[reaperexpress]

Timetable is 70 mph

Yeah they issued a blanket 60 mph slow order in 1996 on all jointed rail on the Guelph sub (a.k.a the entire line) but the line speed is indeed 70 mph in theory.

The alignment looks like it could handle much more han 70 mph but I'm not sure if those upgrades would fit in a 160M budget after subtracting the cost of purchasing the line and building two passing tracks to enable hourly service.

 

[Bordercollie]

Yeah they issued a blanket 60 mph slow order in 1996 on all jointed rail on the Guelph sub (a.k.a the entire line) but the line speed is indeed 70 mph in theory.

The alignment looks like it could handle much more han 70 mph but I'm not sure if those upgrades would fit in a 160M budget after subtracting the cost of purchasing the line and building two passing tracks to enable hourly service.

Will VIA get more track slots?

At 70mph running how close is the timing VS the Dundas Sub?

 

[reaperexpress]

Will VIA get more track slots?

At 70mph running how close is the timing VS the Dundas Sub?

The line was scheduled for 1h14 from Kitchener to London in the 1970's, so adding in the planned 1h30 from TO to KW, a GO train would run TO to London in around 2h45. VIA could do a bit faster, probably around 2h30.

Via currently covers TO to London in 2h10 via Brantford, and they could probably get close to that via the North Mainline (prob 2h20) if it were upgraded to 95 mph west of Kitchener.

If you google search this thread you can find some posts where I and others summarized historical timetables.

 

[Bordercollie]

The line was scheduled for 1h14 from Kitchener to London in the 1970's, so adding in the planned 1h30 from TO to KW, a GO train would run TO to London in around 2h45. VIA could do a bit faster, probably around 2h30.

Via currently covers TO to London in 2h10 via Brantford, and they could probably get close to that via the North Mainline (prob 2h20) if it were upgraded to 95 mph west of Kitchener.

If you google search this thread you can find some posts where I and others summarized historical timetables.

I wonder if that would mean they purchase the yard in Stratford? Or just the main line.

 

[Krypto98]

Yeah they issued a blanket 60 mph slow order in 1996 on all jointed rail on the Guelph sub (a.k.a the entire line) but the line speed is indeed 70 mph in theory.

The alignment looks like it could handle much more han 70 mph but I'm not sure if those upgrades would fit in a 160M budget after subtracting the cost of purchasing the line and building two passing tracks to enable hourly service.

Speaking of 60mph...

Speeds have been raised to 60 mph between mile 76 and mile 86ish between Kitchener and Stratford allowing them to be 12 minutes earlier now

 

[Bordercollie]

Speaking of 60mph...

Speeds have been raised to 60 mph between mile 76 and mile 86ish between Kitchener and Stratford allowing them to be 12 minutes earlier now

For a measly 10miles? How about those 15mph slow orders?

 

[crs1026]

Speaking of 60mph...

Speeds have been raised to 60 mph between mile 76 and mile 86ish between Kitchener and Stratford allowing them to be 12 minutes earlier now

Wow, VIA 87 was 7 minutes early into Kitchener tonight, and only 4 down at Stratford, (according to Moving Maps)….. a big improvement.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

Wow, VIA 87 was 7 minutes early into Kitchener tonight, and only 4 down at Stratford, (according to Moving Maps)….. a big improvement.

- Paul

What did it take to bring the speed up to 60mph? New ballast? Basic trackwork?

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Yeah they issued a blanket 60 mph slow order in 1996 on all jointed rail on the Guelph sub (a.k.a the entire line) but the line speed is indeed 70 mph in theory.

The alignment looks like it could handle much more han 70 mph but I'm not sure if those upgrades would fit in a 160M budget after subtracting the cost of purchasing the line and building two passing tracks to enable hourly service.

The line is pretty straight, so with proper continuous weld rail and crossing upgrades I can’t see why the line couldn’t eventually handle trains faster than 70 mph. Of course, there are some tricky spots like just west of Stratford station where trains may be speed limited due to awkward crossings. Not a deal breaker though.

Some oversharing railway boomer on Facebook claimed to have worked on the internal case for London GO for MX. When I cross-referenced his name on LinkedIn he actually worked for a rail firm so I take his claims more seriously. He claimed that he recommended numerous “packages” of upgrades to slowly build out London GO service over time. Based on this, I assume the $160 million the PCs announced is just one of many eventual investment pieces.

Will VIA get more track slots?

Because of the Brampton bottleneck I can’t see more VIA slots anytime soon (more than the 2 trips each direction pre COVID). I’m just guessing here, but I also assume VIA and GO have struck a back room understanding that VIA will serve the southern route mainly, with GO focusing on the northern one.

One opportunity I’d love to see VIA explore is London, Kitchener, Toronto, Kingston, Ottawa runs (or something like that). A one seat trip could be attractive to some travellers, particularly students.

I wonder if that would mean they purchase the yard in Stratford? Or just the main line.

