VIA Rail

[robmausser]

I too

I concur. I took that trip multiple times to get to and from university, its was awful. It was exacerbated by the fact that VIA runs the oldest cars in their fleet along that section. Such a noisy and rickedy ride.

On the upside, VIA is currently switching that whole subdivision from OCS to CTC. This will allow these trains to run safer and allow room for train traffic growth.

I took it as well to get home from university from 2004-2008

I can recall the trains being the older HEP1 stainless steel Budd cars (NOT the newer refurbished ones) and we would be jostled around like crazy. I can remember seeing the car in front through the glass on the door wildly shaking from left to right.

I guess that was before Transport Canada caught on to the fact that the track was not all too safe.

 

[Long Island Mike]

RM and Everyone:

Thanks for the further insight into VIA cutbacks - there were cuts under PM Paul Martin as mentioned in the Wikipedia VIA Rail history and I agree that
there was a conflict of interest with Martin being involved with Voyageur Bus - he had a bias and should have not been involved with those cutback decisions then...

I agree that when I see a train of this length RDCs or DMUs would be much more practical then a short Sarnia train like this one pictured...
This makes me think of short one and two car LIRR Ronkonkoma-Greenport shuttle trains with DE30 locomotives and C3 multilevel cars...

Amtrak runs trains similar to this two car Toronto-Sarnia run on the New Haven-Hartford,CT-Springfield,MA line at times using two P42 locomotives in a push-pull type with Amfleet cars - and
Philadelphia-Harrisburg,PA trains - back primarily during the 90s - ran with similar short two car consists behind either a
F40PH or a AEM7 electric. Back then PHL-HAR elecrification
before PA increased funding and renovated infrastructure -
was in danger of being discontinued...

Good observations concerning Justin Trudeau - since he is a Easterner and City oriented he will be more for mass transit and VIA Rail then
Harper was - and hopefully VIA will become stronger - and expand train service where it is deemed necessary such as adding more Ontario
Quebec Corridor services - such as bringing back the Montreal-Toronto overnight "Enterprise" operating via Ottawa as a thought...

Adding services outside the eastern Corridor - to help VIA gain support politically elsewhere in Canada - could be another thought here...

LI MIKE

 

[TOareaFan]

Via rail is optimistic they are going to get $3B from new government.

http://www.thestar.com/business/201...ic-liberals-will-back-3b-rail-investment.html

I must say, with all the various governments and agencies that are now optimistic about receiving funds either the infrastructure money that Mr. Trudeau promised is gonna go fast or that $10B/year deficit projection is gonna go higher....they can't all be right.

 

[gweed123]

Via rail is optimistic they are going to get $3B from new government.

http://www.thestar.com/business/201...ic-liberals-will-back-3b-rail-investment.html

I must say, with all the various governments and agencies that are now optimistic about receiving funds either the infrastructure money that Mr. Trudeau promised is gonna go fast or that $10B/year deficit projection is gonna go higher....they can't all be right.

This is a no-brainer in my opinion, as long as the new tracks are built to HSR standards, can be upgraded to HSR standards with only minimal changes. This is an incremental approach to getting to HSR, since the "let's build it from scratch" approach hasn't worked well these past 30 years.

The best part about this plan is that the new tracks can be built in segments, so we can see gradual improvement over time, instead of waiting for the entire thing to be built to see any kind of improvements.

 

[TOareaFan]

This is a no-brainer in my opinion, as long as the new tracks are built to HSR standards, can be upgraded to HSR standards with only minimal changes. This is an incremental approach to getting to HSR, since the "let's build it from scratch" approach hasn't worked well these past 30 years.

The best part about this plan is that the new tracks can be built in segments, so we can see gradual improvement over time, instead of waiting for the entire thing to be built to see any kind of improvements.

I have no qualms about this either....it seems the perfect role/use of federal infrastructure funds and I have long said that 3 - 3.5 hour trip times between Toronto and Montreal is a very good interim target that could switch many car/plane trips to rail.

The gain is not as clear to me in Ottawa as the train does not offer downtown to downtown service but still a good use of funds.

 

[gweed123]

I have no qualms about this either....it seems the perfect role/use of federal infrastructure funds and I have long said that 3 - 3.5 hour trip times between Toronto and Montreal is a very good interim target that could switch many car/plane trips to rail.

The gain is not as clear to me in Ottawa as the train does not offer downtown to downtown service but still a good use of funds.

The Brockville to Ottawa section has low freight on it, but it still needs an upgrade. They've upgraded the tracks through Smiths Falls in the last few years, but the frequency is still limited by the single track. And yes, it's not downtown to downtown, but with the LRT being implemented in Ottawa, it will be a 4 station ride to downtown, which is still infinitely better than the treks out to many airports. VIA also has a suburban station (Fallowfield), which is more convenient for anybody in the west end.

 

[Markster]

The gain is not as clear to me in Ottawa as the train does not offer downtown to downtown service but still a good use of funds.

Thankfully the Ottawa LRT will strengthen the tie between downtown and the train station.

 

[TOareaFan]

Thankfully the Ottawa LRT will strengthen the tie between downtown and the train station.

