VIA Rail

[Admiral Beez]

but what really bothers me is that no railway seems to be intent on implementing airline level lie flat, possibly even pod like, seating.

In 1988 I took VIA from Toronto to Calgary. My seat didn’t even recline as it had a cabin partition behind it. I slept in the empty luggage shelf.

 

[kEiThZ]

what really bothers me is that no railway seems to be intent on implementing airline level lie flat, possibly even pod like, seating.

I've been saying this for years in this thread!

Even with Corridor service, it can still be a long ride. A typical Toronto-Montreal trip today and a Toronto-Quebec City trip with HFR are nearly as long as a trans-Atlantic trip. Since Corridor trains run daytime only maybe lie-flat is overkill, but I wish they went with pod seating. VIA's seats are already pretty comfortable. A slightly roomier seat in VIA 1 isn't much of differentiator. Pods would be. Or least staggered seats in shells to increase privacy.

Trains like the Ocean are perfect for airline like lie-flat pods.

 

[smallspy]

We ordered the exact same coaches. Are there rules that would make the LOPA that different? Or is there some other issue that concerns you with regulation?

"We" didn't order "the exact same coaches". VIA ordered a product from the Siemens product catalogue that happens to share its name with a similar-but-different product sold elsewhere.

Dan

 

[kEiThZ]

"We" didn't order "the exact same coaches". VIA ordered a product from the Siemens product catalogue that happens to share its name with a similar-but-different product sold elsewhere.

Dan

I would assume the coaches are the same as the FRA-compliant Brightline coaches. Is there any reason these coaches can't be fitted with a LOPA similar to the OBB coaches? I'm trying to understand how regulations impact the actual fittings inside the coach, if at all. I understand that engineering would need to done to fit it at all. But how substantial would this be when there's already a layout that works.

 

[crs1026]

Here are a couple quick google grabs

Railway Association of Canada, especially this document

APTA Manual (may not be the most recent rev) and especially this

It’s not that what you suggest is impossible, but every latch, coathook, etc has to be reviewed and qualified. If the European version fails, then one has to find a North American equivalent. Dimensions then change, etc etc. All of this has to be documented.

What makes sleeping cars more complex are all the interior fittings and spaces. A coach is pretty generic from end to end. And systems.... more wiring, more HVAC controls, more gadgets, more complicated issues around fire and crash dynamics. Beds, lockers, sinks, toilets. Stuff that can leak, vibrate, come loose, etc. Confined spaces. Smoke detection.

When the weight of the paperwork exceeds the weight of the railcar, it’s ready.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

I would assume the coaches are the same as the FRA-compliant Brightline coaches.

More-or-less. The ones ordered by VIA will have some modifications to them that the Brightline/Virgin Florida ones won't have.

Is there any reason these coaches can't be fitted with a LOPA similar to the OBB coaches? I'm trying to understand how regulations impact the actual fittings inside the coach, if at all. I understand that engineering would need to done to fit it at all. But how substantial would this be when there's already a layout that works.

Anything is possible if you want to throw enough money at it.

But the rules for how things are done in North America are generally quite a bit different than are done in Europe due to how things have progressed over the last 150+ years of operating railways here versus there. The carbody may look the same at a quick glance, and it's even assembled in more-or-less the same manner. But the cars in North America have to handle 1,000,000 pounds of compressive force without any permanent distortion - no such regulation exists like this in Europe, and this is due to the sheer size and weight of our trains here. A lot of the North American regulations cover worst-case scenarios, requiring things like a half-hour battery life for all installed onboard emergency equipment, specific rules regarding emergency access which dictates seemingly archaic car designs, and a minimum strength requirement for seat fixment. And there are even differences between Canada and the US, like the Canadian regulation requiring enclosed luggage spaces.

I'd also bet that the Austrian equipment also has far more emphasis on flammability, due to the number of tunnels that they operate through.

The other issue likely is....Siemens already has either a design team, or an outside design organization that has likely done most of the legwork regarding the shape, configuration and coordination of the interiors of the equipment. And if you buy Siemens equipment, you're also buying their services, along with their suppliers and production chain. Using an outside firm such as Priestmangoode may require increases in cost and additional time in the production process in order to organize the new designs, source the materials and even find new suppliers to source the new components.

Dan

 

[Allandale25]

Brief reference to HFR in one of the questions here.

Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

You nailed it, Kotsy. That is what Toronto is now. Thanks for watching!

urbantoronto.ca

 

[kEiThZ]

@smallspy @crs1026

Thanks for the explanations. So I guess we would have to wait for Siemens to make the sale of a North American sleeper coach to see what they could offer.

