VIA Rail

[crs1026]

Certainly interesting, but according to Tracing the Lines, page 13, "The Partnership seems to have sunk almost immediately, but its end was officially announced by the parties in 1995, just as CN was being sold to private investors." It would be interesting to know why the partnership failed. Of course there was nothing forcing them to work together and any little disagreement could have sunk the entire joint operation.

The onset of the CN IPO, and the changes in leadership within that organization, certainly seems like an interesting coincidence.

The quote from the ruling that I found especially interesting was

The Agency stated that it considers this application to be one of national importance in as much as it may serve as a model for future similar transactions, and that all persons, nationally, should be given an opportunity to comment on it.

That, and the considerable detailing of the commercial terms. I doubt that either railway would be happy to see that much informatoon divulged going forward.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

I may not have said it before on this forum. I do think that in the last few decades, CN and CP have been doing things only in the pursuit of higher profits. Yes, they are private corporations. Let's say that coal power plant that is regulated to put out a certain level of emissions. decides that that limit is hurting their bottom line? Should they just ignore it? No, what they will do is make it so that what they are doing becomes acceptable. Tearing up rail lines is the same idea. I had heard that OVR wanted to buy one of the lines between Mattawa and Ottawa. They were told No, as it would cut into the major carrier's bottom line for a shorter and faster connection between the west and Montreal.

The current system does not work well for all Canadians. Maybe it is time to start doing something to make it better instead of just reactivating a winding ROW that was abandoned in thee 1980s.



You mean the governments of the past are noble and wise?



There has to be a way to keep industry in Ontario, while increasing space for passenger trains. Maybe it is time to double track all mainlines.



They did block the 401 at times.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-ontario-highway-401-protest-1.5424858

Why does commuter rail have to exist to make a line needed?

It would be easier to build a larger yard in Northern ON to handle the marshaling needed to split trains going to Montreal and further east. Imagine building another MacMillan Yard in the GTA. Now, take the ones in Capreol, Sudbury and Cartier. They could be expanded, or, if needed, there could be a new yard built before the wye going south. In fact, there has been some plans to relocate the Sudbury CP Yard to allow the downtown to expand where the yard is.

If the government forced CN and CP to ensure Via, and all other passenger trains were kept on schedule, CN and CP would have to do something. This is where the lines in the Ottawa Valley become viable again.



One thing that really hurt the rail freight has been the race to the bottom with the various trucking companies. I have trucker friends who have been saying more companies are paying their drivers less per km than they did in the past. The problem also is, immigrants who need a job to support their family will work for those low wages, which only pushes the wages lower.

Sadly, as you dig to figure out why we are left in this mess, it seems that the race for more profit at all costs are the underlying reasons.

That's how capitalism works. You clearly favour a more command-and-control model or outright socialization. I suppose the government could try to regulate-but-not compensate and see how it shakes out, politically and legally. Maybe it could order daily direct AC flights from Toronto to Hornpayne and see what happens. Would be fun.

The claim that OVR was denied the ability to purchase the CP Ottawa Valley line is curious and a reference would be helpful. I'm not sure that's within the authority of the government to deny a sale, and I'm sure CP would have rather received an 'intact' price vs the cost of ripping it up. Owning a line doesn't guarantee customers but CP wouldn't have cared how flawed a purchaser's business case is once they get the cheque.

 

[micheal_can]

That's how capitalism works. You clearly favour a more command-and-control model or outright socialization. I suppose the government could try to regulate-but-not compensate and see how it shakes out, politically and legally. Maybe it could order daily direct AC flights from Toronto to Hornpayne and see what happens. Would be fun.

The claim that OVR was denied the ability to purchase the CP Ottawa Valley line is curious and a reference would be helpful. I'm not sure that's within the authority of the government to deny a sale, and I'm sure CP would have rather received an 'intact' price vs the cost of ripping it up. Owning a line doesn't guarantee customers but CP wouldn't have cared how flawed a purchaser's business case is once they get the cheque.

I am not a fan of "outright socialization", but I am a fan of regulating businesses out of monopolizing a sector. I would feel the same if Bell decided to shut down services in areas they currently serve to make a higher profit. CN and CP weren't broke when the ripping happened. If it were done to prevent bankruptcy, or to get them out of bankruptcy, I would understand and respect it.

As far as the claim, I do not know if there is any public document that would state that as if it ever got out, it would sound like a predatory business practice, and might even be illegal in Canada.

The fact still remains that even without Via on their lines, the mainlines across Canada, including the one between Toronto and Montreal are nearing capacity and something will need to be done.

 

[Urban Sky]

As far as the claim, I do not know if there is any public document that would state that as if it ever got out, it would sound like a predatory business practice, and might even be illegal in Canada.

Okay, so pure and unsubstantiated speculation^^

The fact still remains that even without Via on their lines, the mainlines across Canada, including the one between Toronto and Montreal are nearing capacity and something will need to be done.

