VIA Rail

[SaugeenJunction]

Does anyone know the timeline for the tender? Wasn't RFP supposed to be around now?

The dates are in Appendix A of this document. In theory, RFP awarded December 2018, but I haven’t been following to see if they are on schedule.

PS - VIA did announce the shortlisted bidders in June, so the RFP is likely under way.

- Paul

I assume the RFP is underway, but just issued to the RFQ winners. Not sure how VIA handles tenders vs Metrolinx's method.

 

[dowlingm]

My bet is VIA like the consortium of States will go with no nose cone, even I would prefer it if they had them.

 

[ssiguy2]

I wonder, with Greyhound's pull out, will this see a resurgence in VIA?

I can only assume you are kidding because if you aren't then you really have no concept of how completely irrelevant VIA rail is in Western Canada. VIA out here is a tourist service and absolutely nothing more. Asking Westerners if they use VIA for business or personal trips is like asking Niagarians if the use the Maiden of the Mist to get to work. The Canadian only carries about 100k/year which includes Ontario. Let`s put that 100k into perspective......that`s about 300 passengers a day and probably only 200 when you get rid of the Ontario numbers. I`m willing to bet that there are more horse & buggy riders in Mennonite country everyday than there are people using VIA in the West, and yes, I`m being serious.

VIA West has laughable service, poor on-time arrivals, and is very slow and thru BC, incredibly so. To get even the riders from Kamloops to Vancouver would require far higher service levels and seeing VIA already subsidizes The Canadian to the tune of $600 per passenger ride, I don`t think there is any stomach for even more red ink. In BC where Greyhound has cut service there is talk of a provincially owned or contracted out regional bus service but nothing more, rail has never even entered the conversation. The only place rail would be sustainable in the West is the Calgary/Edmonton corridor and as far as I`m concerned, they shut down the rest of VIA`s entire western services and sell it off to the highest bidder. If they did it would be bigger news at the Star, Globe, & Gazette than it would be at the Herald, Journal, or Sun.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I can only assume you are kidding because if you are then you really have no concept of how completely irrelevant VIA rail is in Western Canada. VIA out here is a tourist service and absolutely nothing more. Asking Westerners if they use VIA for business or personal trips is like asking Niagarians if the use the Maiden of the Mist to get to work. The Canadian only carries about 100k/year which includes Ontario. Let`s put that 100k into perspective......that`s about 300 passengers a day and probably only 200 when you get rid of the Ontario numbers. I`m willing to bet that there are more horse & buggy riders in Mennonite country everyday than there are people using VIA in the West, and yes, I`m being serious.

VIA West has laughable service, poor on-time arrivals, and is very slow and thru BC, incredibly so. To get even the riders from Kamloops to Vancouver would require far higher service levels and seeing VIA already subsidizes The Canadian to the tune of $600 per passenger ride, I don`t think there is any stomach for even more red ink. In BC where Greyhound has cut service there is talk of a provincially owned or contracted out regional bus service but nothing more, rail has never even entered the conversation. The only place rail would be sustainable in the West is the Calgary/Edmonton corridor and as far as I`m concerned, they shut down the rest of VIA`s entire western services and sell it off to the highest bidder. If they did it would be bigger news at the Star, Globe, & Gazette than it would be at the Herald, Journal, or Sun.

Goodness, I can see your point. Looking on VIA’s website, Vancouver to Kamloops (352 km) is 9 hours out and 12 hours back and $150 return. That’s under four hours by car. WTH?

And Vancouver to Prince Rupert (16 hours by car) is a 5 day journey requiring a train switch in Jasper. Jesus.

 

[micheal_can]

I can only assume you are kidding because if you are then you really have no concept of how completely irrelevant VIA rail is in Western Canada. VIA out here is a tourist service and absolutely nothing more. Asking Westerners if they use VIA for business or personal trips is like asking Niagarians if the use the Maiden of the Mist to get to work. The Canadian only carries about 100k/year which includes Ontario. Let`s put that 100k into perspective......that`s about 300 passengers a day and probably only 200 when you get rid of the Ontario numbers. I`m willing to bet that there are more horse & buggy riders in Mennonite country everyday than there are people using VIA in the West, and yes, I`m being serious.

VIA West has laughable service, poor on-time arrivals, and is very slow and thru BC, incredibly so. To get even the riders from Kamloops to Vancouver would require far higher service levels and seeing VIA already subsidizes The Canadian to the tune of $600 per passenger ride, I don`t think there is any stomach for even more red ink. In BC where Greyhound has cut service there is talk of a provincially owned or contracted out regional bus service but nothing more, rail has never even entered the conversation. The only place rail would be sustainable in the West is the Calgary/Edmonton corridor and as far as I`m concerned, they shut down the rest of VIA`s entire western services and sell it off to the highest bidder. If they did it would be bigger news at the Star, Globe, & Gazette than it would be at the Herald, Journal, or Sun.

