VIA Rail

[kEiThZ]

I was looking at old reports yesterday. I looked at the Ecotrain study with 200 kph diesel trains and a Lakeshore route till Kingston.

Toronto-Ottawa: 2:25
Ottawa-Montreal: 1:11
Toronto-Montreal: 3:38

That was of course for HSR with 200 kph diesel. But if we roughly correct for 177 kph diesel service by adjusting those times by 15%, we get:

Toronto-Ottawa: 2:47
Ottawa-Montreal: 1:22
Toronto-Montreal: 4:11

This basically exactly in line what I was suggesting HFR should aim for and be funded towards.

The Ecotrain study prices Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal at $9.067B in 2009 dollars. Probably closer to $12B today. That goes to show how expensive HSR is, as grade separation piles on the costs. But the ~ $2.2B rumoured for TOM under HFR also shows how much room there is for investment. Personally, I think $1-2B more to get Toronto-Montreal under 4.5 hrs would be entirely justified. Would probably create more robust infrastructure too.

 

[kEiThZ]

1. Not everyone uses Porter or YTZ for travel to Montreal. I know a number of my colleagues who fly exclusively from Pearson to YUL (better airport facilities, lounge, bigger planes, other personal reasons).

2. Union to YTZ is 20 min by transit, but also factor in time to get to Union station.

I'm using Union as a reference point because there's no easy way to discuss all of downtown and that's where the train journey would start. Union to YTZ being 20 mins by UPE is close to how long an Uber or streetcar would take to get to Billy Bishop. 5-10 mins either way isn't moving the needle substantially.

2. ...My office is downtown but I've lost count how many times I've sat in Uber stuck in downtown traffic, often times taking 30 min + to drive to YTZ from a downtown office.

This would be true if you were taking a cab to get to Union to catch your HFR train too.

3. Frequent delays arriving in and departing from YTZ airport. YTZ has a 10 pm landing time cutoff (not sure if it's a hard rule but frequently cited by airline staff), so if you couldn't land before then, your plane has to be diverted to YYZ (happens to me 10% of the time for night arrivals). In cold weather, YTZ runway also has limitations which cause frequent diversions to YYZ (or even worse, twice we've had our YTZ bound plane diverted back to Montreal half way during flight due to extreme cold conditions in YTZ).

Here's the difference. If you wanted to be in downtown Toronto by 10, you would have to leave Montreal by 5pm with HFR. By air, you'd have to be at YUL by 7-730pm. Thanks to REM, you wouldn't have to leave downtown Montreal till 630pm.

The realistic travel time between YTZ and YUL, when you factor in the above, is more likely 4 hrs (or more, depending on how long it takes for you to arrive at YTZ, minus any delays or equipment maintenance issues which seem to happen frequently to the YTZ propeller fleet). As for Pearson-YUL, it's easily 5-6 hrs door to door.

Personally, I think 5-6 hrs is a stretch. Outside of peak rush, you can get from anywhere in the 416 to YYZ or YTZ in an hour by car. And most of the Island in an hour on the other side. Add in 1 hr for pre-boarding and 1 hr for the flight and that's roughly 4 hrs. If you add a 25% fudge to that it's 5 hrs. And that's pretty much just you train time with HFR. You'd still be traveling to/from the station on each side and having pre-boarding. Assuming the same driving coverage as the airports, that's 7 hrs door-to-door minimum for HFR.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

I'm using Union as a reference point because there's no easy way to discuss all of downtown and that's where the train journey would start. Union to YTZ being 20 mins by UPE is close to how long an Uber or streetcar would take to get to Billy Bishop. 5-10 mins either way isn't moving the needle substantially.



This would be true if you were taking a cab to get to Union to catch your HFR train too.



Here's the difference. If you wanted to be in downtown Toronto by 10, you would have to leave Montreal by 5pm with HFR. By air, you'd have to be at YUL by 7-730pm. Thanks to REM, you wouldn't have to leave downtown Montreal till 630pm.



