't change the fact that CN still has not proved a goddamned thing in this whole debacle. They're trying to make themselves out to be the judge, jury and executioner. That's why VIA's taking them to court - they are not a regulator, and they should not be acting as such.

roger1818 said:
I wonder if they are having more problems with the Ventures in the USA becasue they operate at lower speeds? My thinking is that when running at higher speeds cleans the wheels more. Just a guess.
Click to expand...

They run them at 110mph on a number of lines outside of Chicago. Speed is not the issue, nor concern - until the train gets to a level crossing.

Dan
 
Ventures to the Far North and Montreal!
Siemens Venture sets 24 and 26 made a weekend trip to Northern Quebec. On January 25, Set 24 led Set 26 as CN No 613 north from Montreal en route to Senneterre-Parent, QC for winter conditions testing for the Ontario Northland Railway. ON already has Venture sets on order.

Today, EXO in Montreal is publicizing their first (of ten) Siemens locomotives. Interestingly, their EXO 1400 tagged along behind VIA's Set 24 and Set 25, arriving in Montreal on November 18.

Meanwhile, in the Corridor, VIA is set to reposition Ventures from Southwest Ontario service east, making two morning J-Trains of four Ventures, and operating more Montreal-Toronto Ventures, likely February 4. Some runs may be Venture-equipped as early as February 2. This should reduce, somewhat, the impact of CN's crossing speed reductions throughout the Corridor. February 7 will see CN's motion to strike VIA's judicial review of the reductions heard in Federal Court.

With 23 of 32 sets in revenue service, 99% of Quebec-Montreal-Ottawa trains are Venture-equipped, though to a lesser degree west of there. Nominally 13 of 28 daily Corridor consists, with around 11 LRC and 4 HEP, with some mixing of equipment types within those consists. We should be able to assess the impact of Venture set numbers in revenue service throughout the entire Corridor after that first week in February.
 
Last edited:
smallspy said:
Amtrak is retrofitting shunt enhancers to all of their locomotives and cab cars. Almost $59mil to purchase and fit them to 443 locos and 192 cab cars, which thankfully would mean that it would cost VIA far less than Urban Sky and I projected. (https://media.amtrak.com/2024/10/amtrak-awarded-126m-in-federal-grants/)

The problem is that it took 2 years for Amtrak to find, test, qualify and then have them certified before they got to the point that they could order them. A similar lead time would be extremely detrimental for VIA.

Of course, that doesn't change the fact that CN still has not proved a goddamned thing in this whole debacle. They're trying to make themselves out to be the judge, jury and executioner. That's why VIA's taking them to court - they are not a regulator, and they should not be acting as such.
Click to expand...
So to connect the dots:

USD $59M for 635 bogies = USD $91k per bogie = CAD $131k per bogie

So for 32 locomotives and 32 cab cars, it would cost about $8.4 Million. Or half that if we only need the locos.
 
I was just checking the Kitchener schedule. Is there really only 1 train a day now? Since Covid?

Really sucks for those in Stratford, etc.
 
Bordercollie said:
Since the GO pilot was cancelled yes.
Click to expand...
Given the absurd time of day that GO Stratford train left, they were pretty screwed if that was supposed to be the replacement. It was 6:45 AM, and the cancelled VIA train was at 8:40 AM and 9:05 pm.

So sad - VIA had 5 trains a day (in each direction) when I first went there. Then four in the late 1980s. Three shortly after that. I was still under the impression they were looking at rolling back the cut to two trains.

When did VIA cut back to a single train?

1738398818082.png
 
E•MO•TION said:
I’d argue that the aforementioned GO trips provide far more value than VIA 85 and 88 ever did. I’m not sorry to see them gone.
Click to expand...
They are useless to get from London to Guelph, or Stratford to Toronto.

Based on the history, I suspect that it's just an excuse, and sooner or later we'll see abandon any pretense of service on this route. Go back to running Sarnia trains through Brantford.
 
With the current state of infrastructure along the Guelph Sub (and the ridiculous constraints it imposes on capacity east of Kitchener and on speeds west of it), GO offering a somewhat frequent connecting bus service Kitchener-London would provide infinitely more utility at the same (if not lower) taxpayer expense than anything VIA could offer…
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top