The only time a Turbo train ever came into contact w/ a steam engine was when Flying Scotsman was on tour of the US and Canada during their revenue service for a short time.
The UAC logo shown throughout this video is the logo for three modern day Russian company called United Aircraft Corporation, the American UAC, prior to their renaming, never actually had a logo, they just used the text United Aircraft Corporation in various different fonts as one
I rode the Turbo from Montréal to Kingston in 1981 and came back on the the LRC's first day of passenger service ! (it still had banking system enabled!). BTW, the LRC was designed and built by MLW. Bombardier ended buying the company just before signing the sale to VIA and got its brand name on it. BTW, the record time in service was 03:59 for Montréal-Toronto, not 3 hours. Normal time is 5 hours (actual 05:30 or more due to delays). The Turbo train, had it been delivered on time, would have competed against the early Shinkansen. The delay of Turbo and improvements in Shinkansen speeds means that at introduction is was much slower. And Turbo was at the limits of conventional trains while the Shinkansen saw its speeds nearly doubled since introduction. The Turbo was, even by world standards, ahead of the curve, with aluminium shell, low centre of gravity, passive banking, jacobs bogies. (and turbine power which SNCF later tried for a few trains and also for the TGV prototype in mid/late 1970s). The FRA would end up banning aluminium trains, jacobs bogies and other modern stuff in order to please a steel company that also made trains: Budd. The LRC, and the Hawkey Siddeley bilevel commuter cars (the Go Trains) were grandfatrhered. The Talgo train sets in pacific northwest had been granted an exemption which was widthdrawn for purely political reasons after the derailment (it was a foreign train). In late 2018, the FRA admitted it had become the laughing stock of the rail world with regulations keeping it in the 1950s and relaxed the rules in order to allow the new Acela trains sets ( made of aluminium !) The LRC and the Hawker Siddeley bi-level trains (aka the GO trains) were grandfathered so are still allowed today under a waiver. Irony: the heacy Steel Siemenes were ordered the same weel the FRA lifted its 1950s rules. But VIA had stipulated the trains had to be FRA compliant despite this being Canada (and this was a way to ensure only Siemens could win). After the 1973 rebuild of the Turbos by CN, the ended up being fairly reliable despite a few incidents. But CN also reduced their speed to be closer to those of its 1950s Rapido trains. (and today's VIA are slower than that). Turbo was designed by United Aircraft Corp. CN, in the 1960s, had just finished its conversion from steam engines and was in no way equipped/trained to maintain aircraft technology which is a big reason for many of the early problems. During the big rebuild (which saw the 9 car trains), CN also improved maintenance procedures and after that, the train had good reliability. Not sure if UAC had relationship with CN or f CN only spoke to MLW, but there was a break in communicatiosn that esulted in CN not being told how to properly maintain an aircraft. During the 1970s, MLW (with Alcan and Dofasco) were busy designing the LRC based on feedback from CN. CN didn't want fancy technology, wanted standard bogies and detacheable cars, and simple diesel engines. They kept the reversible train with locos at both ends, but dithced reversible seats so half the seats faced backwards. At introduction, the backlash from passengers resulted in the Rapido trains being full and people avoiding the LRC and VIA relented and made all seats face forwards and would turn LRC trains around. (and that allowed it to put only 1 loco on trains). However, because told not to use fancy tech, the banking system was all based on mechanical relays, not electronics, Same for door systems and they ended up being highly unreliable and banking system quickly turned off. The automatically deployed stairs in vestiules replaced with manually activated ones. (requiring one agent per car to operate doors as opposed to the conductor opening all doors with one press fo button). Doors between cars were turned to manual because the the push button system has too many problems. There were also problems with wheels falling off, and the outside doors opening once train reached speeds above ~ 130kmh. (and initially problems with wheel profile of locomotives which CN complained about because not designed for freight tracks). VIA, who used CN crews to maintain equipment at that time had the same problem with crews being inexperienced on how to maintain this train. So while it didn't adopt latest tech, it was still too advanced/complex for them. Also, it