Personally, I think 5-6 hrs is a stretch. Outside of peak rush, you can get from anywhere in the 416 to YYZ or YTZ in an hour by car. And most of the Island in an hour on the other side. Add in 1 hr for pre-boarding and 1 hr for the flight and that's roughly 4 hrs. If you add a 25% fudge to that it's 5 hrs. And that's pretty much just you train time with HFR. You'd still be traveling to/from the station on each side and having pre-boarding. Assuming the same driving coverage as the airports, that's 7 hrs door-to-door minimum for HFR.

Maybe I'm just a train nerd.

To me, 5 hrs spent on a train reading, working, and sleeping somehow feels a lot more enjoyable than 5 hrs spent jumping between checkin lines to airport security lines to airport lounge lines to pre-boarding lines (shuffling between AC's zone 1, 2, 3, 4....) to lining up to get seated to waiting for take off to preparing for landing to waiting to for a gate bridge to lining up to deplane to picking up your luggage on the carousel to waiting in line for another taxi at YUL. One thing I noticed when flying between YUL-YTZ/YYZ is that my Fitbit step counter shoots through the roof for the day because the number of times I had to get up, walk, wait, sit down, over and over again in a 4-5 hr window. I admit that YTZ-YUL or YYZ-YUL is a faster proposition, but it's a near hellish, seizure provoking experience even for frequent flyers with airline status.

 

[innsertnamehere]

From when I've flown to Montreal, it's been about this:

15 min - bikeshare from downtown to YTZ
~45 min - clear security and get to gate in YTZ
20 min - board plane and depart
1hr - fly
20 min - land and dock with gate, deboard
30 min - taxi to destination downtown.

total: 3:10.

Alternate for YYZ:

5 min - bikeshare from downtown to Uion
30 min - wait for and take UPX to YYZ
1:15 - clear security and get to gate in YYZ
20 min - board plane and depart
1hr - fly
20 min - land and dock with gate, deboard
30 min - taxi to destination downtown.

Total: 4:00

Those would of course be a bit longer in rush hours.

VIA HFR would be:

5 mins - bikeshare from downtown to Union
10 mins - pre-boarding, await train to depart
4:45 - train ride
5 minutes - deboard
5 minutes - taxi to downtown destination

Total: 5:10

so 1-2 hours longer. travel time wouldn't change in rush hour for the train at least.

HFR will be more competative for Ottawa trips though:

15 min - bikeshare from downtown to YTZ
~45 min - clear security and get to gate in YTZ
20 min - board plane and depart
1hr - fly
20 min - land and dock with gate, deboard
30 min - taxi to destination downtown.

Total: 3:10

vs.

5 mins - bikeshare from downtown to Union
10 mins - pre-boarding, await train to depart
3:15 - train ride
5 minutes - deboard
10 minutes - LRT to downtown
5 mins - walk to downtown destination

Total: 3:50

40 minutes longer for a much more comfortable and productive trip is probably worth it. vs. the alternative.

Depends where you live as well of course. If Eglinton station has parking and is, say, 15 mins faster, it may often be faster to taxi/drive to Eglinton station from many parts of the GTA and go from there than go to YYZ or YTZ.

Then there is the alternative of driving as well, which is a straight 4-5 hours for Ottawa, depending where in the GTA you are coming from.

 

[allengeorge]

Ottawa on track for decision on high-frequency trains between Toronto and Quebec City in ‘coming months’

Transport Minister Marc Garneau says the $4- to $6-billion plan would allow for more frequent trains, shorter trip times and better on-time performance

www.theglobeandmail.com

A few days old

 

[kEiThZ]

Maybe I'm just a train nerd.

