Ontario Northland/Northern Ontario Transportation

[Bordercollie]

No clue where the sidings are and I no longer have a Trackside Guide. I know there is one at Brechin.


Capacity is 169 according to a government presser. No clue what a "cabbage" car is but I get the sense that interior layout options for the Siemens sets are limited.

We can only assume three sets is the minimum that was determined to be needed for reliable and consistent service. They will be based out of Cochrane with regular maintenance at VIA TMC. Changing the deployment would likely mean more sets.



I simply don't get the logic that all routes have to be all things to all people. Should the VIA Canadian stop at all GO stations on its way in or out of the GTA? Should a flight to Vancouver stop at all airports between here and there, simply because they are enroute?

Each type of service fulfills a role, and I simply don't see Northlander (or Canadian for that matter) in a commuter role. I don't see the station times being of any benefit and adding a stop adds minutes to an already long schedule. I frankly don't see the benefit for the two GTA stops that were added to the original Northlander schedule, but maybe they were the price to pay for getting it through Cabinet. Dunno.

I would see the advantage of adding a (preferably) Brechin or even Beaverton stop (not Pefferlaw) but as a replacement for Washago. It would serve Orillia, eastern Lake Simcoe and be decently proximate to the City of Kawartha Lakes area. In terms of separation, Washago is quite close to Gravenhurst so has little catchment area to the north. Brechin is only 5-10 minutes further from Orillia than Washago and would a potentially larger catchment area. That's just me spitballing.

Cabbage car is a cab and baggage car in one.

So combining two trainsets would give you about 300 people. Now would you want two departures? Or one departure with a longer train.

Also what happens if a trainset cannot make the service? Is there an option to lease a VIA set?

 

[nfitz]

Cabbage car is a cab and baggage car in one.

Last time I rode one of those it still had exposed wooden floors. Though I've never ridden in Ontario much north of the corridor.

 

[Bordercollie]

Last time I rode one of those it still had exposed wooden floors. Though I've never ridden in Ontario much north of the corridor

The horn in the cab car is super loud. I would prefer to ride in car 2 if possible

 

[micheal_can]

Remember when there was a push for the return of the Northlander to South River?

If we are adding stations, lets add them to communities that are not connected well with anything.

 

[nfitz]

The horn in the cab car is super loud. I would prefer to ride in car 2 if possible

I don't think there was a car 2! A Budd RDC-2 I would guess, in retrospect.

 

[lenaitch]

Cabbage car is a cab and baggage car in one.

Great. All they would have to do is convince Siemens to build one or two. Seeing as it would be a bespoke design, it wouldn't cost much at all. And the need for a baggage car is where again?

 

[smallspy]

I simply don't get the logic that all routes have to be all things to all people. Should the VIA Canadian stop at all GO stations on its way in or out of the GTA? Should a flight to Vancouver stop at all airports between here and there, simply because they are enroute?

It's not a matter of being "all things to everyone". What matters is that it covers the largest potential population and gives them as many options as possible.

In your case of the Canadian, it should absolutely make at least one stop in York Region, or somewhere just north of the GTA. Why? It wouldn't be for people travelling there to Toronto, it would be for giving better access to the people from the north end of the GTA to the train and points north and west. It's the same argument for the suburban stations of ALTO (and frankly any high speed line that uses such a system worldwide, of which there are many) - they're not for coming into town, they're for leaving town.

More stops mean the trip will be longer, sure. But there is a sweet spot between speed and accessibility. Having people travel an hour or two out of their way to access a station just to save 5 minutes (or less) on the train trip isn't sensible if that stop is going to allow potentially a dozen or more people to more regularly consider the train as an option.

Each type of service fulfills a role, and I simply don't see Northlander (or Canadian for that matter) in a commuter role. I don't see the station times being of any benefit and adding a stop adds minutes to an already long schedule. I frankly don't see the benefit for the two GTA stops that were added to the original Northlander schedule, but maybe they were the price to pay for getting it through Cabinet. Dunno.

I don't see the Northlander as a commuter train either, and that's fine. But more stations don't necessarily make it a commuter service - the scheduling of the trains plays a far bigger role in determining that.

