News   Dec 05, 2025
 841     3 
News   Dec 05, 2025
 2.6K     4 
News   Dec 05, 2025
 509     0 

Ontario Northland/Northern Ontario Transportation

Air Canada ending service to North Bay effective 30 Jan 2026.
I wonder how much of this is the impact of the much improved road travel times since the expressway was opened. I wonder how the modal split has shifted in the last 30 years for North Bay to Toronto.

I don't think this bodes particularly well the Ontario Northland service. The Liberals killed the train to North Bay largely because ridership was so poor.

But now the government thinks that there's enough demand for rail, but not for planes?

Still, I have little desire to drive to North Bay on business - which indeed might drive me to the train - but I feel I'm the exception. Also, no need to go to North Bay - only through it; and there's still flights to points to further north.
 
I wonder how much of this is the impact of the much improved road travel times since the expressway was opened. I wonder how the modal split has shifted in the last 30 years for North Bay to Toronto.

I don't think this bodes particularly well the Ontario Northland service. The Liberals killed the train to North Bay largely because ridership was so poor.

But now the government thinks that there's enough demand for rail, but not for planes?

Still, I have little desire to drive to North Bay on business - which indeed might drive me to the train - but I feel I'm the exception. Also, no need to go to North Bay - only through it; and there's still flights to points to further north.
Part of the reason people didn't use the train is due to the schedule. The new schedule takes into the consideration of what is good for northerners. Time will tell if it is a success.

Maybe it is time that an airport in Northern ON, like Sudbury becomes a hub that all other major airports Northern ON fly to.
 
A 2002 track map shows the first section of the bypass north/west of the switch at MP 226.8 Newmarket Sub as CN but the more northerly end as ONR. I imagine CN may have conveyed that east end over to Old Callander Road (MP 226.44) to ONR - the first step in an abandonment is to offer track to another operating railway, so this transaction might have happened without any public notice.



The history on this relates to the move of the ONR station from the old location on the Alderdale Sub to the new station on the ONR, and the removal of signalling from the old CN-ON diamond, .

From a 1978 Employee Timetable:



No mention of the connecting track at all.

The 1963 ONR timetable cited below notes that trains were routed from the old CNR station along the south side of the ONR yard to a junction with the ONR at Staffend, which was roughly where the ONR Yard Office sits. A dual control switch at Stafend allowed passenger trains to leave and enter the ONR Temagami Sub. The other connecting track you noted was not part of the normal operating move for passenger trains. My own recollection dates to 1984 and that was still the operating pattern at that time.

By 1993, an old timetable tells me that the Alderdale Sub had been made a part of the Newmarket Sub with the connecting switch gaining a Station Name sign (Dykstra), and the connecting track identified as the default route, with switches lined for the connecting track. Operation on the old Alderdale line west of Dykstra was prohibited, but track was not yet torn up.

Whew. Thanks for sending me down the rabbit hole on a Sunday morning ;-)

Some interesting online source material




- Paul
Sorry. :)

This is the 1965 map I referenced (if you place your cursor over any spot it will magnify it):


You learn something everyday - I learned from the map that Airport Rd. from Hwy 11 to the Airport/CFB used to be Hwy 123.

I wonder how much of this is the impact of the much improved road travel times since the expressway was opened. I wonder how the modal split has shifted in the last 30 years for North Bay to Toronto.

I don't think this bodes particularly well the Ontario Northland service. The Liberals killed the train to North Bay largely because ridership was so poor.

But now the government thinks that there's enough demand for rail, but not for planes?

Still, I have little desire to drive to North Bay on business - which indeed might drive me to the train - but I feel I'm the exception. Also, no need to go to North Bay - only through it; and there's still flights to points to further north.

I don't know. Passenger data would be instructive. Before moving up to North Bay, we had been coming up from the Penetang area for around 20 years. I found the improvement in our travel time was about half an hour over the former two-lane stretches that existed north of Huntsville.

Anecdotally, the most popular AC flights when there were three per day were the early morning and late night flights, with the mid-day being the least. After Covid, they returned with the single mid-day flight (when it wasn't cancelled outright). Returning service to North Bay (and other cities) was a condition of federal post-Covid funding. A suspicious person might conclude that it was intended to fail.

The proposed train schedule will have it arriving at Union at 1055 which will limit its value for making morning or evening connecting flights. There is a shuttle service but the times are about the same. They are adding a flight to Sudbury (Google says 1 1/2 hours but I think it's being generous) which is inconvenient, but at least not driving to Toronto.
 
I wonder how much of this is the impact of the much improved road travel times since the expressway was opened. I wonder how the modal split has shifted in the last 30 years for North Bay to Toronto.

I don't think this bodes particularly well the Ontario Northland service. The Liberals killed the train to North Bay largely because ridership was so poor.

But now the government thinks that there's enough demand for rail, but not for planes?