had been designed to be maintained from under and VIA didn't have maintenance bays for that initially. So it was a comnination of a new train rushed by political pressure for a young VIA to get new trains ASAP, and CN crews (whcih were under contract for VIA) being inxperienced to maintain it. The second generation LRCs delivered circa 1985 incorporated many of the solutions which were also incorporated into the first 50 or so (first generarion). This means doors between cars were once again motorized. Banking system left inoperative but still present. ( it is ealry days it made people sick, would sometimes go on perpetual bank to left, bank to right cycle, sometimes get stuck banked on one side etc). The Siemens trains are extremely conventional heavy rail steel trains. Except they have fixed consists of the Turbo, and the unreversible seats with half facing backwards of the early LRC except this time people didn't react violently enough (in part becayse LRCs were also downgraded to have those and VIA's schedule didn't show which trains had those seats oand those that didn't). VIA should have looked at its records of when LRC was introduced. Being steel trains, they have no fancy tech, and despite the fixed consist, have standard bogies (which you need for heavy rail since single bogie can't support weight of both cars attached to it). Steel matters in curves because contrary to those saying speeds limited for comfort, the speed in curves are limited by the actual rails. A bogie exerts force pushing the rail outwards. t is called "cant defficiency". That force is relative to the weight that the bogie supports. A rail can only support a certain amount of lateral force before it rolls over (and that also depends on the type of fasteners it has and the type of ties). A heavy steel car exerts greater lateral force in a curve than a lighter aluminium one so it needs to go slower. The VIA Siemens trains are only 5 cars long so in summer peak season (or if Air Canada had gone on strike), VIA can't add capacity easily.
8:49 I was told by a person who worked at Exporail that they turned down the turbotrain at the time because it was "too modern", he also said that its one of the museum's biggest regrets. Not sure about other museums though
Interestingly, their unique maintenance facility at Gare Centrale, nammed the "Turbo bay" is still in use, first to maintain Deux Montagnes lines rolling stock during the CN and AMT eras and now serves as a maintenance facility for the REM light metro. Altho pics are rare as.
turbos were absolutely everywhere, this ended up with the creation of the amtraks turbo liner, my favourite piece of machinery from funny little jet things is the new york centrals jet train built upon a RDC
My dad saw an Amtrak painted Turbo set on the old GM&O Chicago to St. Louis line but he said it was moved out West where there was dryer weather conditions due to issues of windows leaking when it rained.
I remember first seeing the TurboTrain in a book about trains from around the world when I was a little kid. To me, a German, it was the most alien train I‘d ever seen (Though tbf I assume it still looks pretty alien to you guys across the Atlantic too). I really disliked its design at first, but I must say it somewhat grew on me when I saw pictures of it in the CN and Via Rail liveries. I somewhat think of it as the North American APT: a train that was supposed to do great things, but was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
The first high-school English short story text I was given to use in class had a CN Turbo on the cover. Published 1969. My first class: 2006. Retired from service 2011.
Awesome, The Turbo Train had potential and could've been equivalent of the Acela and European trains like the French TGV and German ICE along with Japanese Shinkansen
No! Gannanoque is ]ronounced Gannanoqué 🙂 When I heaard it on video I was wondering if I had bene pronouncing it wroong all these years, but happy to see I am not the only one pronouncing it that way !
Canadian passenger rail only got slower and slower. Each time when I rode the train between Toronto and Montreal, I am always wondering how nice it could be to have a higher speed train 60s/70s 3h+ with Turbo 80s/90s 4h+ with LRC 2000s and onward, 5h+ for Toronto-Montreal (if there's no delay) 😢
Even taking the earliest 6 am train, it still arrived barely before noon time. Need to wake way too early for a quite late arrival. Another thing I never understood is the Via Rail decision to charge for baggage and seat. It is just WTF, giving free customers base to Air Canada? The first time I heard that a train company charges money for baggage. If Via Rail is not doomed for failure then there's a miracle. Even Amtrak overtime performs better than Via.
