VIA Rail

[robmausser]

That Porto<->Lisbon train has a few different types of service running on it; AP (express) and IC (more stops). The AP track is in such poor shape that I usually take the slower IC train as the express makes me seasick. That top speed is right up against, or even beyond, their technical capability.

I used to take the Sarnia train from Toronto, and it was 2 HEP1 cars behind an old loco, on the GEXR line through kitchener. The portion of track from Kitchener to London was exceptionally terrible and we would sometimes race along it to catch up for lost time being held behind a freight etc. I'd look and see the other HEP1 car swing wildly back and forth almost to the point like they were going to tear apart.

Years later I found out through an aquaintence that someone misunderstood or misread the speed limits on those tracks at VIA or GEXR, and the VIA train was going well over the speed of what the track condition was rated for. Oops!

 

[Allandale25]

Press conference with a VIA announcement:

I am proud to join the VIA Rail Canada team to announce that VIA Rail Canada has awarded a contract valued at $16.4 million to Rail GD to completely refurbish and transform four dining cars intended for use on the long-haul train, the Canadian. Through this investment, people from across the country will be able to appreciate the expertise that the people of the Gaspe have to offer. This announcement confirms that our local businesses, such as Rail GD, are doing remarkable work.

 

[Allandale25]

^ And the official VIA press release: https://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via...-2018-rail-gd-new-richmond-qc-to-renovate-via

 

[dowlingm]

The LRCs are rotting to the frame, and need to be tossed, the refurbishment program on them being abandoned, while the Stainless Steel HEP's will last another 50 years if need be.

Not quite true of the flogged out HEP2s, right? Eventually Father Time and Uncle Rust will have their due, not to mention that these cars were built to norms then in force. We’ve learned a lot about railway vehicle engineering in seven decades, and VIA could use some accessible by design cars just to get the CTA off its back.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Update on the passenger rail project that we want to fail in Vermont (so we can buy the RDCs). Still sounds vague and like it won't happen, in my humble opinion.

Mayors, Trains, and Economic Development

 

[steveintoronto]

Update on the passenger rail project that we want to fail in Vermont (so we can buy the RDCs). Still sounds vague and like it won't happen, in my humble opinion.

Mayors, Trains, and Economic Development

Excellent 'heads-up'.
After viewing that, I want it to succeed for them. I'm really impressed with the attitude, composure and intelligence of the two mayors interviewed. And the quality of the reno appears to be excellent.

I'm still vexed by our reno'd RDCs sitting idle in Mimico.

Just tracking what other news I can find on this before posting. This is a must view:
https://vermontbiz.com/video/allearth-rail-8152017

Addendum: There's a wild-card factor to be considered in the RDC's favour:

[...]
Anderson, in testimony to Congress in February, raised the possibility of disruptions to service as a result of railroads that lease track to the passenger system not meeting the deadline. Other states are concerned that buses may be substituted on certain routes.

In Vermont, U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat, believes Amtrak has “sent too many mixed signals’’ about whether it will continue train service on two lines without positive train control, said his spokesman David Carle. The railroad hasn’t responded to Leahy’s request to say whether or not it plans to suspend service, Carle said.

Leeds said that "Amtrak’s aim is to continue service across all of its network, including the routes in Vermont, and to ensure that we can do so with a common level of safety."
[...]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...ssengers-buses-safety-upgrade-fight/37801999/

See:
https://www.caledonianrecord.com/op...cle_3816d771-387b-509b-ac57-be7560ec9c00.html

And:

News Release — Vermont Agency of Transportation
April 20, 2018

Contact:
Jacqui LeBlanc
Agency of Transportation
802-498-5988
jacqueline.leblanc@vermont.gov

Ethan Latour
Office of the Governor
Ethan.Latour@Vermont.Gov

Montpelier, Vt. – Plans for restoring Amtrak Vermonter passenger rail service to Montreal, electric vehicle initiatives, and other critical Vermont-Quebec border transportation projects made headway today, driven by a long-standing partnership between the governments of Vermont and Quebec.