Still, I have little desire to drive to North Bay on business - which indeed might drive me to the train - but I feel I'm the exception. Also, no need to go to North Bay - only through it; and there's still flights to points to further north.
There's a government commissioned report that contradicts the narrative the Northlander was cancelled due to poor ridership.


The annual passenger counts and on time performance data is available here:

You have to remember that by the time an air passenger checks in and goes through the rounds of security, baggage claims, etc, they're not necessarily saving all that much time flying between Toronto and North Bay. Weather events delays can make the trip last longer. The cost of flying isn't affordable either for budget conscious travelers either.

As for the proposed Northlander schedule times, it's available in the Updated initial business case here (page 42):

 

Attachments

  • 2009-ontc-ibi-northlander.jpg
    2009-ontc-ibi-northlander.jpg
    199.9 KB · Views: 27
Last edited:
Northern Ontario, or at least North Bay, has also started growing quite rapidly in the last few years bucking decades long trends of population decline. Plus the significant amount of population growth that has occurred in the Muskokas (and with remote work, the rise of the live in Muskoka and drive to the City 1-2x a week crowd) might change a bit how well used the Northlander is.

North Bay has jumped from 74,000 to 84,000 people in the last 5 years - the Muskoka's have had similar if not stronger growth.

As a whole I agree it will likely remain heavily subsidized though.
 
As a whole I agree it will likely remain heavily subsidized though.
What passenger rail/transit system isn't.

People forget that the original plan of the McGinty government was to wind-up and divest the entire commission. They faced significant backlash and couldn't be seen completely walking away from that decision so his successor Kathleen Wynne agreed to cancel the Northlander and sell give away the Ontera telecom division. The government did get a commitment from both management and labour to streamline and improve the efficiency of the organization.
 
Sorry. :)

This is the 1965 map I referenced (if you place your cursor over any spot it will magnify it):


You learn something everyday - I learned from the map that Airport Rd. from Hwy 11 to the Airport/CFB used to be Hwy 123.



I don't know. Passenger data would be instructive. Before moving up to North Bay, we had been coming up from the Penetang area for around 20 years. I found the improvement in our travel time was about half an hour over the former two-lane stretches that existed north of Huntsville.

Anecdotally, the most popular AC flights when there were three per day were the early morning and late night flights, with the mid-day being the least. After Covid, they returned with the single mid-day flight (when it wasn't cancelled outright). Returning service to North Bay (and other cities) was a condition of federal post-Covid funding. A suspicious person might conclude that it was intended to fail.

The proposed train schedule will have it arriving at Union at 1055 which will limit its value for making morning or evening connecting flights. There is a shuttle service but the times are about the same. They are adding a flight to Sudbury (Google says 1 1/2 hours but I think it's being generous) which is inconvenient, but at least not driving to Toronto.
Talking to some people in the Industry, North bay going from 3x a day to 1x made it a lot less useful. a 3 day trip for business or fun worked if you took the early AM flight on day 1 and came back late on day 3. Leaving and arriving in the middle of the day is useless.
 
There's a government commissioned report that contradicts the narrative the Northlander was cancelled due to poor ridership.


The annual passenger counts and on time performance data is available here:
[/URL]
Those numbers would be a little more believable if they stated the monthly ridership in riders per month rather than riders per year! 🤣

I don't see how 5 to 15 riders a day is not poor ridership - even if it increased a bit!
 
Those numbers would be a little more believable if they stated the monthly ridership in riders per month rather than riders per year! 🤣

I don't see how 5 to 15 riders a day is not poor ridership - even if it increased a bit!
Thanks for noticing the typo. It doesn't help that ONR didn't have annual ridership data per station at that time. VIA Rail presents it's data differently, which explains the mix-up. Regardless, it's fixed.

What metrics are you using to determine what is poor ridership? If you're comparing it to GO transit, of course the ridership looks low. Different service levels, different population numbers, different reasons for travel... I'm quoting from a government commissioned report that unequivocally says the train was being used by Northerners (despite the less than ideal conditions).

the Northlander only operated 6 days a week at that time. In the last full year of operation, the Northlander had just shy of 40000 annual passengers (39579). That equates to about 126 passengers divided between the North and Southbound trains in 312 days of operation (out of 365 during the year).

Let's remember that seniors, students and medical patients are going to be the bread and butter of this train. They'll be using it to access services that aren't necessarily available in their own community, and may not be able to drive (certainly not in Toronto traffic). If you think it's more economical to have specialized medical facilities and post secondary schools in every place along the line like Temagami, South River and Englehart, then I'd love to see the financials and the strategy on how to recruit a qualified workforce that larger communities like North Bay and Timmins have trouble attracting.
 
