News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

They have not done any work to the units, aside from any minor tweaks. They bought both units as-is.

Apparently the rebuilder doing the work was not told to make them able to be lead units. Maybe ONR just assumed that they would be capable? Maybe they felt they could do it themselves? I honestly don't know.

Dan
Hopefully they will do that work before the train starts to run. This way the second locomotive wouldn't be required and they can add another revenue generating car instead for the same axle count.

If they are going to run an overnight train, does that mean lay flat seats or possibly sleeper cars? But there aren't any in their fleet now so would they just swap out the current seats for ones that become more flat?
 
Hopefully they will do that work before the train starts to run. This way the second locomotive wouldn't be required and they can add another revenue generating car instead for the same axle count.

If they are going to run an overnight train, does that mean lay flat seats or possibly sleeper cars? But there aren't any in their fleet now so would they just swap out the current seats for ones that become more flat?
They do have some older sleepers.
 
They have not done any work to the units, aside from any minor tweaks. They bought both units as-is.

Apparently the rebuilder doing the work was not told to make them able to be lead units. Maybe ONR just assumed that they would be capable? Maybe they felt they could do it themselves? I honestly don't know.

Dan
It was my understanding that they had the prime mover and traction motors removed and generators installed (or the prime mover converted to consist power - I don't know how those things work). I have also heard that the refurbishment was less than ideal and they had been having some reliability issues.

It might be simple things, like the crews have not been cleared or trained on that platform (as far as I know they have no other F40s) or trained on control unit operations, or that they haven't even tested to see if the controls function properly. It's not something they need on the PBX which is what the units were bought and converted for. Maybe they left the controls in for future consideration, or simply didn't want to pay to have them removed.


The issue with the PBX isn't the passengers, its the other stuff, like personal vehicles and boxcars. They would need to set those off in Cochrane and then when returning north hook back on to them. Remember, the PBX is a mixed train.

I'm not married to the idea, but I would think simply cutting a train in two isn't all that time consuming. Freight, including autos, simply would terminate in Cochrane. But - I'm not sure the freight and passenger cars are assembled in distinct sets. I have seen footage showing freight, passenger then freight on the end. There must be a reason for this.

I just think having the facilities to either turn the train or run the power around at Timmins is an expense the government won't be willing to pay.
 
Last edited:
It was my understanding that they had the prime mover and traction motors removed and generators installed (or the prime mover converted to consist power - I don't know how those things work). I have also heard that the refurbishment was less than ideal and they had been having some reliability issues.

It might be simple things, like the crews have not been cleared or trained on that platform (as far as I know they have no other F40s) or trained on control unit operations, or that they haven't even tested to see if the controls function properly. It's not something they need on the PBX which is what the units were bought and converted for. Maybe they left the controls in for future consideration, or simply didn't want to pay to have them removed.




I'm not married to the idea, but I would think simply cutting a train in two isn't all that time consuming. Freight, including autos, simply would terminate in Cochrane. But - I'm not the freight and passenger cars are assembled in distinct sets. I have seen footage showing freight, passenger then freight on the end. There must be a reason for this.

I just think having the facilities to either turn the train or run the power around at Timmins is an expense the government won't be willing to pay.
Isn't it as simple as ordering equipment from WAbtec and installing the equipment? I mean they rebuilt the GO cab cars so it would be the same concept right?
 
Isn't it as simple as ordering equipment from WAbtec and installing the equipment? I mean they rebuilt the GO cab cars so it would be the same concept right?
Perhaps, but why buy stuff if you have no intention of using it. These were bought a rebuilt for the northern service, with a yard and time at both ends. It may require having an extra crew member sitting back in the power units just in case (it would be a long walk back in -40*).

We don't even know what equipment they are planning/thinking about for the Northlander. They ran the test train with what they had.
 
Perhaps, but why buy stuff if you have no intention of using it. These were bought a rebuilt for the northern service, with a yard and time at both ends. It may require having an extra crew member sitting back in the power units just in case (it would be a long walk back in -40*).

We don't even know what equipment they are planning/thinking about for the Northlander. They ran the test train with what they had.
Well depending on when they actually want to get the train running they would need to procure some equipment soon. And there isn't much used equipment lying around unless you want some Amfleets or horizon cars.
 