I'm always surprised by how much less innovation there is in passenger rail interiors than airline interiors.

Calf rests and entertainment systems are increasingly common features in the air. Plane interiors are now moving on to features like shell seat sets, electronically dimmable windows, catering on demand through the IFE and staggered seating for improved privacy. But none of this really is filtering to trains. Which is odd because the benefits of many of those features are substantially higher on intercity passenger trains. I don't believe any of this would add a ton of cost to the construction cost of a coach. But would improve the experience enough to be able to extract a higher premium.

Also, is there something holding back holding pod seating for economy sleeper seating for example? Absolutely perfect for so many of VIA's regional services. And probably a great discount option for long haul routes (and likely more profitable than sleeper cabins).

I wonder if VIA could get some of this designed on future trains and get a royalty cut when the same set is sold to other customers. Get a design that can be sold to Amtrak and it might pay for itself!

 

[crs1026]

@smallspy @crs1026
Calf rests and entertainment systems are increasingly common features in the air. Plane interiors are now moving on to features like shell seat sets, electronically dimmable windows, catering on demand through the IFE and staggered seating for improved privacy. But none of this really is filtering to trains. Which is odd because the benefits of many of those features are substantially higher on intercity passenger trains. I don't believe any of this would add a ton of cost to the construction cost of a coach. But would improve the experience enough to be able to extract a higher premium.

Also, is there something holding back holding pod seating for economy sleeper seating for example? Absolutely perfect for so many of VIA's regional services. And probably a great discount option for long haul routes (and likely more profitable than sleeper cabins).

I wonder if VIA could get some of this designed on future trains and get a royalty cut when the same set is sold to other customers. Get a design that can be sold to Amtrak and it might pay for itself!

You raise an interesting point. There is certainly creative energy applied to designing railcar interiors, and here and there one sees interesting things. I would not agree that railcars are still being designed as they were in, say, the 1950's. I don't believe Amtrak's most recent Viewliners have shoe lockers, for instance.... the anachronisms are slowly disappearing It may be true that train designers work from a traditional rail paradigm, whereas air cabin designers work from a different paradigm, but this does not imply there is less creativity. Less upside from investing in design, certainly.... the budget put into designing the 787 cabin had a lot more sales and profit potential than redesigning the North American long distance railcar fleet.

I'm not sure I would want a railcar to have an airplane look and feel, or that if it did feel like an airplane that would make it "sexier". I would rather that VIA differentiate itself from the air travel, by making best strategic use of amenities that aircraft can't deliver. I would see these to be space, visibility, ride quality, the opportunity to move around, and weight. Pods sell on airplanes because they deliver isolation and usable business space, the alternative (economy) being "travel in the worst way possible". I'm not so sure that traditional trains are so claustrophobic that a customer would pay more to escape to a pod. In fact, when I see business people travelling by rail, the ability to work face to face over a table in a quad seems preferable to "isolating". Windows and natural light remain coveted, even in "boring" Ontario.

The only real mistake I see in VIA's current design philosophy is relying on at-seat snack service without a cafe car alternative as well.

VIA's Prestige cars had a lot of emphasis put into interior design. They do contain some more modern amenities such as big screen TV's. I don't know about whether they have full entertainment systems. But at the same time, one of the most costly improvements that was made to these cars was to enlarge the windows. It would be a huge waste of money to buy a Prestige ticket and then dim the window 787-style and glue onesself to a schlocky movie...at least until dark.

- Paul

Edit: PS - Amenities that I have seen on trains that don't have an airplane equivalent: Individual LED signs over each seat that indicate whether the seat is reserved (and if so, where en route the reservation begins), similar signs that display the name of the passenger holding the reservation, the wonderful Virgin loos on UK trains with their goofy electronic announcements, business meeting rooms, childrens' play area.....

 

[kEiThZ]

I'm not sure I would want a railcar to have an airplane look and feel, or that if it did feel like an airplane that would make it "sexier". I would rather that VIA differentiate itself from the air travel, by making best strategic use of amenities that aircraft can't deliver. I would see these to be space, visibility, ride quality, the opportunity to move around, and weight.

I get this. But my point was that the same tech has a better payoff on rail. Think of IFE onboard, for example. Train rides being so long and wifi being spotty and limited, IFE would be nice. Only so much looking outside the window on a 5 hr train ride. Especially if you ride regularly. Similarly, since trains have the room for comfy seating, reclines with thigh rests, or staggered seats for privacy make the hard product even more spectacular.