Low ridership is an issue as it defines how much revenue the service can draw. I dont think it is the number of people a day in isolation - it is more about how much money it takes to run the service for that given number of riders. Yes, it will be subsidized like almost every other public transit operation - but the broader public will only support so much subsidization for the perceived benefit. If it loses billions and few in the broader electorate use or even value the service - then pressure will build to spend that money better elsewhere.
 
Thanks for noticing the typo. It doesn't help that ONR didn't have annual ridership data per station at that time. VIA Rail presents it's data differently, which explains the mix-up. Regardless, it's fixed.

What metrics are you using to determine what is poor ridership? If you're comparing it to GO transit, of course the ridership looks low. Different service levels, different population numbers, different reasons for travel... I'm quoting from a government commissioned report that unequivocally says the train was being used by Northerners (despite the less than ideal conditions).

the Northlander only operated 6 days a week at that time. In the last full year of operation, the Northlander had just shy of 40000 annual passengers (39579). That equates to about 126 passengers divided between the North and Southbound trains in 312 days of operation (out of 365 during the year).

Let's remember that seniors, students and medical patients are going to be the bread and butter of this train. They'll be using it to access services that aren't necessarily available in their own community, and may not be able to drive (certainly not in Toronto traffic). If you think it's more economical to have specialized medical facilities and post secondary schools in every place along the line like Temagami, South River and Englehart, then I'd love to see the financials and the strategy on how to recruit a qualified workforce that larger communities like North Bay and Timmins have trouble attracting.
The problem with this logic is that you are pretending that coach buses don't exist. Those populations can easily use the existing coach bus service.
 
The problem with this logic is that you are pretending that coach buses don't exist. Those populations can easily use the existing coach bus service.

You ever ride a bus for 12+ hours, overnight no less?

Not only is bus travel uncomfortable for longer distances, but it's subject to the same highway closures as cars are. As mentioned in the UIBC for the Northlander, highways in this region are subject to regular closures due to collisions and terrible weather conditions. There are too often no detours.

Are trains perfect? No, they have their difficulties... just like any other mode. However, Northern Ontario needs a true reliable alternative to the highway.

Most communities along this route don't have air service anymore. Air Canada is pulling out of North Bay in January.
 
My thinking is the Ford government is funding this project in anticipation of the Ring of Fire. They believe that having a passenger rail service to whisk workers up north will make Ontario a more attractive place for mining companies to invest.

I suspect the whole setup will be somewhat similar to oil workers in Fort MacMurray. Workers will ride the train up to Timmins or Cochrane, where they'll then get on a company charter flight into the ring of fire. Once in the ROF they'll spend 2 weeks in an encampment and have 1 week off.

Part of the reason I suspect this is because Timmins airport is currently undergoing upgrades and renovations.
 
Thanks for noticing the typo. It doesn't help that ONR didn't have annual ridership data per station at that time. VIA Rail presents it's data differently, which explains the mix-up. Regardless, it's fixed.

What metrics are you using to determine what is poor ridership?
With only 5 to 15 riders per day - do we need to find a metric?

This O/D pair won't even support a single daily airline flight.

I'm not sure what typo you are referring to!

The problem with this logic is that you are pretending that coach buses don't exist. Those populations can easily use the existing coach bus service.
I assume that ONR will be ending that once the train is restored. If they don't - then who is left to ride the milk train?
 
You ever ride a bus for 12+ hours, overnight no less?

Not only is bus travel uncomfortable for longer distances, but it's subject to the same highway closures as cars are. As mentioned in the UIBC for the Northlander, highways in this region are subject to regular closures due to collisions and terrible weather conditions. There are too often no detours.

Are trains perfect? No, they have their difficulties... just like any other mode. However, Northern Ontario needs a true reliable alternative to the highway.

Most communities along this route don't have air service anymore. Air Canada is pulling out of North Bay in January.
North Bay is less than 300 km from Toronto, so there really shouldn't be any need for a flight.

In the absence of a flight, the next-fastest mass transport mode would be the bus, not the train. It's only a 3-hour drive from North Bay to Hwy 407 station, so even with a connecting subway ride that's under 4h to most parts of the city, or 3.5h to Pearson Airport.
Screenshot 2025-09-23 at 13.42.20.png


By comparison, the Northlander business case projects a 5-hour travel time from North Bay to Toronto:
Screenshot 2025-09-23 at 13.50.39.png


I think the best alternative to flights from North Bay to Toronto would be for ONTC to move their GTA hub from Yorkdale to Pearson Airport. From Highway 407 station it's faster to get to Yorkdale by subway than it is by ONTC bus anyway, so there would be no loss of coverage. Direct airport service to Barrie, Orillia, North Bay and Sudbury would definitely open up a new market they aren't currently capturing with the transfer to GO at Hwy 407 or Yorkdale.

3-jpg.401254

ONTC could further improve their competitiveness by adding an even faster express trip from Pearson to North Bay, making stops only at Hwy 407, Barrie and Bracebridge (rest stop).
 
Last edited:

Back
Top