News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

Northern Light said:
This area:



Got the story......

www.trains.com

CN bridge collapses in Fort Frances, Ontario (updated) - Trains

FORT FRANCES, Ontario — A Canadian National Railway lift bridge in Fort Frances has collapsed, the website NWOnewswatch.com reports. CN said in a statement to website operator Dougall Media on Wednesday, Aug. 14, that it was responding to “an incident” involving the bridge across the Rainy River...
www.trains.com www.trains.com

From the above, additional credit embedded:

View attachment 588383

View attachment 588384
Click to expand...
Brought forward with an update:

www.northernontariobusiness.com

Rail bridge to resume service by mid-September

Five-Mile Bridge near Fort Frances collapsed in August, halting operations
www.northernontariobusiness.com www.northernontariobusiness.com
 
lenaitch said:
Brought forward with an update:

www.northernontariobusiness.com

Rail bridge to resume service by mid-September

Five-Mile Bridge near Fort Frances collapsed in August, halting operations
www.northernontariobusiness.com www.northernontariobusiness.com
Click to expand...

Summary:

Temporary Repairs which will allow resumption of rail, but there will not be an lift capacity for the bridge, so marine traffic remains halted in this location.

Intent to have a permanent replacement lift bridge installed next year, subject to Transport Canada approval.
 
Northern Light said:
Summary:

Temporary Repairs which will allow resumption of rail, but there will not be an lift capacity for the bridge, so marine traffic remains halted in this location.

Intent to have a permanent replacement lift bridge installed next year, subject to Transport Canada approval.
Click to expand...
To be clear, "marine traffic" in the Rainy Lake/Rainy River area consists primarily of small vessel traffic. I suspect the lift bridge (and the one at Fort Francis) was a hold-over from the days when the lake and river were used to move logs. I'm actually a little surprised they are still operating. Most small vessel traffic could likely get under it when it is lowered; although I doubt that is allowed now that it is damaged.
 
Saw this on my FB feed:

1728143690539.png


What caught my attention was the suggestion that the train reached 269 km/per hour.

I don't recall hearing that.......in any event that's far above permitted track speed today for any passenger train in Canada.

So I wanted to tag our rail experts/historians like @crs1026 and @smallspy to see if I could clarify if the train actually reached such speeds, and whether that was acceptable under
regulations then.

Edit to add: Subsequently, I looked up Turbo Trains on Wikipedia; the article there quotes a much lower peak-speed achievement, and notes that was also done only for its inaugural run.

That still leaves me curious, since there is a discrepancy as to what top speed was reached; and even outside of regular service, I find it curious that such an attempt was permitted, contrary to regulation.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
What caught my attention was the suggestion that the train reached 269 km/per hour.

I don't recall hearing that.......in any event that's far above permitted track speed today for any passenger train in Canada.

So I wanted to tag our rail experts/historians like @crs1026 and @smallspy to see if I could clarify if the train actually reached such speeds, and whether that was acceptable under
regulations then.

Edit to add: Subsequently, I looked up Turbo Trains on Wikipedia; the article there quotes a much lower peak-speed achievement, and notes that was also done only for its inaugural run.

That still leaves me curious, since there is a discrepancy as to what top speed was reached; and even outside of regular service, I find it curious that such an attempt was permitted, contrary to regulation.
Click to expand...
It was a speed test in the late 1960s under controlled conditions, without other trains present. Nothing unusual about that - I've certainly seen (and we've discussed) Flexity speed trials on Queen Street, which must have at least hit 70 to 80 km/hr in a 40 km/hr zone.

I thought it was on the new alignment east of Brockville. There are questions - https://www.highspeedrailcanada.com/2018/12/did-cn-turbotrain-reach-speeds-of-273.html

Only 225 km/hr in 1976 according to this - was that in passenger operation??

1728171089782.png
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
It was a speed test in the late 1960s under controlled conditions, without other trains present. Nothing unusual about that - I've certainly seen (and we've discussed) Flexity speed trials on Queen Street, which must have at least hit 70 to 80 km/hr in a 40 km/hr zone.

I thought it was on the new alignment east of Brockville. There are questions - https://www.highspeedrailcanada.com/2018/12/did-cn-turbotrain-reach-speeds-of-273.html

Only 225 km/hr in 1976 according to this - was that in passenger operation??
Click to expand...
Passenger sets routinely test to speeds above nominal limits - but not with passengers on them. It seems to me safe to assume 140/225 was exceeded by an empty turbo on CN at some point but perhaps not to the amount mentioned further upthread.

For example, this mixed bag of a test train consist is operating above the “legal” 125mph of the loco, coaches and cab.

