VIA Rail

[kEiThZ]

Maybe each province should pay a portion of the passenger rail that runs through their province. However,I doubt ON or QC would be happy with the amount they would have to pay.

There's a lot of things that the provinces should maybe do. They aren't interested though. And no federal party is interested in making them do so. That makes all these hypotheticals pointless.

And I'm not sure why they should either. They are spending billions every year building public transit in cities. Intercity transport is low on their priority list. And rightfully so, when virtually every local transport project has better returns on ridership, economics and emissions. There's a lot of transit problems to solve before intercity travel is important. About the only exception to that rule is the Corridor, which the feds understand to be economically, environmentally and politically important. The rest of VIA is mandated charity for remote communities. They don't need to spend a penny more than is necessary.

 

[kEiThZ]

As I keep saying: the main motivation for demanding (additional) non-corridor intercity passenger rail services seems to always be that “the feds” would pay for it. Anyone concerned about actually providing value-for-money by targeting the actual mobility gaps would propose subsidies to enhance intercity bus services rather than much-more-expensive and much-less-useful passenger rail, but heaven forbid if the only citizens who stand to benefit from such subsidies would be asked to pay fir it with their own tax dollars…

Every province: "The feds should pay for it...."

Every federal campaign: "VIA who?"

VIA doesn't even make any top 10 lists for voter priorities. So why would any federal party really invest in it?

We're actually lucky that HFR has some public interest. Outside of that, it would be a very tough public sell. The newly announced federal dental care plan has the same cost to the government as HFR for the first 3-5 years of coverage. I imagine most voters would probably pick dental coverage if they had to choose.

 

[micheal_can]

As I keep saying: the main motivation for demanding (additional) non-corridor intercity passenger rail services seems to always be that “the feds” would pay for it. Anyone concerned about actually providing value-for-money by targeting the actual mobility gaps would propose subsidies to enhance intercity bus services rather than much-more-expensive and much-less-useful passenger rail, but heaven forbid if the only citizens who stand to benefit from such subsidies would be asked to pay fir it with their own tax dollars…

The only way a bus is better is cost. Which, if that is the only metric, then, yes, more buses.

There's a lot of things that the provinces should maybe do. They aren't interested though. And no federal party is interested in making them do so. That makes all these hypotheticals pointless.

And I'm not sure why they should either. They are spending billions every year building public transit in cities. Intercity transport is low on their priority list. And rightfully so, when virtually every local transport project has better returns on ridership, economics and emissions. There's a lot of transit problems to solve before intercity travel is important. About the only exception to that rule is the Corridor, which the feds understand to be economically, environmentally and politically important. The rest of VIA is mandated charity for remote communities. They don't need to spend a penny more than is necessary.

If the provinces were not getting the feds to help pay for those projects,I'd agree. For instance, the Hamilton LRT is going to be funded by the federal government.

Every province: "The feds should pay for it...."

Every federal campaign: "VIA who?"

VIA doesn't even make any top 10 lists for voter priorities. So why would any federal party really invest in it?

We're actually lucky that HFR has some public interest. Outside of that, it would be a very tough public sell. The newly announced federal dental care plan has the same cost to the government as HFR for the first 3-5 years of coverage. I imagine most voters would probably pick dental coverage if they had to choose.

I know the provinces don't even want to pay for things like healthcare or roads so, getting them on board to partially fund Via as well especially when it has been ignored by the feds would be a hard sell.

 

[kEiThZ]

If the provinces were not getting the feds to help pay for those projects,I'd agree. For instance, the Hamilton LRT is going to be funded by the federal government.

As I said, local transit is more important. That's also why the feds fund it. That Hamilton LRT has better returns on economics and emissions than spending the same amount on trains to Sudbury ever will. Most importantly to politicians, it delivers more votes than a train to Sudbury ever would.

You can keep wasting bytes here on what should happen. Real life doesn't work like that. So it's a waste of time for me.

 

[Urban Sky]

You can keep wasting bytes here on what should happen. Real life doesn't work like that. So it's a waste of time for me.

As long as you keep engaging the fantasy bear, his bytes are not wasted at all: From a troll’s perspective, anything which keeps the conversation orbit around him counts as a win…

Anyways, five Venture trainsets are now in circulation, as this Cycling Plan posted on Groups.io shows:

 

[dowlingm]

While the actual scheme parameters might be argued, PRIIA fed-state cooperation has led to explosive growth in ridership/service, and not just in states with strong D leanings. Is it really so hard to come up with a similar structure in Canada?

 

[Urban Sky]

While the actual scheme parameters might be argued, PRIIA fed-state cooperation has led to explosive growth in ridership/service, and not just in states with strong D leanings. Is it really so hard to come up with a similar structure in Canada?

