Lack of meaningful Passenger Rail service outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor

[micheal_can]

As long as VIA and GO operate fundamentally different fleets (train length, capacity and amenities), they will invariably provide a service quality (frequency and travel times), amentities (seat comfort, staffing) and ticketing (flexible free-for-all vs. reserved seat) so fundamentally different that they won’t be able to invade into each other’s turf.

I noticed the new Siemens coaches have a commuter seat feel. The service quality is the difference.

The failed GO experiment has sufficiently proven that 195km is far too far of a distance to provide commuter rail service and that Toronto-London belongs to the intercity rail network currently operated by VIA, as part of its Toronto-Windsor/Sarnia routes. “Commuter rail” and “intercity rail” are primarily references to the rolling stock and service quality, not the kind of passengers which take them (as no one rail service could survive on only one passenger type).

Name me one place of employment in which starts later than 9am and finishes before 5pm. I honestly cannot think of a single thing.

You are missing my point: the conservatives compete on a platform which promises to include Western Canadians (and even First Nations communities). Abandoning all non-Corridor routes while overseeing massive investments in the Corridor would signal quite the opposite:

View attachment 578602
Even their Transport and Infrastructure policy positions read anything but hostile towards VIA and HFR:
View attachment 578615View attachment 578617

Can you provide a link to the actual document? As I have heard, the have no platform This is a platform. I'd like to read it more before I comment.

 

[lenaitch]

Name me one place of employment in which starts later than 9am and finishes before 5pm. I honestly cannot think of a single thing.

Apparently my family doctor.

 

[Admiral Beez]

In Western Canada, VIA is beyond useless and absolutely no one takes it. Even if it was more frequent, it doesn't go anywhere. If VIA were to shut down tommorrow and the media didn't report it, literally 99.9% of the population wouldn't even notice. The ONLY people who take it are tourists

I have friends in Vancouver who take the VIA train to their head office in Kamloops. But anyway, isn't VIA in Western Canada intended as a tourist service?

I don't see why we need a national carrier for regional intercity service. If Ontario can run Ontario Northland, other provinces should look to operate their own passenger rail service, like BC did until 2002.

Revival of passenger railway between Chilliwack and Surrey? Langley Township thinks so

Langley Township backs revival of interurban passenger rail to relieve car congestion south of the Fraser River

vancouversun.com

Alberta could run its own provincial passenger rail from Calgary, Edmonton and FortMac.

Alberta hopes to see passenger rail connecting Fort McMurray and Edmonton

Alberta's plan for commuter rail is in its early stages, but passenger trains could return to Fort McMurray for the first time in decades.

www.fortmcmurraytoday.com

Meanwhile, Saskatchewan is pondering if they can regig the VIA Canadian's route to serve as an intercity (more like inter town/village) service.

https://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/saskat...a-rail-line-to-enhance-connectivity-1.6836460

Perhaps one could argue that VIA by its very existence is holding back meaningful intercity passenger rail outside of the Corridor rather than being its hopeful champion.

 

[Urban Sky]

I have friends in Vancouver who take the VIA train to their head office in Kamloops. But anyway, isn't VIA in Western Canada intended as a tourist service?

It’s not intended as such, but tourists are the only kind of passenger demand which tolerates the low frequencies or average speeds and the high variability in arrival times at intermediary stations, while even shelling out big bucks. Given that the service is close-to-profitable and generates much tourism revenues in complementary industries (hotels, restaurants, tours and flights) while ensuring the capability to move equipment around the country year-round, I don’t see why anyone would object against it being operated by VIA.

I don't see why we need a national carrier for regional intercity service. If Ontario can run Ontario Northland, other provinces should look to operate their own passenger rail service, like BC did until 2002. Alberta could run its own provincial passenger rail from Calgary, Edmonton and FortMac.

Alberta hopes to see passenger rail connecting Fort McMurray and Edmonton

Alberta's plan for commuter rail is in its early stages, but passenger trains could return to Fort McMurray for the first time in decades.

www.fortmcmurraytoday.com

Meanwhile, Saskatchewan is pondering if they can regig the VIA Canadian's route to serve as an intercity (more like inter town/village) service.

https://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/saskat...a-rail-line-to-enhance-connectivity-1.6836460


Perhaps one could argue that VIA is holding back meaningful intercity passenger rail outside of the Corridor rather than being its hopeful champion.

Nobody forces any government or investor in this country to involve VIA when setting up a new intercity passenger rail route. However, unless you reach a reasonable fleet size, you will struggle to justify the expense of a separate full-service maintenance center for each of such geographically discrete operation, which is where VIA has a massive cost advantage with the Canadian (and corridor trains) linking their maintenance centers in Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver and their other termini in Jasper and Sudbury…

As for the Saskatchewan proposal, there is absolutely zero you should take serious about it. It’s just the audacious attempt to demand that the federal government spends federal taxpayer money so that they can avoid spending spending (much less) provincial money on what is undoubtedly a provincial responsibility: providing more and better transportation options for innerprovincial intercity travel. If they were even the slightest bit serious about this, they would revisit their decision to close their own provincial intercity bus service:

Saskatchewan Transportation Company - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[micheal_can]

Apparently my family doctor.

My family Dr also has silly hours. That is because she also is at the hospital the rest of the time.

Perhaps one could argue that VIA by its very existence is holding back meaningful intercity passenger rail outside of the Corridor rather than being its hopeful champion.