4 maglev lines are all Canada needs that’s it sadly only buses and a few upgraded regional trains to and from Winnipeg from parts of northern Ontario at this point you would be better off experimenting with medium speed maglev
the new Avelia Liberty trains are derived from a TGV-M locomotive and Pendolino coaches (hence the mismatch in shape between the two). Amtrak insisted on problem-causing banking for the train instead of providing proper cant on ITS OWN TRACKS which would have costed far less. (one the the holdups in getting FRA approval for format tests of the trains is FRA isnisting Asltom provide data to prove the banking system is safe. Asltom has no such data. The banking system uses a precise map of route and precise location for each car such that the car knows ahead of time that a curve of a certain radius is approaching and can start banking before reaching the curve to ensure the banking increases at exact same time as the centrifigal force of the curve. Proper high speed trains do not have banking because they are designed to run on high speed tracks. Pendolinos with banking are designed to run on conventional tracks (there is a high speed version of Pendolino without bankin though).
I thought when they crash i thought they engine be in front & 3 out 4 lights? horn high & & low horn i kinda like to bad no Food Car Amtrak & VIA bank in the day.
The only time a Turbo train ever came into contact w/ a steam engine was when Flying Scotsman was on tour of the US and Canada during their revenue service for a short time.
NO WAY REALLY??? Show me some proove man!^^
The UAC logo shown throughout this video is the logo for three modern day Russian company called United Aircraft Corporation, the American UAC, prior to their renaming, never actually had a logo, they just used the text United Aircraft Corporation in various different fonts as one
I rode the Turbo from Montréal to Kingston in 1981 and came back on the the LRC's first day of passenger service ! (it still had banking system enabled!).
BTW, the LRC was designed and built by MLW. Bombardier ended buying the company just before signing the sale to VIA and got its brand name on it.
BTW, the record time in service was 03:59 for Montréal-Toronto, not 3 hours. Normal time is 5 hours (actual 05:30 or more due to delays).
The Turbo train, had it been delivered on time, would have competed against the early Shinkansen. The delay of Turbo and improvements in Shinkansen speeds means that at introduction is was much slower. And Turbo was at the limits of conventional trains while the Shinkansen saw its speeds nearly doubled since introduction.
The Turbo was, even by world standards, ahead of the curve, with aluminium shell, low centre of gravity, passive banking, jacobs bogies. (and turbine power which SNCF later tried for a few trains and also for the TGV prototype in mid/late 1970s).
The FRA would end up banning aluminium trains, jacobs bogies and other modern stuff in order to please a steel company that also made trains: Budd.
The LRC, and the Hawkey Siddeley bilevel commuter cars (the Go Trains) were grandfatrhered. The Talgo train sets in pacific northwest had been granted an exemption which was widthdrawn for purely political reasons after the derailment (it was a foreign train). In late 2018, the FRA admitted it had become the laughing stock of the rail world with regulations keeping it in the 1950s and relaxed the rules in order to allow the new Acela trains sets ( made of aluminium !)
The LRC and the Hawker Siddeley bi-level trains (aka the GO trains) were grandfathered so are still allowed today under a waiver. Irony: the heacy Steel Siemenes were ordered the same weel the FRA lifted its 1950s rules. But VIA had stipulated the trains had to be FRA compliant despite this being Canada (and this was a way to ensure only Siemens could win).
After the 1973 rebuild of the Turbos by CN, the ended up being fairly reliable despite a few incidents. But CN also reduced their speed to be closer to those of its 1950s Rapido trains. (and today's VIA are slower than that).
Turbo was designed by United Aircraft Corp. CN, in the 1960s, had just finished its conversion from steam engines and was in no way equipped/trained to maintain aircraft technology which is a big reason for many of the early problems. During the big rebuild (which saw the 9 car trains), CN also improved maintenance procedures and after that, the train had good reliability. Not sure if UAC had relationship with CN or f CN only spoke to MLW, but there was a break in communicatiosn that esulted in CN not being told how to properly maintain an aircraft.
During the 1970s, MLW (with Alcan and Dofasco) were busy designing the LRC based on feedback from CN. CN didn't want fancy technology, wanted standard bogies and detacheable cars, and simple diesel engines. They kept the reversible train with locos at both ends, but dithced reversible seats so half the seats faced backwards.
At introduction, the backlash from passengers resulted in the Rapido trains being full and people avoiding the LRC and VIA relented and made all seats face forwards and would turn LRC trains around. (and that allowed it to put only 1 loco on trains).
