News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

You know I have to wonder, why did the Niagara Train suddenly start using dual F59s?

I understand the London Train needed it due to the St. Mary's Bridge, but is there any reason why the Niagara Train started using them?
 
You know I have to wonder, why did the Niagara Train suddenly start using dual F59s?

I understand the London Train needed it due to the St. Mary's Bridge, but is there any reason why the Niagara Train started using them?
That's really strange. When I rode it (powered by an MP40), it would typically reach 147 km/h between Port Credit, Oakville and Burlington, which is higher than the top speed of an F59 (134 km/h).
 
A few other people and I are waiting eagerly for Metrolinx to buy the Guelph Subdivision, foamers hate the GO trains that run on it and once it's renamed to the Metrolinx Guelph Sub, it'll really rub it into them.
My ETT literally says Metrolinx Guelph from mile 63 to 30... a foamer got upset at me cause i corrected them about calling the section near Acton the Metrolinx Guelph sub... i still see foamers calling it the CN Weston or CN Uxbridge.. the foamer proceeded to say "Railroaders are not essential to the operation of a railway"
 
It’s probably better for the Niagara train to use 2 underpowered locomotives twice a day instead of another line using them multiple times a day.
 
It’s probably better for the Niagara train to use 2 underpowered locomotives twice a day instead of another line using them multiple times a day.
The weekend Niagara train runs in service for 9 hours per day, similar to other trains in the network. It's a single trainset which does two daily round trips with a one-way travel time just over two hours.

And besides, a train with 2 F59s has more power than an MP40 (6400 hp vs 4000 hp) and more traction (8 powered axles vs 4). So it will definitely accelerate faster. The only downside is that there's a lower top speed (134 km/h vs 150 km/h). So you'd think that they'd put the F59 sets on a run which doesn't reach 134 km/h anyway, which is nearly every other run in the network.
 
The weekend Niagara train runs in service for 9 hours per day, similar to other trains in the network. It's a single trainset which does two daily round trips with a one-way travel time just over two hours.

And besides, a train with 2 F59s has more power than an MP40 (6400 hp vs 4000 hp) and more traction (8 powered axles vs 4). So it will definitely accelerate faster. The only downside is that there's a lower top speed (134 km/h vs 150 km/h). So you'd think that they'd put the F59 sets on a run which doesn't reach 134 km/h anyway, which is nearly every other run in the network.
My god I forgot how long the Niagara train is, my bad. But that’s what I meant about underpowered locomotives, they’re only stronger than the MP40 or 54’s if they’re placed together, and that’s not as feasible in regular train service.
 
So apparently no more 6 car consists are being used?

Wasn't MX goal with GO from now on to run shorter trains that are more frequent?
As much as I liked the benefits of the 6 car consists, acceleration/deceleration/fuel savings, at Agincourt I could see a huge problem with them. Time and time again I saw people miss a train because they had no idea it would stop at the north end of the platform, far away from the station or southern end of the platform (for NB trains). The door operator wouldn't see them because they would be blocked by people getting off the train. It was a nearly daily occurrence. It was a great way to ruin a first experience using GO Transit.
 
Canada needs to be more European in regards to transit. ”World-leading North American transit” hasn’t existed since the 1950s. GO Transit will inevitably become more European with DB designing OnCorr.

I’m trying to not be petty, but due to your obsession with horns, I hope GO’s new trains sound like something out of the Netherlands.
Honestly this is North America.... We don't need any European nonsense, if GO ever gets these ugly trains I will probably just move to the U.S because they would have North American trains with lovely horns. "no offense to Europe" but if it ever happens "I hope not" the horns will probably be K5CA-LS's because it's mandated by transport canada for passenger trains.
 