There certainly is no rail corridor anywhere in Canada where freight train volumes alone would exhaust the capacity offered by multiple-tracking (as is present along CN’s entire Montreal-Toronto-London route)...

 

[roger1818]

The fact still remains that even without Via on their lines, the mainlines across Canada, including the one between Toronto and Montreal are nearing capacity and something will need to be done.

There certainly is no rail corridor anywhere in Canada where freight train volumes alone would exhaust the capacity offered by multiple-tracking (as is present along CN’s entire Montreal-Toronto-London route)...

So it is primarily the rail corridors in western Canada that have single track that are nearing capacity when only considering freight traffic? Would that still be true for Toronto-Montreal if CN and CP were to share one, double tracked corridor, or would that combination push them over the edge?

 

[Darwinkgo]

So it is primarily the rail corridors in western Canada that have single track that are nearing capacity when only considering freight traffic? Would that still be true for Toronto-Montreal if CN and CP were to share one, double tracked corridor, or would that combination push them over the edge?

The issue in the corridor wouldn't be capacity exactly, but coordination, and not having preferred timeslots, and not having best access to associated facilities, without interfering with the line. Certainly having unencumbered operational control and plenty of ROW capacity for future expansion is viewed as an asset by both companies. They use it to provide premium services, like guaranteed delivery timelines and some just in time services (though limited).

Plus having more trains onto the same corridor will raise pressures to add grade separations. Which might cost more than just adding another corridor!

 

[roger1818]

Plus having more trains onto the same corridor will raise pressures to add grade separations. Which might cost more than just adding another corridor!

This is especially problematic on CP's Belleville Sub through Belleville.

 

[crs1026]

The issue in the corridor wouldn't be capacity exactly, but coordination, and not having preferred timeslots, and not having best access to associated facilities, without interfering with the line. Certainly having unencumbered operational control and plenty of ROW capacity for future expansion is viewed as an asset by both companies. They use it to provide premium services, like guaranteed delivery timelines and some just in time services (though limited).

How is coordinating time slots for railway trains any more onerous than, say, Westjet and Air Canada coordinating runway and gate allocations for competing flights between YYZ and YUL?

Assuming good connections at either end, what "Associated Facilities" exist between Oshawa and Dorval beyond yards at Belleville, Smiths Falls, and Coteau?

How does having a single rail traffic control center encumber operational control on a jointly used line?

Plus having more trains onto the same corridor will raise pressures to add grade separations. Which might cost more than just adding another corridor!

If VIA is unable to leverage existing grade separation, it will be limited to a 110 mph crossing speed limit regardless of where it runs. This impacts any supposition of a later "Phase II" upgrade to HFR.

I would be interested in what your map looks like with farmers' crossings and minor concession road crossings deleted.

This is especially problematic on CP's Belleville Sub through Belleville.

It would be certainly be interesting to compare the cost and urgency of grade separations to resolve a different Belleville routing with the cost and urgency of grade separations on major north-south roads in the Durham-Northumberland region which cross the proposed HFR route. Also crossings through Perth where HFR will transit. Vehicle volumes on all of these are substantial, and the potential risks associated with hourly high speed trains in each direction, versus current or future volume of freight trains, are a consideration.

And then, how does the cost and scope of a program of further grade separation on the CP/CN lines compare with the cost of rebuilding a new line for VIA?
.
- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

How is coordinating time slots for railway trains any more onerous than, say, Westjet and Air Canada coordinating runway and gate allocations for competing flights between YYZ and YUL?

Assuming good connections at either end, what "Associated Facilities" exist between Oshawa and Dorval beyond yards at Belleville, Smiths Falls, and Coteau?

How does having a single rail traffic control center encumber operational control on a jointly used line?

At an airport, a Cessna and a Dreamliner both have the same slot. Therefore, upgrading the airport is not needed if it cans support a larger plane. Oncoming trains must sit in sidings as you pass. There are only so many siding and are only so long. A train that is longer than the siding is said to be an "over siding train". These trains are used by both CN and CP to maximize profits. They save money because the longer train still only needs 2 people operating it.

So, using the airport example. You have a few options to get more traffic:
1) Extend the length of existing sidings.
2) Put in more sidings
3) Double track

 

[Bordercollie]

At an airport, a Cessna and a Dreamliner both have the same slot. Therefore, upgrading the airport is not needed if it cans support a larger plane. Oncoming trains must sit in sidings as you pass. There are only so many siding and are only so long. A train that is longer than the siding is said to be an "over siding train". These trains are used by both CN and CP to maximize profits. They save money because the longer train still only needs 2 people operating it.

So, using the airport example. You have a few options to get more traffic:
1) Extend the length of existing sidings.
2) Put in more sidings
3) Double track

Or put in legislation that prevents railways from running trains that are longer than sidings. Or trains that are really long and impede VIA trains.

 

[micheal_can]

Or put in legislation that prevents railways from running trains that are longer than sidings. Or trains that are really long and impede VIA trains.

I was talking about what the company can do, not what the government can do. I would love it if the wording was as simple that a train cannot leave a terminal if between it and the next terminal, a siding is not long enough to fit it.