However, because told not to use fancy tech, the banking system was all based on mechanical relays, not electronics, Same for door systems and they ended up being highly unreliable and banking system quickly turned off. The automatically deployed stairs in vestiules replaced with manually activated ones. (requiring one agent per car to operate doors as opposed to the conductor opening all doors with one press fo button). Doors between cars were turned to manual because the the push button system has too many problems.
There were also problems with wheels falling off, and the outside doors opening once train reached speeds above ~ 130kmh. (and initially problems with wheel profile of locomotives which CN complained about because not designed for freight tracks).
VIA, who used CN crews to maintain equipment at that time had the same problem with crews being inexperienced on how to maintain this train. So while it didn't adopt latest tech, it was still too advanced/complex for them. Also, it had been designed to be maintained from under and VIA didn't have maintenance bays for that initially. So it was a comnination of a new train rushed by political pressure for a young VIA to get new trains ASAP, and CN crews (whcih were under contract for VIA) being inxperienced to maintain it.
The second generation LRCs delivered circa 1985 incorporated many of the solutions which were also incorporated into the first 50 or so (first generarion). This means doors between cars were once again motorized. Banking system left inoperative but still present. ( it is ealry days it made people sick, would sometimes go on perpetual bank to left, bank to right cycle, sometimes get stuck banked on one side etc).
The Siemens trains are extremely conventional heavy rail steel trains. Except they have fixed consists of the Turbo, and the unreversible seats with half facing backwards of the early LRC except this time people didn't react violently enough (in part becayse LRCs were also downgraded to have those and VIA's schedule didn't show which trains had those seats oand those that didn't). VIA should have looked at its records of when LRC was introduced.
Being steel trains, they have no fancy tech, and despite the fixed consist, have standard bogies (which you need for heavy rail since single bogie can't support weight of both cars attached to it).
Steel matters in curves because contrary to those saying speeds limited for comfort, the speed in curves are limited by the actual rails. A bogie exerts force pushing the rail outwards. t is called "cant defficiency". That force is relative to the weight that the bogie supports. A rail can only support a certain amount of lateral force before it rolls over (and that also depends on the type of fasteners it has and the type of ties). A heavy steel car exerts greater lateral force in a curve than a lighter aluminium one so it needs to go slower.
The VIA Siemens trains are only 5 cars long so in summer peak season (or if Air Canada had gone on strike), VIA can't add capacity easily.
8:49 I was told by a person who worked at Exporail that they turned down the turbotrain at the time because it was "too modern", he also said that its one of the museum's biggest regrets.
Not sure about other museums though
The train that led to the creation of Rapido Trains Inc
Interestingly, their unique maintenance facility at Gare Centrale, nammed the "Turbo bay" is still in use, first to maintain Deux Montagnes lines rolling stock during the CN and AMT eras and now serves as a maintenance facility for the REM light metro. Altho pics are rare as.
1:47 ok now that was smooth
Babe, wake up! the Winnipeg railfan posted
"and whistleblower erasing boeing" makes sense
I love the turbo train, its just so cool.
10:20 THERE I AM GARY THERE I AM, also nice work on the video mate, glad my 5 year old footage could be of use
Nice John I might want to take part in this too if I have time
0:45 Brilliant choice of clip: indirectly incorporating a reference to a Canadian beloved failure: the BlackBerry phone.
turbos were absolutely everywhere, this ended up with the creation of the amtraks turbo liner, my favourite piece of machinery from funny little jet things is the new york centrals jet train built upon a RDC
The rumor is true! Exporail was supposed to get it but at the time, they had very limited space for storage.
Nice work on using Riot Earth's acoustic version of In Bloom!
Hi The Winnipeg Railfan & it's is Randy and i like yours video & Thanks The Winnipeg Railfan & Friends Randy
Big turbo
My dad saw an Amtrak painted Turbo set on the old GM&O Chicago to St. Louis line but he said it was moved out West where there was dryer weather conditions due to issues of windows leaking when it rained.
I remember first seeing the TurboTrain in a book about trains from around the world when I was a little kid. To me, a German, it was the most alien train I‘d ever seen (Though tbf I assume it still looks pretty alien to you guys across the Atlantic too). I really disliked its design at first, but I must say it somewhat grew on me when I saw pictures of it in the CN and Via Rail liveries. I somewhat think of it as the North American APT: a train that was supposed to do great things, but was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Great video dude! I never even knew VIA Rail had Turbo sets! Great to finally find out. ❤️👍😎
A shame that Canada sucks at railroading. Quite a neat country and really nice engines.