As much as I liked the benefits of the 6 car consists, acceleration/deceleration/fuel savings, at Agincourt I could see a huge problem with them. Time and time again I saw people miss a train because they had no idea it would stop at the north end of the platform, far away from the station or southern end of the platform (for NB trains). The door operator wouldn't see them because they would be blocked by people getting off the train. It was a nearly daily occurrence. It was a great way to ruin a first experience using GO Transit.
This is indeed a problem, but can easily avoided without needing to run unnecessarily long trains.

Most importantly, the station needs to announce the size of the train before it arrives, so people can arrange themselves accordingly. Like you said, with a 6-car train, the cab car is 150 metres from the end of the platform, so it could take up to 2 minutes to walk to the nearest door if someone's waiting at the wrong end of the platform. Which is longer than the trains typically stop. Here in the Netherlands, the length of the next train is displayed on the screens, as you can see below. Dutch platforms are also 12 cars long like ours, yet it's no problem that this particular train is only 4 cars long. As in Ontario, you can see the stopping markers along the platform, so you just need to make sure you are between the <4> signs in either direction (you can see the blue <4> sign in the background).
DelftSign.jpg


Additionally, the accessibility car doesn't really need to always be the 5th car back from the locomotive. With a 6-car train, it could easily be the 3rd car back from the locomotive, allowing those trains to stop near the middle of the platform rather than all the way down at one end. It makes no difference to someone using the accessibility coach where in the train it is. Wherever it is, it will stop at the mini-platform at the station where you board, and also at the station where you alight. The only change required would be to install a second set of stopping markers for 6-car trains in the direction where the locomotive is leading. There are already separate stopping markers for 6-car trains while the cab car is leading.
 
Last edited:
Honestly this is North America.... We don't need any European nonsense, if GO ever gets these ugly trains I will probably just move to the U.S because they would have North American trains with lovely horns. "no offense to Europe" but if it ever happens "I hope not" the horns will probably be K5CA-LS's because it's mandated by transport canada for passenger trains.
If you were around during the ONR's TEE era, your head would likely have exploded. Trains, automobiles, aircraft from all over the world. Oh my.
 
Do us a favour and just move now.
just block, ignored him and hope the mods put him on sick leave. As long someone respond to his posting, he will post more of S^^
 
This is indeed a problem, but can easily avoided without needing to run unnecessarily long trains.

Most importantly, the station needs to announce the size of the train before it arrives, so people can arrange themselves accordingly. Like you said, with a 6-car train, the cab car is 150 metres from the end of the platform, so it could take up to 2 minutes to walk to the nearest door if someone's waiting at the wrong end of the platform. Which is longer than the trains typically stop. Here in the Netherlands, the length of the next train is displayed on the screens, as you can see below. Dutch platforms are also 12 cars long like ours, yet it's no problem that this particular train is only 4 cars long. As in Ontario, you can see the stopping markers along the platform, so you just need to make sure you are between the <4> signs in either direction (you can see the blue <4> sign in the background).
They were supposed to start announcing and displaying the train lengths about the middle of last year, when train lengths were far more variable than they are today. And it was specifically for the reasons that people have been listing here.

I haven't been on GO that much over the past several months, but I certainly didn't notice it on my last several trips.

Dan
 
They were supposed to start announcing and displaying the train lengths about the middle of last year, when train lengths were far more variable than they are today. And it was specifically for the reasons that people have been listing here.

I haven't been on GO that much over the past several months, but I certainly didn't notice it on my last several trips.

Dan
If it was supposed to be implement some time last year, then it must be right on time cause I haven't noticed or heard any of this being implement at all.
 
They were supposed to start announcing and displaying the train lengths about the middle of last year, when train lengths were far more variable than they are today. And it was specifically for the reasons that people have been listing here.

I haven't been on GO that much over the past several months, but I certainly didn't notice it on my last several trips.

Dan
It never happened. I thought about announcements/displays as reaperexpress suggested, but I guessed that might require a version of electronic train info communication that the network might not have right now. Can you provide any info on whether or not it is feasible to do that with the current network?
 

Back
Top