News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.9K     0 

That's not a huge impact on the schedule, and the business case for signalling probably isn't there.... but one does wonder how much paperwork that creates. I wonder if the bypass is Rule 105 territory (ie first one there can proceed, user watch carefully) - not ideal for passenger service, TC might not be impressed....otherwise, does it take an additional OCS clearance just to use the bypass.
Plus, having the crew take time to sweep out those switches even a couple of times in the winter because the train got there before a foreman could... will affect timekeeping. Switch heaters and power switches have their uses...but this isn't that busy a track.
Probably something that just has to be.

- Paul
Down the rabbit hole I went.... based on 2006-2008 data (ie how it was back when the Northlander was still running)....
Going southward, ONR's Temagami Sub leaves OCS territory and enters "Cautionary Limits" at Mile 2.9, which is about 1.3 miles north of North Bay station. From MP 2.9 onwards, southward trains operated per Rule 94 - ie without written authority, on basically a visual basis, 15 mph top speed, "able to stop within half the range of vision of a track unit".
After leaving the station (MP 1.6 Temagami Sub), upon reaching Franklin St (MP 1.21) southbound trains may encounter switching moves from North Bay Yard using the Temagami Sub for headroom, again with trains watching out for each other on a visual sighting basis. As of 2008, there appears to be no specific instruction or measure preventing switching moves from coming north to Franklin St on the Northlander's time (although informally, there may have been an expectation to stay clear at times so as to not delay the passenger train).
The bypass switch is at MP 0.8 Temagami Sub, and was a manual switch. It's not clear whether this switch to the connecting track was normally left lined for the bypass. There was a short connecting track to reach the Bypass, which was the "CN Newmarket North Spur".
The switch from the connecting track to the CN Spur (MP 226.8 Newmarket Sub) was normally left lined towards the ONR, so no manual operation needed. Speed limit MP 226.8 to 225.2 - 10 mph. Speed limit MP 225.2 to 223.5 - 20 mph. Rule 105 territory.
CN Newmarket Sub proper began at MP 223.5, OCS clearance required to proceed south from there.

So - at most one switch needed to be lined for the Northlander, but very slow speed operation for about 6 miles through North Bay.

None of this may still be accurate, and CN and ONR may have made changes during the time the Northlander was not running, and may have planned changes again to speed things up. But absent new signalling, there is a zone thru North Bay where freight and passenger may both be present and will have to manually protect against each other. That's not really desirable by current TC standards, although as noted ONR may not be subject to TC's regulation.

- Paul

So the switches that should be automated would be here, right? The benefits are that crews don't have to manually throw them, and if there were signalization, it would slightly increase speeds as it would reduce the conflicts between passenger/freight. I would have to assume it would help with reliability if the Northlander and/or a freight is late, and one has to wait for the other. I think as @smallspy noted, the marginal additional cost given the overall budget could make this worth it. Corrections welcomed.

1753237776076.png

1753237863419.png
 

Attachments

  • 1753237599834.png
    1753237599834.png
    318.4 KB · Views: 23
  • 1753237835514.png
    1753237835514.png
    193.4 KB · Views: 25
^Correct.

There are flavours of automatic and semi automatic power switches that exist short of full signalling, but they are less popular in Canada than in the US.

The challenge is not just the automation of the switch, and the installation of a switch heater, it’s the system of authority and protection required to operate over them.

The beauty of manual operation under Cautionary Limits or Rule 105 rules is, there is no paperwork and no electronics to maintain. The tradeoff is switches must be lined by hand and speed is limited to 15 mph, and there is no mechanical intervention to prevent human error - ie a less safe mode of operation.

To really streamline passenger service, one would need to install signalling from a couple miles north of the station to some distance east of the wye - possibly all the way over to the connecting track to OVR. That would allow passenger trains to operate at higher speeds and not stop to throw switches.