0:08 what CP SD70ACU is that I like the horn a lot I NEED TO KNOW WHERE THAT ACU CLIP CAME FROM
The first high-school English short story text I was given to use in class had a CN Turbo on the cover. Published 1969. My first class: 2006. Retired from service 2011.
Bro... WHERE - Did you get this GREAT footage from?
5:07 i cant remember it off my haad, but it only took 1-2 weeks for it to be returned to revenue service!
we need a Florida fun train episode
0:07 WHAT DU HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEL OUH MAH GAAAAAAD NO EYEYEYEY
The Funny turbo
Awesome, The Turbo Train had potential and could've been equivalent of the Acela and European trains like the French TGV and German ICE along with Japanese Shinkansen
8:55 this is actually tragic man
By the way, Gananoque is pronounce "Gan-a-knock-way".
No! Gannanoque is ]ronounced Gannanoqué 🙂 When I heaard it on video I was wondering if I had bene pronouncing it wroong all these years, but happy to see I am not the only one pronouncing it that way !
@@jfmezei Mais c'est corrêt quand nous parlons français, in English we're lazy about it 😁
I've heard a lot of weird pronounciations for gananoque but never heard "Gan-an-oak"
Ahh, gotcha. Didn't really know as I've never heard it out loud before, lol
Love the pfp (also the content but not what I'm focusing on rn)
I wanna see a video on the LRC, a super underrated train
Turbo Drifter
Canadian passenger rail only got slower and slower. Each time when I rode the train between Toronto and Montreal, I am always wondering how nice it could be to have a higher speed train
60s/70s 3h+ with Turbo
80s/90s 4h+ with LRC
2000s and onward, 5h+ for Toronto-Montreal (if there's no delay)
😢
Even taking the earliest 6 am train, it still arrived barely before noon time. Need to wake way too early for a quite late arrival.
Another thing I never understood is the Via Rail decision to charge for baggage and seat. It is just WTF, giving free customers base to Air Canada? The first time I heard that a train company charges money for baggage. If Via Rail is not doomed for failure then there's a miracle. Even Amtrak overtime performs better than Via.
Bruh I was just looking at footage of this train irl how did this upland at the exact same time
Damn, I ain’t know you had a TH-cam 😭 I gotta sub
Funfact the UACs used a modified variant of the pratt and Whitney ST-6
2:22 pronounced *Shy-Raq, Awesome video tho, always loved the trubotrain
Live CN priority intermodel reaction
The fastest train in Canada, The CN hi prio Zs
4 maglev lines are all Canada needs that’s it sadly only buses and a few upgraded regional trains to and from Winnipeg from parts of northern Ontario at this point you would be better off experimenting with medium speed maglev
NEVER FORGET WHAT THEY TOOK FROM YOU
D1 Yapper
Big Mac
G R U N K
I don’t know if you can call The Acela high speed rail bro 😂
the new Avelia Liberty trains are derived from a TGV-M locomotive and Pendolino coaches (hence the mismatch in shape between the two). Amtrak insisted on problem-causing banking for the train instead of providing proper cant on ITS OWN TRACKS which would have costed far less. (one the the holdups in getting FRA approval for format tests of the trains is FRA isnisting Asltom provide data to prove the banking system is safe. Asltom has no such data. The banking system uses a precise map of route and precise location for each car such that the car knows ahead of time that a curve of a certain radius is approaching and can start banking before reaching the curve to ensure the banking increases at exact same time as the centrifigal force of the curve.
Proper high speed trains do not have banking because they are designed to run on high speed tracks. Pendolinos with banking are designed to run on conventional tracks (there is a high speed version of Pendolino without bankin though).
I thought when they crash i thought they engine be in front & 3 out 4 lights? horn high & & low horn i kinda like to bad no Food Car Amtrak & VIA bank in the day.
G R A N D T R U N K (can we start a chain?)
G R A N D T R U N K
G R A N D T R U N K
G R A N D T R U N K
G R A N D T R U N K
G R A N D T R U N K
First