To me, 5 hrs spent on a train reading, working, and sleeping somehow feels a lot more enjoyable than 5 hrs spent jumping between checkin lines to airport security lines to airport lounge lines to pre-boarding lines (shuffling between AC's zone 1, 2, 3, 4....) to lining up to get seated to waiting for take off to preparing for landing to waiting to for a gate bridge to lining up to deplane to picking up your luggage on the carousel to waiting in line for another taxi at YUL. One thing I noticed when flying between YUL-YTZ/YYZ is that my Fitbit step counter shoots through the roof for the day because the number of times I had to get up, walk, wait, sit down, over and over again in a 4-5 hr window. I admit that YTZ-YUL or YYZ-YUL is a faster proposition, but it's a near hellish, seizure provoking experience even for frequent flyers with airline status.

I like the train too! That's why we're all here. But you can't let fandom colour analysis.

It's pretty obvious that getting Montreal bound business travelers would be a tougher sell for VIA, without them knocking off at least 15-30 mins from the rumoured HFR trip time. Hard to tell how much it would cost, but from what we know, I think they could do that for $1-2B more.

 

[robmausser]

40 minutes longer for a much more comfortable and productive trip is probably worth it. vs. the alternative.

Depends where you live as well of course. If Eglinton station has parking and is, say, 15 mins faster, it may often be faster to taxi/drive to Eglinton station from many parts of the GTA and go from there than go to YYZ or YTZ.

Then there is the alternative of driving as well, which is a straight 4-5 hours for Ottawa, depending where in the GTA you are coming from.

Absolutely, thats a huge factor.

Getting on a train downtown and just plunking your ass in a seat and ending up downtown again in a single ride is way worth an extra 40 minutes versus the complexity and risk of issues with 2-3 transfers and dealing with airport security.

 

[roger1818]

I like the train too! That's why we're all here. But you can't let fandom colour analysis.

It's pretty obvious that getting Montreal bound business travelers would be a tougher sell for VIA, without them knocking off at least 15-30 mins from the rumoured HFR trip time. Hard to tell how much it would cost, but from what we know, I think they could do that for $1-2B more.

I am not so sure that could be done for the amount extra you are suggesting. As you previously said, according to the EcoTrain study, the 200km/h diesel option cost $9.067B in 2009 dollars. If you were to follow the same route, but slow it down to 177 km/h, you will save on grade separations but most of the other costs will be close to the same. For the entire Windsor to Quebec City route, grade separations accounted for 21% of the cost, so if we assume the total savings for the TOM section would be 25%, you are still looking at $6.8B 2009 dollars without electrification. That is considerably more than the $3.3B estimated for the TOM section of HFR (after you subtract the $1.14B for the Montreal Quebec portion from the $4.4B total).

 

[kEiThZ]

I am not so sure that could be done for the amount extra you are suggesting.

See the previous discussions we've had in this thread. It's pretty obvious there's a few spots where bypasses can be built or straight corridors cut which would save a fair bit of time. Saving time on Ottawa-Montreal would admittedly be challenging. But I have zero doubts, they could cut 15-30 mins from the Toronto-Ottawa trip if given $1-2B more.

As you previously said, according to the EcoTrain study, the 200km/h diesel option cost $9.067B in 2009 dollars. If you were to follow the same route, but slow it down to 177 km/h, you will save on grade separations but most of the other costs will be close to the same.

The Lakeshore proposals have all been substantially more expensive because there's far more settlement along that corridor, with a lot more crossings, stops, etc. A lot more traffic, freight and passenger (near the GTA). Straightening track along the Lakeshore would be more expensive. Land acquisition more expensive. Etc. Building the HFR route as HSR would probably be 20-30% cheaper than any Lakeshore proposal. This difference is only getting higher with each year as more development happens along the Lakeshore. The Havelock route is shorter too....

What we'll have to see is if they considered investment opportunities. Ie. This bypass save 10 mins but costs $100M. What does that do to passenger demand and fare premiums. I hope that analysis is eventually released. And we see what they could have done with additional capital. This is what a CAIV analysis (Cost as an Independent Variable) would tell us.

 

[kEiThZ]

.... the $3.3B estimated for the TOM section of HFR (after you subtract the $1.14B for the Montreal Quebec portion from the $4.4B total).