Dan

 

[MidtownKW]

It's not a matter of being "all things to everyone". What matters is that it covers the largest potential population and gives them as many options as possible.

In your case of the Canadian, it should absolutely make at least one stop in York Region, or somewhere just north of the GTA. Why? It wouldn't be for people travelling there to Toronto, it would be for giving better access to the people from the north end of the GTA to the train and points north and west. It's the same argument for the suburban stations of ALTO (and frankly any high speed line that uses such a system worldwide, of which there are many) - they're not for coming into town, they're for leaving town.

More stops mean the trip will be longer, sure. But there is a sweet spot between speed and accessibility. Having people travel an hour or two out of their way to access a station just to save 5 minutes (or less) on the train trip isn't sensible if that stop is going to allow potentially a dozen or more people to more regularly consider the train as an option.


I don't see the Northlander as a commuter train either, and that's fine. But more stations don't necessarily make it a commuter service - the scheduling of the trains plays a far bigger role in determining that.

Dan

Unless the pricing disincentivized travel between the stop in York Region and Toronto or the timing was for whatever reason very inconvenient, such a stop would be used by a lot of commuters.

You're right that there is a sweet spot between speed and accessibility. It will be different for every line, wildly different for a service like Northlander than for Alto. Any given station might make sense on its own, though, and cumulatively would make an intolerable impact on speed. You do have to draw the line somewhere. Is Langstaff not pretty good accessibility for potential riders in York Region, considering what this service is intended to be?

 

[reaperexpress]

Unless the pricing disincentivized travel between the stop in York Region and Toronto or the timing was for whatever reason very inconvenient, such a stop would be used by a lot of commuters.

You're right that there is a sweet spot between speed and accessibility. It will be different for every line, wildly different for a service like Northlander than for Alto. Any given station might make sense on its own, though, and cumulatively would make an intolerable impact on speed. You do have to draw the line somewhere. Is Langstaff not pretty good accessibility for potential riders in York Region, considering what this service is intended to be?

Northbound the Canadian is useless for commuters because it needs to do a three-point turn from the Newmarket sub to the York sub, making it slower than the subway.
Southbound the Canadian is useless for commuters because it commonly shows up several hours late.
It would almost certainly be a net-positive for ridership on the Canadian if it stopped at Langstaff, thanks to the improved access to the suburbs. Especially since it takes northbound trains over an hour to get from Union to Langstaff, so boarding there would save a ton of time.
There's also plenty of room there to extend the platform northward toward the pedestrian bridge to fit the long Via trains.

As for the Northlander, Langstaff provides very good access from the outer GTA thanks to its connection to the Richmond Hill Centre GO/YRT bus terminal, notably served by GO's 407 corridor, Viva Blue (Yonge), Viva Orange (Hwy 7 west) and Viva Purple (Hwy 7 east).

Here is the current GO Richmond Hill schedule overlaid with the planned Northlander schedule:

 

[lenaitch]

It's not a matter of being "all things to everyone". What matters is that it covers the largest potential population and gives them as many options as possible.

In your case of the Canadian, it should absolutely make at least one stop in York Region, or somewhere just north of the GTA. Why? It wouldn't be for people travelling there to Toronto, it would be for giving better access to the people from the north end of the GTA to the train and points north and west. It's the same argument for the suburban stations of ALTO (and frankly any high speed line that uses such a system worldwide, of which there are many) - they're not for coming into town, they're for leaving town.

More stops mean the trip will be longer, sure. But there is a sweet spot between speed and accessibility. Having people travel an hour or two out of their way to access a station just to save 5 minutes (or less) on the train trip isn't sensible if that stop is going to allow potentially a dozen or more people to more regularly consider the train as an option.


I don't see the Northlander as a commuter train either, and that's fine. But more stations don't necessarily make it a commuter service - the scheduling of the trains plays a far bigger role in determining that.

Dan

Fair enough, but it is already scheduled for two GTA stops that it didn't have before cancellation. I suspect the 'sweet spot for Brock and Georgina would be when they get a station.