Vermont Agency of Transportation Secretary Joe Flynn, Premier of Quebec Phillip Couillard, Minister of Transport Andre Fortin, and other Canadian delegates and members of the business community toured Montreal’s Electric Vehicle Show and continued dialogue on specific initiatives to establish an electric car charging corridor between the two territories and to promote transportation electrification. Premier Couillard’s participation in today’s conversations reaffirms the transportation partnership and expansion of efforts proposed for the Cooperation Agreement between the State of Vermont and the Province of Quebec.

Vermont Governor Phil Scott, who supports the transportation projects underway, commented that, “We continue our active collaboration with Quebec and other state, federal, and international partners affected by these initiatives. Vermont will be closely involved in, and monitoring, these efforts over the next few years to assure safe, efficient, timely, and secure flow of trade and travel between Vermont and Quebec.”

“Vermont has committed to working with our partners in Quebec,” said Transportation Secretary Flynn. “Through our cooperative agreement, we are working to provide an efficient and sustainable transportation network that contributes to efforts to fight climate change and to avoid new trade barriers, fostering regional economic development and competitiveness.”
[...]

https://vtdigger.org/2018/04/23/ver...ves-progress-passenger-rail-service-montreal/

AllEarth might not realize the originally intended use for the RDCs, but another more ambitious scheme if Amtrak become problematic.

 

[cplchanb]

Press conference with a VIA announcement:

im not sure what to think about this. sure they can keep this thing going, but wouldnt it be smarter on the long term on investing on jobs through building new cars?
they keep irking out the hep until they absolutely cant run anymore, but at the same time they dont invest on new rolling stock for the canadian. imo not only does it
mean a much higher price tag in the future and a capability gap when the trains break down, but also it lowers the public perception of our system as being old fashioned
and low tech. people want to be drawn into the newest products and frankly most of the people taking the train are middle aged and repeat riders. we need something new to inject
fresh interest in via.

 

[steveintoronto]

^Bear in mind that VIA are not an agency. They're totally at the pleasure or not of the sitting regime and have to accept 'what they're given' for funding. I see the refurbishment of *selected* HEP stock as a wise investment. It doesn't satisfy overall need, but when you can't buy dinner every night, you have to make do with what's leftover from yesterday.

 

[cplchanb]

^Bear in mind that VIA are not an agency. They're totally at the pleasure or not of the sitting regime and have to accept 'what they're given' for funding. I see the refurbishment of *selected* HEP stock as a wise investment. It doesn't satisfy overall need, but when you can't buy dinner every night, you have to make do with what's leftover from yesterday.

All the more for selling this off as a regulated private agency. I know the whole JR comparison been debated to death but they need to make money and work properly. we all know that govt run business are the epitome of money/resource wasting.
They need to rip out the leech

 

[robmausser]

im not sure what to think about this. sure they can keep this thing going, but wouldnt it be smarter on the long term on investing on jobs through building new cars?
they keep irking out the hep until they absolutely cant run anymore, but at the same time they dont invest on new rolling stock for the canadian. imo not only does it
mean a much higher price tag in the future and a capability gap when the trains break down, but also it lowers the public perception of our system as being old fashioned
and low tech. people want to be drawn into the newest products and frankly most of the people taking the train are middle aged and repeat riders. we need something new to inject
fresh interest in via.

The Canadian is a tourist train. Its not a rail service for transportation, its for leisure. Anyone who argues this, GO TAKE IT. I've taken it twice. I would never use it for passenger rail service. It was a wonderful vacation though.

People who take trains as a tourist train want a traditional service. They dont want shiny new modern sleek trains, they want to be taken back to the era of historical rail travel. Which is what the Canadian is, and always will be.

Using modern rolling stock here would be a waste of that rolling stock, going 60km/h stuck behind a freight train winding through slow bendy track amongst the rockies.