I am not kidding. I also know that Western Canada is more or less ignored when it comes to rail transportation. To me, with the loss of Greyhound, there is no more excuses that the bus companies are lobbying for less train service.

 

[ssiguy2]

Rail will NEVER work in BC as the routes are too limited {the most populace area of the Interior, The Okanagan, has never had rail service}, the lines are far too indirect, and painfully slow. The bus got traction because not only was it cheaper than the train but also MUCH faster. As far as Greyhound or any potential new bus service, I am willing to bet that Western Canadians would be more than happy to ditch every single rail line but keep Ottawa`s subsidy to put back into Greyhound and other providers to offer cheaper fares, and better service.

 

[Urban Sky]

I can only assume you are kidding because if you aren't then you really have no concept of how completely irrelevant VIA rail is in Western Canada.

Yet, Western Canadians rank VIA Rail higher than Air Canada (which certainly has a usable offering to the West with its hubs in Vancouver and Calgary) on the Dalhousie University's "Social License to Operate Ranking":

Source: Dalhousie University (2017, p. 12)

To get even the riders from Kamloops to Vancouver would require far higher service levels and seeing VIA already subsidizes The Canadian to the tune of $600 per passenger ride, I don`t think there is any stomach for even more red ink.

I have to credit you for being one of the very few discussion partners I've encountered on forums like this, who actually bothered to base his argument on relative (rather than absolute) figures, though that figure is $400 ($392.84 in 2017) instead of $600 and includes an allocation of VIA's overheads (such as my Salary) which would remain basically the same even if you terminated the Canadian. However, the appropriate metric is "subsidy per passenger-mile" (not: per passenger), as a per-rider subsidy of $20 would be simultaneously disastrous for a 5 mile long Metro scheme and phenomenal for a 2800 mile long transcontinental route (like, you know, the Canadian). When you look up that figure in VIA Rail's most recent Annual Report, you will find that figure to be $0.32, which I believe to be same order of magnitude paid for transit rides in Canadian cities like Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver...

The only place rail would be sustainable in the West is the Calgary/Edmonton corridor and as far as I`m concerned, they shut down the rest of VIA`s entire western services and sell it off to the highest bidder.

Okay, now we are back to the extremely rudimentary level of ssiguy2's understanding of Economics and Business^^. I don't mind people having impractical ideas and recommendations, but I do expect people to show some willingness to learn and acknowledge facts instead of repeating and repeating their misconceptions. Therefore, I will just recopy what I responded to the identical claim last time you made it:

I`m starting to think that VIA should just be sold to the highest bidder.

The whole system is so political now that, that I think the public would be better served. A private run passenger train system would get rid of these expensive lines like entire section east of Sudbury to Vancouver and the splinter lines which serve nearly no one yet suck up all the resources.

And what sort of private investor exactly would pay the government money to acquire a business unit which requires $265.3 Million per year [1] in federal subsidies just to cover its operational expenses? What kind of assets would they sell to recover the acquisition price? An obsolete fleet which is between 23 and 75 years old? Trust me, if VIA owned any assets which the federal government could gain significant privatization revenues from, they would have already sold them in 1990...

[...]

These "splinter line" only account for 46.6% of VIA's deficit [3], meaning that more than half of VIA's operating subsidies (and a much higher share of its operational funding) go to the Corridor.

[...]

Why would a private operator buy a service like the Canadian which currently looses $41.2 million per year (representing a deficit of 35.2% of its operating costs) [3] for any other reason than to terminate the competition to its own tourist operations and how would this benefit this country as a major tourist destination? By the way, the other non-Corridor routes even lost $97.95 million last year or 84.1% of their operating costs [4]...

How would a private owner of VIA circumvent the challenges under which VIA operates, such as the very constrained frequencies, travel times and punctuality its host railways are willing to provide?

[...]

[3] 2017 Annual Report, p.9: Shortfall ($41.23 million) divided by Costs ($117.17 million)
[4] 2017 Annual Report, p.9: Shortfall ($265.33-$141.74-$41.23=$82.35 million) divided by Costs ($631.00-$415.87-$117.17=$97.95 million)

By the way, there was one business unit which was transferred from VIA Rail to the private sector, but this approach isn't exactly what I would call being "sold to the highest bidder"...