Just a note that $3B includes rolling stock. It's $2.1B for Toronto-Ottawa and $91.5M for Ottawa-Montreal. So $2.2B for TOM as per the Globe and Mail article some time back. That really seems unbelievably cheap (ballpark $3.67M/km for 600 km). Looks like they have some room to invest more. It's not even double track.

 

[robmausser]

I like the train too! That's why we're all here. But you can't let fandom colour analysis.

It's pretty obvious that getting Montreal bound business travelers would be a tougher sell for VIA, without them knocking off at least 15-30 mins from the rumoured HFR trip time. Hard to tell how much it would cost, but from what we know, I think they could do that for $1-2B more.

I really think we are focusing on trip length, but HFR has got it right, the REAL issue is reliability.

Out of the 20 trips to Montreal from Toronto ive taken, none have been on time. 5 of them were egregiously late.

These were for pleasure, but I know people who would swear to never take the train again after even one of these events where we were 2 hours late.

A businessperson? Forget about it.

 

[roger1818]

Just a note that $3B includes rolling stock.

Agreed, I included them because the EcoTrain study also included them.

It's $2.1B for Toronto-Ottawa and $91.5M for Ottawa-Montreal. So $2.2B for TOM as per the Globe and Mail article some time back. That really seems unbelievably cheap.

For what they are planning it sounds reasonable though. By following existing or former ROWs and not trying to straighten out curves that were put there for a reason, you save a lot of money.

 

[kEiThZ]

I really think we are focusing on trip length, but HFR has got it right, the REAL issue is reliability.

Out of the 20 trips to Montreal from Toronto ive taken, none have been on time. 5 of them were egregiously late.

These were for pleasure, but I know people who would swear to never take the train again after even one of these events where we were 2 hours late.

A businessperson? Forget about it.

Reliability does indeed suck. But for business travel, it's only the starting point of the discussion. It will help to improve consideration of rail. But a near 5 hr block time, I think is a tough sell to anybody not price sensitive, which really hurts VIA on revenue generation by hurting premiums. I don't think VIA needs High Speed Rail. But I think scheduled trips can't be longer than 4.5 hrs. And I think the closer you get to 4 hrs, the more competitive rail gets to air.

The retort would be that VIA only cares about driving pax. But if that's true, then why not add stops and make it a 6 hr trip? There's clearly a sweet spot in there. I think it's below 4.5 hrs, closer to 4 hrs. But I can accept that others see it differently.

There's also the political angle. And I agree with Paul. They spend $4.4B and Toronto-Montreal is still close to 5 hrs? It's going to be a PR disaster. The "but reliability" and "but frequency" arguments are going to be drowned out by people saying this is still a slow 5 hr ride. All those other benefits are far more sellable if the trip is a bit faster too. I'm honestly worried about how this might go down in the press when officially announced. Call me a concern troll if you must.

 

[kEiThZ]

Putting the travel time debate in a different context,. Consider a Torontonian driving to Quebec City for a weekend getaway. It's an 8 hr drive. HFR would make that a 7 hr train ride, assuming minimal transfer time in Montreal. So 1-2 hrs time savings at best on an 800 km trip. The fare would have to be really cheap to compete with the car on that.

 

[roger1818]

Putting the travel time debate in a different context,. Consider a Torontonian driving to Quebec City for a weekend getaway. It's an 8 hr drive. HFR would make that a 7 hr train ride, assuming minimal transfer time in Montreal. So 1-2 hrs time savings at best on an 800 km trip. The fare would have to be really cheap to compete with the car on that.

First of all, that 8 hours assumes no stops to pee, eat or drink (all of which you can do without stopping on the train). Secondly, if you assume that Torontonian is still using old 20th century technology and driving a gasoline car, that the car gets the Canadian average of 8.9 l/100km, and gas still only costs about $1 per litre, the cost of gas alone would be $142 for the round trip (not to mention the wear and tear on the vehicle). Not having the stress of driving and saving time would make paying more than that worthwhile.