VIA Rail

[steveintoronto]

Just got a chance to read more of the Caltrans study linked in prior post, I highly recommend the reading of it for many posters in this string. Higher Speed Freight on HFR really helps buttress the business case. This also melds with the Pearson Hub topic. HFR hosted higher speed freight is of course apart from temporally separated local freight, which with few exceptions, will necessarily be slower speed conventional diesel, and able to run-through to conventional freight yards or connections at junctions along the line. Some businesses might be induced to set-up operations along the HFR route on the premise of 'express freight' service, but with very affordable land costs.

From the Caltrans study, from a European paper (Produced by CTC & Associates LLC):
(Pardon the rough format, if links don't show, access the study from the url at bottom)

[...]
This article provides background on the Euro Carex project, which plans to use existing HSR
lines to transport air freight.
Highlights from the article:
A group aiming to substitute 300kph rail services for some short-haul European air freight
flights hopes to launch its first services between the Continent and the [United Kingdom
(UK)] later this decade, it has announced after bringing a freight-carrying French high-speed
train to the UK.
François Coart, strategy director of Europorte, an arm of France’s Groupe Eurotunnel that is
participating in the Euro Carex project, said the group had identified sites at four mainland
European airports and in south-east England as terminals for the service, which it hopes to
launch in 2017 or 2018.
....
The project has backing from several express parcel delivery services—including the U.S.’s
UPS and FedEx and the Netherlands’ TNT Express—as well as the four airports that could
be served—Amsterdam Schipol, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Liège Airport and Lyons Airport.
Euro Carex aims to shift to rail both some of the feeder flights that bring parcels and air
freight to the express package providers’ main hubs, as well as some of the truck and van
movements to and from the airports.
....
It was “not rocket science” to build the relatively simple rail terminals required, Mr. Coart
said. Each would cost between €30m and €50m to build.
Mr. Coart was speaking after Euro Carex for the first time brought a French TGV train to
London to demonstrate how loading and unloading would work. The train is one of the
handful of the 30-year-old first wave of French high-speed trains that has been converted to
carry mail for La Poste, France’s post office. The train had called at both Lyons and Charles
de Gaulle airports before heading through the Channel tunnel to London.
....
Unlike the existing postal service TGVs, these would have doors large enough to accept air
cargo containers from aircraft. The train would be able to carry around 120 tonnes of
packages, around the same as seven Boeing 737 aircraft or seven articulated trucks.
Related Resources:
Euro Carex: Cargo Rail Express, The European High-Speed Rail Freight Network, Euro
Carex, 2013.
http://www.eurocarex.com/
This web site describes the Euro Carex European freight service, which uses the existing
HSR network to carry air freight. The project shifts air cargo that is currently transported by
truck and short- and medium-haul planes to high-speed trains. The first phase runs until
2015, and connects the Amsterdam-Schiphol, Liège, Paris-Roissy-CDG, Lyon-Saint
Exupéry airports, as well as the London basin. In a second phase, Carex will spread to
Germany and additional airports in France; the third phase brings in airports in Spain and
Italy. One Carex train can carry 100 tons of freight.
As the web site notes, the Euro Carex project requires:
•
A specific rolling stock to transport air pallets and air containers in high-speed trains.