Acela test running beyond 150mph norms (I thought they stopped before 165 but I may be thinking of a different run)
 
Northern Light said:
Saw this on my FB feed:

View attachment 601822

What caught my attention was the suggestion that the train reached 269 km/per hour.

I don't recall hearing that.......in any event that's far above permitted track speed today for any passenger train in Canada.

So I wanted to tag our rail experts/historians like @crs1026 and @smallspy to see if I could clarify if the train actually reached such speeds, and whether that was acceptable under
regulations then.

Edit to add: Subsequently, I looked up Turbo Trains on Wikipedia; the article there quotes a much lower peak-speed achievement, and notes that was also done only for its inaugural run.

That still leaves me curious, since there is a discrepancy as to what top speed was reached; and even outside of regular service, I find it curious that such an attempt was permitted, contrary to regulation.
Click to expand...
As usual, the history has been blurred somewhat by rose-coloured glasses and boosterism....

The speed listed in the post is wrong. The American TurboTrains did a similar speed test as the Canadian ones in the late 1960s, and managed to achieve 167mph. The Canadian ones, by virtue of being longer (and thus heavier), and with less track to take a run up, "only" achieved a top speed of 140mph.

It should be noted that was a test run solely for publicity purposes - and only because Bombardier's LRC demonstrator (with help from CN's competitor) had reached 139mph a couple of months previously. Rather infamously, police officers were posted at all of the level crossings (as the gates would not come down in time in advance of the train's arrival at many of them), and all switches were bolted shut. The mileposts listed correspond to the Kingston Sub between about Cardinal and Crysler - Morrisburg almost perfectly splits the two locations at 92.2. In revenue service, the train was limited to 95mph, and lower in a lot of places due to track geometry - just like the trains of today.

The reality is that the TurboTrain was faster than any other train on the line, but not significantly so - and that was mainly due to not having as many stops. It was originally timetabled at 3 hours and 59 minutes, and very quickly it was realized that was overly optimistic - for much of its life it was timetabled to make the runs in 4 hours and 29 minutes. The sub-4 hour time was only brought back with the LRCs in the early 1990s, and at that point only once per day - whereas the Turbo did it twice-a-day.

Dan
 
Via Ron Bouwhuis in Bruce Rails re rail-related murals and imagery in Caledon.

Anyone who’s gone by the intersection of The Grange Sideroad and McLaren Road near Inglewood this past year will notice that the small OBRY/CPR overpass, long known locally as ‘Graffiti Bridge’, now sports a detailed mural on both abutments. Featuring various flora and fauna on a deep green background, the piece is entitled ‘Into The Woods’. The work was signed by Blazeworks, (real name Blaze Wiradharma). Installed in 2023, it has thus far mostly avoided the hand of taggers’ scrawls – perhaps because the artist himself is both a graffiti and mural artist. I’ve attached a photo of it. Here’s a link to his website: https://www.blazeworksart.com/

It looks like he’s done some other pieces in Caledon, including two very different works attached to the abutments at Cardwell Junction:

https://www.caledon.ca/en/living-here/arts-and-culture.aspx - Rails-to-Trails-Public-Art-on-the-Caledon-Trailway

Click on ‘Rails to Trails: Public Art on the Caledon Trailway’.

I would also note that there is now a photographic plaque in Caledon East showing the station that once existed there. I’m not 100% certain, but believe this went up within the last year. There has been another such plaque (albeit an older design) at Inglewood for some time now.

Ron Bouwhuis
Click to expand...
 
Allandale25 said:
winnipegsun.com

Arctic Gateway Group building momentum, restoring business for Churchill’s port

A new partnership could soon see rail traffic and grain shipments restored between the town of Churchill and a Saskatchewan community.
winnipegsun.com winnipegsun.com
Click to expand...
Very cool, thanks for sharing that.

I wonder if a railway from Moosonee to Churchill has ever been considered? With no roads, it could connect communities and possible commercial/resource expertise along the Hudson Bay shoreline.

Screenshot 2024-10-16 110452.png

rac.jmaponline.net

RAC Canadian Rail Atlas

rac.jmaponline.net rac.jmaponline.net
 
Admiral Beez said:
Very cool, thanks for sharing that.

I wonder if a railway from Moosonee to Churchill has ever been considered? With no roads, it could connect communities and possible commercial/resource expertise along the Hudson Bay shoreline.
Click to expand...

To what purpose?

The Churchill line has a much clearer case as a direct and competitive route for the export of Western Canada output, especially grain.
Ontario has much less bulk material to export and the route to Atlantic ports is already pretty good.

Sure, one could draw the line on a map…. But it’s a high cost and not likely to present a return on that innvestment.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top