News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

From Trains.com

MONTREAL — When safety is on the table, there can be no debate about measures taken to ensure it.

So when Canadian National informed VIA Rail Canada last Friday that all Venture trainsets of less than 32 axles could not operate at track speed across highway crossings equipped with warning devices triggered by Grade Crossing Predictors, the operator had no recourse but to immediately comply [see “CN imposes axle-count restriction …,” Trains News Wire Oct. 14, 2024].

Still unanswered is why CN chose the beginning of Canada’s Thanksgiving Day holiday weekend to impose the restriction and what role the railroad’s track maintenance or other factors might have prompted the decision.

In response to a News Wire request for more details, a VIA spokesman says, “No incidents or issues at level crossings have been reported to VIA Rail since the Venture trains have been in operation.” The trainsets were tested on all routes to the satisfaction of regulatory agency Transport Canada and host railroads before VIA’s acceptance in 2021, and have operated in revenue service since Nov. 8, 2022, “with CN’s collaboration and approval.”


Canadian National spokeswoman Ashley Michnowski, responding to the same inquiry, explains, “We advised VIA very early on in the process (October 2021) that operating at a 24-axle count could create issues.” This was confirmed, she says, in March 2024. “We immediately notified VIA and took necessary measures to protect the public by reverting to CN’s 32-axle minimum requirement or imposing restrictions on the designated routes that VIA was operating this fleet on.”

VIA tells News Wire slowdowns at crossings were indeed mandated then on portions of the Montreal-Quebec City corridor, but reiterated that CN failed to divulge any specific incident or incidents where the crossing activation issue, known as loss of shunt, occurred. And that was in March.

Four passenger cars at station
A Budd-built HEP-2 coach and three “Light Rapid Comfortable” cars await departure from Ottawa to Toronto on Sept. 30, 2024. VIA has routinely operated the LRCs in four-car sets for decades without incurring loss-of-shunt incidents. Bob Johnston

Canadian National only said, “it was discovered on Oct. 11, 2024, that these Venture trainsets were operating in expanded service with crossings which may experience shunt loss and thus be unprotected, CN took immediate measures to issue the proper instructions to protect the safety of train operations and crossings.”

Engineers must slow their trains enough to visually confirm that warning devices are operating at least 20 seconds prior to the train’s approach to crossings. A Transport Canada official told a reporter for broadcaster CTV that this was 72 kilometers per hour (about 44 mph).


Michnowski’s statement further notes that “shunt enhancer antennas” are in use in the United Kingdom. The locomotive-mounted device appears to be the railroad’s blanket solution to otherwise unexplained instances where loss of shunt on certain CN track segments — but not others — has resulted on equipment-specific and axle-count requirements if maximum authorized track speeds are to be maintained.

In the U.S., a years-long mandate requiring seven Superliner on Amtrak’s Chicago-Carbondale, Ill., regional route has prevented 14 long-distance cars from providing much needed capacity elsewhere [see “Short consists constrain Capitol Limited …,” News Wire, Jan. 19, 2024].

Meanwhile in Canada, only CN has imposed the speed restriction on Ventures. A recent News Wire round trip between Dorval, Que., and Ottawa confirmed VIA continues to operate the trainsets at maximum speeds up to 100 mph across highway crossings on track it owns and maintains after leaving CN’s Montreal-Toronto main line at Coteau, Que.

Acording to VIA, host railroads Metrolinx in the Toronto area and Canadian Pacific around Smiths Falls, Ont., have also not imposed Venture-only restrictions.

Today (Thursday, Oct. 17), train No. 22 from Ottawa was 10 minutes late leaving Coteau on the all-VIA route. On CN, it departed Montreal 40 minutes late, was 1 hour, 20 minutes behind schedule at St. Hyacinthe, Que., and arrived at Quebec City at 1:59 p.m. instead of 11:40 a.m., well after any passengers’ lunch appointments. In the other direction, VIA No. 35 was an hour late over CN leaving Coteau, but the train lost only 8 minutes more on the way to Ottawa.

People standing in line in railroad station
A trainload of passengers await the boarding announcement at Ottawa on Sept. 30 for Venture-equipped train No. 26 headed for Montreal and Quebec City. Travelers on the route continue to be severely impacted by tardy arrivals. Bob Johnston
 
Thank you for pointing out that a massive proportion of train movements worldwide have less than 32 axles! If it can’t reliably detect a train, then the problem is with your train detection equipment, not the train…

Let’s also not forget this extremely leightweight 4 axle train working one of their main lines in BC:
That equipment was replaced several years ago with a high-rail school/activity bus.

In any case, it wasn't considered a train but a "track unit", and so was not required to shunt any signals.

Dan
 
That equipment was replaced several years ago with a high-rail school/activity bus.

In any case, it wasn't considered a train but a "track unit", and so was not required to shunt any signals.

Dan

I understand that it's not Visa's fault but by simply saying find your own way home is not the best way to handle the situation.
 