The HEP1 cars will last for another 100 years, in terms of the frames. They are stainless steel.

The Canadian isnt a mode of transportation and it never will be, with flights costing a fraction as much and taking a fraction of the time.

 

[Urban Sky]

The Canadian is a tourist train. Its not a rail service for transportation, its for leisure. Anyone who argues this, GO TAKE IT. I've taken it twice. I would never use it for passenger rail service. It was a wonderful vacation though.

People who take trains as a tourist train want a traditional service. They dont want shiny new modern sleek trains, they want to be taken back to the era of historical rail travel. Which is what the Canadian is, and always will be.

Using modern rolling stock here would be a waste of that rolling stock, going 60km/h stuck behind a freight train winding through slow bendy track amongst the rockies.

The HEP1 cars will last for another 100 years, in terms of the frames. They are stainless steel.

The Canadian isnt a mode of transportation and it never will be, with flights costing a fraction as much and taking a fraction of the time.

Amen. (I've taken it once - when I was already hired, but not yet employed by VIA Rail - with my wife all the way from Toronto to Jasper in Cabin for 2 and after 2 days in the Rockies in Economy Jasper to Vancouver as sleeper was sold out)

 

[cplchanb]

The Canadian is a tourist train. Its not a rail service for transportation, its for leisure. Anyone who argues this, GO TAKE IT. I've taken it twice. I would never use it for passenger rail service. It was a wonderful vacation though.

People who take trains as a tourist train want a traditional service. They dont want shiny new modern sleek trains, they want to be taken back to the era of historical rail travel. Which is what the Canadian is, and always will be.

Using modern rolling stock here would be a waste of that rolling stock, going 60km/h stuck behind a freight train winding through slow bendy track amongst the rockies.

The HEP1 cars will last for another 100 years, in terms of the frames. They are stainless steel.

The Canadian isnt a mode of transportation and it never will be, with flights costing a fraction as much and taking a fraction of the time.

I agree that the train is mainly for tourist applications however what will they do for those in the prairies who no longer have greyhound to service them? That is why I've been a long time proponent that they split the route up into 2 so that reliability can be maintained. They can keep the hep for a historical set but one way or another they need to provide service to those who cant be served by local air or bus travel. For those they should get new MU sets that are faster, can be in smaller consists and are more reliable.

 

[littlewill1166]

I've been noticing that VIA Rail has been changing its seat assignments. Previously car 3 was designated primarily for passengers getting on/off at intermediate stops. However, I've noticed that VIA has been booking these passengers into car 4 instead, leaving car 3 as the car for overflow passengers from the other cars. Occasionally I've even seen trains without a car 3, where car 4 is the lead economy class car, and the final car in the consist is a deadhead. Does anyone know why the change occurred, was it a cost-saving measure? Also, does anyone know what's up with the entertainment system, I've been getting "File not Found" errors for the past couple of weeks whenever I tried using it.

 

[ssiguy2]

The Canadian is no way shape or form a transportation line. It is a cruise ship and nothing more. The only difference between a cruise ship and the Canadian is that one is not subsidized to the tune $600/ per passenger by the Canadian taxpayer. The only place where a train service would be viable is the Cal/Edm Corridor, which of course has no service.

Sell the Canadian to the highest bidder and let the private sector run it.

 

[Urban Sky]

The only difference between a cruise ship and the Canadian is that one is not subsidized to the tune $600/ per passenger by the Canadian taxpayer.

If you already have to troll so compulsively, can you at least correct the incorrect figures you are using? I've even provided you with the correct number and references:

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 of taxpayer money paid for transit rides in Canadian cities like Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver...

Now to the second part of your trolling:

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.

Sell the Canadian to the highest bidder and let the private sector run it.

Please take the moment to actually read the reply I've given to you multiple times to your repeated misconceptions and let me know if you have troubles understanding my argument or grasping the underlying fundamentals of Economics:

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...

[...]

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?