Probably just the mainline. GEXR and CN still are heavy users of the yard, and will be for the foreseeable future. If GO service to London keeps expanding, GO will eventually need some type of layover yard in London itself. Shouldn’t be an issue as plenty of rail-adjacent industrial land exists on the Guelph Sub within London.

For a measly 10miles? How about those 15mph slow orders?

Some of those 15 mph slow orders have been lifted, and evidently more will be soon. There is slow, but tangible progress happening.

 

[Krypto98]

For a measly 10miles? How about those 15mph slow orders?

The 10 mph between mile 63 and 65 was also raised to 30 mph.

Kitchener station is Mile 62.7 while Stratford is Mile 88.5 so that's 26 miles. So if the remaining 16 miles can be increased to 60 we could see an additional 10-12 minutes savings... 30 minutes is not too bad...

 

[crs1026]

What did it take to bring the speed up to 60mph? New ballast? Basic trackwork?

The answer is likely, some of this, some of that, and a whole bunch of the other….

You may want to read the Transport Canada Rules Regarding Track Safety.

Class 2 is 30 mph, Class 3 is 60 mph. One major differentiator is the number of “good” ties per 39 foot segment. Another is the condition of ties at rail joints. Other things that have different tolerances such as gauge and track surface geometry is assessed by automated inspections - those big track test train thingies. Defects in the rails, and overall rail wear, likewise.

Grade crossings are a key spot where track geometry goes wonky - different roadbed conditions plus the pounding from auto traffic may cause low spots.

And there are differences in the frequency and type of inspections - meaning CN has to agree to inspect more frequently and more intensively before the higher speed can be allowed.

I have no specific inside information on what is being upgraded, but it’s pretty clear that over the GEXR era, many things were downgraded or allowed to get out of spec and now they have to be brought back up to snuff.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

The answer is likely, some of this, some of that, and a whole bunch of the other….

You may want to read the Transport Canada Rules Regarding Track Safety.

Class 2 is 30 mph, Class 3 is 60 mph. One major differentiator is the number of “good” ties per 39 foot segment. Another is the condition of ties at rail joints. Other things that have different tolerances such as gauge and track surface geometry is assessed by automated inspections - those big track test train thingies. Defects in the rails, and overall rail wear, likewise.

Grade crossings are a key spot where track geometry goes wonky - different roadbed conditions plus the pounding from auto traffic may cause low spots.

And there are differences in the frequency and type of inspections - meaning CN has to agree to inspect more frequently and more intensively before the higher speed can be allowed.

I have no specific inside information on what is being upgraded, but it’s pretty clear that over the GEXR era, many things were downgraded or allowed to get out of spec and now they have to be brought back up to snuff.

- Paul

So tax payer money is being used to fix what private corporations allowed to degrade to line their own pockets. Great.

 

[crs1026]

So tax payer money is being used to fix what private corporations allowed to degrade to line their own pockets. Great.

It’s even better than that. Reportedly GEXR was required to compensate CN for any repairs required after handing the line back to bring the line up to the standard it was in when the lease commenced.

One assumes that when the line was turned back to CN, they would have done a comprehensive condition assessment, to ensure they got their full compensation for any repairs…. not to mention ensuring they could begin operating the line. (That’s likely why CN imposed new slow orders after GEXR left….. they likely had a revelation or two…)

We don’t know what CN is charging GO or VIA for upgrading the line, but if CN collected money from GEXR for repairs and then charged GO for the same repairs…. they monetised the downgrade, and are double dipping on the fixup.

Hence the concern about lack of transparency in the contracts between CN and its passenger tenants.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

It’s even better than that. Reportedly GEXR was required to compensate CN for any repairs required after handing the line back to bring the line up to the standard it was in when the lease commenced.

One assumes that when the line was turned back to CN, they would have done a comprehensive condition assessment, to ensure they got their full compensation for any repairs…. not to mention ensuring they could begin operating the line. (That’s likely why CN imposed new slow orders after GEXR left….. they likely had a revelation or two…)

We don’t know what CN is charging GO or VIA for upgrading the line, but if CN collected money from GEXR for repairs and then charged GO for the same repairs…. they monetised the downgrade, and are double dipping on the fixup.

Hence the concern about lack of transparency in the contracts between CN and its passenger tenants.

- Paul

That doesn't make sense in GEXR's part. Why would you not keep the track in good operating condition since it would benefit travel times and you have to pay for it anyways.

I don't think Metronlinx is that naive to pay for repairs that GEXR paid for. CN likely banked the money until they had to fix it.

It sucks for VIA because their travel times suffered during all of this.

 

[crs1026]

That doesn't make sense in GEXR's part. Why would you not keep the track in good operating condition since it would benefit travel times and you have to pay for it anyways.

GEXR inherited a line that was in better condition than they needed to run a branchline freight business. Short line railways are notorious for not doing maintenance and living with low quality track. That’s how they operate marginal lines.

I don't think Metronlinx is that naive to pay for repairs that GEXR paid for. CN likely banked the money until they had to fix it.

Yeah, I hope the negotiators didn’t let this slip by…. but the information that they needed to argue the point successfully might not have been discoverable.

- Paul