It would take a province caring enough for intercity passenger rail to pay for it. I don’t see anyone else than Ontario (ONR) or Quebec (infrastructure funding to restore the line to Gaspé) who cares enough to do at least something…

 

[kEiThZ]

American interstate transport developed in the context of the Cold War and considered interstate travel to be a matter of national interest and national security that should be supported. This is why it was Cold Warriors like Eisenhower who helped build up the interstates and Nixon who created Amtrak. There has never been such an impulse in Canada. We don't have a national road network. Just the Trans-Canada which is more branding than strategic road network.

In the modern era, a big part of why Amtrak partners with states is because Congress will not give them more funding for expansion without some other support (expected from the states). If we tried this in Canada, our provinces would happily say no and avoid expansion or accept the termination of services. There's just not the same priority for intercity travel in Canada. The Corridor is literally the only exception to this.

 

[micheal_can]

It would take a province caring enough for intercity passenger rail to pay for it. I don’t see anyone else than Ontario (ONR) or Quebec (infrastructure funding to restore the line to Gaspé) who cares enough to do at least something…

The fact that the desire to add rail to places is coming from Saskatchewan, maybe that attitude is changing.

Does anyone know when, or even if this has ever been discussed during Via's existence?

 

[Bordercollie]

The fact that the desire to add rail to places is coming from Saskatchewan, maybe that attitude is changing.

Does anyone know when, or even if this has ever been discussed during Via's existence?

It only adds 60km to the whole route and if that will benefit the people living along the line then isn't that a good thing?

 

[kEiThZ]

It only adds 60km to the whole route and if that will benefit the people living along the line then isn't that a good thing?

1) It depends on how tourism is impacted, which is what actually pays the bills on that route.

2) It depends on how riders are lost elsewhere from the diversion.

3) It depends if they have access. Like fantasies discussed on here, these municipal councils simply assume VIA can do whatever they want. That's not the case when operating on track they don't own.

They can ask. But really, they shouldn't be surprised when the Fed says no. If councils actually want to be taken seriously on these kinds of requests, they need to show up with money and detailed studies.

 

[Bordercollie]

1) It depends on how tourism is impacted, which is what actually pays the bills on that route.

2) It depends on how riders are lost elsewhere from the diversion.

3) It depends if they have access. Like fantasies discussed on here, these municipal councils simply assume VIA can do whatever they want. That's not the case when operating on track they don't own.

They can ask. But really, they shouldn't be surprised when the Fed says no. If councils actually want to be taken seriously on these kinds of requests, they need to show up with money and detailed studies.

CN is the operator for both lines so it would require their permission.

Is the north line CTC enabled? Is it kept in good condition? What is the current speed limit?

 

[micheal_can]

It only adds 60km to the whole route and if that will benefit the people living along the line then isn't that a good thing?

Many would scoff at that idea.

 

[kEiThZ]

Anyways, five Venture trainsets are now in circulation, as this Cycling Plan posted on Groups.io shows:
View attachment 527732

How long does it take to get a trainset into service? I thought they've taken delivery of 11 sets?

The delivery rate is a bit frustrating here. Personally, I know lots of regular folks who would really notice the difference with a new trainset and might prompt them to travel by train more. I would hope that at least all trains on Corridor East would be Ventures by end of 2024. But that doesn't look likely.

 

[Urban Sky]

It only adds 60km to the whole route and if that will benefit the people living along the line then isn't that a good thing?

For the sake of protecting the mental health and sanity of myself and others, may I kindly ask you to refrain from engaging the fantasy bear, as to not embolden him to place his fantasies into the centre of every discussion we are having here? We already have two threads which were effectively created to prevent him from monopolizing this thread…

CN is the operator for both lines so it would require their permission.

As I‘ve shown previously in a back-of-the-envelop calculation for Regina, the incrental revenues of serving additional population centres is almost impossible to offset the incremental operating costs of rerouting the Canadian (let alone: ever recovering the significant upfront capital costs of upgrading lines which haven‘t seen a single regularly scheduled passenger train in decades. Now imagine the same when we drop rather than add a city the size of Regina (i.e. Saskatoon)…

Is the north line CTC enabled? Is it kept in good condition? What is the current speed limit?

The line is at least partly „dark territory“, which makes this entire discussion a non-starter for Transport Canada, because safer alternatives evidently exist…

How long does it take to get a trainset into service? I thought they've taken delivery of 11 sets?

The delivery rate is a bit frustrating here. Personally, I know lots of regular folks who would really notice the difference with a new trainset and might prompt them to travel by train more. I would hope that at least all trains on Corridor East would be Ventures by end of 2024. But that doesn't look likely.

My understanding is that staffing the new trains (i.e. with LE/OTS/maintenance crews which have been explicitly trained on and for the Siemens trainsets) is a major constraint in increasing their deployment, especially before the new Siemens-run maintenance facilities have opened…