[Krypto98]

Wasn't paying attention and I didn't realize so much trackage had been removed here. Looking at Toronto Maps, it seems it was somewhere from 2012-2014. What was the reasoning? Maybe @smallspy can chime in here too? Wild stuff!

Hunter Harrison wanted to get rid of hump yards at the time to lower operating costs.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Hunter Harrison wanted to get rid of hump yards at the time to lower operating costs.

And now he's dead. Good riddance.

 

[micheal_can]

Both railways have long held plans for the projected eventual sale of their respective main yards & facilities.

In the case of CP, the Trenton area has been thrown about as a potential location for a facilities to largely replace Agincourt.

Dan

Where would trains from SWO and from the rest of Canada go to switch out crews?

 

[crs1026]

And now he's dead. Good riddance.

Agreed, but nobody is bringing back hump yards.

The awkward reality is, he was ahead of the curve on a lot of stuff. How he imposed his changes was pretty reprehensible, but those changes may have been coming regardless of personalities.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

In the case of CP, the Trenton area has been thrown about as a potential location for a facilities to largely replace Agincourt.

I never understood this one. Too far east to be useful. I would have predicted Spence-Alliston, as a place to extract non-eastern traffic freom transcon trains, and bring it down to the GTA to connect with Chicago, Buffalo, and beyond. Add this to Kinnear and Wolverton.
CP’s proven inability to cope without Lambton is a sign of that need.
Moving the diesel shop that far east made no sense either.
Trenton might be a good place to seap blocks for traffic to/from Montreal and beyond, but that is only one segment of the traffic. Agincourt has other roles that Trenton won’t help much.

- Paul

 

[Metroscapes]

I would argue the opposite - there has always been a bold plan, and it still exists. If only people would read it.

The Big Move was produced in 2008, and has seen regular updates since. If you consider the total capital and operating envelopes for all its elements, and its impact on transit capacity and coverage, it's hardlly a wallflower. Nor is it perfect, but it's a tool to keep people on the same page. It is the definitive plan offered by the supposed leadership in transit planning, after all. (yeah, I choked a little on those words... but less cynically, its authors had that mandate)

I'm glad I'm not the only one singing the praises of that document (note: drafted in 2006, approved in 2008). I'll be frank: we'd be in a bigger mess if it weren't for that document. It's been something to go off of. It kickstarted implementation of a number of projects (including the takeover of the UPX and Georgetown South project, to name one) and started planning on a number of others.

What these folks never seem to take into account is that the North Toronto / Galt is one of the two national freight carrier's main routes east-west across Toronto. When prompted on this, they go: well just send that traffic up to the York / Halton as if it's as easy as a hand wave...Like, sure, it's an interesting idea and it would bring more frequent two-way service to Mississauga much closer to reality, but the fact is it isn't easy. And all these 'napkin drawing' ideas, while interesting thought exercises, aren't really worth much more than that.

Maybe I'm just grumpy and making mountains out of molehills - and please let me know if this is the case - but I just don't see this happening in any term without some massive tripartite agreement between governments, owners, and operators and a huge payment to boot.

Well, sending CPKC up above the city is absolutely one plain solution. It could be a permutation of that (e.g. co-locating with the 500 kV transmission corridor and/or the 407), or something else entirely (e.g. merging with / replacing Highway 413). But you hit the nail on the head: it needs a massive agreement between governments and the railway(s). The feds are the party most notably absent, as they have the regulatory benefit, industrial strategy and money coffers to overcome the barriers. It's stupid we're still talking about this and not doing anything.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Agreed, but nobody is bringing back hump yards.

The awkward reality is, he was ahead of the curve on a lot of stuff. How he imposed his changes was pretty reprehensible, but those changes may have been coming regardless of personalities.

- Paul

My understanding is he was at the forefront of PSR which, while good for corporations, has been an absolute disaster for those working on the railroads and has led to a far more dangerous and less enjoyable workplace. You can't use the 'f word' here, but emphatically: eff that guy.