However, that might create a need for much more paperwork and crew-to-rtc interaction for freight and switching moves , especially with the lifting and setting off activity for through freights. I don’t know much about what that daily cycle looks like in North Bay, or how busy the rtcs are in key periods.

So there is no silver bullet solution, but I agree that the capital cost would not move the needle very far in the overall cost of resuming the Northlander… but it would impact ONR operations in other ways, and have a maintenance cost element which the northlander’s business case would have to swallow.

- Paul
 
So the switches that should be automated would be here, right? The benefits are that crews don't have to manually throw them, and if there were signalization, it would slightly increase speeds as it would reduce the conflicts between passenger/freight. I would have to assume it would help with reliability if the Northlander and/or a freight is late, and one has to wait for the other. I think as @smallspy noted, the marginal additional cost given the overall budget could make this worth it. Corrections welcomed.

View attachment 668194
View attachment 668198
I'm not sure if the station bypass track in the second pic is still in service and, if it is, not really needed. It might have been considered necessary when there were more trains and/or the Northlander schedule was different and potentially interfered with other movements.
 
Last edited:
Airo? Not Venture? Seems weird (or mistaken by the photog) to be a different model than VIA - different enough that Cascades Airo set is expected to have a year of testing including TTCI

In other ONR news, they will be moving 3000 cars in support of a hospital project in Moosonee. A little puzzling to put the logistics hub in Iroquois Falls, and thus rehab of the Iroquois Falls Subdivision (6.15 miles per trackside guide which doesn’t quite accord with the 11.5km in the article below).


According to Abitibi Connex, this rehab will involve the spending of $3.9m
 
Airo? Not Venture? Seems weird (or mistaken by the photog) to be a different model than VIA - different enough that Cascades Airo set is expected to have a year of testing including TTCI

I suspect that it is a mistake by the original poster. Likely they thought that Airo is the new name for Venture cars.
 
Airo? Not Venture? Seems weird (or mistaken by the photog) to be a different model than VIA - different enough that Cascades Airo set is expected to have a year of testing including TTCI
It's a mistake by the poster.

Airo is Amtrak's name for their specifically-configured Siemens sets. Venture is what the various flavours of coaches are called and Chargers for the locos, but most of the properties that have bought sets have not named them as any particular thing.

Dan
 
Airo? Not Venture? Seems weird (or mistaken by the photog) to be a different model than VIA - different enough that Cascades Airo set is expected to have a year of testing including TTCI

In other ONR news, they will be moving 3000 cars in support of a hospital project in Moosonee. A little puzzling to put the logistics hub in Iroquois Falls, and thus rehab of the Iroquois Falls Subdivision (6.15 miles per trackside guide which doesn’t quite accord with the 11.5km in the article below).


According to Abitibi Connex, this rehab will involve the spending of $3.9m
Seeing as it is a joint federal/provincial public project, I suspect throwing some public money at Iroquois Falls is viewed as supporting a local community. Resolute closed the wood mill, the primary employer in 2014.
 
In other news, I saw on FB (which I can't re-find) that they will be closing part of the Cochrane platform for rehab work 'getting ready for the return of the Northlander'. I've never really seen an official statement on how they were planning to accomplish the Timmins-Cochrance link. Many just assumed it would be a revenue backhaul but the business case had several options. Upgrading the platform, coupled with no tenders for other equipment, suggests that the assumption was correct.
 
In other news, I saw on FB (which I can't re-find) that they will be closing part of the Cochrane platform for rehab work 'getting ready for the return of the Northlander'. I've never really seen an official statement on how they were planning to accomplish the Timmins-Cochrance link. Many just assumed it would be a revenue backhaul but the business case had several options. Upgrading the platform, coupled with no tenders for other equipment, suggests that the assumption was correct.

Here is the Facebook post.
 
“Fully” accessible - we’ll see what that ends up looking like I guess.
i really dont understand why they cant make it a high platform level boarding station. they are doing a new build and not a retrofit. how much more can it be?
 

Back
Top