I'm not married to the idea, but I would think simply cutting a train in two isn't all that time consuming. Freight, including autos, simply would terminate in Cochrane. But - I'm not the freight and passenger cars are assembled in distinct sets. I have seen footage showing freight, passenger then freight on the end. There must be a reason for this.

I just think having the facilities to either turn the train or run the power around at Timmins is an expense the government won't be willing to pay.

All you would need is a siding to swap them around. As far as the cars being swapped in and out in Cochrane, that may or may not be as simple as you think.

Isn't it as simple as ordering equipment from WAbtec and installing the equipment? I mean they rebuilt the GO cab cars so it would be the same concept right?

As far as I have heard, the fleet is not set up for a DPU setup. So, all 3 engines they used, and the rest of the fleet would need to be considered for it to happen.
 
I guess they would need to run MU cables through the coaches and setup a specific number of locomotives to be compatible with this.

Can the MU cables be run through the floor? I guess they where never retained after being acquired from GO transit.
 
All you would need is a siding to swap them around.
And they might. The government has already announced the Northlander will eventually terminate at Timmins (Porcupine). Whether the PBX gets extended - who knows. It would require some serious lobbying and additional funding, certainly not part of the announced Northlander plan. Depending on what equipment they end up buying or using on the Northlander, they might have to figure out how to turn the train or power at Timmins anyway.

As far as the cars being swapped in and out in Cochrane, that may or may not be as simple as you think.

Yup. I don't know enough about the practice or the rules. Everything sounds easy if you say it fast enough.
 
And they might. The government has already announced the Northlander will eventually terminate at Timmins (Porcupine). Whether the PBX gets extended - who knows. It would require some serious lobbying and additional funding, certainly not part of the announced Northlander plan. Depending on what equipment they end up buying or using on the Northlander, they might have to figure out how to turn the train or power at Timmins anyway.



Yup. I don't know enough about the practice or the rules. Everything sounds easy if you say it fast enough.

I, and many others feel that without a direct connection to Timmins, and a direct connection to the PBX, it won't be as successful as it could be.
 
Hopefully they will do that work before the train starts to run. This way the second locomotive wouldn't be required and they can add another revenue generating car instead for the same axle count.

I guess that depends on how they envision any potential service would be run. They've been using them as-is for the time being with no issues.

If they are going to run an overnight train, does that mean lay flat seats or possibly sleeper cars? But there aren't any in their fleet now so would they just swap out the current seats for ones that become more flat?

This is a good question. Maybe I need to read through the report again, but I didn't see anything about how they would configure the equipment for such a service.

They do have some older sleepers.

I'm fairly certain that those sleepers have long since been scrapped. If they are somehow still around, they would now have been sitting for about 26 years, and so would need a LOT of work.

It was my understanding that they had the prime mover and traction motors removed and generators installed (or the prime mover converted to consist power - I don't know how those things work). I have also heard that the refurbishment was less than ideal and they had been having some reliability issues.

They did have a lot of issues getting them into service, but they seem to have managed to correct all of them.

As for how they were built, they removed the original EMD prime mover and alternator (and air compressors, and radiators - basically leaving the shell completely empty) and fitted a small skid-mounted diesel engine and alternator that is better configured for this kind of service.

It might be simple things, like the crews have not been cleared or trained on that platform (as far as I know they have no other F40s) or trained on control unit operations, or that they haven't even tested to see if the controls function properly. It's not something they need on the PBX which is what the units were bought and converted for. Maybe they left the controls in for future consideration, or simply didn't want to pay to have them removed.

I can't see training being a game-breaking activity, especially since the cabs of these things are configured almost identically to three-quarters of ONR's existing fleet. It is more likely that much of the original equipment required for operating them/a train was fitted into the two units from their days in service with Amtrak is still there, but has not been touched in many years (or has even been cannibalized) - which is why they can't be made to lead right now. But again, that isn't a big deal for the forces at the North Bay Shops.