One factor driving the decision to move the Canadian over to the Super Continental’s route was lobbying by Vancouver entrepreneur Peter Armstrong to privatize VIA’s summer excursions to Banff, Alta., introduced in 1988. This came with the understanding his fledgling operation would get route exclusivity and some initial financial assistance from VIA to ensure the venture’s success. After a few shaky early years, Armstrong invested heavily in specialty dome cars to make Rocky Mountaineer a financial and creative success in a way the publicly funded operator never could.

Source: Trains, November 2018, "VIA Rail Canada at 40" (pp.29-30)
Subscription available here

...nor do I see how selling this service has made it more affordable to Canadians (or anyone else):

Pricing during last summer under operation by VIA Rail (note that the 1-night package from Vancouver to Banff cost $295 or $525 in 2018 prices):

Source: Official VIA Rail timetable (effective 1989-04-30, p. 51)

Current pricing as private enterprise (Note that the one-night package from Vancouver to Lake Louise now starts at $1499 or $843 in 1989 prices, thus almost 3 times as much as what VIA charged):

Source: Rocky Mountaineer Website

{the most populace area of the Interior, The Okanagan, has never had rail service}

Canadian Pacific operated passenger service on quite a variety of routes in the Okanagan area (of which (Revelstoke-)Sicamous-Vernon-Kelowna survived until 1960 and on (Medicine Hat-)Lethbridge-Nelson-Castlegar-Penticton-Spence's Bridge(-Vancouver) until 1964), as this map shows:

Source: CP Network timetable (effective 1950-04-30, p.46)

 

[micheal_can]

Yet, Western Canadians rank VIA Rail higher than Air Canada (which certainly has a usable offering to the West with its hubs in Vancouver and Calgary) on the Dalhousie University's "Social License to Operate Ranking":
View attachment 159792
Source: Dalhousie University (2017, p. 12)

I have to credit you for being one of the very few discussion partners I've encountered on forums like this, who actually bothered to base his argument on relative (rather than absolute) figures, though that figure is $400 ($392.84 in 2017) instead of $600 and includes an allocation of VIA's overheads (such as my Salary) which would remain basically the same even if you terminated the Canadian. However, the appropriate metric is "subsidy per passenger-mile" (not: per passenger), as a per-rider subsidy of $20 would be simultaneously disastrous for a 5 mile long Metro scheme and phenomenal for a 2800 mile long transcontinental route (like, you know, the Canadian). When you look up that figure in VIA Rail's most recent Annual Report, you will find that figure to be $0.32, which I believe to be same order of magnitude paid for transit rides in Canadian cities like Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver...


Okay, now we are back to the extremely rudimentary level of ssiguy2's understanding of Economics and Business^^. I don't mind people having impractical ideas and recommendations, but I do expect people to show some willingness to learn and acknowledge facts instead of repeating and repeating their misconceptions. Therefore, I will just recopy what I responded to the identical claim last time you made it:


By the way, there was one business unit which was transferred from VIA Rail to the private sector, but this approach isn't exactly what I would call being "sold to the highest bidder"...

Source: Trains, November 2018, "VIA Rail Canada at 40" (pp.29-30)
Subscription available here

...nor do I see how selling this service has made it more affordable to Canadians (or anyone else):

Pricing during last summer under operation by VIA Rail (note that the 1-night package from Vancouver to Banff cost $295 or $525 in 2018 prices):
View attachment 159798
Source: Official VIA Rail timetable (effective 1989-04-30, p. 51)

Current pricing as private enterprise (Note that the one-night package from Vancouver to Lake Louise now starts at $1499 or $843 in 1989 prices, thus almost 3 times as much as what VIA charged):
View attachment 159799
Source: Rocky Mountaineer Website


Canadian Pacific operated passenger service on quite a variety of routes in the Okanagan area (of which (Revelstoke-)Sicamous-Vernon-Kelowna survived until 1960 and on (Medicine Hat-)Lethbridge-Nelson-Castlegar-Penticton-Spence's Bridge(-Vancouver) until 1964), as this map shows:
View attachment 159789
Source: CP Network timetable (effective 1950-04-30, p.46)

A few things:

1) I wish the Rocky Mountaineer ran trains year round. To ride those routes in winter would be spectacular. Also, it would provide links to various skiing opportunities for the large cities. (Vancouver and Calgary)

2) Didin't the line into the Okanagan Valley get abandoned and made into a rail trail?

 

[Urban Sky]

A few things:

1) I wish the Rocky Mountaineer ran trains year round. To ride those routes in winter would be spectacular. Also, it would provide links to various skiing opportunities for the large cities. (Vancouver and Calgary)

2) Didin't the line into the Okanagan Valley get abandoned and made into a rail trail?