Reading that articles, the rationale put forward for additional stops in the northern GTA; boost tourism, better access to Toronto, don't really hold much water when people look at the schedule. People travelling in from the north to points in the northern GTA is not argued by any of the proponents.

 

[nfitz]

Fair enough, but it is already scheduled for two GTA stops that it didn't have before cancellation. I suspect the 'sweet spot for Brock and Georgina would be when they get a station.

Two stops they didn't have just before cancellation. But if you go back further there used to be 2 stations between Toronto and Washago.

If you go back to the early days of VIA, they'd return north by the same route they came south,, and there were stations at Richmond Hill and Beaverton.

In the late 1980/90ss, northbound, that was Barrie and Orillia.

Here's the 1977 VIA schedule. It looks like CN ran the 3 daily trains (4 on weekends) to North Bay and one Timmins, while ONR ran the one train to Cochrane and beyond, with CN taking over at North Bay.

 

[Bordercollie]

Two stops they didn't have just before cancellation. But if you go back further there used to be 2 stations between Toronto and Washago.

If you go back to the early days of VIA, they'd return north by the same route they came south,, and there were stations at Richmond Hill and Beaverton.

In the late 1980/90ss, northbound, that was Barrie and Orillia.

Here's the 1977 VIA schedule. It looks like CN ran the 3 daily trains (4 on weekends) to North Bay and one Timmins, while ONR ran the one train to Cochrane and beyond, with CN taking over at North Bay.

View attachment 718375

View attachment 718374

The map is upsidedown lol. But the Newmarket sub doesn't go all the way so you can't replicate it anymore. You could use the CP line through Bolton.

 

[lenaitch]

Two stops they didn't have just before cancellation. But if you go back further there used to be 2 stations between Toronto and Washago.

If you go back to the early days of VIA, they'd return north by the same route they came south,, and there were stations at Richmond Hill and Beaverton.

In the late 1980/90ss, northbound, that was Barrie and Orillia.

Here's the 1977 VIA schedule. It looks like CN ran the 3 daily trains (4 on weekends) to North Bay and one Timmins, while ONR ran the one train to Cochrane and beyond, with CN taking over at North Bay.

View attachment 718375

View attachment 718374

Lots of things were done by VIA and its predecessors compared to today. That era of ONR Northlander used the CN Newmarket sub and only one of two trains made one stop - Barrie - south of Washago.

You could use the CP line through Bolton.

Not to get to North Bay or anywhere in the northeast. The CP lines goes to Sudbury.

 

[micheal_can]

Northbound the Canadian is useless for commuters because it needs to do a three-point turn from the Newmarket sub to the York sub, making it slower than the subway.
Southbound the Canadian is useless for commuters because it commonly shows up several hours late.
It would almost certainly be a net-positive for ridership on the Canadian if it stopped at Langstaff, thanks to the improved access to the suburbs. Especially since it takes northbound trains over an hour to get from Union to Langstaff, so boarding there would save a ton of time.
There's also plenty of room there to extend the platform northward toward the pedestrian bridge to fit the long Via trains.

As for the Northlander, Langstaff provides very good access from the outer GTA thanks to its connection to the Richmond Hill Centre GO/YRT bus terminal, notably served by GO's 407 corridor, Viva Blue (Yonge), Viva Orange (Hwy 7 west) and Viva Purple (Hwy 7 east).

Here is the current GO Richmond Hill schedule overlaid with the planned Northlander schedule:
View attachment 718304
View attachment 718305

This sounds like GO London all over again. Add random stops to a train and people will use it instead of putting out a train that would actually meet the needs of the mos riders of those stops. It is clear now with that timetable that this will not serve any real commuters. So, who would it serve?

And, who is to say that the train won't do the same thing as the Canadian will? It is obvious that the Canadian is routed that way for a reason.

 

[dowlingm]

And, who is to say that the train won't do the same thing as the Canadian will? It is obvious that the Canadian is routed that way for a reason.

The reason is that Canadian doesn’t fit on TMC wye and they don’t want to use Bayview Jct to turn it, or run shorter consists more times a week. Hardly a problem for Northlander.