[micheal_can]

LOL the same organization that took an investigator off a case for daring to point out CP was stonewalling an investigation!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/cp-railway-tsb-lawsuit-threat-investigator-field-fatal-derailment-1.6070183

Another thing I missed.

Sounds like enough is pointing that this will be swept under the rug.

How come Ontario has never developed a shipping port out of Moosonee? We have a rail terminal there, and could compete with Churchill, MB.

I have the paper chart for that area. One look at it shows that it would be very difficult to have a good channel in and out. The mud flats can extend for several km at low tide. One grounded ship and it would become an ecological disaster.

I would ask why would competing with Churchill even be worth the cost? Churchill works because it is closer to the originating cargo than somewhere like Moosonee.

 

[roger1818]

Obviously, no one would knowingly allow a bridge, etc. to be unsafe, but non-destructive testing and visual inspections have their limits.

I guess it depends on your definition of "knowingly allow" but this video is an interesting case of people knowing that the bridge was unsafe, but not doing anything about it (granted it wasn't a rail bridge).

 

[Admiral Beez]

Moosonee is about 20km upriver from James Bay on a very shallow delta. Trying to dredge and maintain a deep channel to open water for such a short shipping season wouldn't be economically sustainable.

Interesting points. This makes me wonder why we bothered making a rail line to Moosonee in the 1930 and maintained to before the beginnings of the tourist train era. Passenger service alone was likely not viable.

Moosonee station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The first station in Moosonee was built in 1932 by the then Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway."

But why?

 

[micheal_can]

Interesting points. This makes me wonder why we bothered making a rail line to Moosonee in the 1930 and maintained to before the beginnings of the tourist train era. Passenger service alone was likely not viable.

Moosonee station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The first station in Moosonee was built in 1932 by the then Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway."

But why?

I recommend the book "The Northern Connection,Ontario Northland since 1902"
Chapter 9 talks about the push beyond Cochrane. and how it was potentially going to be for shipping.

Churchill station was build only a few years earlier in 1929. So, it sounds like they were looking at Hudson Bay as a potential shipping area.

northern connection: ontario northland since 1902 robert j. surtees - Google Search

 

[nfitz]

I wonder if the lack of being able to build a good port at Moosonee was on their radar back then. Or if it's something that could be built with the right amount of engineering - which might get more economical as the shipping season for the Hudson Bay lengthens.

Also, how has the shoreline and bathymetry changed with time in the 140 years since this route was proposed? There's been pushing 2 metres of uplift there since then - effectively making the sea level 2 metres lower, making navigation more difficult. It would be fascinating to see some of the original maps!

 

[lenaitch]

Interesting points. This makes me wonder why we bothered making a rail line to Moosonee in the 1930 and maintained to before the beginnings of the tourist train era. Passenger service alone was likely not viable.

Moosonee station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The first station in Moosonee was built in 1932 by the then Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway."

But why?

I haven't read the book cited by Michael but views were a little more 'pioneering' back then. I don't know if a '"port" was intended for international shipping or simply to supply the arctic. To be clear, commercial shipping does take place but it is barges that supply communities along the coast. They used to also provision the Quebec side but that has been pretty much negated by Hydro Quebec opening roads into the area.

With the explosion of mineral development opening by the southern portion of the new railway, and the agricultural potential of the Clay Belt, maybe they hoped for some similar settlement in the lowlands. Also, construction was a make-work project during the depression, as was the Ferguson Highway (Hwy 11).

I wonder if the lack of being able to build a good port at Moosonee was on their radar back then. Or if it's something that could be built with the right amount of engineering - which might get more economical as the shipping season for the Hudson Bay lengthens.

Also, how has the shoreline and bathymetry changed with time in the 140 years since this route was proposed? There's been pushing 2 metres of uplift there since then - effectively making the sea level 2 metres lower, making navigation more difficult. It would be fascinating to see some of the original maps!

Interesting point about the bathymetry back then vs. now. Also, I don't know how much, if any, the impact on hydro-electric development on the Moose River system has had on the flow and sedimentation.

You can pretty much create anything with enough money. The river and 'port' would require significant and regular dredging and I'm not sure it would be viable for ocean-going cargo without being heavily subsidized. I've been across to Moose Factory Island via motorized canoe and the operator was constantly sounding with a paddle (at full throttle!) and a lot of times he was hitting bottom. Even with his knowledge of the river, the channels move constantly. Keep in mind that the river and delta is tidal, so any depth considerations would have to take that into account.

 

[Jonny5]

The feds have invoked binding arbitration and ordered normal operations to resume in the interim.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-railway-cpkc-lockout-job-action-negotiations-1.7301419

 

[micheal_can]

I wonder if the lack of being able to build a good port at Moosonee was on their radar back then. Or if it's something that could be built with the right amount of engineering - which might get more economical as the shipping season for the Hudson Bay lengthens.

Also, how has the shoreline and bathymetry changed with time in the 140 years since this route was proposed? There's been pushing 2 metres of uplift there since then - effectively making the sea level 2 metres lower, making navigation more difficult. It would be fascinating to see some of the original maps!

Chances are, it was on their radar, but once they got there and really looked into it, it likely was shelved.

I haven't read the book cited by Michael but views were a little more 'pioneering' back then. I don't know if a '"port" was intended for international shipping or simply to supply the arctic. To be clear, commercial shipping does take place but it is barges that supply communities along the coast. They used to also provision the Quebec side but that has been pretty much negated by Hydro Quebec opening roads into the area.

