Allandale25
Senior Member
Churchill update courtesy of David Maiers:
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Good news, and using the corridor to lay fibre makes sense. I know it has been rejected in the past, but using Churchill as a port to export oil may become a reality with pipeline issues plaguing Canada. I'd love to ride the VIA there at some point!
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Me too. Presumably the tracks will be improved, allowing for a faster transit to Churchill.
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Over a line that long, a small speed boost would make a comparatively big dent in the travel time. Does anyone know what the old track speed was?
crs1026
Superstar
Maybe someone has the pre-suspension schedule to add the "latest" Gillam-Churchill timings. I'm afraid I stopped archiving timetables when VIA went to pdf.
October 1967 The Pas - Gillam 14:45 326 miles Gillam - Churchill 06:30 173 miles
October 1987 The Pas - Gillam 13:20 Gillam - Churchill 06:55
Current 2018 The Pas - Gillam - 22:30
- Paul
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Wikipedia says 36 hours over 1,710 kms for an average speed of 48 kph.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnipeg–Churchill_train
Increase that average speed to 80 kph, and you can cut it down to about 22 hours. Even that's too slow. I know it's primary a freight corridor so it's not going to be HSR, but I'd like to see 100 kph or faster over the straight bits.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Here you are:
Source: official VIA Rail timetable (effective 2017-05-29)
You will find this and almost 100 VIA Rail timetables here. Please let me know if you have any timetables which I haven't archived yet. The same goes for the over 130 CN and CP timetables, which you can find here...
I'm afraid that one of the characteristics of Permafrost is that the ground is not very stable, which is not exactly conducive to operating trains at high speeds...
Attachments
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Does the speed of the train over a straight section of track impact the stability of the track bed?
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Not sure, but the stability of the track bed certainly impacts the maximum level of speed at which trains may still operate safely...
Last edited:
dowlingm
Senior Member
Presuming the HBR is dark territory, I wonder if some basic signalling can be enabled by the fiber works (if they happen) such that faster operations are possible where the ground is stable enough and the track class permits, or at least provide RTCs better location data and communications backhaul.
lenaitch
Senior Member
I've not traveled this line but if it is anything like ONR's Cochrane-Moosonee sub (the terrain is similar), the side-to-side rocking would tend to inhibit significant speed and I imagine there is significant longitudinal undulating as well. It is largely built on muskeg which is water saturated organic material and impossible to completely stabilize. The economics of the line (such as they are) will be dependent on freight revenue, not passenger.
With its low traffic volumes, I'm not sure improved signaling vs. occupancy permission would make much of a difference. One problem with higher speeds is the passenger train is (was) a flag stop service and has to be able to see a passenger and stop in time. As well, dwell times can vary depending on what is being loaded (canoe, ATV, MSV, moose, etc.). For the people dependent on the line, I imagine on-time performance is less important.
With its low traffic volumes, I'm not sure improved signaling vs. occupancy permission would make much of a difference. One problem with higher speeds is the passenger train is (was) a flag stop service and has to be able to see a passenger and stop in time. As well, dwell times can vary depending on what is being loaded (canoe, ATV, MSV, moose, etc.). For the people dependent on the line, I imagine on-time performance is less important.
Northern Light
Superstar
Not sure if you know, but I'll ask.
What percentage of the route is over muskeg?
If its agreed that its desirable to cut travel times on the route, where practical, perhaps focusing on more southerly sections, presumably on more solid ground, might yield better results?
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Just to throw a number into the round: $599.77 was the per-passenger subsidy for the Winnipeg-Churchill service in 2016, i.e. the last entire year it operated all the way to Churchill. I can assure you that everyone at VIA is impatiently waiting for this essential service to be back and running soon and serving the communities again which depend on them and missed it so deerly in the last 15 months, but there are always competing priorities for capital funding which goes beyond what is needed for simply ensuring that VIA's various mandates can be fulfilled...
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
Signalling would have little benefit on this line. Basic maintenance and remediation of past deferred maintenance during the Omnitrax years is the priority. That will be costly enough. It will be enough to get the line back on its traditional timing, and eliminate slow orders. The line was never built for current freight car weights - that’s the best route to improving the line’s economics and restoring port operations at Churchill.
While I am pleased to see this line brought back to life, it’s an out-of-the-frypan situation. There will be an ongoing need for subsidy, for both freight and passenger. That’s a political minefield. To some degree the subsidy gets swept into the Indigenous Reconciliation category, where it is a relatively small line item. Even there, if you have a choice between improving drinking water, health care, education, and social support on First Nations communities, versus signalling to Churchill - I know what my choice would be.
- Paul
While I am pleased to see this line brought back to life, it’s an out-of-the-frypan situation. There will be an ongoing need for subsidy, for both freight and passenger. That’s a political minefield. To some degree the subsidy gets swept into the Indigenous Reconciliation category, where it is a relatively small line item. Even there, if you have a choice between improving drinking water, health care, education, and social support on First Nations communities, versus signalling to Churchill - I know what my choice would be.
- Paul
lenaitch
Senior Member
Not first hand but drawing on N/W Ontario experience, the Hudson's Bay Lowland is essentially one big bog. In Manitoba it appears to reach inland about 150km which would put it around Gillam, which is where the railway line turns north to Churchill (it was originally surveyed to go to the mouth of the Nelson R.). The elevation of the Gillam airport is about 145m asl so not a lot change over the distance to the coast (and I assume the airport is on high ground). They might have taken advantage of gravel/sand eskers but their difference from the surrounding bog is measured in single digits, and since this part of the line runs pretty much like an arrow they probably figured it wouldn't have made much difference. Even Thompson, 350km inland is only 224m asl - not really hilly country. The Canadian boreal - pretty much all of Manitoba ex. the s/w - is characterized by large tracts of muskeg interspersed with drier ground. I would imagine the original builders tried to take advantage of the terrain where possible, but the resulting 'circuitous' route doesn't lend itself to high speed. Since this area pretty much drains all the land west to the mountains and between the Mississippi and Arctic watersheds, with its gradual topography I imagine it is susceptible to overland seasonal flooding that requires constant mitigation. Even without flooding, the ground is largely saturated all the time.
I haven't read the final ownership consortium for the line and if, in fact Via will be the carrier (or who will be the freight carrier for that matter). Other lines in Manitoba and Quebec have been turned over to FN corporations for passenger service and seem to be operating well. The observation is likely correct that this may well be be an accounting change between direct FN subsidies and FN corporate subsidies but it brings with it some degree of corporate governance and discipline.