This situation actually angers me. The government is eager to invest in rail infrastructure, but only if it is in Quebec.
https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/transportation/feds-spending-over-45m-for-gaspesie-railway-rehab/1003409643/
https://www.railwayage.com/freight/short-lines-regionals/bypass-build-slated-for-lac-megantic/
First, you have the Gaspé rail line that is receiving $45M to be rebuilt. That line has fewer prospects for growth and not many industries in the region currently use it. There aren't as many heavy industries that could make use of it, yet funding is easily forthcoming. Lac Megantic gets a bypass where the feds are spending more than $50M. The price tag for the federal government would be half that of the previously mentioned projects than for Huron Central and it would have more benefits. Both of these projects are important and should be carried out, but in comparison to Huron Central, they should be lower priorities.
Communities, industries and livelihoods in northern Ontario are at stake here and no funding. The railway is even modestly profitable, very much unlike the Gaspé railway, but no funding. Then you have projects in Quebec that are expensive and should be lower priority, but they get funding, no issue.
I find it unbelievable that people in Quebec sometimes still complain about Canada, that they aren't treated fairly, or whatever else they argue. Quebec always gets everything it wants and so much more, and almost always at the expense of the rest of the country. Sometimes I wonder if Canada would be better off without them.
Didn't the government spend money recently in Manitoba on the Churchill line?
MidlandMikeDidn't the government spend money recently in Manitoba on the Churchill line?
Yes, but only after years of agonizing delay. During that process the town almost died.
Flintlock76 Throwing away business in the amount of 12,000 carloads a year. Insanity! But as the man said, "It may not make sense to you or me, but it makes sense to somebody!"
Throwing away business in the amount of 12,000 carloads a year. Insanity!
But as the man said, "It may not make sense to you or me, but it makes sense to somebody!"
Someone else mentioned the 100 cars per mile per year rule of thumb used as an indicator of a property's ability to generate sufficient funds to maintain its fixed plant. That rule is of long standing and seems accurate.
I know it was accurate, excluding rail relay, when I was Chief Engineer for a short line. We earned a bit over $300 for every load we originated or terminated. I figured $100 per car which gave a MorW budget of $10,000 per mile. That 30% MofW ratio is about double the class I average due to higher traffic density on class I routes.
Another key concept is normalized maintenance, that is the level of maintenance required to offset the ravages of time and traffic holding the quality of track constant in terms of speed and axle weight limits. This is dominated by average tie life unless a line has light rail or an unusual collection of bridges, which I will not discuss because rail and bridge projects on a short line are expensive and very lumpy.
What is the average life of a tie in the conditions they see on this property? Wet or dry? high speed/slow speed, crooked as a snake or lots of tangents? All affect tie life but the rule of thumb most places is 30-35 years in low traffic density service. We were in a dry climate, so I figured 35 years. We had three, three man section gangs for spot work and a 20-25 man extra gang in the summer for heavier work like rebuilding switches and tie projects.
Our projects were about 500 ties per mile on a 7 year cycle. It would take five such projects to change out every tie. We were in catch up mode. We added a bit of ballast and surfaced the track immediately after changing ties. Surface would generally hold for the 7 years.
A Normalized plan assumes you do not need to catch up track quality, nor that you intend to run the property down. This is a matter of what speed you need to operate at. Speed is a direct function of track quality.
Back to Huron. The line is 173 miles. Traffic of 12,000 carloads is 69 cars per mile per year meaning that the property is not likely to be generating enough cash to fund adequate maintenance. Knowing nothing more than that, I conclude that the line is not self supporting in 12,000 carloads per year.
Mac
PNWRMNM-- Thanks! That was very informative.
PNWRMNMBack to Huron. The line is 173 miles. Traffic of 12,000 carloads is 69 cars per mile per year meaning that the property is not likely to be generating enough cash to fund adequate maintenance. Knowing nothing more than that, I conclude that the line is not self supporting in 12,000 carloads per year.
Would it then make more financial sense to to pull up the line, and shift those loads to trucks? The taxpayer is going to be on the hook regardless, the question is, should that burden be taken by the highway or by the taxpayer to fund the line. The main problem was that the line was in historically poor condition and needs to be brought up to standard, it just doesn't bring enough profit to do that. The $40M question is if the money is worth it to help industries and to preserve growth prospects. Not sure of the right answer. It might not be worth it. In the near future however, it is highly likely that SSM will lose all rail access. It is just that case that when business slumps, even temporarily, the railway is removed and lost forever but the road stays open.
