[smallspy]

The F59s are fine, it has nothing to do with them.

There has apparently been an edict made that prevents all trains from running with 2 locomotives at the head end. It seems that it doesn't preclude locos at both ends however, but GO hasn't yet had the opportunity to turn some of them around to use them as such.

I'm still trying to find out what exactly has caused this, and whether it affects VIA or UPX as well.

Dan

 

[rbt]

The F59s are fine, it has nothing to do with them.

There has apparently been an edict made that prevents all trains from running with 2 locomotives at the head end. It seems that it doesn't preclude locos at both ends however, but GO hasn't yet had the opportunity to turn some of them around to use them as such.

I'm still trying to find out what exactly has caused this, and whether it affects VIA or UPX as well.

Interesting. I don't see anything obvious within recent Transportation Safety Board investigations.

Could it be as simple as distributing the weight to for bridge loads?

 

[RU479]

The F59s are fine, it has nothing to do with them.

There has apparently been an edict made that prevents all trains from running with 2 locomotives at the head end. It seems that it doesn't preclude locos at both ends however, but GO hasn't yet had the opportunity to turn some of them around to use them as such.

I'm still trying to find out what exactly has caused this, and whether it affects VIA or UPX as well.

Dan

so does this mean the London Train will run under an L10L consist formation?

 

[smallspy]

Interesting. I don't see anything obvious within recent Transportation Safety Board investigations.

Could it be as simple as distributing the weight to for bridge loads?

Potentially.

But this is system-wide - not just for the London trains - and I can't think of what bridge may be in such dire straits as to require this kind of limitation.

so does this mean the London Train will run under an L10L consist formation?

It sounds like that's what they're trying to get set up for.

Dan

 

[RU479]

I’m still left wondering why there was a sudden ban on doubleheader passenger trains, and who orchestrated this edict?

 

[Bordercollie]

I’m still left wondering why there was a sudden ban on doubleheader passenger trains, and who orchestrated this edict?

But when breaking in a locomotive they have two at the head end.

So I presume non corridor trains like the Canadian are exempt?

Could it be an emissions compliance thing?

 

[RU479]

Could it be an emissions compliance thing?

I doubt it. Seems as though multiple locomotives are still allowed on one train, but they are just not allowed to be situated right next to each other on the consist.

 

[Bordercollie]

I doubt it. Seems as though multiple locomotives are still allowed on one train, but they are just not allowed to be situated right next to each other on the consist.

But the Canadian requires multiple locomotives for their consist. Is that an exception?

 

[reaperexpress]

What's next, distributed power on the Canadian?

 

[Bordercollie]

What's next, distributed power on the Canadian?

That won't work as you cannot pass through the locomotive.

Why is it only a restriction with passenger locomotives? Makes no sense.

 

[RU479]

207 has been delivered to Mac yard

 

[RU479]

Passed by Willowbrook and noted the following

557, 558, and 559 resting by themselves
206 still facing the incorrect way

 

[RU479]

I’m guessing they will wye one of the F59s by next week to have it face west for the London train.

 

[RU479]

The bike cars have been reinstalled on the Niagara trains.

 

[Richard White]

The bike cars have been reinstalled on the Niagara trains.

They also have dedicated stroller carriages this year