News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.9K     0 

MisterF said:
I guess the Windsor Train doesn't have the same ring to it as the Gimli Glider.
Click to expand...

Alas, it's net uphill Toronto to Windsor.... Tronto 113m above sea level to Windsor 190m. Gliding won't get you there.

I have heard a theory that the added acceleration account the CN crossing restrictions affects fuel consumption, but I don't know if either incident involved a venture trainset. As Dan noted, fuel gauges may be unreliable or unreadable.... or somebody misread or even forgot to read the fuel gauge.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Alas, it's net uphill Toronto to Windsor.... Tronto 113m above sea level to Windsor 190m. Gliding won't get you there.

I have heard a theory that the added acceleration account the CN crossing restrictions affects fuel consumption, but I don't know if either incident involved a venture trainset. As Dan noted, fuel gauges may be unreliable or unreadable.... or somebody misread or even forgot to read the fuel gauge.

- Paul
Click to expand...
The picture in the news shows an F40 with LRC consist. I guess the fuel supply company didnt get the memo?
 
crs1026 said:
I have heard a theory that the added acceleration account the CN crossing restrictions affects fuel consumption, but I don't know if either incident involved a venture trainset. As Dan noted, fuel gauges may be unreliable or unreadable.... or somebody misread or even forgot to read the fuel gauge.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Both trains were older stock, the first with a P42 and the second with an F40.

Dan
 
Bordercollie said:
Why? It literally requires a truck and a hose.
Click to expand...
Ok... should it be expected that every engine that lays over is refueled overnight? I know it can be as simple as a truck. However, for places where several trains are laid over, better fueling facilities may make more sense.
 
micheal_can said:
Ok... should it be expected that every engine that lays over is refueled overnight? I know it can be as simple as a truck. However, for places where several trains are laid over, better fueling facilities may make more sense.
Click to expand...
The trains lay over in the station overnight. To fuel them in a facility would require spare crews to move the train to the facility.
Why would you spend that money when you can fuel it at the station?
 
Bordercollie said:
The trains lay over in the station overnight. To fuel them in a facility would require spare crews to move the train to the facility.
Why would you spend that money when you can fuel it at the station?
Click to expand...
Could they not have a nozzle at the station?
Regardless of how it is done, refueling every night should be a thing.
 
micheal_can said:
Could they not have a nozzle at the station?
Regardless of how it is done, refueling every night should be a thing.
Click to expand...
Here is the issue, to store any kind of fuel anywhere you need to pass various environmental and safety hurdles.

One time of the GO diesel tanks from their layover facility leaked into the ground causing ground water contamination.

Imagine it leaked underground and it leaked into the LRT station?

It's much easier to pull a truck onto the platform and fuel the train. It probably got missed because of the storm. Or the truck broke down and they didn't have a backup and never noticed VIA.

A simple solution would be to add a procedure for the first crew of the day to manually check the fuel in the locomotive. A dip stick would do the trick. Most GO locomotives have a fuel gauge visible from outside. So did they have to TOW that train back to TMC?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
Bordercollie said:
Here is the issue, to store any kind of fuel anywhere you need to pass various environmental and safety hurdles.

One time of the GO diesel tanks from their layover facility leaked into the ground causing ground water contamination.

Imagine it leaked underground and it leaked into the LRT station?

It's much easier to pull a truck onto the platform and fuel the train. It probably got missed because of the storm. Or the truck broke down and they didn't have a backup and never noticed VIA.

A simple solution would be to add a procedure for the first crew of the day to manually check the fuel in the locomotive. A dip stick would do the trick. Most GO locomotives have a fuel gauge visible from outside. So did they have to TOW that train back to TMC?
Click to expand...
Hopefully this no longer is an issue when the new fleet is fully up and running on the Corridor. I know for the Sudbury - White River route, they fill up both ways in Sudbury and Chapleau. I am wondering if this would ever be a problem for the other LDR or do they have a good routine that prevents it.
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
I found it odd that the Motion to Strike was heard February 7 and it took nearly two weeks for that decision to be made public, while extensive maneuvering, submissions and preparations continued for the February 25 court date apace.

I would say CN has won, and that the crossing supplements stay in effect and there is no requirement for VIA to move ahead on shunt-enhancers. Just keep slowing down and arriving late, passengers!

Transport Canada/the Minister of Transport has yet to weigh in on this. They have however received evidence from CN that CN was quick to make confidential in the Federal Court proceedings, lest they be made public. I do however, anticipate the CN response to Transport Canada reaching the light of day within the next month.

Evidence was indeed put forward, though most of CN's affidavits and exhibits did not make sense to this layman as causative for their actions. Arbitrary and based on their US experience with Siemens equipment. I was also searching, scanning for a smoking gun but never found one!
Click to expand...
Well that's sad to read.
 
There will be an appeal by VIA of the successful CN Motion to Strike VIA's application for Judicial Review of CN's Crossing Supplements in the Corridor that mandated speed reductions at crossing by Venture-equipped trains.

Today, oral directions received from Associate Judge Catharine Moore directed that further to the case management conference held [today], the Court will hear an appeal and potentially, a Rule 398 motion to stay the effect of the Order rendered February 19, 2025.
The Notice of Motion will be served and filed in accordance with the Rules by March 3, 2025
The balance of the Appellant's record will be served and filed by March 12, 2025.
The Respondents' records will be served and filed by March 24, 2025.
If the Appellant intends to bring a motion to stay pursuant to Rule 398 [Stay of Order], the Court will direct a separate filing schedule."
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
There will be an appeal by VIA of the successful CN Motion to Strike VIA's application for Judicial Review of CN's Crossing Supplements in the Corridor that mandated speed reductions at crossing by Venture-equipped trains.

Today, oral directions received from Associate Judge Catharine Moore directed that further to the case management conference held [today], the Court will hear an appeal and potentially, a Rule 398 motion to stay the effect of the Order rendered February 19, 2025.
The Notice of Motion will be served and filed in accordance with the Rules by March 3, 2025
The balance of the Appellant's record will be served and filed by March 12, 2025.
The Respondents' records will be served and filed by March 24, 2025.
If the Appellant intends to bring a motion to stay pursuant to Rule 398 [Stay of Order], the Court will direct a separate filing schedule."
Click to expand...
Isn't this transport Canada's jurisdiction? They are the federal regulator of railways.
 
Well, the JR process has been in play with many, many submissions, exhibits and affidavits submitted by both sides since then and all of them heard in Federal Court since November, 2024. Railways are a niche operation that can be heard in Federal Court. There may have been other ways for VIA to stickhandle this CN imposition, but this is the one they took. One of CN's main contentions was that the Federal Court did not have jurisdiction. VIA laid out why the court did have jurisdiction in its application for JR, I thought convincingly. I'm not sure of the tack VIA is taking in its appeal.

Yes, the matter became the subject of a Ministerial Order by TC in December. CN had to submit data by January. We've heard nothing since. Those concerned should get in touch with TC and ask why that is :cool:
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top