[Urban Sky]

Well, not all drivers follow the speed limit. I've been on an LRC consist pulled by a P42 travelling 170 km/h on Lakeshore West (it was bumpy to say the least)

Not sure how you could have measured with enough reliability to safely distinguish 170 from 160 km/h, but do you happen to have the train number and date of that one?

 

[steveintoronto]

If VIA Rail is given the authority to build its own infrastructure and electrification is required, then the additional trainsets must be capable of both diesel and electric operation (dual-mode) at up to 125 mph, with seamless transition, and bi-directional operation.

https://m.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/About_VIA/new-fleet/VIA Rail_Corridor_Fleet_Renewal_Project_Request_for_Qualifications.pdf

Worded very carefully to use the term "trainset", something many miss. Asymmetric locos (one diesel, one electric) at either end would render the present tranche as completely compatible with no mechanical modifications.

Further to

To start with, I would hope that the new trainsets would be cleared to 100 in “LRC 100mph” track territory,

Googling shows 110 mph allowed at one time on certain stretches of the Lakeshore Corridor. One wonders if that could be reinstated?

Addendum: Here's the best I could find on the books still, albeit elsewhere in regs is reference to the Minister granting an exception for higher:

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/rules-tce54-832.htm

Further digging reveals:

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2007/r07t0323/r07t0323.asp

 

[nfitz]

HFR will be run on privately owned track.

That has no bearing on electrification or infrastructure costs.

And indeed the Europeans are doing it even cheaper than the East Coast Mainline was even:

East coast mainline? Electrification started over 40 year ago! The pricing I've seen is in 1983 currency! If that's the kind of thing that's been using for price estimation for anything current, it's no wonder that estimates are woefully low! There's probably some fool out there inflating this ancient numbers, using very different building practices, using consumer price indexes, rather than construction or tender price indexes!

It costs what it costs, and if an incompetent idealistic fool is going to try and use ancient data and massively optimistic assumptions to keep prices low, then we'll see a massive cost-overrun ... which seems to be par for the course in Montreal engineering circles.

 

[Urban Sky]

That has no bearing on electrification or infrastructure costs.

East coast mainline? Electrification started over 40 year ago! The pricing I've seen is in 1983 currency! If that's the kind of thing that's been using for price estimation for anything current, it's no wonder that estimates are woefully low! There's probably some fool out there inflating this ancient numbers, using very different building practices, using consumer price indexes, rather than construction or tender price indexes!

It costs what it costs, and if an incompetent idealistic fool is going to try and use ancient data and massively optimistic assumptions to keep prices low, then we'll see a massive cost-overrun ... which seems to be par for the course in Montreal engineering circles.

I would have hoped that having just been corrected on an otherwise human error (like it could have happened to everyone here, myself explicitly included) would make you slightly more nuanced on your own judgements about other engineers...

[Edit: rephrased and defused in the light of nfitz comment immediately below this comment, which he apparently wrote at the same time]

 

[nfitz]

Now to the topic of electrification:

• One of the main cost drivers for electrification in the United Kingdom is the high number of overpasses - most of which were built according to the railway clearance standards of Victorian times, where electrification was simply unknown. I invite you to start counting the number of overpasses (i.e. bridge over the railroad) on the London-Cardiff line using Google Earth and compare it with the HFR route...

• That's a good point, and there are so many small roads, and farm lanes. I don't need to look at a map to know that! And perhaps justification the somewhat lower $3 billion cost using US numbers is better.

How can a fleet consisting of a diesel locomotive, some cars and a cab car be electrified? Replace the locomotive through an electric locomotive and you have a single-mode electric train or replace the cab car through the same electric locomotive and you have a bi-mode train.

I meant how do the locomotives be converted. Of course, simply replacing the diesel locomotives with electric locomotives works. But it's hardly conversions of the locomotives themselves.

Maybe we should first discuss the quality of engineering made in Ontario before we dismiss what you suspect to have been fabricated by your peers in Quebec?

Ah, divide instead of multiply by 1.6. Fixed - thanks for that. Still, using US costs for single-track Toronto to Quebec City would be almost $3 billion - probably at $3 billion I used a 2015 source. Now is Toronto to Quebec City all single-track?

That still doesn't fit in a $3 billion or $6 billion budget.

My point is simply that the VIA proposal clearly isn't going to be electrified from Toronto to Quebec City - it doesn't come close to fitting in the budget.

And I think in your less nebulous comment, you confirmed that!

 

[steveintoronto]

That has no bearing on electrification or infrastructure costs.

Then why do you keep ranting on VIA's figures? Even though their business plan for private investment isn't fully articulated in print, it's understood that VIA provide the rolling stock, and investors provide the RoW.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in that you may have been drunk prior. That doubt has now disappeared...but which way?

