VIA Rail

[dowlingm]

Baggage does not generate enough revenue to cover its costs. That's why there are no baggage cars unless absolutely necessary.

I think what you're thinking of is courier services. And again, no they don't.

Dan

I was surprised that cabs were signed off as full length passenger spec in a new build consist. The one thing about having a cab which has no or limited seating is that it does provide more buffer in the event of a collision, particularly when sharing track with freight locomotives with limited or no CEM (see Selby rail crash). The space could have been used for baggage or alternatively for HEP generation. Another upside of more storage space would be the facility to carry more food/fluids during inclement weather...

And of course, the decision to go with a shorter consist to save money is not exactly working out given the present axle count issues. Of course, the risks in both cases would be reduced if we could get serious on significantly reducing grade crossings on track >80mph (to start with)

 

[micheal_can]

I was surprised that cabs were signed off as full length passenger spec in a new build consist. The one thing about having a cab which has no or limited seating is that it does provide more buffer in the event of a collision, particularly when sharing track with freight locomotives with limited or no CEM (see Selby rail crash). The space could have been used for baggage or alternatively for HEP generation. Another upside of more storage space would be the facility to carry more food/fluids during inclement weather...

And of course, the decision to go with a shorter consist to save money is not exactly working out given the present axle count issues. Of course, the risks in both cases would be reduced if we could get serious on significantly reducing grade crossings on track >80mph (to start with)

I thought they were going to be having different lengths of trains for the Corridor service. I do not know where I heard it, but I thought there were going to be 5 and 7 car trains. AFAIK we only have 5 car trains. Please correct me if this is wrong.

 

[smallspy]

The Branchline magazine apparently reported at least two such consists in June 2002:

20th anniversary of first Ren trips

groups.io

Then I stand very corrected. My apologies.

I was surprised that cabs were signed off as full length passenger spec in a new build consist. The one thing about having a cab which has no or limited seating is that it does provide more buffer in the event of a collision, particularly when sharing track with freight locomotives with limited or no CEM (see Selby rail crash). The space could have been used for baggage or alternatively for HEP generation. Another upside of more storage space would be the facility to carry more food/fluids during inclement weather...

And of course, the decision to go with a shorter consist to save money is not exactly working out given the present axle count issues. Of course, the risks in both cases would be reduced if we could get serious on significantly reducing grade crossings on track >80mph (to start with)

And yet GO Transit does it at virtually the same speeds, so why do you figure that VIA should be any different?

Dan

 

[dowlingm]

Then I stand very corrected. My apologies.


And yet GO Transit does it at virtually the same speeds, so why do you figure that VIA should be any different?

Dan

Point taken. That said, given the relationship of energy and velocity, nudging a bit over 80 here and there is a bit different to long stretches of 95-100mph, or more. While the current GO situation is not great, hopefully the deployment of ETCS will provide more protection against that eventuality for GO, whereas VIA are barrelling through the countryside protected by CN track circuits and their wits.

 

[smallspy]

Point taken. That said, given the relationship of energy and velocity, nudging a bit over 80 here and there is a bit different to long stretches of 95-100mph, or more. While the current GO situation is not great, hopefully the deployment of ETCS will provide more protection against that eventuality for GO, whereas VIA are barrelling through the countryside protected by CN track circuits and their wits.

GO regularly exceeds 90mph.

And on top of that does so with a 12 car train, which is going to have a LOT more kinetic energy than one of the VIA sets even at 100mph.

Dan

 

[Urban Sky]

VIA creates its own crowding. There is no need to line up at Ottawa.

Of all the airline practices VIA keeps copying from airports and airlines, I’m surprised they still haven’t discovered their zig-zag crowd control barriers you can apparently even order on Amazon:

I was travelling across Germany a year or two ago and didn't totally understand their ticketing system and so ended up without a permanent seat for most of the trip. Ended up hanging out in the bar car for most of the trip drinking pints and hanging out with DB staff. A very enlightening trip, although after a few beers Berlin Hauptbahnhof becomes very confusing!

Tickets generally don’t include a reservation, which can be purchased (together with the ticket or separately) through Deutsche Bahn’s website, App or ticket machines. There is no compulsory reservation, so you can still enter a train without one, but that means you have no guaranteed seat.

Then I stand very corrected. My apologies.

No need to apologize! I was very surprised as well and and I am told that the baggage cars appeared only a few months later, by January 2023.

And yet GO Transit does it at virtually the same speeds, so why do you figure that VIA should be any different?

Dan

For what it’s worth, the FRA allows “Passenger Occupied Lead Cars” for up to 125 mph (200 km/h) in mixed traffic (Tier I) with freight and on dedicated passenger lines (Tier III) for up to 220 mph (350 km/h):

https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/17786/Lauby%20-%20FRA%20%26%20the%20Next%20Generation%20of%20High%20Speed%20Rail%20Equipment.pdf