 

[Willybru21]

Back then with the Big Move, Metrolinx focused a lot more on the expansion of the network over service increases, if you read the document there’s a ton of proposed rail service expansions (mapped above) and very little service increases for the existing network, obviously this has changed, with both GO Expansion and RER focusing a lot more on service increases (to date we’ve only seen 5 of these network expansions happen out of the 11 proposed).

In my opinion it was a much better decision to focus more on increasing service, since it benefits way more people than any of those extensions would have.

 

[Metroscapes]

Update from Guelph Central GO. There's glass being installed, the wiring appears ready for electrical outfit, and a fence between the tracks is being completed. Most of the flashing is done, paving appears done.

 

[drum118]

Theoretically feasible. However, the Sheppard subway is on TTC Gauge rather than standard, so it would not play nicely with the existing track.

The connection and yard would need to be segregated from CP's mainline and any of their yard functions. That would require altering the layout of the current yard.

Its not a bad site for it, but does have its complications and costs.

The best area for CP is on the south end as it has longer tracks to hold trains either going to western Canada or the US along with local needs. Anything north of the engine facility can be use for TTC as well ML since has obtain land on the north side of the yard.

Line 2 can be extended north of Sheppard underground and then branch off McCowan and surface to an area that can be use as an subway complex. The whole area that can be use as an yard for TTC would have to be fully redevelop to house an maintenance complex and yard tracks. It would be a better option than using Obico Yard as well been cheaper.to do.

CP prefer unit trains and trains going point to point than breaking trains down or up of mixed traffic as they make more money..

 

[Willybru21]

Throwback to 1972 and 1994 when they wanted to use both or all three sets of track surrounding the CP yard

 

[smallspy]

What's the reasoning there? For CN, what would happen to MacMillan? That would be an odd move as it sits right off the York, no?

The reasoning is that the land in the GTA is just too bloody valuable to have it tied up by tracks with cars sitting on them. The yards and facilities can be located just about anywhere, but preferably somewhere with cheap(-ish) land.

One of the ideas I've heard about for CN is the Belleville area.

Hunter Harrison wanted to get rid of hump yards at the time to lower operating costs.

A little bit of context here is necessary, I think.

Hunter Harrison wanted to get rid of hump yards for two main reasons:
- The primary one is that the railways are in the business of moving goods - and hump yards are (largely) an anathema to that. Every day that a car spends in a hump yard is hundreds of miles that it could have traveled to get it closer to its destination. And he had gone on record as saying precisely this.
- The secondary one is that carload and less-than-carload traffic - think of things like boxcars and tank cars - are much harder to make a big profit on, as they require much more handling by the railways. While yes, the amount of that traffic on the railways of North America has dropped precipitously in the past 50 years (and there are a LOT of reasons for that, not just the railways turning away that business), taking away the hump yards - which are specifically designed to handle exactly that kind of traffic - was seen as another way of focusing more on the high-profitability traffic like bulk goods and containers. And in this case, this was more of a stick than a carrot - being detrimental to the carload/less-than-carload business and making it harder to deal with.

Where would trains from SWO and from the rest of Canada go to switch out crews?

Anywhere they want. It frequently doesn't happen at yards today.

I never understood this one. Too far east to be useful. I would have predicted Spence-Alliston, as a place to extract non-eastern traffic freom transcon trains, and bring it down to the GTA to connect with Chicago, Buffalo, and beyond. Add this to Kinnear and Wolverton.
CP’s proven inability to cope without Lambton is a sign of that need.
Moving the diesel shop that far east made no sense either.
Trenton might be a good place to seap blocks for traffic to/from Montreal and beyond, but that is only one segment of the traffic. Agincourt has other roles that Trenton won’t help much.

- Paul

I can't say that I understand it either, but......

If the land at Agincourt is worth too much when compared to land elsewhere - and while it may not be yet, it is certainly trending that way - they'll make it work.

