Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

The situation with the UP Express is incredibly frustrating, and seems to have a lot with the NS Trains, which we've long known are pretty bad. IIRC that's a big part of why they have never consistently run frequent service with three car trains, even if they did they would probably have 4/18 cars out of service which seems fine.

The best course of action might be to order something like the Alstom trains used on Ottawa's Diesel O Train line, those would be similar enough floor height to use regular GO platforms and with alt compliance or whatever would probably be fine to operate on entirely Metrolinx owned tracks. Then once you get those trains delivered (ideally with a bigger spare ratio), you shut the UP down for 2 months (or less) and adjust the platforms and screen doors at Pearson. Low floor DMUs could use GO platforms at the other stations. Sure, you have some extra diesel trains kicking around, but if they work with GO platforms we'd find a use.

What's irritating is that what I imagine will happen is we will continue to allow the UP service to limp along until we decide we're sick of the poor service or the infra is changed so it can be used by electric trains. UP Trains are always busy, it seems really bad to give up on running a good service because we don't want to spend money on additional / functional trains. We've certainly spent money on less useful things!
 
superelevation said:
The situation with the UP Express is incredibly frustrating, and seems to have a lot with the NS Trains, which we've long known are pretty bad. IIRC that's a big part of why they have never consistently run frequent service with three car trains, even if they did they would probably have 4/18 cars out of service which seems fine.

The best course of action might be to order something like the Alstom trains used on Ottawa's Diesel O Train line, those would be similar enough floor height to use regular GO platforms and with alt compliance or whatever would probably be fine to operate on entirely Metrolinx owned tracks. Then once you get those trains delivered (ideally with a bigger spare ratio), you shut the UP down for 2 months (or less) and adjust the platforms and screen doors at Pearson. Low floor DMUs could use GO platforms at the other stations. Sure, you have some extra diesel trains kicking around, but if they work with GO platforms we'd find a use.

What's irritating is that what I imagine will happen is we will continue to allow the UP service to limp along until we decide we're sick of the poor service or the infra is changed so it can be used by electric trains. UP Trains are always busy, it seems really bad to give up on running a good service because we don't want to spend money on additional / functional trains. We've certainly spent money on less useful things!
Click to expand...
The issue is two-fold.

One is maintenance. There are many parts to this, but at least some of it is a lack of time to perform it. And this also stems from the second issue.

And that second issue is that there was simply not enough equipment purchased to operate the service.

The Nippon-Sharyo trains have managed to be remarkably reliable considering the intensive service that they are being expected to operate. That they have been seldom able to operate the full service entirely with 3-car trains is more of an indictment of the size of the fleet - or lack thereof - than anything.

Dan
 
UPX site currently states:
SERVICE ALERT:
For the remainder of the week, UP Express service will be operating a 30-minute train service. Trains will serve all stops.

We appreciate our customers’ patience during this time.

Does anyone know if, once the brake discs have been fixed, service will increase back to the original 15 minute frequency?
 
smallspy said:
The Nippon-Sharyo trains have managed to be remarkably reliable considering the intensive service that they are being expected to operate. That they have been seldom able to operate the full service entirely with 3-car trains is more of an indictment of the size of the fleet - or lack thereof - than anything.
Click to expand...
They only need 12 of the 18 cars in service at a time to run a full 15-minute with three-car trains. Basically four out of six trainsets - not that they are generally in trainsets.

That this never (or rarely) seems to happen, seem to me to be more of an indictment of the quality of the fleet (or the quality of the maintenance staff). Though I suppose that so many brake discs failed without anyone noticing speaks more to the quality - or at least the competence - of the maintenance staff.
 
nfitz said:
They only need 12 of the 18 cars in service at a time to run a full 15-minute with three-car trains. Basically four out of six trainsets - not that they are generally in trainsets.

That this never (or rarely) seems to happen, seem to me to be more of an indictment of the quality of the fleet (or the quality of the maintenance staff). Though I suppose that so many brake discs failed without anyone noticing speaks more to the quality - or at least the competence - of the maintenance staff.
Click to expand...
You are wrong.

5 trainsets are required to operate a 15 minute schedule. 3 are required to operate a 30 minute schedule (although there is a modified version of the schedule that they can use in a pinch that allows for only 2 trainsets in service).

Thus, 15 of the 18 cars are required for the full service to be operated with exclusively 3-car trains. And all of those trains are scheduled to be out of the yard from about 5.20am to 2.20am each day.

Dan
 
smallspy said:
You are wrong.