1) This is the kind of opportunities you forgo by selling a service to a private operator, which will only operate on dates and routes which he deems profitable and this seems to not be the case for winter operations. An alternative would have been to make a public service obligation (PSO) agreement with RMR (which would result in increased service and/or subsidised fares or just ensure the opportunity to ride the train without buying a whole vacation package), but that's not what happened back in 1990...
2) You are correct and the tracks were indeed laid inconveniently (thus effectively impeding direct service from Vancouver to Kelowna), but the absurd claim that they had never seen passenger rail service begged to be corrected...

 

[crs1026]

I wish the Rocky Mountaineer ran trains year round. To ride those routes in winter would be spectacular. Also, it would provide links to various skiing opportunities for the large cities. (Vancouver and Calgary)

IIRC they have run one or two snow trains in some past years. I’m sure that if RMRT thought they could fill trains in the winter, they would run. However:
- Few tour operators operating in the winter, all other tour stops/attractions shut down outside summer season
- Shorter days - so trips not so scenic
- Greater risk of operating delays up to/including line blockages due to snow
- Cost and effort to operate in subzero conditions, equipment reliability

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

Yet, Western Canadians rank VIA Rail higher than Air Canada (which certainly has a usable offering to the West with its hubs in Vancouver and Calgary) on the Dalhousie University's "Social License to Operate Ranking":

Source: Dalhousie University (2017, p. 12)

I get you want to rep your employer, but I wouldn't put much stock in this. Easy to have great reviews from strangers who don't use VIA. I'm sure folks in Manitoba would rank BC ferries well. Such a survey needs context. How many times per year has the respondent taken VIA Rail, Greyhound, Air Canada, WestJet, etc.?

Your other points I fully agree with. Subsidy levels need context. Considering passenger-mile does provide some.

 

[robmausser]

I thought I'd share a visual of what I thought new trains for The Corridor could look like. I should mention: had this on the go for a while, but that awesome new Via Rail commercial gave me the final kick to finish it.


Via Rail Siemens trainset by Adrian Badaraco, on Flickr

I really like it but I would love to see your design with a touch of green from the Renaissance Green livery.

 

[robmausser]

Nosecones are cool.

I'll take any good comfortable 177kph ride, even if the loco looks ugly.

But nosecones are cool.

The Chargers can do 201 kmh as their max speed, and I would hope that VIA has put this requirement in their RFP as well for the cars, not just the loco.

Even if the track doesnt currently allow for 200kmh it would be a terrible investment to buy something that cant potentially do it, and upgrade the tracks later.

 

[Urban Sky]

I get you want to rep your employer, but I wouldn't put much stock in this.

I am the first to concede that Canada's intercity passenger railroad has too little to offer as to be considered a serious choice for a significant number of Western Canadians. Heck, the entire annual ridership is less people than there are people living in the GTHA and the average Canadian rides the intercity train approximately only once every ten years! However, I was providing evidence which somehow counters the claim that Western Canadians would be indifferent about loosing what little intercity passenger rail service remains to them:

As far as Greyhound or any potential new bus service, I am willing to bet that Western Canadians would be more than happy to ditch every single rail line but keep Ottawa`s subsidy to put back into Greyhound and other providers to offer cheaper fares, and better service.

I thought that using the word "yet" would make clear that I'm not contesting his observation that intercity rail in its current form is basically irrelevant to most Canadians (not just those in the west), but his conclusion that they'd rather replace it altogether in exchange for better bus services. My interpretation of the survey is that Canadians from all parts of the country are generally supportive of taxpayer-supported intercity passenger rail (which - to borrow from the Surveys name - would provide it with a "social license to operate"), but that the current service levels and quality offered don't correspond well with their needs. Or in simpler words: I agree with ssiguy2 that Canadians want better intercity rail options in the two main corridors (Quebec-Windsor and Edmonton-Calgary), but I would like to see some evidence before I'm willing to accept his notion that they are willing to sacrifice the non-Corridor services (which anyways account for less than half of VIA's operational subsidy [1]) in exchange. The survey strengthens my belief that they want both and that they are less concerned about the cost to them as taxpayers than the utility that taxpayer money brings...

[1] Subsidy figures from the Annual Report 2017:
Network: $265,325,000
- of which Corridor: $141,738,000 (53.4%)

 

[SaugeenJunction]

The Chargers can do 201 kmh as their max speed, and I would hope that VIA has put this requirement in their RFP as well for the cars, not just the loco.

Even if the track doesnt currently allow for 200kmh it would be a terrible investment to buy something that cant potentially do it, and upgrade the tracks later.

Yup, that speed (125 mp/h = 201 km/h) is a requirement as per PDF page 40 in the RFQ.