With the explosion of mineral development opening by the southern portion of the new railway, and the agricultural potential of the Clay Belt, maybe they hoped for some similar settlement in the lowlands. Also, construction was a make-work project during the depression, as was the Ferguson Highway (Hwy 11).

Most of the line was built by the 1930s.

It first was a way to connect to the Great Clay Belt around New Liskard as they saw it as a potential boom for agricultural. Before they reached there, they hit the silver deposits of Cobalt an Haileybury. As they pushed north to Cochrane, they found gold and other minerals.

The lowlands, they suspected coal. Had they found it, the area would have boomed even more.

Interesting point about the bathymetry back then vs. now. Also, I don't know how much, if any, the impact on hydro-electric development on the Moose River system has had on the flow and sedimentation.

I never thought of how that dam would change things. Most likely it has.

You can pretty much create anything with enough money. The river and 'port' would require significant and regular dredging and I'm not sure it would be viable for ocean-going cargo without being heavily subsidized. I've been across to Moose Factory Island via motorized canoe and the operator was constantly sounding with a paddle (at full throttle!) and a lot of times he was hitting bottom. Even with his knowledge of the river, the channels move constantly. Keep in mind that the river and delta is tidal, so any depth considerations would have to take that into account.

Back then, a case could have been made for it. Now a days, until the Arctic is ice free year round, It won't be viable enough to put the money there.

The feds have invoked binding arbitration and ordered normal operations to resume in the interim.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-railway-cpkc-lockout-job-action-negotiations-1.7301419

This isn't back to work legislation, right?

 

[smallspy]

The feds have invoked binding arbitration and ordered normal operations to resume in the interim.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-railway-cpkc-lockout-job-action-negotiations-1.7301419

Not quite - they have only ordered binding arbitration, not that the lockouts end.

To that point, CN ended their lockout last night, but as of 8am CPKC continues to lock out their staff.

Dan

 

[Jonny5]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cirb-decision-railway-dispute-1.7304194

Freight trains must start rolling again first thing Monday morning, the federal labour board ruled on Saturday as it ordered thousands of rail employees back to work to end a bitter contract dispute that shut down the country's two major railways.
The decision by the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) imposes binding arbitration on the parties following an unprecedented dual work stoppage at Canadian National Railway (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) that halted freight shipments and snarled commutes across the country.

 

[Metroscapes]

The Hunter Street rail corridor was previously lowered to allow for GO Bilevels in 1995, This apparently included work in the tunnel.

It would be instructive to know the 'then' cost, which would obviously be profoundly inflated today.,

I found a picture of the work in the open cut:

View attachment 590861
Credit is embedded as noted above. Source: https://www.railpictures.ca/upload/...-was-being-upgraded-for-go-transit-the-statio

The associated caption:

View attachment 590862

This seems to be a rather common railfan trope about how the work was done to fit the GO service.

It wasn't.

The autoracks posiitioned behind the locos was the actual reason for the work (as well as, more importantly, remedial structural work) being doing in the way it was. The top of autorack is several feet taller than a BiLevel is. In fact, a BiLevel is only a small handful of inches taller than the SD40s pulling that train.

I guess it could also be noted that Hamilton has better bus service to and from it than almost any other city in the GTA.

Dan

A good and interesting myth disspelled.

Not to stir the pot, but my (quick) take is West Harbour should be the future of GO train service in Hamilton from an efficiency perspective. It is the direct line to/from Niagara. Someday, if we ever get serious about achieving common goals of passenger and freight in this country, the Hamilton sub should be abandoned below the brow in favour of a bypass right adjacent to Hamilton Airport (to enable direct or indirect rail-to-air freight). The lower Hamilton sub can then be used as a light rail line between some appropriate point east in the city and Bayview Junction / Aldershot. I've always thought Bayview was a good candidate for a simultaneous grade separation and GO-VIA interchange station project, but that's my pie-in-the-sky dreaming.

Does that exist, anywhere? Given that much of Canadian rail freight is large tonnage of containers and bulk commodities, and aircraft are the modern equivalent of less-than-carload or 'loose' cargo, I'm not sure I see much compatibility between the two modes.

Moving this to general rail discussion from the GO thread. To address the last part, I generally agree bulk goods would not be compatible with air shipments. It would certainly serve higher-end goods (e.g. imported cars), but I would lament how many other rushed imported goods of lower value could benefit if we had quick turnaround from air to rail delivery to a logistics hub. There's not enough effort to do this, but the opportunity is there. CN / CPKC certainly don't have the incentive to do it on their own, it would take federal / provincial funding and an overall push.

 

[drum118]

Aug 13
More up on my site

Still a fair amount of work still to be done, but getting close to opening the northbound lanes. The intersection at the south end is built with both side roads closed off. The 2 bridges are not parallel to each other with a wider gap on the west side

 

[Bojaxs]

Aug 13
More up on my site

Still a fair amount of work still to be done, but getting close to opening the northbound lanes. The intersection at the south end is built with both side roads closed off. The 2 bridges are not parallel to each other with a wider gap on the west side

Thanks for taking photos of the network in Southern Ontario. London needs more grade separations. In particular Egerton street that runs along "at grade" on the west side of the CN yard.

 

[drum118]

Thanks for taking photos of the network in Southern Ontario. London needs more grade separations. In particular Egerton street that runs along "at grade" on the west side of the CN yard.

I don't see it happening as it will cut off streets and not as busy as the east end of the yard.

The shutting of the yard is done on the east end

I train watch at the east end of the yard.

 

[Allandale25]

Bit of a unique video here in the FB Group Canadian Trains of boxcars being delivered to a customer.