VIA Rail

[Urban Sky]

To expand a 5-car set to a 7-car set, Via needs one additional economy car and one business car. That means that three 5-car sets can be reorganized to create two 7-car sets, with one cab car and one locomotive left over.

Meanwhile the two existing 7-car sets can be reorganized into three 4- or 5-car sets with the addition of a locomotive. My understanding is that the LRC and Ren coaches are being retired more urgently than the P42 locomotives, so it should be possible to temporarily delay the retirement of one P42 locomotive until the CN restrictions are resolved.

So yes, assembling two 7-car Siemens sets would reduce the number of Siemens sets by 1. And it might enable the number of legacy sets to be increased by 1. Which overall I would consider to be an improvement since it would enable all 5 sets involved to be immune to CN's restrictions rather than just 2 of the sets currently.

My understanding is that car type „Business 1-A“ (26XX) doesn‘t have a regular diaphragm at the locomotive-facing end and can therefore only be attached to a locomotive. I tried to find a clear photo, but all I could find is whatever this screenshot of a Youtube-video shows at 17:35 minutes:

This would only leave 3 of the 5 cars which can be reused as intermediary cars, so you would need to slaughter 2 trainsets for every 3 extended trainsets - which would then have not just different car layouts but even a different number of Business Class seats cars.

Also, I believe that the contract with Siemens only allows certain configurations, presumably the one which got tested (Note how the additional Business Class car is 27XX and not 26XX):

2311
2811
2911
2906*
2706* business class
2711 business class
2611 business class
2211

Given that Siemens is guaranteeing a certain level of reliability and availability, it would most likely insist on very extensive testing before accepting any deviating configuration which was not explicitly mentioned in the contract.

It really might not be as easy and straightforward as it appears from the sidelines…

 

[nfitz]

Buying 64 more coaches to fill out all 32 sets to 7 cars seems unlikely.

They should certainly be doing a capital funding request to the ministry for this - if only driving home the issue.

And/or buy the things, and sue CN for the cost.

And hope the next government has more backbone.

I guess we'll see. Chrystia Freeland is certainly known for backbone - so there's a chance!

 

[dowlingm]

I never claimed that assembling two or three 7-car Siemens sets would "resolve the situation", I claimed that it would reduce the impacts. Do you disagree that using Siemens sets on the only equipment rotations that would allow Siemens sets to avoid the CN speed restrictions would reduce the impacts of the speed restrictions?

If it’s true that VIA is not putting additional Siemens trainsets in service for now, it makes no sense to me that VIA would not create sufficient trainsets of those already accepted to at minimum cover the existing 32-axle services at all times, but if they can form even more (especially if also waiting for windshields on end vehicles anyway) then adopt the Ryanair approach - flood Reservia with cheap seats to fill trains.

But this is an organization that this week, apparently, sent a test train (trainset 03, which had been parked for some time) on a test trip from Montreal to Alexandria but then had to send it all the way to Ottawa at god knows what cost in crew hours, because enough diesel hadn’t been loaded by the yard to turn it back to Montreal. Not exactly giving confidence of solid decision making. https://groups.io/g/Canadian-Passenger-Rail/message/101423

 

[Bordercollie]

If it’s true that VIA is not putting additional Siemens trainsets in service for now, it makes no sense to me that VIA would not create sufficient trainsets of those already accepted to at minimum cover the existing 32-axle services at all times, but if they can form even more (especially if also waiting for windshields on end vehicles anyway) then adopt the Ryanair approach - flood Reservia with cheap seats to fill trains.

But this is an organization that this week, apparently, sent a test train (trainset 03, which had been parked for some time) on a test trip from Montreal to Alexandria but then had to send it all the way to Ottawa at god knows what cost in crew hours, because enough diesel hadn’t been loaded by the yard to turn it back to Montreal. Not exactly giving confidence of solid decision making. https://groups.io/g/Canadian-Passenger-Rail/message/101423

They couldn't get a fueling truck to meet them in Alexandria?

They can utilize the cab cars in additional trains they just need to couple them infront of other cab cars. Or have two locomotives in one train.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

We need to blow up these legacy organizations and strip CN their legacy legal rights from a century ago.

AoD

 

[Urban Sky]

They can utilize the cab cars in additional trains they just need to couple them infront of other cab cars. Or have two locomotives in one train.

Not exactly sure what you are proposing here, but the cab cars have regular American couplers on the cab side and semi-permanent couplers on the other, so the only way to couple them is front-to-front or back-to-back…

 

[Bordercollie]

Not exactly sure what you are proposing here, but the cab cars have regular American couplers on the cab side and semi-permanent couplers on the other, so the only way to couple them is front-to-front or back-to-back…

There is a video on YouTube where brightline swapped out an AAR coupler for a permanent one in half a day so if there is a will there is a way.

