[crs1026]

I have zero experience on the NE Corridor. Would you consider that line(s) to be the model for what the VIA corridor could become? The distances and population numbers are not quite comparable, but equipment could, may or might be. Without taking up your time, as this may have been discussed other places previously, a yes, no or maybe would be good for me! Thanks. I'll need to go for a ride myself.

It's always interesting to benchmark against others, but one has to be careful about apples and oranges. The NEC runs through many much more dense urban areas and has a combination of High Speed, Regional, and commuter functions that may or may not lend itself to direct application to VIA's needs.

Also, we are talking here about electrical supply and not system design as a whole.

The difference between the NEC and VIA in regard to electricity infrastructure is that the NEC has had to retrofit many things onto an extremely old and often obsolete but still vital infrastructure spanning multiple jurisdictions. Whereas VIA will have the ability to design from the ground up, and (if they get ahead of things) won't have to cater to other jurisdictions' already in place infrastructure and precedent.

Should VIA just copy what's in place in the NEC? Absolutely not. But VIA's designers may reach similar conclusions on similar issues and problems. We have similar winters and summers, a common electricity grid, for example. But some things may not matter, and different visions of equipment choice and operating envelopes will inform the design.

But it's definitely an interesting system to explore.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

What I found interesting about comparing VIA’s Corridor services with Amtrak’s NEC was that their trip rates (i.e. ridership divided by the relevant population figures for the megalopolitan area) are actually surprisingly similar…

 

[crs1026]

What I found interesting about comparing VIA’s Corridor services with Amtrak’s NEC was that their trip rates (i.e. ridership divided by the relevant population figures for the megalopolitan area) are actually surprisingly similar…

Interesting. Was that a point in time comparison or a consistent trend over time?

It's a bit of a two-edged sword. If the NEC's per capita uptake is the same as ours, after all their upgrading and speed improvements, then one has to ask why would we bother upgrading our system.

I doubt there is a simple equation, but one has to think that Amtrak will have seen ridership grow as they improved velocity and equipment/track/power reliability, and VIA would see the same.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

I have zero experience on the NE Corridor. Would you consider that line(s) to be the model for what the VIA corridor could become? The distances and population numbers are not quite comparable, but equipment could, may or might be. Without taking up your time, as this may have been discussed other places previously, a yes, no or maybe would be good for me! Thanks. I'll need to go for a ride myself.

First off, as Paul noted, I was speaking specifically about the power systems, and the ability for the rolling stock to change (or not change) between differing overhead power systems on the fly - should that need arise. I think it's fair to assume that if the HFR line gets electrified that it will be done with the 25kV ac that is the defacto standard, and so realistically any requirement for the rolling stock to change between differing voltages is unnecessary.

But more holistically, the NEC it is an easier comparison to make versus European operators as they run equipment that is equivalent to ours, with regulations very similar to ours, and in a similar climate. They also have issues regarding the intermixing of high(er) speed trains and local commuter trains and freights. It may have problems, sure - but it is in large part what we should be aspiring to achieve.

What I found interesting about comparing VIA’s Corridor services with Amtrak’s NEC was that their trip rates (i.e. ridership divided by the relevant population figures for the megalopolitan area) are actually surprisingly similar…

This fact blows me away, considering that Amtrak has long made a big deal about the fact that they have as high as a 70% market share on some portions of the NEC.

Dan

 

[kEiThZ]

Just curious if anybody knows. Do suburban rail, intercity rail and HSR use the same voltage in France, Spain, Germany, Japan, etc? Are there drawbacks to GO RER and HFR/HSR using the same voltage?

 

[rbt]

Just curious if anybody knows. Do suburban rail, intercity rail and HSR use the same voltage in France, Spain, Germany, Japan, etc? Are there drawbacks to GO RER and HFR/HSR using the same voltage?

Large chunks of Spain uses 3kV but large chunks of Spain also use a different railway gauge, and yes they built variable gauge trains so they can run on both systems in a single trip. They're also tri-voltage: 25kV ac, 3kV dc and 1.5kV dc but that's trivial compared to changing gauge on a loaded train.

France has been converting their older 1500V DC lines to 25kV but it's not a fast process. Part of a line joining the HSR network includes new or modified rolling stock for local services.

Japan mostly uses 1500V DC for non-HSR lines. Also, for fun, they have a mix of 25kV AC @ 50Hz, 25kV AC @ 60Hz, 20kV AC @ 50Hz, and 20kV AC @ 60Hz.

