VIA Rail

[crs1026]

Would double tracking/platforms at stations between Ottawa and Montreal and Montreal and Quebec City work?

Interested in this because I see so much potential for this stretch. I think it could support more than hourly. At least on Ottawa-Montreal.

Depends on whether VIA wants two trains in the station at the same time. Yes, it makes sense to have the meets on double track where track speed is slower anyways, and it mitigates variability in dwell time ie one train holding at platform for an extra minute or two doesn't delay the opposing train. But it demands a more expensive station (tunnels or overpasses) and there will be "people herding" issues.

To my mind, one would double track the first few miles out of the end points, presuming that schedules will inevitably have one train having to wait until an incoming train arrives....you don't want to create delay in the first/last minutes of a run. Get the departing train out on time, and don't make an arriving train stop for a meet in the final minutes of its run. That way, delays won't propagate to later trains. The problem is that unless very expensive high speed turnouts are used, the train will have to decelerate to negotiate the turnout at the end of double track. The minutes of delay caused by slowing and speeding up again might add up just as fast.

In Montreal, it's hard to know how much more trackage will be needed to interleave hourly service with CN freight east of Coteau (Frequency is not far off that now, but we know that delays are happening at present). And going north/east towards Quebec, I don't know where trains will be able to hit full speed. Will the trackage close in be held to lower speed limits (similar to the absurdly low speeds for the first few miles westwards from Ottawa today)?

Stretches of double track would have to be fairly long to improve timing over at-siding meets. I doubt VIA will achieve stereotypical Swiss timekeeping. With even 4-5 minutes' variability in train performance, a train that is scheduled to meet another train in a short (say 5-8 mile) stretch of double track at 95 mph would outrun the double track before a meet, ie if the opposing train were more than a few minutes late, the first train would have to stop at the end of double track anyways to wait. The time saved by doubletracking versus having closely spaced sidings would not be huge.

I'd love to see the spreadsheet that compares the cost of building 14 miles of double track, with a single switch and interlocking at each end, versus the cost of three sidings with a total of six switches and six interlocking plants. I won't try to guess which is cheaper. But in practice, the sidings would suffice.

- Paul

 

[p_xavier]

Posted this elsewhere. Will post here.

Air France must cut emissions, domestic flights for aid: minister

Air France will have to cut its carbon emissions and domestic flights as conditions for government financial support, France's finance minister said on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

These are some of the conditions being imposed on airline bailouts elsewhere. Rail integration. Reduction of domestic/regional flights. I hope we have similar foresight in our government. HFR should enable integration of Ottawa and Montreal and Peterborough into Toronto.

The feds will put similar greenwashing for funding, though I don't know to what extent. I would be in favor of eliminating such short flights.

 

[lenaitch]

Depending how "short flight" is defined, it's difficult to cut them without a reasonable alternative in place (not planned, proposed, suggested,thought-of); otherwise you drive people back to personal vehicles.

 

[micheal_can]

Depending how "short flight" is defined, it's difficult to cut them without a reasonable alternative in place (not planned, proposed, suggested,thought-of); otherwise you drive people back to personal vehicles.

Outside the corridor, there is no rail service that would be able to do this.
... now, if they only had a way to do it...

 

[Urban Sky]

I assume “micheal_can” has blocked me here just like he has on Skyscraper Page (where he is known as “swimmer_spe”), but the following has already been discussed here (and even more so on SSP) ad nausea to an extent that I strongly suggest to anyone tempted to reply to this comment to first browse through the last 20 or 30 pages in the discussion of the ”VIA Rail” thread on Skyscraper Page and to see how these discussions with him keep monopolizing the discussions in that thread, while frustrating posters wishing to discuss other topics:

Outside the corridor, there is no rail service that would be able to do this.
... now, if they only had a way to do it...

I’m not arguing that these discussions shouldn’t be allowed here, but with the experience of more than 1,400 posts in only 6 months of existence of that thread on SSP (approximately one-quarter of them written by himself), I would strongly recommend to outsource this topic (“Can we restore daily intercity passenger rail service outside the Corridor?”) into a separate thread, so that we preserve the breathing space required to discuss other topics.

Thank you and have a great evening!

 

[p_xavier]

@Urban Sky Any news on the Mount Royal tunnel sharing between HFR and the REM? News I hear from my part, it's not even being considered into engineering plans.

 

[kEiThZ]

The feds will put similar greenwashing for funding, though I don't know to what extent. I would be in favor of eliminating such short flights.

Depending how "short flight" is defined, it's difficult to cut them without a reasonable alternative in place (not planned, proposed, suggested,thought-of); otherwise you drive people back to personal vehicles.

Difficult to do this in Canada. But....post-HFR I can see public servants in Ottawa required to use rail for some trips to Ottawa, Montreal or Quebec City. The booking tool already shows carbon footprint. At some point this will become accounting....

 

[kEiThZ]

I am most curious to know how pricing would work. I am hoping for fares competitive enough to kill Greyhound and Megabus.

Also, hoping VIA can pull off air-rail integration at Dorval post-HFR and REM extension to Dorval. It's kinda crazy that Air France-KLM had three buses per day departing from Ottawa's VIA station for PET Airport. Those seem like easy low hanging fruit for VIA. Along with all the other carriers at Dorval that don't have connections with Air Canada to fly passengers to Ottawa and Quebec City.

 

[littlewill1166]

I am most curious to know how pricing would work. I am hoping for fares competitive enough to kill Greyhound and Megabus.