There was a time I would argue tooth and nail to keep Via as is. The more I learn about how they operate and the restrictions placed on them, the more I feel they cannot exist and provide good rail transportation options out of the Corridor.

 

[Admiral Beez]

My family Dr also has silly hours. That is because she also is at the hospital the rest of the time.


There was a time I would argue tooth and nail to keep Via as is. The more I learn about how they operate and the restrictions placed on them, the more I feel they cannot exist and provide good rail transportation options out of the Corridor.

And maybe that's what they should be, Corridor intercity service and long distance tourist trains. Which is essentially where we are now.

 

[micheal_can]

And maybe that's what they should be, Corridor intercity service and long distance tourist trains. Which is essentially where we are now.

What I mean is that they cannot grow from what they are outside of what they currently do where they serve. For example, you are not going to see a tourist train along the Corridor, or you are not going to see a simple intercity train more frequent than 3x a week on the prairies. If Via survives the CPC's cuts that are inevitable, my hope is they get away from tourist trains and instead focus on trains that can run daily between city pairs where it makes sense. All of my hopes of Via doing both are disappearing as the polls tick up for the CPC.

 

[Urban Sky]

And maybe that's what they should be, Corridor intercity service and long distance tourist trains. Which is essentially where we are now.

What exactly is the problem you are trying to fix and how would spinning off VIA’s remote services onto someone else help with solving it? If there was any provincial interests to improve or expand VIA’s current services, they could signal their interest in doing so and work together with the federal government and VIA to make it happen…

 

[Admiral Beez]

What exactly is the problem you are trying to fix and how would spinning off VIA’s remote services onto someone else help with solving it?

48 pages (by my pc) and 713 posts and we haven't identified the problem to address?

 

[Urban Sky]

48 pages (by my pc) and 713 posts and we haven't identified the problem to address?

The issue(s) at hand will differ greatly between whoever contributes here and when. Which is why I ask which of these issues you are currently trying to solve, as I can only see downsides and no upsides with your suggestion so far…

 

[crs1026]

48 pages (by my pc) and 713 posts and we haven't identified the problem to address?

The only problem is that a single poster has dreams of rekindling VIA services to resemble a 1950's public timetable.

Perhaps it would help if they chose one pair of cities and then explained their vision fully, in terms of
- Amount of investment required to improve or reinstall trackage adequate for their vision
- Amount of investment required to build and operate stations
- Number of trains they envision per day, and number of riders that would generate
- What evidence is there that this number of riders could be attracted, or that a market exists at all between those two cities
- How much interference does that imply for current freight operations
- Where would trains be maintained, and how many trainsets would be needed, and cost of same

Obviously these would be guesstimates, but.... it all sounds dreamy until one starts looking at specifics, and then it does mostly look much more like a dream than something that is achievable.

- Paul

PS - another useful data point would be the most recent year's highways budget for the province in question... to understand the proposed investment as a proportion of the money that province has available for transportation expenses.

 

[micheal_can]

48 pages (by my pc) and 713 posts and we haven't identified the problem to address?

We have identified the problems. We have not identified any real solutions. So, it is status quo.

The only problem is that a single poster has dreams of rekindling VIA services to resemble a 1950's public timetable.

Perhaps it would help if they chose one pair of cities and then explained their vision fully, in terms of
- Amount of investment required to improve or reinstall trackage adequate for their vision
- Amount of investment required to build and operate stations
- Number of trains they envision per day, and number of riders that would generate
- What evidence is there that this number of riders could be attracted, or that a market exists at all between those two cities
- How much interference does that imply for current freight operations
- Where would trains be maintained, and how many trainsets would be needed, and cost of same

Obviously these would be guesstimates, but.... it all sounds dreamy until one starts looking at specifics, and then it does mostly look much more like a dream than something that is achievable.

- Paul

PS - another useful data point would be the most recent year's highways budget for the province in question... to understand the proposed investment as a proportion of the money that province has available for transportation expenses.

I have dreams of not needing a car to get from any major city in the country to any major city in the country by rail. To do that, we do need to start somewhere. To start, we need funding. We have no funding. That is why I am hoping that if Via survives the expected CPC government, they get out of the tourist business and focus on being just a rail transportation crown corporation.

 

[Urban Sky]

That is why I am hoping that if Via survives the expected CPC government, they get out of the tourist business and focus on being just a rail transportation crown corporation.

I’m a bit shocked about myself, but I much rather have a Conservative government decide VIA’s fate than anyone taking inspiration from your ideas about what routes it should serve and which ones it should abandon…

 

[nfitz]

Somewhere in London . . .
View attachment 577773

Green and yellow cabs? Purple one-decker buses? 9 lanes of traffic? That's clearly not London. The cab colours suggest India.

I believe that's Delhi.

In this thread I've put @micheal_can on the Ignore list and the entire thread has a totally different vibe.

I've had them there for months. Part of the problem is that so much of the thread seems to be responding to his comments, that the thread itself has little meaning.

That said, I thought the whole point of this thread, was to stop such posts clogging up less abstract threads.

When I pop in here every few months or so, there never seems anything of substance.

 

[micheal_can]

I’m a bit shocked about myself, but I much rather have a Conservative government decide VIA’s fate than anyone taking inspiration from your ideas about what routes it should serve and which ones it should abandon…

From your posting, this is not shocking to me. TBH,I know I am not someone who should be held as an expert about what routes should exist or be added. If they came to my house and wanted to do what I think is best, I would ask myself how desperate they have become.