Bordercollie
Senior Member
They are 4 axles short with the F40 so it doesn't make them faster. They have speed restrictions and can only go as fast as 95mph.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
I think it's there as an HEP-rescue locomotive. If the HEP fails only, otherwise the F40 is along for the ride only. I haven't been able to correlate the F40-added Ventures as being problematic HEP, or knowing how the F40's were assigned to certain sets.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The axle count is irrelevant because it's still less than 32
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
VIA officially ruled out tacking cars (never heard about locomotives) onto Venture consists for safety and monitoring reasons - back in the fall of 2024 when CN imposed the crossing speed reductions. (VIA also said it rejected joining Venture sets at that time, then formulated a complete plan for full J-training of the Corridor in March, 2025 then rejected that plan.)
I also think VIA is pinning its hopes on its court cases against CN, still before the Quebec Superior Court, rather than making wholesale changes to its Venture operations. That has not prevented them from making stopgap changes like XL, DXS, now the F40 HEP tack-ons!
smallspy
Senior Member
You assumed wrong.
As pointed out by Reaperexpress and Bordercollie, the axle count is still less than 32 with the addition of the F40.
The first set that they've been using for testing to dial this whole process in was led by the F40 westbound, so it was definitely providing motive power for the train at the least. Eastbound the trainset has the F40 trailing, so it may just be along for the ride at this point.
Or......they could use it for HEP, and free up another 400-ish horsepower for traction in the Charger.
Dan
nfitz
Superstar
If the axle count is still too low, it's only on the short trainsets. If it's neither there for axle count or rescue, then the implication could be that there's not enough power in the trainset as originally designed. Which seems unlikely to me (though with VIA and Siemens anything is possible). All seems very odd ...
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Apparently the F40 could not lead the train due to a broken windshield, which is why the train was Wye'd in Ottawa. At least this makes the train slightly faster than the F40 leading.
The extra locomotive is for backup incase the chargers HEP craps out.
Have you not been paying attention to what happened in Brockville? Multiple trains crapped out and had to be towed to TMC or MMC.
nfitz
Superstar
No I have not been paying attention. I think we are all paying attention.
smallspy
Senior Member
Okay, since it's still not registering.....
- The addition of the F40 is not for axle count.
- The addition of the F40 is not for traction power.
- The Siemens trainsets as they are built are sufficiently powered for both propulsion and onboard services.
If you go back a page you two, you'll see this whole thing came about from a particularly bad weekend were about 7 different trainsets had their HEP fail while enroute. Most of the legacy trains are already operating with two locos, so when the HEP failed on two of those, they were able to transfer the HEP to the second loco. Most of the Siemens sets, however, only have one loco so when the HEP fails on those there is no backup. Thus the addition of the F40 to this one set, and potentially others.
Dan
reaperexpress
Senior Member
No it's not only on the short trainsets, unless by "short" you mean everything other than those two 7-car sets. There are 4 axles per coach and locomotive.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
Agreed, there is some basic math here. 24 axles plus 4 axles does not make 32 axles.
Well, there have been photos on the interweb where the F40 is leading, so whether intended or not, the operating procedure has to accommodate this. The F40 is not always just a deadweight trailing along for the ride.
It doesn't prevent safe and productive operations, but it is a curiosity. Especially when so many runs depend on push-pull to avoid wyeing.
Which makes the situation a bit of a headscratcher. To have that many failures is not coincidence so there is a smoking gun somewhere.
One would think that since the HEP power is part of the core spec, Siemens has an onus to fix it. We haven't heard what the root cause is or what it will take to fix it. Could be bad components, could be a systemmic build error, could be software related. Could simply be a need for better training and operating documentation. The core technology is in use all over the place in Siemens products - electric and diesel - so while it's a puzzle, it's hard to see this as a situation that is likely to continue over time.
I'm confident that VIA will not accept F40 trailers as the long term fix. Not nearly as serious a showstopper as say the LRC wheel/bearing issues which actually sidelined the equipment shortly after it went in service. Just something to, er, enjoy as an oddity until a solution is applied.
- Paul
nfitz
Superstar
There's no reason to be so utterly rude. It's a discussion forum, not a peer-reviewed journal.
Please try to be kinder.
Also why repeat something, that someone else has also pointed out since, and I even acknowledged?
I'm pretty sure that most people don't store it in their head how many axles a trainset has, or what the current limit is. And why the pile on? We don't need "me too" posts.
Though I don't see that anything precludes them to sticking on two old locos - could even stick a freight car between the old loco and the trainset. Surely if they are only doing this with one trainset, it's proof of concept at this stage for the HEP.
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
VIA doesn't have that kind of spare equipment and resources to put two additional locomotives on these trains. Those would need to be pulled from other running trains and those would need to be cancelled due to the lack of equipment.
The whole reason they want to get to 32 axles is so that the crossing arms will activate. Currently they have to slow down to visually determine if the crossing is active.
Freight cars are limited to 75mph. Adding axles to limit a train that can travel at 100mph to 75mph so that it meets the 32 axles count would be completely pointless. It would be nice even slower than the trains slowing at crossings.
To counter this problem they build 7 car trainsets and 2x4 car trains to meet the 32 axle count to get around the speed restrictions.
Go back and read the thread going back 24 months. You will understand a lot.
nfitz
Superstar
I hear Minnesota has some going cheap ...
Whole thing seems rather silly. I have to doubt that this will be widely implemented.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
They don't need to visually inspect the crossings anymore, CN issued an update in September that eliminated that requirement and just created permanent slow orders instead. Trackside Treasure mentions it here, and in much more detail on his blog.