dowlingm
Senior Member
why would any minister want Transport to create political liability on itself for future accidents when the option of sitting on their hands is right there?
|
|
|
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
smallspy
Senior Member
With what extra fleet? GO is not sitting on that much excess equipment, and certainly almost no extra locos.
They do have structural issues. That's why there's a bit of a rush on replacing them.
You're finally right.
Dan
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
VIA tested another variation on the varied-length consist today, consisting of the cornucopic casserole of leftovers from Sets 7 and 25 not used in the augmenting of Sets 12 and 24. This 'melangay' cab-car-centred consist comprised 2207-2606-2806-2306-2324-2824-2624-2224, operating as VIA No 631 Montreal-Ottawa. Some VIA fans use the term "XS" to refer to this Crossing Supplement-skirting assemblage.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Any pictures?
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
No pictures yet of the new 'melangay' mixed Venture set, but here is another development in the Venture implementation process. CN-imposed crossing speed reductions become CN-posted Permanent Slow Orders: http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com/2025/08/vias-venture-speed-reductions-become-cn.html
Bordercollie
Senior Member
That's a nail in the coffin right there
dowlingm
Senior Member
Given that the crew cannot walk from one end of such a train to the other, does this impose additional crewing requirements (such as having a conductor in each half)? In a J Train there are two formal trains within a single consist but presumably this is a single train number.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Wouldn't it make more sense to but the cab cars next to each other? It would require more work thou.
smallspy
Senior Member
There are no conductors are VIA trains.
The word online is that 2 Service Managers on the train - one in each half - for this service.
Dan
KevinT
Active Member
I appreciate all the information that you've been sharing, but seriously, where are these crazy words like ajoutay and melangay coming from, and are we honestly expected to use them with a straight face? Are they VIA's own words, or did some railfan make them up and hope they'd stick if they just started throwing them around? I'm happier to just say 7-car or 8-car Venture set...
Full disclosure: I'm guilty of throwing around limes-and-frogs and wintergreen to describe the GO train liveries, and hoping that those terms gain traction. At least they're descriptive...
smallspy
Senior Member
It's railfan jargon, nothing official.I appreciate all the information that you've been sharing, but seriously, where are these crazy words like ajoutay and melangay coming from, and are we honestly expected to use them with a straight face? Are they VIA's own words, or did some railfan make them up and hope they'd stick if they just started throwing them around? I'm happier to just say 7-car or 8-car Venture set...
Full disclosure: I'm guilty of throwing around limes-and-frogs and wintergreen to describe the GO train liveries, and hoping that those terms gain traction. At least they're descriptive...
If there is one thing that railfans are really good at, it's coming up with inane names and terms for things that don't need them.
Dan
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
Sometimes I forget how highbrow and serious watching trains rattling by has gotten. Like some other hobbies...stamp collecting? No, gotta call it 'philately'. That's why model railroaders like Rapido Trains Inc.'s videos - their excellent use of humour, irony and yes, Yiddish words. Talk about a whole new lingo!!I appreciate all the information that you've been sharing, but seriously, where are these crazy words like ajoutay and melangay coming from, and are we honestly expected to use them with a straight face? Are they VIA's own words, or did some railfan make them up and hope they'd stick if they just started throwing them around? I'm happier to just say 7-car or 8-car Venture set...
Full disclosure: I'm guilty of throwing around limes-and-frogs and wintergreen to describe the GO train liveries, and hoping that those terms gain traction. At least they're descriptive...
Seriously though, if that's possible at this point, I came up with these terms completely without AI assistance
and since you asked...The genesis was with the first linked (J-trained, nobody knows what the heck that means and it was never a really good descriptive word) Ventures. It was a play on words hinting at 'double-V' or as the French word for 'W' puts it, doublavay. Looks English, sounds French, so bilingual-ish. Then came the augmented Ventures with two cars added (ajoute') or in Franglish 'ajoutay'. The casserole consist of leftover cars was a bit of a puzzle. A melange? A menage? So I went with the former, making 'melangay' which sounds like a mix of emotions or something. No-one is expected to use or even approve of the inanity and possible insanity therein.
I am on the verge of replacing all three, so say goodbye soon. 'Ajoutay' will become XL, and 'melangay' will become XS.
Just call me a humble blogger and probably now the pre-eminent correspondent tracking all aspects of the Venture implementation - deliveries, in service notes, CN's truly inane crossing speed reductions and even court cases - and approaching 30 in number over the past four years. And having fun doing it, of course.
And my first nicknames were conferred on CN's new fleet of GP40-2L(W) nearly 50 years ago now:
Locomotive Nicknames
Early in our railfanning careers, we approach our new-found fascination of trainspotting with fervor and unabashed enthusiasm! If we stic...
tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com
Happy Friday to all!!
Last edited:
lenaitch
Senior Member
I wonder what it would take for the regulator to actually grow a pair and, you know, regulate.
crs1026
Superstar
I am interpreting their continued inaction, and VIA's MacGuyvering (sp?) to achieve longer trainsets, as a final answer.
- Paul
Trackside_Treasure
Active Member
Indeed, Paul. We still don't know whether TC has been involved behind the scenes in the Macgyvering, or the implementation of Permanent Slow Orders by CN. There has certainly been no public reporting on actions flowing from its Ministerial Order to CN.
Per VIA's injunction in Quebec Superior Court, here are some points VIA made as to why CN's crossing speed reductions can only be countered by remedies that VIA cannot effectuate. Previously, VIA had said that lengthening consists to 32 axles would reduce its available Venture fleet by 50%. VIA's recent remarshalling has actually produced two XL and one XS set from a total of four sets: 7, 12, 24 and 25.
Here are the remedies that VIA said it could not effectuate: Even the concept of Venture J-trains is brought up, considered and then dismissed by VIA. Alternative solutions to comply with the Crossing Supplement cannot be implemented in either the short- or mid-term or are otherwise unfeasible:
- adding Onboard Shunt Enhancers may present other safety risks that would need to be tested and would require applying for an exemption with the Minister, a process that would likely take over two years to complete.
- shifting back to Legacy [LRC and HEP] trainsets would not be feasible, as they are being cycled out of service by early-2026 on preset engineering retirement dates.
- increasing the number of axles on VIA Venture trains from 24 to 32 would not be feasible in the short-to-medium-term. Train cars are not easily interchangeable, and adding Legacy cars to VIA Venture trains would be impractical from a compatibility standpoint.
- Ordering new compatible Venture cars would come at a very significant cost and, more importantly, take approximately 12 to 24 months.
- Following a thorough risk assessment, VIA determined that coupling two VIA Venture trains together to increase axle numbers (known as “J-Trains” or “Double-Ventures”), would increase other safety risks and pose other operational challenges to such a degree that this is not a viable option either.
- Since the proceedings began before the Federal Court, VIA was forced to re- explore the J-Train concept, even though it was previously determined that such an option was not viable, for the purpose of reducing residual risk to a level As Low As Reasonably Practicable (known as the “ALARP Principle”). This option is still under review and has not been formally approved. Siemens has advised that it does not wish to help VIA in assessing or implementing this option, considering that J-Trains were not the intended use of VIA Venture trains. This Double-Venture option may also lead to other safe