• Dedicated rail terminals called “railports” in the immediate vicinity of airports and
HSR lines.
• Committed and determined public and private partners.
The Technical File portion of the web site (see the left navigation bar) provides details on
the project’s principles, facilities, operations and results.
“Project of High-Speed European Rail Freight Service Connected to Airports and
Logistic Areas,” Euro Carex: Cargo Rail Express, December 2011.
http://www.eurocarex.com/pdf/pressreview/100103240178_carex-pressreview.pdf
This presentation includes a history of the Carex project and offers details of the project’s
network, the Carex railports in Europe, and the rolling stock used for the service. Data
offered in the closing slides of the presentation includes:
•
•
Initial investments:
o The Euro Carex trains: Between 600 and 700 million € for 20 units according
to the manufacturer and options selected. Maintenance costs are not
included.
o Railway connection to the high-speed line: Cost varies from 10 million to over
100 million € per site depending on the length and complexity.
o Railport terminals: Between 15 million € for a basic terminal with two tracks
and 25 million € for a bigger one.
Estimation of annual expenses for the first phase (operations):
o €125 M in 2015, with the first phase of the Euro Carex network.
o Of this cost, €86 M is for rolling stock, train maintenance, driving, energy,
train paths (slots), branch line maintenance.
o The Euro Carex trains will emit approximately 35 times less carbon than the
aircrafts and trucks currently used.
“SNCF Faces New Challenges,” Keith Fender, International Railway Journal, December 22,
2009.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/blogs/david-briginshaw/sncf-faces-new-challenges.html
http://trid.trb.org/view/2009/C/911893
From the abstract:
The views of David Azema, Director of Finance and Strategy at French National Railways
(SNCF), are presented in regard to development of SNCF’s freight business and high speed
services. Major changes are scheduled for rail freight in an effort to obtain a sounder
financial footing, but wagonload freight will at the same time not be exited. These changes
include increased combined and container transportation, Autoroute Ferroviaire piggyback
service development, and a Carex interairport high-speed freight project. Introducing “short-
line operators” is a key part of the plan for improved wagonload traffic viability. In regard to
high speed, a fleet of 35 international trains will be used, from 2015 on, mainly on cross-
border routes. Incumbent operators will be impacted by the change of mindset required by
liberalized passenger operations. [...]

http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/resea...high-speed_rail_preliminary_investigation.pdf

 

[cplchanb]

Just got a chance to read more of the Caltrans study linked in prior post, I highly recommend the reading of it for many posters in this string. Higher Speed Freight on HFR really helps buttress the business case. This also melds with the Pearson Hub topic. HFR hosted higher speed freight is of course apart from temporally separated local freight, which with few exceptions, will necessarily be slower speed conventional diesel, and able to run-through to conventional freight yards or connections at junctions along the line. Some businesses might be induced to set-up operations along the HFR route on the premise of 'express freight' service, but with very affordable land costs.

From the Caltrans study, from a European paper (Produced by CTC & Associates LLC):
(Pardon the rough format, if links don't show, access the study from the url at bottom)

http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/resea...high-speed_rail_preliminary_investigation.pdf

its all rosey and all until CN and CP grabs HFR by the balls and imposes their schedules over via's. Then itll just be back to square one at high speed.
If theyre going to do that then it has to be via freight and not cn/cp

 

[steveintoronto]

its all rosey and all until CN and CP grabs HFR by the balls and imposes their schedules over via's. Then itll just be back to square one at high speed.
If theyre going to do that then it has to be via freight and not cn/cp

HFR RoW will be privately funded, and most likely owned by whomever builds or owns the rolling stock. VIA's lease to operate the passenger aspect would clearly state (and TC might even be empowered to embody this) that 'VIA (or as the Transportation Act revisions state: "Passenger") has operating precedence' for this line to receive certification.

In the event, if it is a consortium that funds and runs this, and freight is given status equal or almost equal to VIA, (with dispatching remaining VIA precedence), then air-freight companies would very likely be shareholders and prime participants. CP, due to their RoW being used in stretches, would have a minority share status offset by land exchange or some other form of consideration. One only has to look at the European and other world models to see how this is done.

I'm going to be reviewing the Pearson Hub prospectus to post their views on combining air and rail premium freight operations and will post later.

 

[kEiThZ]

its all rosey and all until CN and CP grabs HFR by the balls and imposes their schedules over via's. Then itll just be back to square one at high speed.
If theyre going to do that then it has to be via freight and not cn/cp

How would that happen if VIA owned the HFR corridor?

 

[kEiThZ]

Higher speed freight would actually be a huge upgrade for Canada Post. Right now, Priority Courier is a next day option. Imagine, if Canada Post could run same day delivery between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Drop off to post office by 10 am. In Ottawa or Montreal before close of business at 5pm. Not sure, if there's enough of a market. But, definitely worth investigating.

Would add in consideration for companies like Amazon. Perhaps they'd be willing to locate warehouses/shipping centres near the line to run quick transfers to Ottawa and Montreal on the postal trains too.