ttrraaffiicc That is a reasonable question that would have to be answered by the Provincial govt on whom the cost of aditional roadway maintenance will fall. The public will suffer from more car-truck wrecks and fatalities at a reate that is easily calculable. Industrial development prospects that might otherwise exist will be forclosed. Washington State got smart about the highway damage issue many years ago which allowed WSDOT to put money into railroad infrastructure in Eastern Washington to avoid larger highway expenditure. Of course the problem was created by the US Govt building dams to give the barge operators a free ride to Lewiston ID with the express intent of diverting grain from the railroads to the river. The question is political will. Wikipedia says there have been govt funded rehab projects in the past, but like Yog Berra is said to have said 'Predictions are hard, especially about the future. Mac PNWRMNM Back to Huron. The line is 173 miles. Traffic of 12,000 carloads is 69 cars per mile per year meaning that the property is not likely to be generating enough cash to fund adequate maintenance. Knowing nothing more than that, I conclude that the line is not self supporting in 12,000 carloads per year. Would it then make more financial sense to to pull up the line, and shift those loads to trucks? The taxpayer is going to be on the hook regardless, the question is, should that burden be taken by the highway or by the taxpayer to fund the line. The main problem was that the line was in historically poor condition and needs to be brought up to standard, it just doesn't bring enough profit to do that. The $40M question is if the money is worth it to help industries and to preserve growth prospects. Not sure of the right answer. It might not be worth it. In the near future however, it is highly likely that SSM will lose all rail access. It is just that case that when business slumps, even temporarily, the railway is removed and lost forever but the road stays open.
That is a reasonable question that would have to be answered by the Provincial govt on whom the cost of aditional roadway maintenance will fall. The public will suffer from more car-truck wrecks and fatalities at a reate that is easily calculable. Industrial development prospects that might otherwise exist will be forclosed.
Washington State got smart about the highway damage issue many years ago which allowed WSDOT to put money into railroad infrastructure in Eastern Washington to avoid larger highway expenditure. Of course the problem was created by the US Govt building dams to give the barge operators a free ride to Lewiston ID with the express intent of diverting grain from the railroads to the river.
The question is political will. Wikipedia says there have been govt funded rehab projects in the past, but like Yog Berra is said to have said 'Predictions are hard, especially about the future.
PNWRMNM Back to Huron. The line is 173 miles. Traffic of 12,000 carloads is 69 cars per mile per year meaning that the property is not likely to be generating enough cash to fund adequate maintenance. Knowing nothing more than that, I conclude that the line is not self supporting in 12,000 carloads per year.
Using the Domtar mill as the example since I'm familiar with it; the majority of their process chemicals arrive by rail. If Domtar had the ability to receive these chemicals 100% by truck, you'd still have the issue whether the suppliers of those chemicals are set up to load the number of trucks necessary to keep the mill humming along.
In the case of my former employer, supplying Espanola 100% by truck would be impossible without a significant capital outlay at the Quebec production sites. I know our competitors' production sites were also heavily rail oriented when it came to outbound shipments. And, as I noted a few days ago in this thread, finding enough trucks to maintain supply to the mill was damn near impossible even for fairly short periods of time. Without rail service, I don't see the Domtar mill at Espanola remaining in operation.
Curt
PNWRMNMThat is a reasonable question that would have to be answered by the Provincial govt on whom the cost of aditional roadway maintenance will fall. The public will suffer from more car-truck wrecks and fatalities at a reate that is easily calculable. Industrial development prospects that might otherwise exist will be forclosed. Washington State got smart about the highway damage issue many years ago which allowed WSDOT to put money into railroad infrastructure in Eastern Washington to avoid larger highway expenditure. Of course the problem was created by the US Govt building dams to give the barge operators a free ride to Lewiston ID with the express intent of diverting grain from the railroads to the river. The question is political will. Wikipedia says there have been govt funded rehab projects in the past, but like Yog Berra is said to have said 'Predictions are hard, especially about the future.
The unfortunate part is that at this point, the line is very unlikely to be saved. There are a few reasons for this.
The first reason is that there will probably be a federal election this fall. This, to me, is the biggest reason. The federal election last fall got in the way of federal funding. It is possible that this federal election will bring a change in government. This all means that federal support is unlikely. If there is no election, than federal support is possible. Without federal support the line is doomed.
The next is political will. The MPP and MP for Sault Ste. Marie both recognize and understand the importance of the line and getting a deal done, but most voters don't. Most voters see this as just another American company looking for public money. They don't realize the impact the closure will have on the region. I have even seen people say that trucks will be better for the economy and region as they will provide more employment and be cleaner than trains. Bonkers, I know, but most people in the region would rather see the line pulled than to have the government invest in it.
It is absolutely crazy that we are in this situation anyway. Any line that transports 12,000 carloads per year shouldn't even be in discussion to be closed. Even if it isn't yet self sustaining, at least, plans are in place to begin down the road to self-sufficiency. Even if they weren't, you would think that 12,000 carloads per year would make the line vital infrastructure worthy of public support. I guess not though. Just another stop on the road to total collapse for Canadian rail freight. Too bad! Industrial prospects in the north were starting to look good too.