I understand that it's not Visa's fault but by simply saying find your own way home is not the best way to handle the situation.
I don’t know when that changed, but during my (still rather recent) time at VIA, passengers would routinely get placed onto a Calm Air flight to get shuttled to Churchill and/or back whenever that line was interrupted…
 
I don’t know when that changed, but during my (still rather recent) time at VIA, passengers would routinely get placed onto a Calm Air flight to get shuttled to Churchill and/or back whenever that line was interrupted…
How frequently was that line interrupted? Could VIA have some kind of retainer with that airline to move people because it was frequently interrupted?
I assume also there were not too many people making that trip all the way there on any one train?
 
That equipment was replaced several years ago with a high-rail school/activity bus.

In any case, it wasn't considered a train but a "track unit", and so was not required to shunt any signals.

Dan
Thanks for that. I didn't notice the dates on the articles/images.
 
This whole thing is turning into a 'he said - she said' affair. CN seems quite happy with the technology for the equipment it runs and seems to have little sympathy with the concerns of a tenant operator. Maybe it's time for the the regulator to say something.
 
This whole thing is turning into a 'he said - she said' affair. CN seems quite happy with the technology for the equipment it runs and seems to have little sympathy with the concerns of a tenant operator. Maybe it's time for the the regulator to say something.

Maybe it's time to go a lot further than that - I am not convinced the current arrangement is in the national interest.

AoD
 
Maybe it's time to go a lot further than that - I am not convinced the current arrangement is in the national interest.

AoD
I'm not sure it's that dire - yet. Adding X minutes to schedules doesn't strike me as a national crisis. The regulator needs to step up and, you know, regulate. The US imposed PTC and it seems none of the railways packed up their toys and went home. What we don't know, sitting on the outside looking in, is whether there is a relatively quick and inexpensive solution just around the corner.
 
This whole thing is turning into a 'he said - she said' affair. CN seems quite happy with the technology for the equipment it runs and seems to have little sympathy with the concerns of a tenant operator. Maybe it's time for the the regulator to say something.

My gut feeling when reading the article was that since there are no documented incidences, this is a ploy by CN's senior management to use safety as an excuse to call wolf and slow VIA trains down to freight train speeds. This will help improve their freight operations, and nudge the government to fund HFR and to get VIA off of their tracks. Just speculation on my part.
 
My gut feeling when reading the article was that since there are no documented incidences, this is a ploy by CN's senior management to use safety as an excuse to call wolf and slow VIA trains down to freight train speeds. This will help improve their freight operations, and nudge the government to fund HFR and to get VIA off of their tracks. Just speculation on my part.
And then that stupid article leading with a line about being unable to question safety calls; it got my back up faster than just about anything else I’ve seen recently, and frankly I’ve seen that attitude way to often lately. “Someone claims this is a safety issue so we HAVE to do it, what do you mean you want to check if it actually is one? Don’t you care about SAFETY?”
 
I'm not sure it's that dire - yet. Adding X minutes to schedules doesn't strike me as a national crisis. The regulator needs to step up and, you know, regulate. The US imposed PTC and it seems none of the railways packed up their toys and went home. What we don't know, sitting on the outside looking in, is whether there is a relatively quick and inexpensive solution just around the corner.
I don’t think it’s fair to say it was an easy process either, as I recall it.

The implementation outside the NEC was largely radio frequency based and the feds left it to individual companies to contract for spectrum licenses rather than require FCC to reserve it centrally to meet the federal mandate.
There was a lack of standardization (ACSES, IETS, I-ETMS)
PTC was not imposed above a certain daily frequency of passenger movements (14 IIRC) which resulted in a cap on Downeaster movements so the host railroad wouldn’t have to implement it.
 
Nothing really new in this column for those following the issue here. But it does have this passage which again has already been posted here.


The mind boggles as to how this issue could have been missed, and it’s not clear whose fault it is. CN warned Via of the 24-axle issue way back in 2021, according to CN spokesperson Ashley Michnowski, and confirmed the issue once it became official that the Siemens trains wouldn’t meet the 32-axle requirement. Via counters that this all came “without prior notice.”
 
Who to blame?
Let's look at something different that is the same.
If you drive a motorcycle, eventually you will find that a set of lights won't turn no matter how long you are there. It is due to the old technology not able to detect the motorcycle. So,you treat it as a 4 way stop. Then the road is rebuilt and new technology is installed. Now,you ride up to the stop line, and the lights work properly when you are riding the motorcycle. Wasn't the motorcycle's fault that the lights would not work. It was the owner of the road's fault.
So,if we take this back to the issue with Via's trains and the issue that is happening on CN's lines,it is not Via's fault. It is CN's.
 
This still seems to be an issue even though there’s been no info to travelers. I’m currently on train 33 from Montreal to Ottawa. Just left Coteaux at 10:30, rather late, and immediately accelerated up to 130km/h after being stuck at 70-90km/h since Montreal. I only found of the delays here when looking up if it’s already discussed.

Interestingly, the train just slowed to 70 for the CP line crossing before reaccelerating to 140, the top speed of the journey so far.
 

Back
Top