APTA-2048
Senior Member
Yes, that’s what it sounds like.
|
|
|
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I‘ve heard rumours that revenue service won‘t start this month already, but I have the impression there is a deliberate effort to avoid communicating timelines when they are not sure yet about their ability to commit to them…
Last edited:
EnviroTO
Senior Member
I don't get it. They posted a video of breaking a champagne bottle on the first train entering the fleet but it went on a simulated run? So when it actually enters service they will have practiced breaking a bottle on the train?
Bordercollie
Senior Member
They did test runs but likely not in a simulated equipment cycle. I wonder what slot they had open.
APTA-2048
Senior Member
For what it’s worth: Via Rail social media is now saying the first train will go into service in 2023.
dowlingm
Senior Member
So I was wrong about the part where we wouldn’t get public acknowledgement of the HEP issue:
tc.canada.ca
Order Under Section 32.01 of the Railway Safety Act (MO 22-06)
Ministerial Order Under Section 32.01 of the Railway Safety Act (MO 22-06).
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Therefore, I find it necessary in the interests of safe railway operations to make this order, under section 32.01 of the RSA, requiring VIA to:So I was wrong about the part where we wouldn’t get public acknowledgement of the HEP issue:
Order Under Section 32.01 of the Railway Safety Act (MO 22-06)
Ministerial Order Under Section 32.01 of the Railway Safety Act (MO 22-06).
Implement the following operational mitigations to reduce the potential consequences of a collision even
Position empty rolling stock directly behind the locomotive and as the last car in any train that includes HEP cars to act as a buffer
Ensure HEP cars are positioned as per the engineering consultant's recommendation to minimize energy transfer and impact to an occupied car
Conduct an engineering simulation of predicted HEP car collision performance and provide to Transport Canada a report summarizing the assumptions and findings by October 31, 2022
Conduct a tear down inspection of four HEP cars with structural defects to identify whether additional structural conditions, which are only visible in this invasive-type inspection, are present and provide Transport Canada with a copy of the inspection report and a list of recommended actions by January 31, 2023
Conduct a static structural test (compression test) to the requirements of the Association of American Railroads - S034, of at least two unrepaired HEP cars, to validate the structural capacity and provide Transport Canada a copy of the test report and an assessment of how the test outcomes will inform future repairs and mitigating measures by January 31, 2023.
Provide the final report of the engineering simulation, incorporating findings from tear down and static structural tests required in item 3 and item 4 by March 31, 2023
Conduct a static structural test (compression test) to the requirements in the Association of American Railroads - S034, of at least one fully repaired HEP car, to validate the repair methodology and provide TC a copy of the test report and an assessment of how test outcomes will inform future repairs and mitigating measures by December 31, 2023.
So why the car behind the locomotive? So is that two buffer cars?
So they need to crash 2 cars that are not overhauled to determine what needs to be repaired and then come up with a plan to reinforce the structure of those cars.
Where is the funding going to come from to overhaul all of the cars?
What about the ones that were already rebuilt? Do those repairs count as acceptable?
I guess if they can't repair them then they will need to be pulled from revenue service until they can be replaced.
APTA-2048
Senior Member
It sounds like they’re doing both.
crs1026
Superstar
^ The four cars to have the teardown are ones that apparently have already been identified as having defects. Presumably they are already sidelined. So, yes, they become the sacrificial lambs.... but is that really surprising? The fleet is clearly at end of life. Somebody has to go first.
I don't record or track the consists of long distance trains, but there are enthusiasts that do very detailed logs of such. It shouldn't be too hard to identify which four cars haven't been spotted in active service lately.
The three cars to be given compression testing - which is a very well understood procedure and standard in validating railcar designs and safety qualification - may or may not fail. If they fail, they too are just crossing the rainbow railway bridge a little sooner than their peers - but the rest of the fleet will follow.
If the rebuilt car fails the compression test.... well, that would prove the point that the equipment is at end of life. And ought to lead to calling out all the people (especially bureaucrats, and politicians) who maintained that we don't need a new fleet yet, because the existing fleet is life extendable.
This is actually a pretty logical and reasonable path forward for an issue that basically should have been resolved by buying a new fleet a decade ago.
- Paul
I don't record or track the consists of long distance trains, but there are enthusiasts that do very detailed logs of such. It shouldn't be too hard to identify which four cars haven't been spotted in active service lately.
The three cars to be given compression testing - which is a very well understood procedure and standard in validating railcar designs and safety qualification - may or may not fail. If they fail, they too are just crossing the rainbow railway bridge a little sooner than their peers - but the rest of the fleet will follow.
If the rebuilt car fails the compression test.... well, that would prove the point that the equipment is at end of life. And ought to lead to calling out all the people (especially bureaucrats, and politicians) who maintained that we don't need a new fleet yet, because the existing fleet is life extendable.
This is actually a pretty logical and reasonable path forward for an issue that basically should have been resolved by buying a new fleet a decade ago.
- Paul
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
But this puts them in a predicament. It will take 5-10 years to procure a new fleet. What will they do in the interim if they cannot repair them to whatever standard?
Even if they are it should be understood that a fleet replacement needs to begin immediately given that the repairs being made may not last ten more years.
crs1026
Superstar
Well, this leads us to a more fundamental question: Is it time to cancel the train altogether? Is a replacement fleet a good investment for the country?
I'm not saying that's my preference..... I'm just reading the tea leaves and trying to imagine what the people in Ottawa may be thinking.
I am very concerned where this may lead.
Chrystia Freeland warns cabinet ministers: New programs must be funded by budget cuts
- Paul
Bordercollie
Senior Member
I think it would be unpopular to cancel an essential service.
I would guess that before actually making the repairs they can use a computer to model what would likely pass the test before doing these tests.
I would also think that they know that it is in the realm of possibility given the short timeline.
Amare
Senior Member
Ah yes, meanwhile they keep finding more initiatives to give out free handouts to millions of Canadians which oh so certainly "eases" budgetary pressures and inflation. Honestly I wonder what planets our delusional politicians live on; so instead of putting money where we need it, we put it in places we dont and where it has next to no positive impact whatsoever.
Here's an idea for them, some of that money couldve been used to purchase additional trains which wouldve helped to increase economic output by providing more reliable and efficient train service (investment and consumption increase, thus helping to stimulate a GDP increase). Basic Economics 101 which I guess most of them dont understand.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
I'm sure that there are some initiatives through the investment bank that could be used to fund this procurement.
smallspy
Senior Member
It isn't the long-distance cars that are problematic. Well, they are....but they are less so than the HEP II cars.
Remember, many of them are almost 10 years older than the ex-CP fleet, and due to their heritage have always been more questionable from a longevity standpoint. Even despite CP's passenger death throes of the 1970s, it has long been felt that the ex-CP cars are in far better shape structurally than the HEP II cars. Several of them had been sidelined for multi-month periods over the years for remedial structural work.
Dan