What about a shpper-owned railroad?
Juniata ManUsing the Domtar mill as the example since I'm familiar with it; the majority of their process chemicals arrive by rail. If Domtar had the ability to receive these chemicals 100% by truck, you'd still have the issue whether the suppliers of those chemicals are set up to load the number of trucks necessary to keep the mill humming along. In the case of my former employer, supplying Espanola 100% by truck would be impossible without a significant capital outlay at the Quebec production sites. I know our competitors' production sites were also heavily rail oriented when it came to outbound shipments. And, as I noted a few days ago in this thread, finding enough trucks to maintain supply to the mill was damn near impossible even for fairly short periods of time. Without rail service, I don't see the Domtar mill at Espanola remaining in operation. Curt
https://www.sudbury.com/around-the-north/sault-sudbury-rail-line-closure-could-spell-disaster-for-espanolas-domtar-mill-2698208
This article seems to agree with your point here. It doesn't seem likely that it will be saved at this point though, so I guess the mill's days are numbered. It's a real shame too. The government just invested millions into the mill as well as the other industries served by the line. I guess all of it was wasted.
Sorry to hear this RR is closing. Did get to ride Algoma Central excursion train a few years ago. great scenery along the route, high bridge crossing and waterfalls at lunch break stop We left from Sault. It is probably near the area of the RR that is closing.
ttrraaffiiccMost voters see this as just another American company looking for public money. They don't realize the impact the closure will have on the region.
Are there any Canadian shortline companies that might be interested?
MidlandMike ttrraaffiicc Most voters see this as just another American company looking for public money. They don't realize the impact the closure will have on the region. Are there any Canadian shortline companies that might be interested?
ttrraaffiicc Most voters see this as just another American company looking for public money. They don't realize the impact the closure will have on the region.
Isn't Huron Central a short line itself?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD MidlandMike ttrraaffiicc Most voters see this as just another American company looking for public money. They don't realize the impact the closure will have on the region. Are there any Canadian shortline companies that might be interested? Isn't Huron Central a short line itself?
I believe the HC is run by an American shortline holding company. I was wondering if there are any Canadian shortline holding companies, would they be interested.
This is getting worse than the Blast Zone. Huron Central is run by a Canadian company, that is a subsidiary of an American company, and this is exactly the same story, for essentially the same reasons, as last year
https://www.railwayage.com/news/gw-shuttering-huron-central/
As Ulrich said, every year at this time. The thing that's surprising is all these posts that, one after the other, don't know what's going on, when a fraction of a second would have given you everything needful.
Simple answer---Abandon the track between Espanola and the Soo. The local Soo traffic can go out on the CN (ex-ACR or WC) and the paper mill traffic can go out through Sudbury. There'd be a lot fewer miles of roadbed to maintain and the added traffic on the CN would make it more viable.
BackshopSimple answer---Abandon the track between Espanola and the Soo. The local Soo traffic can go out on the CN (ex-ACR or WC) and the paper mill traffic can go out through Sudbury. There'd be a lot fewer miles of roadbed to maintain and the added traffic on the CN would make it more viable.
An even simpler answer is that you abandon the SOO sub northbound out of town and keep the Huron Central alive. The Sault to Sudbury run links two much larger towns and as an East-West link, it is much more strategically important. Also, the Huron Central is the preferred route out of the SOO for most goods as opposed to the Algoma Central. A much more desireable solution would be to keep all lines, let CN sell off to a shortline and give HCRY the funding and work with them to achieve self sufficiency, as several industries have committed to locating in the North if Huron Central remains open in the long term. Or the best solution would be that Ontario Northland buys both the Algoma Central and the Huron Central and runs them as essential pieces of northern infrastructure and carries them to self-sufficiency. There is still some time and local officials, MPs and MPPs seem commited to making a deal even if it will be difficult. So maybe we will wait and see.
What is the difference in track condition between the HCR and the old ACR?
wasdAlso, the Huron Central is the preferred route out of the SOO for most goods as opposed to the Algoma Central.
Only for eastbound traffic to CP. (To be fair there's a decent amount of it.) Westbound traffic to both CP and CN would be preferred to go up the former ACR. Eastbound traffic to CN would either go north on the former ACR or south via Chicago. Southbound traffic to the US would still go through Michigan-Wisconsin.
Either way you kinda need at least one of them - CN bound traffic can go into the US for Chicago, but CP interchange traffic would want to be transferred at either Sudbury or Franz (the old ACR crossing). There might be a place to interchange it via Chicago as well I suppose, but then Sault Ste. Marie is the terminus of a dead end line from Green Bay WI
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
An additional consideration is that the Huron Central does closely parallel the highway between Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury.
