General railway discussions

[crs1026]

Surely if the Churchill line can be economically viable this one can. Right?

Who says the Churchill line is “viable”? It is being subsidized heavily, on the premise that there is no viable alternative mode available, and there are tangible benefits to the communities along the line, as well as an intangible strategic benefit in not letting the Port of Churchill deteriorate to oblivion from inactivity (with the E&N being a good example of what can happen if we let things slip too far - an E&N scenario is what we are avoiding by keeping the Churchill line up to a usable standard).
There is also the reality (I hope I say this carefully, I am meaning it constructively) that the Churchill line is important enough to Manitoba First Nations that Ottawa and Winnipeg see this as a priority. One of the things we have to realize about Reconciliation is that the wealth we need to start sharing more equitably with the Indigenous will be spent on the things that First Nations value, not on what we colonials think they should or shouldn’t have. Clearly, they want the Churchill line, so that ends the story.
In the case of the E&N, unlike Chuchill there is already a highway, and ample marine transport capability, and these are mostly meeting the Island’s needs for both freight and passenger. The issues of mobility for people in the north end of the Island can be met much more economically in other ways. While there is Indigenous interest in restoring the railway, it appears to be less of a “destiny issue” in the relationship - hypothetically, if Ottawa were to hand the affected FNs an envelope with enough money to rebuild the railway, they might elect to spend it on other things they need more.
So, while one can imagine how nice a revitalised railway might be, there isn’t a justification as either a piece of public infrastructure or as a business proposition.
We may miss the old E&N, but that’s not a reason to revive it.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

Who says the Churchill line is “viable”? It is being subsidized heavily, on the premise that there is no viable alternative mode available, and there are tangible benefits to the communities along the line, as well as an intangible strategic benefit in not letting the Port of Churchill deteriorate to oblivion from inactivity (with the E&N being a good example of what can happen if we let things slip too far - an E&N scenario is what we are avoiding by keeping the Churchill line up to a usable standard).
There is also the reality (I hope I say this carefully, I am meaning it constructively) that the Churchill line is important enough to Manitoba First Nations that Ottawa and Winnipeg see this as a priority. One of the things we have to realize about Reconciliation is that the wealth we need to start sharing more equitably with FM will be spent on the things that First Nations value, not on what we colonials think they should or shouldn’t have.
In the case of the E&N, unlike Chuchill there is already a highway, and ample marine transport capability, and it’s mostly meeting the Island’s needs for both freight and passenger. The issues of mobility for people in the north end of the Island can be met much more economically in other ways. While there is Indigenous interest in restoring the railway, it appears to be less of a “destiny issue” in the relationship - hypothetically, if Ottawa were to hand the affected FNs an envelope with enough money to rebuild the railway, they might elect to spend it on other things they need more.
So, while can imagine how nice a revitalised railway might be, there isn’t a way to get to it profitably as either a piece of public infrastructure or as a business proposition.
We may miss the old E&N, but that’s not a reason to revive it.

- Paul

Doesn't VIA have a mandate to provide services to remote communities? I don't expect it to break even but if it is able to be run at a reasonable cost then they should operate it. If they don't build it now it's going to cost 10x as much in 2030 when traffic is clogging the roads.

 

[crs1026]

Doesn't VIA have a mandate to provide services to remote communities? I don't expect it to break even but if it is able to be run at a reasonable cost then they should operate it. If they don't build it now it's going to cost 10x as much in 2030 when traffic is clogging the roads.

First of all, the E&N is not a “remote service” in the meaning that VIA is mandated. There is highway access to most or all of it.
Secondly, no VIA remote service justifies retention of a rail line that doesn’t have some freight utility as well.
And more importantly, there are remote services that VIA does not operate. Being a remote service does not create an obligation for VIA to jump in. It’s morea case of VIA and Ottawa choosing to not shed the legacy services from past days. It’s not a “growth business”.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

First of all, the E&N is not a “remote service” in the meaning that VIA is mandated. There is highway access to most or all of it.
Secondly, no VIA remote service justifies retention of a rail line that doesn’t have some freight utility as well.
And more importantly, there are remote services that VIA does not operate. Being a remote service does not create an obligation for VIA to jump in. It’s morea case of VIA and Ottawa choosing to not shed the legacy services from past days. It’s not a “growth business”.

- Paul

But we do agree that this dependence on cars to travel on the island will not be sustainable in the future and doing something about it later is going to cost a lot more money and be more complicated once it's turned into a trail.

 

[crs1026]

But we do agree that this dependence on cars to travel on the island will not be sustainable in the future and doing something about it later is going to cost a lot more money and be more complicated once it's turned into a trail.

Yes in places, but only maybe in others. The approaches to Victoria cry for higher order transit, because the highways are cut into narrow gorges that cannot be easily widened.
But once one gets beyond about Nanaimo, I’m less sure. Once the cars and trucks and buses are all electric, there is a less solid basis to push for a carbon free solution, and the population will have to explode before the road is full. Vancouver Island is a different case than other provinces, because of the water link and the ability to haul freight to/from so many places by water - and the delays inherent in ferrying railcars versus drive on/drive off trucking with a ferry system that runs almst hourly. I’m a lot more optimistic about the future of rail where roads are congested and capacity is scarce, than where roads are wide open and distances are not as great.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

Surely if the Churchill line can be economically viable this one can. Right?