Also, hoping VIA can pull off air-rail integration at Dorval post-HFR and REM extension to Dorval. It's kinda crazy that Air France-KLM had three buses per day departing from Ottawa's VIA station for PET Airport. Those seem like easy low hanging fruit for VIA. Along with all the other carriers at Dorval that don't have connections with Air Canada to fly passengers to Ottawa and Quebec City.

Given that VIA sometimes gouges students with $120 economy class tickets from London to Toronto, while Greyhound charges less than half of that during the Holidays, I'm not very comfortable with VIA having a monopoly.

 

[kEiThZ]

Given that VIA sometimes gouges students with $120 economy class tickets from London to Toronto, while Greyhound charges less than half of that during the Holidays, I'm not very comfortable with VIA having a monopoly.

If they overprice, the monopoly won't last long. Not hard for a bus operator to launch new service.

Also, I asked if they could compete at those levels. It's good for every traveler if they can.

 

[crs1026]

^VIA will likely apply the same demand pricing that they practice today. It would be foolish not to. It’s a standard good business practice. Advance booking and off peak travel - big savings. Peak travel, enhanced business level service.... yeah, the price will be higher.

What may be different will be seat availability. Imagine if VIA were serving London every hour at Christmas instead of 5 or 6 times a day. It might take a different pricing to fill those extra seats.

I don’t believe that VIA will be allowed to price in a way that is predatory to bus service, even if they can do so at a profit. Politics will still have its role. Hopefully the result is competitive in the best way.

- Paul

 

[littlewill1166]

^VIA will likely apply the same demand pricing that they practice today. It would be foolish not to. It’s a standard good business practice. Advance booking and off peak travel - big savings. Peak travel, enhanced business level service.... yeah, the price will be higher.

What may be different will be seat availability. Imagine if VIA were serving London every hour at Christmas instead of 5 or 6 times a day. It might take a different pricing to fill those extra seats.

I don’t believe that VIA will be allowed to price in a way that is predatory to bus service, even if they can do so at a profit. Politics will still have its role. Hopefully the result is competitive in the best way.

- Paul

While I agree with your idea about what things should look like. It seems like VIA is going in a different direction and targeting high-yield business travellers over leisure travellers. According to the proposed trainset layouts here (slide 10), the base trainset capacity is 87 business/194 economy seats or around a 1:2 ratio. In comparison, Air Canada has around a 1:8 ratio here. There are also issues with the fact that the total capacity of the new fleet being less than that of the current fleet mentioned in a post a while back. I also don't see how VIA is able to compete with the bus companies on price while being profitable given that their current per passenger subsidy is equivalent to the starting fares on the busses here (page 11). Ultimately, I see VIA going after expense accounts with good service being the driver of its future ridership. Meanwhile, those on a budget will be relegated to grabbing a ride with friends or the dreaded bus.

Edit: In some ways, VIA's new model (with its new fleet), somewhat reminds me of what Singapore Airlines is doing with its Newark-Singapore non-stop flights. A Business/Premium Economy only service. Of note, this pivot towards higher yields isn't new. Commuters were hit all the way back in 2012 here.

 

[crs1026]

^VIA's fare policy is just good business - with the fleet constrained by government, one can set prices high. VIA has no obligation to set prices at a level that some demographic might prefer. It's supply and demand pricing, Selling 300 seats at $20 or selling 200 seats at $30 delivers the same revenue, and the 200 seat train is probably cheaper to operate.

The fleet replacement reflects a status quo for fleet size, but VIA has options to enlarge the fleet if they raise the capital for HFR. That could lead to more equipment and more seats. It would depend on the business case - if VIA adds a train, can it sell those additional seats and at what cost? Does it make sense to procure one more trainset? If the breakeven point on the 200 seat train is $15 per seat, then $20 might fill the train where $30 might not.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

^VIA's fare policy is just good business - with the fleet constrained by government, one can set prices high. VIA has no obligation to set prices at a level that some demographic might prefer. It's supply and demand pricing, Selling 300 seats at $20 or selling 200 seats at $30 delivers the same revenue, and the 200 seat train is probably cheaper to operate.

The fleet replacement reflects a status quo for fleet size, but VIA has options to enlarge the fleet if they raise the capital for HFR. That could lead to more equipment and more seats. It would depend on the business case - if VIA adds a train, can it sell those additional seats and at what cost? Does it make sense to procure one more trainset? If the breakeven point on the 200 seat train is $15 per seat, then $20 might fill the train where $30 might not.

- Paul

Would the new equipment work on other routes?

 

[kEiThZ]

According to the proposed trainset layouts here (slide 10), the base trainset capacity is 87 business/194 economy seats or around a 1:2 ratio. In comparison, Air Canada has around a 1:8 ratio here.

It's not an apple-to-apples comparison. The cost to offer a business class seat on an airplane is substantial. The fare pricing is also substantially higher than Economy which limits the customer base.

This is VIA anticipating a growth in business traffic. And that is both a good thing and understandable if you understand corporate travel policies. There's a lot of corporate travel policies (including the government's own policies for public servants) which will allow business class on a train in lieu of economy airfare. This is what will allow VIA to grow its business travelers. And that is not coming at the expense of economy travelers, but in addition to them.

Ultimately, I see VIA going after expense accounts with good service being the driver of its future ridership. Meanwhile, those on a budget will be relegated to grabbing a ride with friends or the dreaded bus.

Desjardins-Siciliano specifically stated that this effort was aimed at growing marketshare against driving. I don't get how that can be accomplished by making fares so high that people bus instead. If VIA can't compete against buses, they most certainly can't compete against cars. I'm taking him at his word and trying to understand how this can be done.