That is true (haven't studied it but if it is very close to the train station that is good) but my comment just was that for travel from DT to DT ...a speedier VIA really is a terrific option between Toronto and Montreal (it is already "not bad" but it will be much better)...less so for Toronto - Ottawa trips because of the station location in Ottawa.

 

[Megaton327]

That is true (haven't studied it but if it is very close to the train station that is good) but my comment just was that for travel from DT to DT ...a speedier VIA really is a terrific option between Toronto and Montreal (it is already "not bad" but it will be much better)...less so for Toronto - Ottawa trips because of the station location in Ottawa.

I've never taken issue with Ottawa's station location, myself--this is definitely the first I'm hearing of it from anyone. Everyone I know who travels Toronto-Ottawa still vastly prefers VIA. The Ottawa airport is MUCH farther from downtown than the train station which is quite close and was already connected via the transitway.

And yes, the LRT will be exactly where the current 'Train' stop on the Transitway is--for those unfamiliar, out the front doors of the station, you walk through (I think) two lanes of pickup/dropoff/taxi traffic, go down some stairs or an elevator, and you're there.

 

[crs1026]

My reservation with the whole thing is not with the train concept - which I love - but rather with how it's being pitched.

If the return were as slam-dunk and as positive as claimed, the line would already be under construction, by private investors.

Call me jaded but I have seen several previous new, enthusiastic VIA CEO's take the reins full of enthusiasm, only to be beaten into subservient silence by the Transport bureacracy (and often the caucus/cabinet of the day, too). I give the guy props for coming out of the blocks at full gallop, and for trying to get his place in the money queue early. But - similar to what happened when both John Tory and then Kathleen Wynne tried to have an "adult conversation" about revenue tools for transit - it just ain't that easy. The more he waxes about this proposal, the more opportunity there is for number crunchers and financial analysts to poke holes in the numbers.

Maybe this guy has the smarts to steer this through the decisionmaking process, or maybe he has been given good signs that the pitch will find favour. I wish him well. Personally, I would sell this a little more cautiously, as a necessary and prudent investment for public infrastructure funds - but no promises about ever breaking even.

- Paul

 

[CapitalSeven]

Regarding the Star article,

1) They aren't saying they want the feds to pay for all or most of the 4 billion. The headline says "back," and they are pitching this to big investors.

2) I'd forgotten or missed that they are talking electrification here. Green angle.

I doubt if they would build fully to HSR standards. VIA have already said that the benefit isn't there for the extra expense.

 

[TOareaFan]

Regarding the Star article,

1) They aren't saying they want the feds to pay for all or most of the 4 billion. The headline says "back," and they are pitching this to big investors.

2) I'd forgotten or missed that they are talking electrification here. Green angle.

I doubt if they would build fully to HSR standards. VIA have already said that the benefit isn't there for the extra expense.

did the Star amend that article? I swear when I linked to it said they were optimistic of getting $3B from feds.

EDIT...even some of the early comments refer to the $3B figure.....papers really need to note when they edit/amend stories.

EDIT2...if you look in the url of the article it still says $3B ....so, clearly, they edited a pretty important part of the story but failed to note that in the edit. In this day of comment sections...that is a bit slimy (IMHO).

 

[MisterF]

A couple billion in government money to reduce travel time to Montreal by over an hour, more than triple ridership, and vastly increase service...seems like a bargain to me.

Has VIA released any more information on their plan? Like where the new route would be built - specifically on a new corridor? Because they spent $900 million a few years back on things like triple track sections (along with new stations, refurbished equipment, etc.) that were designed to make service faster and more reliable. And yet service has deteriorated. Seems like much of that money was little more than a subsidy to CN. VIA really does need to have its own corridors without freight traffic if lasting improvements are ever to be made.

If the return were as slam-dunk and as positive as claimed, the line would already be under construction, by private investors.

No it wouldn't. Big infrastructure project like this are almost always government driven, even on highly profitable routes. Private companies can't just start building. Think about the logistics of it. Getting access to train stations, negotiating with CN/CP, expropriating land, working out ticketing and connecting services, dealing with dozens of municipalities, figuring out rail's place in the transportation mix.... These are all things that can't or won't be done by private companies unless it's part of a government plan.

In most countries the rails are owned by the government, often with private companies running the trains. It looks like VIA might be trying to set up the same kind of thing here, if only on its busiest route. Britain's railways may have their issues, but they're still in a whole different league than VIA.

 

[smallspy]

Because they spent $900 million a few years back on things like triple track sections (along with new stations, refurbished equipment, etc.) that were designed to make service faster and more reliable. And yet service has deteriorated. Seems like much of that money was little more than a subsidy to CN.

That's exactly what that money was. The additional track that was built was done as much to get the VIA trains out of the way as it was for improving the capacity of the corridor for all of the freight. The supposed benefit was that the passenger trains would be able to move nimbly between the freights, but with the sheer number of trains on that corridor, that really hasn't happened at all.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[gweed123]

That's exactly what that money was. The additional track that was built was done as much to get the VIA trains out of the way as it was for improving the capacity of the corridor for all of the freight. The supposed benefit was that the passenger trains would be able to move nimbly between the freights, but with the sheer number of trains on that corridor, that really hasn't happened at all.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Then look at it this way: they got an expensive upgrade section out of the way .