[micheal_can]

VIA should do none of those things if right now they can’t afford a power switch in Moncton. If New Brunswick wants to, and will pay, perhaps. Given that they seem to have allowed every foot of rail in Fredericton to be turned into trails, I doubt we will be seeing anything close to what’s described.

I was not suggesting it be done now. This is if Via ever decides to add more routes in the Maritimes. That switch should be done sooner than later. Call me weird, but I don't think a passenger train conductor/engineer should ever throw a switch, unless the switch mechanism is broken.

 

[Urban Sky]

I think we are way past the point where people here would call a certain commenter just “weird”…

 

[lenaitch]

Call me weird, but I don't think a passenger train conductor/engineer should ever throw a switch, unless the switch mechanism is broken.

Then I suggest don't ride any train that doesn't operate in CTC territory. That will include the Northlander when it comes back.

I should know better than to get caught up in your technicolour dreams.

 

[micheal_can]

Then I suggest don't ride any train that doesn't operate in CTC territory. That will include the Northlander when it comes back.

I should know better than to get caught up in your technicolour dreams.

The Northlander would run on the through tracks. They are usually lined for the mainline. Having said that, just because it is that way, does not mean I cannot use it. It just annoys me. Add it to the pile.

 

[Mihairokov]

If there is ever a new passenger service added in NB it's between Saint John and Moncton. Fredericton has no rail. The province is controlled partly by an oil company which has a vested interest in ensuring people continue to drive instead of taking passenger rail. It's not happening.

 

[dowlingm]

If there is ever a new passenger service added in NB it's between Saint John and Moncton. Fredericton has no rail. The province is controlled partly by an oil company which has a vested interest in ensuring people continue to drive instead of taking passenger rail. It's not happening.

Not saying that you’re wrong but that family owns a railway too (New Brunswick Southern)

 

[smallspy]

Call me weird, but I don't think a passenger train conductor/engineer should ever throw a switch, unless the switch mechanism is broken.

What fantasy world do you live in?

If a mechanism is broken, a crew member going to the ground isn't going to fix it, so that's not a reason to do it.

I guess you don't want to know that EXO, GO and WCE crews operate hand-thrown switches every day then, eh? As do Amtrak, New Jersey Transit, Metrolink, etc.

Dan

 

[lenaitch]

Not saying that you’re wrong but that family owns a railway too (New Brunswick Southern)

In that sense, New Brunswick is actually easy to figure out: Irving owns one half, McCain the other.

 

[crs1026]

This is if Via ever decides to add more routes in the Maritimes.

This remark certainly places your commentary on a scale from "useful discussion" to "fantasy thread".

I don't think a passenger train conductor/engineer should ever throw a switch, unless the switch mechanism is broken.

You should inform yourself about how and when signalling is required or found appropriate in the real world of North American railroading. It may also help to understand the difference between "broken" and "dual power switch".

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

If there is ever a new passenger service added in NB it's between Saint John and Moncton. Fredericton has no rail. The province is controlled partly by an oil company which has a vested interest in ensuring people continue to drive instead of taking passenger rail. It's not happening.

I know that is most likely what will happen if Via ever expands service in the Maritimes. I am saying that if they are going that far, maybe reactivating the old line might be worth it. It could even be a phased thing such that the section between Fredericton Junction and Fredericton are reactivated first.

This remark certainly places your commentary on a scale from "useful discussion" to "fantasy thread".

I know. I try to keep things as realistic as I can. Fantasy would be HSR throughout. Understanding that this will never happen unless Via has the extra money to do it keeps it closer to the useful discussion.

You should inform yourself about how and when signalling is required or found appropriate in the real world of North American railroading. It may also help to understand the difference between "broken" and "dual power switch".

- Paul

What I mean by a broken switch is one where the automatic mechanism is not functioning, but where the switch can be operated in a manual mode. I am not sure of the trade name for it. What would that switch be called?

 

[micheal_can]

What fantasy world do you live in?

If a mechanism is broken, a crew member going to the ground isn't going to fix it, so that's not a reason to do it.

I guess you don't want to know that EXO, GO and WCE crews operate hand-thrown switches every day then, eh? As do Amtrak, New Jersey Transit, Metrolink, etc.

Dan

In the revenue sections of GO, where are those hand thrown switches? Not talking about yards that they store the trains in.

 

[crs1026]

What I mean by a broken switch is one where the automatic mechanism is not functioning, but where the switch can be operated in a manual mode. I am not sure of the trade name for it. What would that switch be called?