I only found this out recently, but there was apparently quite the uproar when Vaughan was disclosed as their location for a container facility, as it was seen as "the middle of nowhere" and "miles away from anything". Now, though.....

My understanding is he was at the forefront of PSR which, while good for corporations, has been an absolute disaster for those working on the railroads and has led to a far more dangerous and less enjoyable workplace. You can't use the 'f word' here, but emphatically: eff that guy.

I think a lot of people place a lot of the industry's current ills on PSR, which is a bit unfair. PSR has its own problems vis-a-vis the industry as a whole and the way it deals with its customers, but staffing requirements aren't really integral to it's being.

And honestly, he was cutting crews - and their associated costs - long before he ever announced the idea of PSR.

Dan

 

[crs1026]

One of the ideas I've heard about for CN is the Belleville area.

That (kind of) makes sense, as there are enough customers and routes east of Belleville to do all the swapping and shunting there. CP is a different story - to this spectator, far less of the tonnage that moves through Agincourt has an eastern origin or destination.

If the land at Agincourt is worth too much when compared to land elsewhere - and while it may not be yet, it is certainly trending that way - they'll make it work.

Yyeah, that's how railways think.... it may be disfunctional, but it's the cheapest option,, so figure it out.

In fairness, I think a lot of people place a lot of the industry's current ills on PSR, which is a bit unfair. PSR has its own problems vis-a-vis the industry as a whole and the way it deals with its customers, but staffing requirements aren't really integral to it's being.
And honestly, he was cutting crews - and their associated costs - long before he ever announced the idea of PSR.

EHH gets heavily slammed (deservedly) for his contempt of rail workers and unions. What gets less play is his equal contempt for downstream customers and shippers.

PSR and EHh are a bit of a Venn diagram where people overestimate the degree of overlap between the two circles. PSR is an attractive proposition in the sense that it looks very critically at effort vs return, and is far more stingy with capital than previous models. Achieving favourable operating ratios and concentrating on high return traffic only is something that investors drool over.... the investors, not EHH, are the real culprits. As public policy, though, it sucks.... and when implemented by destroying peoples'' lives, it's definitely abusive. But efficiency is mostly win-win if done properly.

- Paul

 

[Metroscapes]

Back then with the Big Move, Metrolinx focused a lot more on the expansion of the network over service increases, if you read the document there’s a ton of proposed rail service expansions (mapped above) and very little service increases for the existing network.

Awesome map, as always. But I will have to object to that characterization of service in the plan. The 15-year plan outlined "Regional Rail (full-day, 2-way)" most GO lines within the Greenbelt, as well as "Express Rail" service on the Lakeshore lines, as well as Union to Brampton. The 25-year plan expanded this a bit. These terms were defined in the glossary:

Regional Rail: Diesel-electric or electric trains serving primarily longer-distance regional trips; approximate capacity at 10-minute headways of 5,000 to 20,000 passengers per hour peak direction; service can be enhanced by electrification, enabling better train performance (acceleration) and therefore higher average speeds even with relatively close station spacing. Average speed: 30 km/h with two km station spacing; 50 km/h with wider station spacing or electrified trains. Example: GO Transit rail system.

Express Rail: High-speed trains, typically electric, serving primarily longer-distance regional trips with two-way all-day service. Regional Express service could have a capacity of 25,000 to 40,000 passengers per hour in the peak direction with trains operating in completely separated rights-of-way, with as little as 5 minutes between trains. Average speed: 50 to 80 km/h with stations two to five km apart. Example: Paris Region Réseau Express Regional (RER).

 

[lenaitch]

I only found this out recently, but there was apparently quite the uproar when Vaughan was disclosed as their location for a container facility, as it was seen as "the middle of nowhere" and "miles away from anything". Now, though.....

If you hang around the world enough years, you hear that a lot. I remember when the York sub was pushed through farm fields, Malton was a village with an airport and going to visit a buddy who's parents moved the family to the dark wilds of Mount Albert