5 trainsets are required to operate a 15 minute schedule. 3 are required to operate a 30 minute schedule (although there is a modified version of the schedule that they can use in a pinch that allows for only 2 trainsets in service).

Thus, 15 of the 18 cars are required for the full service to be operated with exclusively 3-car trains. And all of those trains are scheduled to be out of the yard from about 5.20am to 2.20am each day.
Click to expand...
]Looking at the schedule, The train that leaves Union at 5 pm, arrives at Pearson at 5:25 pm. It then leaves Pearson at 5:27 PM arriving at Union at 5:52 pm - 8 minutes before the 5:30 pm departure.

So where's the 5th train, if 4 trains can meet the schedule?
 
I wondered about using the NS trains to provide a summer service to the zoo... but there is no way to do that without building at least a little bit of track. (If you where going to do it you may as well also build a spur to have the station actually at the zoo and not a 20 min walk away.) Maybe its a dumb idea but it might be cool...
 
LemonCondo said:
I wondered about using the NS trains to provide a summer service to the zoo... but there is no way to do that without building at least a little bit of track. (If you where going to do it you may as well also build a spur to have the station actually at the zoo and not a 20 min walk away.) Maybe its a dumb idea but it might be cool...
Click to expand...
If they can't actually run proper service to the airport, which is their real job. How would a "cool "
train to the zoo fit into things? Let's grow up and talk about real things.
 
DSC said:
If they can't actually run proper service to the airport, which is their real job. How would a "cool "
train to the zoo fit into things? Let's grow up and talk about real things.
Click to expand...

Rude. I was implying that we won't need these trains once the UP is electrified. The zoo is a major destination like Niagara Falls and it's pretty damn close to rail. Don't tell me to grow up.
 
Perhaps they will learn that the trains should have shorter maintenance timeframes for certain components going forward.

They could have been working some of the equipment harder because other units were down due to other issues, which led to the brake issues. Is there a way to drive the trains and utilize the dynamic brakes more to prolong the life of the disks?

Perhaps it was just a bad batch?
 
I don't know for certain but I highly doubt the DMUs would have dynamic braking. If nothing else, they would need space for the dissipation grids. I don't know all that much about train operations but I don't see a need for dynamic brakes in this type of operations. I'd be surprised if any ML power uses it.
 
lenaitch said:
I don't know for certain but I highly doubt the DMUs would have dynamic braking. If nothing else, they would need space for the dissipation grids. I don't know all that much about train operations but I don't see a need for dynamic brakes in this type of operations. I'd be surprised if any ML power uses it.
Click to expand...
It basically a bus on rails. So is there a way to use the retarder to help stop the train.
 
Bordercollie said:
It basically a bus on rails. So is there a way to use the retarder to help stop the train.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by "retarder". Dynamic braking basically turns motors into generators and the magnetic field resistance creates physical resistance, but the electricity generated has to be dissipated; typically by roof mounted resistor grids generating heat. The equipment is either installed or it's not, and I doubt it is in this equipment It is most common in heavy weight, grade heavy freight use to supplement the air brake system.

Or something like that.

I understand these units have regenerative braking which supplements onboard power. I don't know enough about the technology to know if dynamic brakes could 'feed back' into onboard systems but the little bit of reading I did says no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
nfitz said:
]Looking at the schedule, The train that leaves Union at 5 pm, arrives at Pearson at 5:25 pm. It then leaves Pearson at 5:27 PM arriving at Union at 5:52 pm - 8 minutes before the 5:30 pm departure.

So where's the 5th train, if 4 trains can meet the schedule?
Click to expand...
You expect them to reliably turn the trains around in 2 minutes? Good luck with that.

Trains are given a 8 minute layover at Union, and 17 minutes at Pearson.

lenaitch said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "retarder". Dynamic braking basically turns motors into generators and the magnetic field resistance creates physical resistance, but the electricity generated has to be dissipated; typically by roof mounted resistor grids generating heat. The equipment is either installed or it's not, and I doubt it is in this equipment It is most common in heavy weight, grade heavy freight use to supplement the air brake system.

Or something like that.

I understand these units have regenerative braking which supplements onboard power. I don't know enough about the technology to know if dynamic brakes could 'feed back' into onboard systems but the little bit of reading I did says no.
Click to expand...
No, they don't have regenerative braking, as that would require electric traction motors, which they don't have. Generally with railroads, the term "regenerative braking" is used to describe a system whereby an electric vehicle returns power back into the grid, whereas in "dynamic braking" the electricity generated by braking is converted to heat.

They do use a retarder, which is a device that is mounted on the driveshaft and slows the wheels down via the driveline. This is common on buses and trucks as well.


Dan
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top