To be noted, I am not saying there's necessarily a business case for higher speed freight. There may be. There may not be. I am just hoping that at some point, if HFR is assured that VIA and Canada Post, Fedex, etc at least study it. Every little thing that helps the business case should be looked at.

 

[Urban Sky]

Higher speed freight would actually be a huge upgrade for Canada Post. Right now, Priority Courier is a next day option. Imagine, if Canada Post could run same day delivery between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Drop off to post office by 10 am. In Ottawa or Montreal before close of business at 5pm.

If you allow one hour each for the same-day mail to reach the departure terminal and to leave the arrival terminal (i.e. for the first and the last mile), you would have to at least match VIA's current travel times (5h, i.e. an average speed beyond 100 km/h) to work within such tight deadlines between Montreal and Toronto...

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

HFR RoW will be privately funded, and most likely owned by whomever builds or owns the rolling stock. VIA's lease to operate the passenger aspect would clearly state (and TC might even be empowered to embody this) that 'VIA (or as the Transportation Act revisions state: "Passenger") has operating precedence' for this line to receive certification.

In the event, if it is a consortium that funds and runs this, and freight is given status equal or almost equal to VIA, (with dispatching remaining VIA precedence), then air-freight companies would very likely be shareholders and prime participants. CP, due to their RoW being used in stretches, would have a minority share status offset by land exchange or some other form of consideration. One only has to look at the European and other world models to see how this is done.

I'm going to be reviewing the Pearson Hub prospectus to post their views on combining air and rail premium freight operations and will post later.

And what happens if hypothetically CN and CP see this as a threat and decide to partner up to form a consortium to thwart the efforts? I'm just picturing it now: "Canadian High Speed Railway" a private organization that funds, builds, operates and maintains Canada's premier higher speed rail corridor. CN and CP will just continue to choke Via Rail...nothing to see here folks, carry on.
Addendum: Lets sweeten the pot by partnering up with one of the Canadian Pensions for a win-win-win.

Although this is hypothetical but if the Aecon-CCCC International Holding Ltd. takeover gives any insight it's that Ottawa will scrutinize whoever the non-Western private organization is. I say this since most likely the organizations with the deepest pockets are going to be coming out of Asia.

 

[dowlingm]

How would that happen if VIA owned the HFR corridor?

Because VIA doesn't own corridors end to end - it owns bits in the middle no-one else wants. Look at how VIA has to ask CN nicely for slots to get off the Alexandria Sub and into Montreal at Coteau. Owning the bit in the middle of the Havelock Sub route makes VIA beholden to CP at both ends.

 

[steveintoronto]

Although this is hypothetical but if the Aecon-CCCC International Holding Ltd. takeover gives any insight it's that Ottawa will scrutinize whoever the non-Western private organization is.

And the outcome has yet to be decided. But let's back up for a second, and CCCC isn't CRRC, as much as CRRC is also a large part sovereign ownership, it is independent, and more than capable of standing on its own bogies. And it's already set-up in Canada in New Brunswick, CRRC to build North American wagon plant in Canada - Railway ...
and already bidding on contracts in Canada and the US:

How China built a global rail behemoth that’s leaving Western train makers behind
NATHAN VANDERKLIPPE AND NICOLAS VAN PRAET
Globe and Mail
BEIJING/MONTREAL
INCLUDES CORRECTION
PUBLISHED JUNE 9, 2017UPDATED JUNE 12, 2017

On May 11, just hours after Bombardier Inc. shareholders streamed out of a jet hangar near Montreal's Trudeau International Airport, the company's train executives received a phone call from the city's regional commuter-rail agency advising them they had lost a bid on a tender to Chinese rival CRRC Corp.

For Bombardier, the decision was wholly unexpected, and marked the Chinese rail-manufacturing giant's first significant contract win in Canada. Details of the agreement are fairly straightforward: Montreal's regional commuter-rail service – Réseau de transport métropolitain (RTM) – picked CRRC to supply 24 double-decker train cars. The agency had expected to spend $103-million; the Chinese manufacturer bid just $69-million.