I'm not married to the idea, but I would think simply cutting a train in two isn't all that time consuming. Freight, including autos, simply would terminate in Cochrane. But - I'm not the freight and passenger cars are assembled in distinct sets. I have seen footage showing freight, passenger then freight on the end. There must be a reason for this.

It's not overly onerous, no. But there are rules around it, and there are certain things - brake tests, for instance - that are required of the process. There is absolutely a time factory to take into account, too.

The equipment all has to be marshalled together in such a way to allow the passenger cars to have power. Whether that means all of the coaches at the back or at the front is less important.

What may be more important, however, is how it is marshalled vis-a-vis switching operations at one end or the other. There is lots of room to maneuver at Cochrane, so I suspect that the orientation of the cars doesn't matter so much. But at Moosonee, I don't believe that the run-around track is long enough to handle more than a pair or trio of locos, so to save time for everyone it may make most sense to have the freight located on the tail end of the train. That way the locos pull into the station, cut off of the train, run around to the back, and grab the freight cars to bring them to their set of tracks for unloading.

I just think having the facilities to either turn the train or run the power around at Timmins is an expense the government won't be willing to pay.

Running the power around would imply that they would (likely) require a pair of locos to run the train, which seems excessive and a huge waste of resources. At the same time, I don't think that building a wye is such a bit deal/cost - keep in mind that it doesn't need to be located right at any potential terminus - there is no reason why they couldn't build one at one of the mine spurs.

Dan
 
I guess that depends on how they envision any potential service would be run. They've been using them as-is for the time being with no issues.



This is a good question. Maybe I need to read through the report again, but I didn't see anything about how they would configure the equipment for such a service.



I'm fairly certain that those sleepers have long since been scrapped. If they are somehow still around, they would now have been sitting for about 26 years, and so would need a LOT of work.



They did have a lot of issues getting them into service, but they seem to have managed to correct all of them.

As for how they were built, they removed the original EMD prime mover and alternator (and air compressors, and radiators - basically leaving the shell completely empty) and fitted a small skid-mounted diesel engine and alternator that is better configured for this kind of service.



I can't see training being a game-breaking activity, especially since the cabs of these things are configured almost identically to three-quarters of ONR's existing fleet. It is more likely that much of the original equipment required for operating them/a train was fitted into the two units from their days in service with Amtrak is still there, but has not been touched in many years (or has even been cannibalized) - which is why they can't be made to lead right now. But again, that isn't a big deal for the forces at the North Bay Shops.



It's not overly onerous, no. But there are rules around it, and there are certain things - brake tests, for instance - that are required of the process. There is absolutely a time factory to take into account, too.

The equipment all has to be marshalled together in such a way to allow the passenger cars to have power. Whether that means all of the coaches at the back or at the front is less important.

What may be more important, however, is how it is marshalled vis-a-vis switching operations at one end or the other. There is lots of room to maneuver at Cochrane, so I suspect that the orientation of the cars doesn't matter so much. But at Moosonee, I don't believe that the run-around track is long enough to handle more than a pair or trio of locos, so to save time for everyone it may make most sense to have the freight located on the tail end of the train. That way the locos pull into the station, cut off of the train, run around to the back, and grab the freight cars to bring them to their set of tracks for unloading.



Running the power around would imply that they would (likely) require a pair of locos to run the train, which seems excessive and a huge waste of resources. At the same time, I don't think that building a wye is such a bit deal/cost - keep in mind that it doesn't need to be located right at any potential terminus - there is no reason why they couldn't build one at one of the mine spurs.

Dan
When the train used to run to Toronto how did they wye the train? Did they use the stub track at TMC?
 
^The tail end “cabbage” makes a good shoving platform, regardless of whether it is used in control (a true push-pull) or just as a place for a crew member to protect the shove (to and through a wye, for instance). So there is logic to having it on the rear end even if it’s controlless.

With the number of connections between cars (and between cars and licos), it’s important to do as little joining and disconnecting as possible. Especially in winter. If a wye is available, I can’t imagine a service plan that has any making or breaking of joints at either end of the run.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
In Cochrane, they still have some of the old T&NO equipment. Reality is, if they want the sleepers to be ready for the start of the train, there would be a movement to bring them to the North Bay shops where they can refurbish them.
 

Back
Top