It is hoped by the private owners, supported by the provincial and federal governments, that it becomes economically viable, but that remains to be seen, and experts are divided. If nothing else, Churchill has the potential for overseas export of bulk commodities through a direct connection to the national rail network, something Victoria is lacking. The only real bulk commodity moving off Vancouver Island is lumber, and there are other ports that are closer to the sources, as opposed to shipping it all down island.

 

[Voltz]

So a curious question about an unusual train I saw this week, I saw an old passenger train that looked similar to the South Simcoe Railway train heading southbound through Alliston on Thursday afternoon, with a decent number of passenger cars, probably two diesel locomotives. What would it have been?

 

[smallspy]

So a curious question about an unusual train I saw this week, I saw an old passenger train that looked similar to the South Simcoe Railway train heading southbound through Alliston on Thursday afternoon, with a decent number of passenger cars, probably two diesel locomotives. What would it have been?

CP is running a train for its president and other higher-ups. It started in Calgary, and has stopped in many major locations across their network to canvass employees in a series of "town halls". It is ultimately heading to the upcoming Canadian Open event this weekend in Ottawa, where those onboard will attend. The train will then layover in Smith's Falls before returning west next weekend.

Dan

 

[Bordercollie]

CP is running a train for its president and other higher-ups. It started in Calgary, and has stopped in many major locations across their network to canvass employees in a series of "town halls". It is ultimately heading to the upcoming Canadian Open event this weekend in Ottawa, where those onboard will attend. The train will then layover in Smith's Falls before returning west next weekend.

Dan

CP doesn't have a station in Ottawa. So how will that work?

 

[crs1026]

CP doesn't have a station in Ottawa. So how will that work?

There is a station in Ottawa. Its owner would likely be very willing to let CP park its train there (And use its tracks to reach Ottawa from the Falls, for that matter), as a matter of goodwill and maybe in exchange for a favour or two down the road.

- Paul

 

[AHK]

So a curious question about an unusual train I saw this week, I saw an old passenger train that looked similar to the South Simcoe Railway train heading southbound through Alliston on Thursday afternoon, with a decent number of passenger cars, probably two diesel locomotives. What would it have been?

A Canadian Pacific special using the railroad’s Royal Canadian Pacific trainset made a rare southbound move across the railroad’s bridge over the Seguin River at about noon on Thursday, Aug. 11, 2022, during a trip from Thunder Bay, Ontario, to Toronto. CP executives including CEO Keith Creel were reportedly on board.

Please see this article from TRAINS.COM for more details, and a great picture of the train crossing the trestle in Parry Sound.

News Photo: CP executive special running against the grain - Trains

PARRY SOUND, Ontario — A Canadian Pacific special using the railroad’s Royal Canadian Pacific trainset makes a rare southbound move across the railroad’s bridge over the Seguin River at about noon on Thursday, Aug. 11, 2022, during a trip from Thunder Bay, Ontario, to Toronto. CP executives...

www.trains.com

 

[smallspy]

CP doesn't have a station in Ottawa. So how will that work?

CP has used the VIA station many times before. There's no reason to believe that they wouldn't allow them access again.

Of course, it is still unknown to those of us outside the organiation if the train will actually be traveling to Ottawa, or whether its layover at Smith's Falls will be the end of it's eastward trip.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

Significant concerns being raised by many in the environmental community about the proposed Calgary-Banff rail service.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-to-banff-passenger-train-environmental-concerns-1.6551309

The primary concerns are both related to wildlife, one is straight-up mortality issues, particularly for Grizzly Bears which are sometimes killed now by trains, and there would obviously be a material increase in rail traffic,
and additional track, creating the possibility of trains passing each other (no room to escape on at least one side).

In addition there is concern expressed over habitat fragmentation with a larger rail corridor more of a barrier to wildlife dividing the park up; finally the issue of rising usage of the park and rising population in Canmore (along the route and just outside the park) is also raised as a concern.

While a possible reduction in pollution with a zero-emission train (hydrogen is being considered for power); is certainly seen as an eco-benefit, there seems to have been insufficient cooperation
with local stakeholders in developing the basic vision and this is resulting in some friction.

 

[Bordercollie]

Significant concerns being raised by many in the environmental community about the proposed Calgary-Banff rail service.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-to-banff-passenger-train-environmental-concerns-1.6551309

The primary concerns are both related to wildlife, one is straight-up mortality issues, particularly for Grizzly Bears which are sometimes killed now by trains, and there would obviously be a material increase in rail traffic,
and additional track, creating the possibility of trains passing each other (no room to escape on at least one side).

In addition there is concern expressed over habitat fragmentation with a larger rail corridor more of a barrier to wildlife dividing the park up; finally the issue of rising usage of the park and rising population in Canmore (along the route and just outside the park) is also raised as a concern.

While a possible reduction in pollution with a zero-emission train (hydrogen is being considered for power); is certainly seen as an eco-benefit, there seems to have been insufficient cooperation
with local stakeholders in developing the basic vision and this is resulting in some friction.

How about building animal crossings like the ones used on the highway?

 

[roger1818]

How about building animal crossings like the ones used on the highway?

It certainly could be done, but it adds to the cost, especially since it is an active ROW that needs to be kept open. Also, for them to be effective, you need to fence off the ROW to redirect the animals to the crossings. Each crossing requires significant design effort to ensure that animals feel safe using them.