I meant how do the locomotives be converted. Of course, simply replacing the diesel locomotives with electric locomotives works. But it's hardly conversions of the locomotives themselves.

VIA states "Trainsets". It's been pointed out many times. There is no reason or agreement to convert the locos, and every reason not to.

 

[nfitz]

I would have hoped that having just been corrected on an otherwise human error (like it could have happened to everyone here, myself explicitly included) would make you slightly more nuanced on your own judgements about other engineers...

I think you are missing my main point here. $3 billion for single track Toronto to Quebec City is clearly not in the budget presented. Is it even single track?

I'm being attacked by another poster for claiming that the budget isn't big enough to electrify from Toronto to Quebec city, even a single-track line. I think you've indicated that they are not planning to electrify with that budget.

As for Quebec budgeting - can you explain why the Metro estimate for the Laval extension was so very wrong? The Laval extension wasn't even particularly expensive, with a cheaper cost per kilometre than the Sheppard subway. But the estimate was amazingly low!

edited as requested

 

[nfitz]

Then why do you keep ranting on VIA's figures? Even though their business plan for private investment isn't fully articulated in print, it's understood that VIA provide the rolling stock, and investors provide the RoW.

Are you saying the $3-$6 billion estimate that was thrown around was only for rolling stock?

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in that you may have been drunk prior. That doubt has now disappeared...but which way?

Ah! Resorting to personal insults.

Which everyone knows means that one realizes one is wrong! LOL!

VIA states "Trainsets". It's been pointed out many times. There is no reason or agreement to convert the locos, and every reason not to.

Interesting ... and subtle. That's rather disingenuous of them. Of course one can use railway cars with either electric of diesel locomotives. Or steam trains if they wish ...

Reality is, that there'll be plenty of other routes that diesel locomotives and even the cars for many many years.

 

[Urban Sky]

Okay, nfitz, let's disarm at this point!

[I will update this point to allow a conversation, but let's just not escalate this further, okay?]

First, I posted my comment while you were writing yours', so obviously not in reaction to yours':

[Still to be continued]

Okay, I've rephrased my comment in acknowledgement of your comment which you had been writing at the same time and I would appreciate if you did the same on #4901. Thank you very much and sorry for escalating!

 

[littlewill1166]

Not sure how you could have measured with enough reliability to safely distinguish 170 from 160 km/h, but do you happen to have the train number and date of that one?

It was 78 sometime within the last month, I was tracking it on tsimobile.viarail.ca. The train was a bit late and a go train was supposed to leave Aldershot at the same time, but my train got the green light first so the driver just gunned it out of the station.

 

[dowlingm]

My recollection is that it is usually considered bad form to post identifiable incidents of overspeed on forums. there are official channels to report that sort of thing.

In any event, isn’t the max on LSW 144km/h, not 160?

 

[Urban Sky]

My recollection is that it is usually considered bad form to post identifiable incidents of overspeed on forums. there are official channels to report that sort of thing.

Agreed, and given that TSI is based on GPS positioning (IIRC), I would only trust it to calculate average speeds over longer segments, not actual speeds at certain points...

 

[robmausser]

Has VIA ever been in the situation that they had to turn potential passengers away?

Yes, I tried to book a train once to Montreal from Toronto during the holidays and every single train that day was booked full. Like no seats, not even in business class. I called Via and they said this was even after moving some cars from other services and considering all options. They were out of cars.

 

[robmausser]

To start with, I would hope that the new trainsets would be cleared to 100 in “LRC 100mph” track territory, giving a small bump where service is currently operated by 90mph power or coaches (as I recall not all F40s are good for 95, although the 90mph units may be dedicated to LD services perhaps?)

Speed limits are useless when you are stuck behind a freight train.

 

[robmausser]

WOW some big nuggets here:

• plan has strong support at the federal cabinet table from Infrastructure Minister François-Philippe Champagne. He is "totally behind VIA's plan"
• a decision will be made early next year
• dedicated passenger lines would cost at least $4-billion. The cost would rise to about $6-billion if the line is equipped to run trains using electric power
• federal studies – which have not been released – included looking at extending the plan through Southwestern Ontario to Windsor, but that would not likely be part of the initial stage of the plan

The fact that Minister of infrastructure FPC is so excited about it makes me more confident about its approval.

I hope they build out the HFR route without electrification and order 16 more trainsets from Siemens to run on it, and simply have a provision to electrify it in the future.

Or at the very least use Dual Mode Locos so we dont have to wait on electrification of Union and Montreal Central station etc. Those parts of the project will delay the project by 5-7 years IMO, since so much is going on with REM in Montreal and RER in Toronto.