Canadian Railroads > VIA Ventures facing operational changes due to shunting

Breaking news today - perhaps similar to CN's experiences with various Amtrak equipment in Illinois and elsewhere. Today, CN 'is instituting operational changes involving VIA Corridor trains in Ontario and Quebec that operate with Siemens Venture sets to ensure crossing safety where there may be 'loss-of-shunt'. This may involve flagging crossings and/or adding 'buffer cars' to increase axle count and train weight. This is Day One so it's hard to know what exact changes will be instituted. I will be updating this just-published Trackside Treasure blog post: 
http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com/2024/10/breaking-buffer-cars-20-on-via.html
Eric Gagnon
Kingston, ON

Only with Venture trains, not any other legacy trains.

Posted from Android

That is correct, Sir. 
 

They could also add los of shunt timers or enable los of shunt programming in the predictors. It's really not that involved considering the feature is built into most predictors since 2000.

I saw two of the Toronto-Windsor Ventures - #76 Saturday and #71 this morning.  They have the usual consists.   Saturday's #76 was a little late which is nothing unusual and today's #71 is on time. It has been running at the usual speed even through level crossings.

  Ventures on the Quebec-Montreal route were running at speeds up to 150 km/h Saturday.  Most were within a few minutes of the schedule and some were as much as 11 minutes early at their destination.  I'm sure we will hear more of this situation in the near future.

Are these things so light that they don't shunt the signals? What about the single level AMT cars and the RDC's CN and VIA used to run? Are they heavier than the new equipment?

I believe ot is highway grade crossings that are the problem,at speed.   AFAIK, earlier trains didnt operate at 93mph and, at least in illinois, i believe the trains are OK at lower speeds.   Amtk would rather waste needed equipment as deadheaded "axles count" cars, than run the trains at slower speeds.  I believe "slower speeds" is 79/mph

I could be wrong..but this is my understanding.

I thought lower speed was 60 on the Ilini and Saluki, which, if I understand the contracts correctly, would mean a need for two engineers instead of one on each train, greatly increasing state costs.  I could be wrong on this, tho.

In doing some research for the post I published (linked in my initial comment in this thread), I realized this was a prior problem for CN in Illinois. I'm sure it has coloured their response to VIA in this instance. No doubt, higher levels of CN management are in some way potentially linking the two problems and acting out of an abundance of caution. Some pundits say intentionally jerking VIA's chain as a reluctant infrastructure host.

VIA has made their operating employees aware of CN's requirements already. What we haven't seen yet is detail from CN as to which crossings are so affected, and whether this requirement is being enforced. I haven't seen the Special Instructions from CN that VIA employees are referred-to. I would also like to hear where and when problems were detected. Which crossings or signals weren't activated? 

So far, VIA trains are operating at or about their usual On-Time Performance. I'm not seeing delays recorded on Venture trains as I would have expected. No notifications so far from VIA beyond notifying passengers who MIGHT be affected by delayed Venture trains. 

Indeed, Ventures have been operating in revenue service on CN's Kingston Subdivision, predominantly Ottawa-Toronto for the past year. Before that, Ventures were operating in revenue service since June, 2023 in Quebec-Montreal-Ottawa service beginning with one pair of trains per day. Before that, the first Venture set arrived in September, 2021 then the second set in August, 2022. Did it have something to do with the revenue implementation of Ventures into Southwest Ontario from Toronto? The implementation was the week of October 7th, at the end of which this requirement was made known to VIA from CN.

So with that relatively long service history, one has to wonder...why now. Indeed this is the most-often asked question I'm seeing about implementation.

We have yet to see if CN can support their contention and negotiate with VIA to minimize Venture delays. Safety first, passenger convenience second at this point. I'll be updating ongong developments here:
http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com/2024/10/breaking-buffer-cars-20-on-via.html
Eric Gagnon
Kingston, ON

 

Trackside_Treasure Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In doing some research for the post I published
> (linked in my initial comment in this thread), I
> realized this was a prior problem for CN in
> Illinois. I'm sure it has coloured their response
> to VIA in this instance. No doubt, higher levels
> of CN management are in some way potentially
> linking the two problems and acting out of an
> abundance of caution. Some pundits say
> intentionally jerking VIA's chain as a reluctant
> infrastructure host.
>
> VIA has made their operating employees aware of
> CN's requirements already. What we haven't seen
> yet is detail from CN as to which crossings are so
> affected, and whether this requirement is being
> enforced. I haven't seen the Special Instructions
> from CN that VIA employees are referred-to. I
> would also like to hear where and when problems
> were detected. Which crossings or signals weren't
> activated? 
>
> So far, VIA trains are operating at or about their
> usual On-Time Performance. I'm not seeing delays
> recorded on Venture trains as I would have
> expected. No notifications so far from VIA beyond
> notifying passengers who MIGHT be affected by
> delayed Venture trains. 
>
> Indeed, Ventures have been operating in revenue
> service on CN's Kingston Subdivision,
> predominantly Ottawa-Toronto for the past year.
> Before that, Ventures were operating in revenue
> service since June, 2023 in Quebec-Montreal-Ottawa
> service beginning with one pair of trains per day.
> Before that, the first Venture set arrived in
> September, 2021 then the second set in August,
> 2022. Did it have something to do with the
> revenue implementation of Ventures into Southwest
> Ontario from Toronto? The implementation was the
> week of October 7th, at the end of which this
> requirement was made known to VIA from CN.
>
> So with that relatively long service history, one
> has to wonder...why now. Indeed this is the
> most-often asked question I'm seeing about
> implementation.
>
> We have yet to see if CN can support their
> contention and negotiate with VIA to minimize
> Venture delays. Safety first, passenger
> convenience second at this point. I'll be updating
> ongong developments here:
> http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com/2024/10/brea
> king-buffer-cars-20-on-via.html
> Eric Gagnon
> Kingston, ON
>
>  

Whatever VIA and CN work out as solutions, they need to share those plans with Amtrak to get this back in order. I've already stated that for the Midwest Corridor trains - operate them at the lower speeds in order to release the "axle count cars" that are being drug around in the consist needlessly and COSTING Amtrak lost revenue (e.g. Superliners for the National Network). Nothing is forcing or provoking an aggressive solution here in the US. There's got to be something that can be implemented. And with VIA having made such a HUGE investment in the Sieman's Venture train sets - not good! So they have to come up with an answer. 

PS - Weren't the European born VIA Renaissance coaches a lot lighter than the Venture cars? They didn't always operate with extra cars to meet this requirement. And speeds were UPPED as part of the Renaissance rail program. 

jp1822 Wrote:
> Safety first, passenger
> > convenience second at this point.

At it should alway be.


 >I've already stated that for the
> Midwest Corridor trains - operate them at the
> lower speeds in order to release the "axle count
> cars" that are being drug around in the consist
> needlessly

No.  If there is a way to safely run the trains at track speed, do it.

 

jp1822 Wrote:
...
>
> PS - Weren't the European born VIA Renaissance
> coaches a lot lighter than the Venture cars? They
> didn't always operate with extra cars to meet this
> requirement. And speeds were UPPED as part of the
> Renaissance rail program. 

Several years ago there was a posting elsewhere from someone who knows far more details than most do, saying the Renaissance cars are quite heavy.  Because they were to operate through the Channel Tunnel and in Europe they had to be strong.

We don't know if the crossings on the CN in Canada have identical track circuit hardware and technology (ohms, voltage, etc)  as on the IC. Perhaps it is less stringent since CN didn't say anything about needing to run Superliners or some sort of bi-level car on VIA"s Corridor, which don't exist in on VIA Rail.