From the CROR

Dual Control Switch
A switch equipped for powered and hand operation

Power-operated Switch
A switch equipped for powered operation, but not hand operation

Main Track Hand Operated Switch
A switch connected to the main track used to route equipment or a track unit to or from the main track.
(in railway space, a "main track" is a whole different proposition than yard trackage and a main track switch has a whole set of rules of its own)

Electric Switch Lock
An electric lock connected with a hand operated switch to prevent its operation until the lock is released
(Even more rules to follow if a switch has an electric lock)

Without getting too far into the rules, passenger train crew regularly operate switches out on the mainline in signalled territory under direction from the RTC. This may happen due to signal failure, or because of maintenance of way activity, or because the signal circuitry won't allow the RTC to align the route desired in some unusual situation.

As to designing the trackwork, one does not simply plunk in a power switch like one does on an HO layout (which isn't always easy, either). There is a whole set of considerations including cost, impact on the surrounding signalling and circuitry, and frequency of use. Adding a switch may change how the rules work in that location, creating complications for other trains in the general area, and adding work for the RTC. Five or ten minutes of effort by the train crew and RTC a few times a week may be much simpler for the railway than complicating the plant.

Moncton VIA is a good example of how much the rail infrastructure has changed over the years. The railways have removed every extraneous switch, siding, and signal that no longer serves any function. If you assume that because a passenger train once ran someplace, it can be reinstated, you are missing an important point. Moncton is a good example of a once elaborate rail center that has been stripped down to bare minimum.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

From the CROR

Dual Control Switch
A switch equipped for powered and hand operation

Power-operated Switch
A switch equipped for powered operation, but not hand operation

Main Track Hand Operated Switch
A switch connected to the main track used to route equipment or a track unit to or from the main track.
(in railway space, a "main track" is a whole different proposition than yard trackage and a main track switch has a whole set of rules of its own)

Electric Switch Lock
An electric lock connected with a hand operated switch to prevent its operation until the lock is released
(Even more rules to follow if a switch has an electric lock)

Without getting too far into the rules, passenger train crew regularly operate switches out on the mainline in signalled territory under direction from the RTC. This may happen due to signal failure, or because of maintenance of way activity, or because the signal circuitry won't allow the RTC to align the route desired in some unusual situation.

As to designing the trackwork, one does not simply plunk in a power switch like one does on an HO layout (which isn't always easy, either). There is a whole set of considerations including cost, impact on the surrounding signalling and circuitry, and frequency of use. Adding a switch may change how the rules work in that location, creating complications for other trains in the general area, and adding work for the RTC. Five or ten minutes of effort by the train crew and RTC a few times a week may be much simpler for the railway than complicating the plant.

Moncton VIA is a good example of how much the rail infrastructure has changed over the years. The railways have removed every extraneous switch, siding, and signal that no longer serves any function. If you assume that because a passenger train once ran someplace, it can be reinstated, you are missing an important point. Moncton is a good example of a once elaborate rail center that has been stripped down to bare minimum.

- Paul

So,then what kind of switch is needed to prevent the need for backing up to leave?

 

[crs1026]

So,then what kind of switch is needed to prevent the need for backing up to leave?

The signal engineer would have to look at the data and decide, but I think that what you are wanting would not suit a hand throw device, as there would still be crew getting off and walking, and possibly doing paperwork or waiting five minutes before touching the switch.

It's back to my earlier post - outlining just how much hardware that requires. And CN might need to relocate the approach signal for the existing switch, because you have shaved a couple trainlengths off the stopping distance from that signal to the home signal. And then you have to redesign the signal progression because the signals beyond each end will now have different information to display, and all that needs to be reconfigured in the circuitry and processor logic, and then in all the CN technical and operating documentation and employee timetables - and programming done in the RTC console.

So sure, it's doable..... but the dollars add up, and so one looks to where the money can be best used.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

The signal engineer would have to look at the data and decide, but I think that what you are wanting would not suit a hand throw device, as there would still be crew getting off and walking, and possibly doing paperwork or waiting five minutes before touching the switch.

It's back to my earlier post - outlining just how much hardware that requires. And CN might need to relocate the approach signal for the existing switch, because you have shaved a couple trainlengths off the stopping distance from that signal to the home signal. And then you have to redesign the signal progression because the signals beyond each end will now have different information to display, and all that needs to be reconfigured in the circuitry and processor logic, and then in all the CN technical and operating documentation and employee timetables - and programming done in the RTC console.

So sure, it's doable..... but the dollars add up, and so one looks to where the money can be best used.

- Paul

Thank you for laying this out. It does sound like a lot for 3x a week train each way. If it were a daily, and another daily from Saint John were running,then it might make sense for those dollars to be allocated.