List of railway electrification systems - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Urban Sky]

Just curious if anybody knows. Do suburban rail, intercity rail and HSR use the same voltage in France, Spain, Germany, Japan, etc? Are there drawbacks to GO RER and HFR/HSR using the same voltage?

Have a look at Open Railway Map and choose the “electrification” layer. I’ll go with Germany where I’m most familiar: The S-Bahnen of Hamburg and Berlin use third rail, so DC (750V), whereas all other networks use 15kV AC. The Tram-Trains of Kassel, Saarbrücken and (of course) Karlsruhe use 600-750V on their urban (light rail) networks and switch over to 15kV AC before they merge into the heavy rail networks (same goes for the S-Bahn in Hamburg).

Outside of Germany, I remember that Tokyo and NYC have quiet a crazy variety of electrification systems:

 

[roger1818]

If (and it’s a big if) CN and CP were to electrify their lines, I suspect they would use 50 kVAC.

 

[cplchanb]

If (and it’s a big if) CN and CP were to electrify their lines, I suspect they would use 50 kVAC.

who else uses that much power?! the world norm for intercity rail is 25k max.

 

[just east of the creek]

It's always interesting to benchmark against others, but one has to be careful about apples and oranges. The NEC runs through many much more dense urban areas and has a combination of High Speed, Regional, and commuter functions that may or may not lend itself to direct application to VIA's needs.

Also, we are talking here about electrical supply and not system design as a whole.

The difference between the NEC and VIA in regard to electricity infrastructure is that the NEC has had to retrofit many things onto an extremely old and often obsolete but still vital infrastructure spanning multiple jurisdictions. Whereas VIA will have the ability to design from the ground up, and (if they get ahead of things) won't have to cater to other jurisdictions' already in place infrastructure and precedent.

Should VIA just copy what's in place in the NEC? Absolutely not. But VIA's designers may reach similar conclusions on similar issues and problems. We have similar winters and summers, a common electricity grid, for example. But some things may not matter, and different visions of equipment choice and operating envelopes will inform the design.

But it's definitely an interesting system to explore.

- Paul

Thank you for your reply. Although it appears as if allowances are being made now in new or retrofit construction for electrically powered trains, implementation looks to be well off in the future. When you factor in current plans for service expansion and those affiliated costs (mainly GO i believe), estimated and projected cost's of electrifying one corridor line, current fleets and lifespans of existing equipment, interaction with GO and EXO and their plans, timeline for implementation, and the political will power to announce big ticket funding.....could be some time yet I think before we see comparable higher speed EMU's (say 160 kmh), let alone some of those gorgeous HSR EMU's from Korea or Europe. running at 200 kmh or more. I am not sure we are building infrastructure to support Chinese/Japanese style HSR.

When i was last in China, they were talking about and showing conceptual diagrams of a double decker HSR train. I think a version for higher speed commuter work, and then another for longer distances. I thought of GO when looking at those at the time but I am not sure where they are in the implementation stage currently.

Again, thanks for your reply.

 

[roger1818]

who else uses that much power?! the world norm for intercity rail is 25k max.

It isn't common, but is occasionally used for hauling iron and coal. According to Wikipedia, it is/was used in:

South Africa	Northern Cape, Western Cape	Sishen–Saldanha railway line	opened in 1976 and hauls iron ore
Canada	British Columbia	Tumbler Ridge Subdivision of BC Rail (Now Canadian National Railway)	Opened in 1983 to serve a coal mine in the northern Rocky Mountains. No longer in use.
United States	Arizona	Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad	First line to use 50 kV electrification when it opened in 1973. This was an isolated coal-hauling short line; no longer in use.
United States	Utah	Deseret Power Railroad	Formerly Deseret Western Railway. This is an isolated coal-hauling short line.

Given the size of the freight trains we have, the extra power from doubling the voltage (power = voltage x current) would be helpful. Most of the world focuses on passenger trains and freight is an after thought. North American freight railways won't really care what voltage they use in Europe or Asia.

 

[turini2]

Just curious if anybody knows. Do suburban rail, intercity rail and HSR use the same voltage in France, Spain, Germany, Japan, etc? Are there drawbacks to GO RER and HFR/HSR using the same voltage?

Yes, 25kV AC - for example in the UK, the East Coast Main Line into Kings Cross has 125mph Intercity EMUs on the fast lines, with 85-100mph commuter/RER trains on the slow lines.

No, there are no drawbacks - 25kV AC is an international standard for electrification at this point.