The only real mistake I see in VIA's current design philosophy is relying on at-seat snack service without a cafe car alternative as well.

Ordering through seatback IFE or the mobile app if no IFE, becomes a fantastic system if there's no cafe car. Attendant doesn't have to go around asking what people want. Swipe/tap and pay at the seat.

Pods sell on airplanes because they deliver isolation and usable business space, the alternative (economy) being "travel in the worst way possible". I'm not so sure that traditional trains are so claustrophobic that a customer would pay more to escape to a pod.

I guess I see the pods differently. I see them as a way to give an economy class passenger on the Ocean or Canadian a way to sleep. And for a Corridor business passenger a place to work in privacy. And in both cases a big differentiator against other forms of transport. You aren't getting a chaise lounge on a bus from Quebec City to Halifax. And you aren't really getting room to work on your flight from Toronto to Montreal.

In fact, when I see business people travelling by rail, the ability to work face to face over a table in a quad seems preferable to "isolating". Windows and natural light remain coveted, even in "boring" Ontario.

This can and should be improved upon. The Italians put these on their HSR Viaggio coaches:

The goal here should be enable the business traveler to work how they want. Not everyone is traveling with others. Not everyone who is traveling together wants their conversations heard. But making the business travel experience one that can be highly productive should produce higher fare premiums.

 

[kEiThZ]

Amenities that I have seen on trains that don't have an airplane equivalent: Individual LED signs over each seat that indicate whether the seat is reserved (and if so, where en route the reservation begins), similar signs that display the name of the passenger holding the reservation, the wonderful Virgin loos on UK trains with their goofy electronic announcements, business meeting rooms, childrens' play area.....

Things that I wish VIA would actually implement! But it doesn't seem like any of this was really consider in the fleet refurb sadly. I wish they would get the budget to do some of this stuff.

It may not be a differentiator. But bathrooms are actually a point often ignored, but can be yet another differentiator. Especially now that airlines are stuffing economy toilets in the tail cone on narrowbody aircraft. Simply offering a better pax/toilet ratio, more space and higher quality fittings would help appeal tremendously.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

Things that I wish VIA would actually implement! But it doesn't seem like any of this was really consider in the fleet refurb sadly. I wish they would get the budget to do some of this stuff.

It may not be a differentiator. But bathrooms are actually a point often ignored, but can be yet another differentiator. Especially now that airlines are stuffing economy toilets in the tail cone on narrowbody aircraft. Simply offering a better pax/toilet ratio, more space and higher quality fittings would help appeal tremendously.

On the one hand, it really does seem that VIA was very much focused on requesting the smallest possible fleet with the new order. The up side is that these ARE still conventional, individual locomotive hauled cars. Add-ons are very easy.

I'm almost inclined to wonder if we might be approaching the right time for something like the old Pullman business model for some of these business oriented services given that both Amtrak and VIA are at least theoretically open to private owner cars.

 

[smallspy]

Calf rests and entertainment systems are increasingly common features in the air.

Entertainment systems? Absolutely not - virtually every airline has either removed their entertainment systems or is in the process of doing so, in order to force customers into a pay-for-use wifi system.

As "spotty" as people claim VIA's wifi supposedly is - and I can tell you with pretty good precision the three areas that are problematic - I would much rather have it than a pay-for-use system.

Dan

 

[kEiThZ]

Entertainment systems? Absolutely not - virtually every airline has either removed their entertainment systems or is in the process of doing so, in order to force customers into a pay-for-use wifi system.

What airlines do you fly? Here in Canada, AC and WestJet are taking delivery of new aircraft with IFE. Just look at AC's brand new CSeries/A220 jets. And if they don't have seatback IFE they have IFE options through the mobile app and WiFi, which VIA does not. Should be noted, I don't want to see some crazy movie selection. Just give me the CBC and maybe give Canadian filmmakers a place to showcase their stuff.

As "spotty" as people claim VIA's wifi supposedly is - and I can tell you with pretty good precision the three areas that are problematic - I would much rather have it than a pay-for-use system.

In 2020, a wifi connection which doesn't allow streaming, while traveling through areas with poor mobile reception, is of limited value. Wouldn't be as big a deal if the ride was only 1-2 hrs as most flights are. Not so when you're on there for 5 hrs.

 

[rbt]

And if they don't have seatback IFE they have IFE options through the mobile app and WiFi, which VIA does not.

Technically VIA has offered that since 2013. You can connect to "VIA_WiFi_VIDEO" and stream movies and TV shows served from hardware on the train. There's almost nothing you would want to watch due to a decision that everything on VIA should be Canadian sourced where possible.