Behind the numbers, however, is a more complicated backstory that includes RTM voiding the initial request for proposals and opening a second bidding process. Staff from RTM even travelled overseas to entice foreign bidders. In its new tender, the RTM changed some of the terms, deciding to nix a previous requirement that bidders have a service-proven vehicle that was already running. It also lowered the Canadian manufacturing-content requirement. The outcome has angered Bombardier, which says it is "baffled" by the decision and vowed to rethink its rail-manufacturing footprint in Canada if lower local-content rules become the new norm.


The Montreal-based train maker is facing other woes at the same time. The World Bank has launched a probe into possible wrongdoing by Bombardier in connection with a deal to supply signalling equipment for a rail project in Azerbaijan.

But the bigger story may involve the rise of the successful bidder.


Nine years since it stepped outside its own borders and made its first overseas acquisition, CRRC has embarked on a global pursuit for market share. The megamanufacturer, formed in 2015 through the merger of China's state-owned makers of locomotives and train cars, is the largest industrial company of its kind on Earth. And with its first contract win in Canada and plans to build its first Canadian plant under way, it is changing the game for global train making.

The Montreal order comes after other CRRC wins, in Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles. It took less than five years for China to build the world's biggest high-speed rail network, a system running almost entirely on rolling stock supplied by CRRC's former entities – CNR and CSR. It might take even less time for CRRC to assume its spot as the yardstick against which the planet's rail-equipment manufacturers are measured. With 190,000 employees and annual revenue topping $32-billion, CRRC has become a new national export champion.

"The new player is the biggest in the world and has already changed the game," said Maria Leenen, chief executive officer at transportation consultancy SCI Verkehr in Hamburg, Germany.
[...]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...-western-train-makers-behind/article35272833/

CRRC don't need CCCC. CRRC is more than capable of *single handedly* building HFR with their own cash, and many other projects to boot. And there's other very cash-rich corporations similar.

The real question is: "Why would they want or need the InfraBank to meddle and force them to tender out on rolling stock?" CRRC alone has financed and built many projects around the world. "But not here" you say?

Chinese firms want to build, finance California high-speed train - Reuters

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A team of Chinese firms, along with the Export-Import Bank of China, wants to build and finance a large part of California’s proposed 800-mile high-speed rail project.

The firms expressed their interest last month in a 23-page document sent to the California High-Speed Rail Authority. The authority asked private companies from around the globe to help shape the state’s strategy to launch the first stage of its train line, considered the most ambitious infrastructure project in the United States.

Led by China Railway International, the Chinese team proposed it could provide big elements of the project, including design expertise, construction, equipment procurement, and rolling stock. It also proposed financing from the Export-Import Bank of China.

By packaging large pieces of the high-speed rail line together, for delivery by a single contractor, the project’s cost and construction timeline would be greatly reduced, the team proposed.

“To the Chinese team, a relatively large-scale contract is proper and reasonable,” said the letter, obtained by Reuters through a Public Records Act request.

California’s high-speed rail line would run trains at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour between Los Angeles and San Francisco by 2029 and, later, expand to San Diego and Sacramento.

The United States is a key target for China’s rail industry, even though policymakers have been split over the need for high-speed rail and some have taken a dim view of Chinese involvement. Last month, a unit of China’s CRRC Corp, the world’s biggest train maker by revenue, agreed to a deal to help build a high-speed link between Las Vegas and Los Angeles.
[...]

To be continued...(and keep a close eye on Trump, he hasn't a clue of how the Laws of Unintended Consequences work. I'll explain more later if the obvious isn't clear to some now)

 

[steveintoronto]

To be continued...(and keep a close eye on Trump, he hasn't a clue of how the Laws of Unintended Consequences work. I'll explain more later if the obvious isn't clear to some now)

I posted prior on how there's zero tariff on Canada/EU trade of locomotive, carriage and other rail equipment, and how Siemens, for instance, could ship trainsets from their European factories that match what's produced in their US one for the Charger locomotive and Brightline trainset. Would this entail extra costs? Undoubtedly. Shipping, although very cheap compared to the full cost of the order, would add a few percent. In the big picture, that cost is part of being in a 'free trade association' with partners, and the US is making trade difficult. Why buy from the US when reciprocity of trade is asymmetric?