The old Algoma Central hits much farther into the bush and has potential for some tourism and passenger service - the Agawa Canyon Tour is still popular (not running this year due to pandemic, but otherwise would have) and local groups have been trying to restart the regular passenger service (long messy story on its cessation). HCRY has no such passenger opportunities.
Hopefully this decision doesn't have to be made as both lines are critical to SSM. I still think that if you had to pick one to close, it should be the ACR. If eastbound traffic had to go over the ACR, it would add a huge amount of mileage to the trip and the customers would probably switch to trucks as a result. Westbound traffic could easily be served by the WC without much increase in mileage and be interchanged at Duluth or elsewhere. In normal times, the ACR only saw a few trains per week but the Huron Central ran daily between SSM and Sudbury so the case is stronger to retain the HCR.
Either way, if you are in Ontario and want to see this crisis avoided, now would be a good time to write your MP and MPP and let them know how you feel while there is still time. Many in government are aware of the situation and are looking to create a solution, but a bit of vocal support could help push it over the goal line.
Also, remember, CN recently announced it was searching for a buyer for 850 miles of its low density lines in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ontario. Looks like the steel mill is poorly located.
Gramp Also, remember, CN recently announced it was searching for a buyer for 850 miles of its low density lines in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ontario. Looks like the steel mill is poorly located.
Overmod ... Huron Central is run by a Canadian company, that is a subsidiary of an American company, and this is exactly the same story, for essentially the same reasons, as last year
... Huron Central is run by a Canadian company, that is a subsidiary of an American company, and this is exactly the same story, for essentially the same reasons, as last year
Seems like a distinction without a difference. As a Canadian poster has said, it is still seen as a foreign (American) company. Events have shown on Bretton Island and the Churchill line that such lines have been left to flounder. While the HC may have been helped in the past, there is no certainty that the provence's patience is inexaustable..
MidlandMike Seems like a distinction without a difference. As a Canadian poster has said, it is still seen as a foreign (American) company. Events have shown on Bretton Island and the Churchill line that such lines have been left to flounder. While the HC may have been helped in the past, there is no certainty that the provence's patience is inexaustable..
He said he’s spoken with several ministers including Greg Rickford, Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines, Caroline Mulroney, Minister of Transportation and Steve Clark., Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. “The conversation has not ended,” Romano said. “We are very hopeful that we can address this. There is a plan in place and we’ve been working very closely on it and we hope we will have more information for you in the weeks to come.”
Does the added day or so of some steel going north on the ACR before heading east really make a difference to the customers as long as delivery is consistant? The paper mill could be served off a stub branch from Sudbury.
Backshop Does the added day or so of some steel going north on the ACR before heading east really make a difference to the customers as long as delivery is consistant? The paper mill could be served off a stub branch from Sudbury.
Probably more than you think, and the extra transit time would probably take longer than just one day. It would also really mess up the economy of Sault Ste. Marie for the future and make the region less competitive. Algoma Steel is not the only rail customer in SSM. In addition, a few industries have said that they would locate in the area if they had a long term commitment from Huron Central.
Another thing to consider is that the ACR customers could accept the extra day and have their line converted to a stub branch. If you had to pick one line to abandon, ACR would be the one to go without question. It goes through more difficult terrain, has fewer customers, sees much less traffic (and if rumours are to be believed, service is currently suspended due to the pandemic while the HCRY still runs) and its function could more easily be replaced by other lines than the Huron Central.
wasdIt very much seems like something is being worked out, but we don't know any details. In my opinion, it would probably be best if the province showed G&W the door and had Ontario Northland take it over. In that case, it would be more closely tied to the government and have management more focused on doing what is good for the north. ...
If Ontario buying the line would save it, than I would hope that happens. The thing that worries me is that the Provence has a history of trying to sell off the Ontario Northland. What happened to BC Rail is fresh in my mind.
Glad to hear the Cape Bretton line is holding on. I missed riding the line before the 1990s VIA cuts, but got to ride the line in 2001 on VIA's tour train.
MidlandMikeIf Ontario buying the line would save it, than I would hope that happens. The thing that worries me is that the Provence has a history of trying to sell off the Ontario Northland. What happened to BC Rail is fresh in my mind.
I think we are past the point of any chance that ONR would be sold off. Since the discontinuance of the Northlander, its fortunes have really turned around and on top of being a successful railroad, it is also providing significant bus service to remote communities.
I think the question right now is what form of deal the government will take with HCRY. I think if we are going to fund it, it would be better to see it under public ownership with ONR. Better than to take another risk with G&W 10 years down the line.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.