 

[turini2]

It isn't common, but is occasionally used for hauling iron and coal. According to Wikipedia, it is/was used in:

South Africa	Northern Cape, Western Cape	Sishen–Saldanha railway line	opened in 1976 and hauls iron ore
Canada	British Columbia	Tumbler Ridge Subdivision of BC Rail (Now Canadian National Railway)	Opened in 1983 to serve a coal mine in the northern Rocky Mountains. No longer in use.
United States	Arizona	Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad	First line to use 50 kV electrification when it opened in 1973. This was an isolated coal-hauling short line; no longer in use.
United States	Utah	Deseret Power Railroad	Formerly Deseret Western Railway. This is an isolated coal-hauling short line.

Given the size of the freight trains we have, the extra power from doubling the voltage (power = voltage x current) would be helpful. Most of the world focuses on passenger trains and freight is an after thought.

Not the case - India has nearly 2,000km of newly built electrified railway dedicated for double stack freight - electrified at 25kV AC.
Trains of comparable length to ones used in North America, running at 100kmh on these dedicated, grade separated lines. They use Alstom electric locomotives.

(Freight isn't always an afterthought, Indian Railways has historically subsidized the passenger segment with income from the freight business!)

(Also this image is great at scaring US foamers who claim double stack freight isn't possible under wires)

 

[roger1818]

Not the case - India has nearly 2,000km of newly built electrified railway dedicated for double stack freight - electrified at 25kV AC.
Trains of comparable length to ones used in North America, running at 100kmh on these dedicated, grade separated lines. They use Alstom electric locomotives.

(Freight isn't always an afterthought, Indian Railways has historically subsidized the passenger segment with income from the freight business!)
View attachment 533796
(Also this image is great at scaring US foamers who claim double stack freight isn't possible under wires)

That is a bit of a strawman argument. Just because you provide an example of one country outside of North America that has long, electric freight trains, that doesn't mean that "most of the world" doesn't focus on passenger trains. I will admit that the Scandinavian countries also has some long freight lines, but that isn't representative of the rest of Europe, where significant restrictions are placed on train length, height and weight, mostly because of an unwillingness to upgrade their infrastructure for better freight.

I'm curious, is that "nearly 2,000km of newly built electrified railway" one continuous line, or a network of lines? India has significantly different geography and demographics than Canada. Sure CN and CP could probably get away with a 25 kVAC feed in the "Quebec-Windsor Corridor" (admittedly the topic of this thread) where:

1. The topology is flat, and
2. There is a well developed electrical grid, allowing frequent feeds to the catenary.

In other parts of the country this isn't the case. For example, in BC the combination of a mountainous terrain, combined with frequent, heavy resource loads (which, AFAIK, are typically heaver than containers), the higher power could be helpful. Also, in Northern Ontario, there are large sections without a well developed electrical grid, so having a higher voltage, would lower the current, meaning the distance between grid feeds could be longer.

The freight railways could possibly choose to use 25 kVAC in some sections to allow them to import European locomotives there (assuming they meet North American Standards) and then switch to 50 kVAC locomotives where those are more useful, but I somehow think they would want to standardize on a single voltage.

I will conclude by reiterating that the freight railways have shown no interest in installing catenary anywhere on their networks (or even permitting it), so the whole discussion is likely moot.

 

[cplchanb]

It isn't common, but is occasionally used for hauling iron and coal. According to Wikipedia, it is/was used in:

South Africa	Northern Cape, Western Cape	Sishen–Saldanha railway line	opened in 1976 and hauls iron ore
Canada	British Columbia	Tumbler Ridge Subdivision of BC Rail (Now Canadian National Railway)	Opened in 1983 to serve a coal mine in the northern Rocky Mountains. No longer in use.
United States	Arizona	Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad	First line to use 50 kV electrification when it opened in 1973. This was an isolated coal-hauling short line; no longer in use.
United States	Utah	Deseret Power Railroad	Formerly Deseret Western Railway. This is an isolated coal-hauling short line.

Given the size of the freight trains we have, the extra power from doubling the voltage (power = voltage x current) would be helpful. Most of the world focuses on passenger trains and freight is an after thought. North American freight railways won't really care what voltage they use in Europe or Asia.

so its 2 systems (1.5 since the utah is 1 small line) vs the whole world.... id say thats pretty much zero then. theres no point in using an essentially bespoke voltage. costs would be 5x right off the bat.
the obstacle is not technical. as shown above for india its all about whether CN/CP wants in invest on electric infrastructure or stick with the good ol' diesel. right now its the latter because its more short term financially convenient for them.