That thinking is now becoming noted in the press. Globe's had a couple of stories, National Post's managing editor (a Centrist with a solid background in economics) effectively makes the point:

Andrew Coyne: How should Canada respond to Trump's tariffs? First, do nothing
Rather than raise tariffs on U.S. exports, why not lower them on exports of the same goods from other countries, giving them a leg up over the Americans in our market?

[...]But all right: if national pride dictates we must retaliate in some way, let me dust off a proposal once advanced by Jack Kemp, the late Republican statesman and happy warrior for free markets and lower taxes. Rather than raise tariffs on American exports, why not lower them on exports of the same goods from other countries, giving them a leg up over the Americans in our market? The point is made, the punishment is delivered, without shooting off our toes in the process.

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/and...nd-to-trumps-tariffs-there-arent-many-options

Normally it would and should be adept to keep VIA out of political/economic challenges, but this is taxpayer money buying this fleet (Government Procurement), and an excellent place for a 'rider' to be attached to the RFQ stating that tariffs not only should be included in the price...but perhaps any price with a contested tariff should be disqualified. Paying a contested and possibly illegal tariff is tantamount to corruption. So as much as there wouldn't be a counter-tariff placed on locos/rolling stock from the US, indirectly we do pay one by not having trade reciprocity. So block that trade, and do it with those who do 'play fair'. And through CETA, we have that protection guaranteed with the EU. Zero tariffs for all railway goods, in either direction. And many other goods too, far more than are guaranteed....well...*were* guaranteed under Nafta.

The present regime in Ottawa should quietly start shuffling the chairs to share meals with trade partners we can trust. That includes adapting Transport Canada regs more towards UIC/EC ones instead of FRA ones, or at the least, recognizing UIC/EC ones as being compliant with some provisos for adaptation being added.

 

[Urban Sky]

PS: If anyone finds the cycling exercise with the baggage cars interesting and enjoyable to solve, I can let you know next time VIA Rail is hiring someone for the Network Planning department...

Since I talked about job opportunities in VIA's Network Planning department only one week ago, this one just opened:
Senior Planner, Network Planning and Scheduling – Montreal

There are also other openings elsewhere in the company, for example: Industrial Engineer, Continuous Improvement – Toronto

 

[SaugeenJunction]

My post in the GO Construction thread. Metrolinx has done some work on the Don Branch, the line that VIA will use to connect to Union Station for HFR.

Noticed a few things on the Metrolinx Don Branch while driving (as a passenger) along the DVP. For starters, the half-mile bridge is now fenced off on both ends, to prevent people from trespassing. This is pictured below.

Additionally, the entire Don Branch between the Richmond Hill line and the half-mile bridge has had its extremely over-grown track cut back so it looks like a railway, not a bush again. Strange to see this work take place, without an impending reason. Yes, VIA envisions using this track for its HFR/Dedicated Tracks project, but that is still a few years away. Metrolinx has also upgraded the Canpa sub (mentioned here a while back) without any clear reason. Maybe it’s just keeping its lines up to date?Anyways, glad to see the Don Branch looking a little more fresh!

 

[crs1026]

Wonder what's up with this.

ETOBICOKE, ONTARIO — The Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport, will join Yves Desjardins-Siciliano, President and Chief Executive Officer of VIA Rail Canada, to make an important announcement regarding VIA Rail’s fleet in the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor.

A photo opportunity and media availability will follow the press conference.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

Info on the new fleet. Hopefully what models we are getting.

Too soon. I'd speculate that it's the restart of a procurement process.

Wonder how that would line up with NAFTA negotiations, given potential US suppliers of interest.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

^ "regarding VIA Rail’s fleet in the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor."

Wonder how that would line up with NAFTA negotiations, given potential US suppliers of interest.

I can certainly see that becoming an issue, have posted on it prior as per a "rider" duty attached to the RFQ if done in kind by the US, (But the EU having zero duty due to CETA) but Garneau and D-S would be kept scrupulously away from such an announcement. That would be Morneau and Freedlands' sphere.

Just prey to God they don't pull a Del Duca, and announce a new station in Wesleyville...