 

[Urban Sky]

There is a video on YouTube where brightline swapped out an AAR coupler for a permanent one in half a day so if there is a will there is a way.

I don‘t know the specifics about Brightline‘s contract with Siemens, but VIA‘s contract with Siemens includes maintenance&parts and guarantees about certaib minimum availability levels and that requires very specific and strict contractual terms defining what VIA may or may not do with the fleet. It‘s like you are free to open up your iPhone and play around with (or swap) its components, but if you decide to do so you shouldn‘t expect Apple to any longer accept any liability or provide any warranty or free support…

 

[Bordercollie]

I don‘t know the specifics about Brightline‘s contract with Siemens, but VIA‘s contract with Siemens includes maintenance&parts and guarantees about certaib minimum availability levels and that requires very specific and strict contractual terms defining what VIA may or may not do with the fleet. It‘s like you are free to open up your iPhone and play around with (or swap) its components, but if you decide to do so you shouldn‘t expect Apple to any longer accept any liability or provide any warranty or free support…

I also would like to point out that VIA should have known this was going to be an issue if you look at CN's handling of Amtrak.
Since down south they also require 32 axle counts so why would it be any different?
This will also mean that the Northlander sets will be subject to the same speed restrictions.

 

[crs1026]

We need to blow up these legacy organizations and strip CN their legacy legal rights from a century ago.

AoD

Well, in fact it was the 1990’s when we blew up any legacy rights…. And we did it in exchange for selling shares and reaping a huge pile of money for the taxpayers.
Be careful what you ask for, it’s what you get applies here. We did this to ourselves.

- Paul

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Well, in fact it was the 1990’s when we blew up any legacy rights…. And we did it in exchange for selling shares and reaping a huge pile of money for the taxpayers.
Be careful what you ask for, it’s what you get applies here. We did this to ourselves.

- Paul

Yep I do remember this one - it was a mistake of all times.

AoD

 

[crs1026]

Yep I do remember this one - it was a mistake of all times.

AoD

Yes and no. Having one privatised railway and one nationalised railway was not sustainable. Privatising CN was not a bad move…. But letting both railways off the hook by relieving them of an enforceable obligation towards VIA was the mistake. Investors should never have been given an expectation that Canada will not intrude on their property rights in this respect.
On paper, the law would appear to have retained this obligation, but Ottawa seems determined not to enforce or defend it. I really don’t understand why.

-Paul

 

[robmausser]

We need to blow up these legacy organizations and strip CN their legacy legal rights from a century ago.

AoD

CN was a crown corp until the 1980s, so quite the opposite happened.

Now they are one of the largest companies in Canada. Stopping them will be a very impossible task.

Also remember that Canada ships way more freight by railcar than places like Europe. As progressive and future thinking we consider Europe for their passenger rail service, they ship way more freight by trucks on roads, which is less quick and less efficient and more costly than raill, and way worse environmentally.

The government needs to build our own passenger rail lines where possible (Alto, buying up GEXR and branch line to Windsor, Missing Link project) and leave the usage of CN and CPs mainline rail lines to freight imo. Its a losing battle.

 

[dowlingm]

the choice in the 90s wasn’t one privatized (class I) and one not. The avoidable choice was selling the freight business and infrastructure as a single entity, rather than separate the Infrastructure Manager, which could then choose to assign operating rights, or lease parts of it (the BC Rail model)

There is little point in hoping for the current or alternative governments to make great strides in rail acquisition when they have made it clear that investment is a thing pension funds are intended to do rather than the treasury directly, and thus even straightforward capacity improvements like doubling Fallowfield-Federal-Ottawa are in abeyance.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

I also would like to point out that VIA should have known this was going to be an issue if you look at CN's handling of Amtrak.
Since down south they also require 32 axle counts so why would it be any different?
This will also mean that the Northlander sets will be subject to the same speed restrictions.

This CN-Amtrak history doesn't account for the intervening 15 years...

The year 1993 is where the loss-of-shunt investigations were started, but they really didn't pick up any co-ordinated effort until a Detroit-Chicago Amtrak train operating on CN tracks in Michigan's Canton-Township hit a vehicle and killed the five occupants on July 9, 2009. There had been several documented reports of activation failures at this one crossing with no apparent equipment malfunction found. The US Federal Regulator found CN at fault, which was the start of mandated minimum-axle counts, and CN was directed to lead an industry-wide task force to find mitigations for the loss of shunt issue.

So it would seem these shortcomings were noted in 2009 and in 2021 when the first Ventures arrives, and 2022-2024 when the Ventures entered service across the Corridor on CN tracks but only in October 2024 when the Ventures began Southwest Ontario operations in earnest did CN start to restrict VIA.

Certainly, the communications between CN and VIA leading the crossing speed reductions CN imposed were (as-presented by both sides) vague and not exhaustive.