 

[Bordercollie]

You can start by lobbying your member of parliament, or minister Garneau. Make sure you mention it's for public safety too.

 

[Urban Sky]

I was talking about what the company can do, not what the government can do. I would love it if the wording was as simple that a train cannot leave a terminal if between it and the next terminal, a siding is not long enough to fit it.

Nobody knows for sure in which alternative reality Micheal lives, but in the reality the rest of us are part of and where individuals and organizations adapt their behaviors to the incentives they are given, what happens if the shortest siding defines the maximum allowable train length in your network? Some short sidings may be extended, but most short sidings (which are still way longer than even the full-sized Canadian) would just get removed - to the detriment of the very passenger trains you want to boost (because unlike with many freight trains, they still fitted even the longest passenger trains).

Short-sighted and counter-productive incentive-setting at its finest!

 

[Urban Sky]

How is coordinating time slots for railway trains any more onerous than, say, Westjet and Air Canada coordinating runway and gate allocations for competing flights between YYZ and YUL?

Because there simply isn't an equivalent to timetable slots for a transport mode which has an almost infinite amount of possible paths (resulting from horizontal and vertical variations of any thinkable path) between any two airports to choose from, very unlike a mode which, well, is bound to a physical guideway?

Assuming good connections at either end, what "Associated Facilities" exist between Oshawa and Dorval beyond yards at Belleville, Smiths Falls, and Coteau?

Judging by the RAC's interactive railway map:

• CN Kingston Subdivision (from west to east)
  • Yards in Kingston, Brockville
  • Freight customers or loading facilities at MP 30 (Les Cedres), MP 35 (Coteau-du-Lac), MP 38 (Coteau Junction with Valleyfield Sub), MP 65/66 (Cornwall), MP 90/92 (Morrisburg), MP 105 (Cardinal), MP 112/114 (Prescott), MP 118/119/121 (Maitland), MP 126 (Brockville), MP 174/178 (Kingston), MP 187 (Bombardier), MP 188 (Ernestown), MP 190 (McIntyre), MP 220 (Belleville), MP 233 (Trenton), MP 264 (Cobourg), MP 271 (Port Hope), MP 292 (west of Bowmansville) and at MP 300 (east of Oshawa)
• CP Vaudreuil/Winchester/Belleville Subdivisions (from west to east)
  • Vaudreuil Subdivision
    • A yard in Vaudreuil-Dorion
    • A freight customer at MP 13 (east of Baie-d'Urfé)
  • Winchester Subdivision
    • A yard in Bedell
    • Freight customers or loading facilities at MP 35 (east of De Beaujeu), MP 49 (west of Green Valley), MP 58 (west of Apple Hill), MP 88 (east of Winchester)
  • Belleville Subdivision
    • Freight customers or loading facilities at MP 16 (Glen Tay), MP 103 (Trenton), MP 120 (Colborne), MP 133 (East of Cobourg) and MP 175 (Oshawa)

How does having a single rail traffic control center encumber operational control on a jointly used line?

Because you now have three control centers (CN, CP and joint) which have to coordinate movements with each other...

If VIA is unable to leverage existing grade separation, it will be limited to a 110 mph crossing speed limit regardless of where it runs. This impacts any supposition of a later "Phase II" upgrade to HFR.

None of the rail corridors between Toronto and Montreal has a sufficiently long grade separated segment which would allow operation beyond 110 mph. Given that (unlike the HFR route) almost no part of the Kingston Subdivision is slated for later use as an HSR corridor, there is no economic case to grade separate it (at least not at taxpayer expense)...

I would be interested in what your map looks like with farmers' crossings and minor concession road crossings deleted.

Go to the RAC map and visit all road crossings marked there, while noting down those which don't fall under the two categories you just mentioned before mapping them out with the mapping software of your choice!

It would be certainly be interesting to compare the cost and urgency of grade separations to resolve a different Belleville routing with the cost and urgency of grade separations on major north-south roads in the Durham-Northumberland region which cross the proposed HFR route.

Nobody stops you from finally outlining which route you would use for HFR, where you would route the non-local freights of CN and CP and how you would maintain service to the existing customers along the CN and CP routes...

Also crossings through Perth where HFR will transit. Vehicle volumes on all of these are substantial, and the potential risks associated with hourly high speed trains in each direction, versus current or future volume of freight trains, are a consideration.

Given that the tightest of the various curves in Perth has a radius of only 550 meters, it is rather unlikely that trains will be able to exceed 60 mph while traversing Perth, which is not exactly what I would call "high speed trains"...

And then, how does the cost and scope of a program of further grade separation on the CP/CN lines compare with the cost of rebuilding a new line for VIA?
.
- Paul

Given that grade separating the CP or CN lines and rebuilding a new line for VIA achieve wildly different things, the difference in capital requirements (if we assume there is one!) might not be as instructive as you hope...

 

[Bordercollie]

Are there plans to restore more corridor services in the near future?