Allandale25
Senior Member
There a lot happening on that map. Where is that spur?
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
There a lot happening on that map. Where is that spur?
roger1818
Senior Member
The M&O line is the abandoned CPR line. (thus dotted red) north of VIA’s Alexandria sub.
nfitz
Superstar
Something like that ... back in the 1980s I think. I haven't heard much about it since the 1990s.
From Hudson in Quebec, most of the way to Ottawa.
roger1818
Senior Member
Not most of the way, but all the way. VIA's wye just east of Ottawa Station as well as some of their final approach into the station is along the old Montreal and Ottawa railway (later to become CPR's M&O sub) as shown in the map below (M&O ROW (in red) curtesy of the Ontario Railway Map Collection).
Last edited:
roger1818
Senior Member
My apologies for the lack of responsiveness lately, but I'm on paternity leave currenty and therefore have slightly different priorities at the moment...
Congratulations! That is totally understandable. I am sure you are also lacking sleep at the moment.
I apologise. There are many strawman arguments on here and it seemed as though that was another one.
If you take another look at that map, it only shows the ROW owned by VIA plus the likely HFR route. The Winchester Sub west of De Beaujeu is conspicuously missing (Hint, I intentionally deleted it).
That is why I said it would only be done when demand is high enough to justify it and the bypass would be made as short as feasible to minimize those costs (even if it makes the total distance traveled a bit longer).
Considering bypasses could be much less than "100 km long" and could be much less than than "40+ km away" (there are many options but it could easily be less than 50km long and less than 20km from Ottawa Station if you wanted to keep it short to minimize construction and maintenance costs), that seems like a needlessly demanding challenge. Having said that, have a look at the German ICE route from Hamburg to Munich, a 250-280km/h bypass was built around Frankfurt (which is bigger than Ottawa), that is about 85 km as the crow flies (though rail maps show the actual route to be longer) and about 68 km east of Frankfurt (using the route shown on Google Maps).
ICEtracks
Classical geographer, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Not really a fair comparison as the TGV is aligned to travel straight through Lyon, so significantly more track would be needed to circle around the city rather than cut the corner. If the plan was to use the M&O sub, then maybe it would be more comparable, but with the Alexandra sub, there is a triangle that can be cut off somewhere (once again, not necessarily to create the shortest route overall, but to shorten the length of the bypass required).
nfitz
Superstar
Excellent!
I was trying to check quite what happened in the west on the Canadian Railway Atlas - but it doesn't seem to want to load for me this week.
kEiThZ
Superstar
It's a really simple calculation. How many passengers does bypassing Ottawa add? And what does that do to the cost model?
As it stands, I'm not sure that bypassing Ottawa will actually yield a net increase in passengers if the bypass results in lower frequencies to Ottawa or Montreal, than a combined service would have. Meanwhile, the bypass increases VIA's operating costs and capital required, reducing profitability and damaging the business case for the overall service.
I don't think there's any sensible way to make the math work on this until we're at the point that HFR is running on 30 min departures and still facing substantial demand. And at that point, investment in upgrading towards higher speed rail will start looking more appealing.
As it stands, I'm not sure that bypassing Ottawa will actually yield a net increase in passengers if the bypass results in lower frequencies to Ottawa or Montreal, than a combined service would have. Meanwhile, the bypass increases VIA's operating costs and capital required, reducing profitability and damaging the business case for the overall service.
I don't think there's any sensible way to make the math work on this until we're at the point that HFR is running on 30 min departures and still facing substantial demand. And at that point, investment in upgrading towards higher speed rail will start looking more appealing.
Last edited:
DirectionNorth
Senior Member
Probably an issue with the atlas. It's not loading for me, either.
I believe the M&O has been converted into a trail.
roger1818
Senior Member
For HFR, I agree 100%. I have said it before and will say it again, but a bypass would only be useful once both of the following are true:
- Demand increases on Montreal-Toronto, Montreal-Ottawa and Ottawa-Toronto increases to the point that they can all have a minimum of hourly train service, independently of each other.
- VIA has the funding to build HSR.
EDIT: Fixed typo where I forgot the word "not"
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
It was, as a temporary use - but there was talk of closing it to. I'm not sure the status - but here's a story from a few years ago https://ottawacitizen.com/news/loca...-prescott-russell-may-be-in-danger-of-closing
I thought their agreement with VIA Rail to use it expired in 2020.
Edit - breaking news. There's an extension of the agreement until June 2021.
But the big news is that VIA Rail may be selling (that part of) the M&O sub to the county - http://en.prescott-russell.on.ca/news/what_s_new/ucpr_and_via_rail_canada_extend_lease
lenaitch
Senior Member
Current land use aside, I would think the compelling point is who owns it, and if the ownership is continuous end-to-end.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I'm suggesting this won't be enough. Because at that point, the comparison will be against half hourly service on the whole route. And 30 min headways would be an absolute gamechanger. No more booking tickets on Tuesdays. Tap your Presto, Opus or credit card and board, 10 mins after you show up at the station. Traveling from Ottawa or Montreal to Toronto will be no different than taking a GO train from Union to Kitchener at that point. Weighing that kind of service against saving a few minutes for a subset of riders will not work well for that subset. The dead time saved for all passengers outweighs the trip time savings for a subset of passengers.
Keep in mind, too, the bypass doesn't just impact Ottawa-Toronto. It also reduces frequencies on Ottawa-Montreal, a stretch that would see several towns become notable exurbs to both metros as service increases.
If there's HSR funding, a bypass becomes even less important because the time savings from the bypass would be even lower, while the capital and operating costs go up. VIA would have to maintain the HSR bypass and the HSR Ottawa-Montreal mainline. All to save 10-15 mins? Not going to happen.
But if we're at the point that we have HSR trains leaving Union in Toronto every 30 mins and demand is still growing such that they need to increase frequencies, a bypass might start looking appealing. But that is realistically outside of any of our lifetimes here. And who knows what kind of technology will be there at that point.
Last edited:
MisterF
Senior Member
I'd add one more variable to your formula: how many passengers would be lost? Considering that Ottawa is the second busiest Via station in the corridor, it seems likely that each train bypassing it would lose more Ottawa passengers than it would gain Montreal passengers.
Not to mention that trains using the CP mainline world be subject to the same reliability and scheduling issues that plague the current route. So we'd probably spend billions of dollars for fewer passengers, higher costs, worse reliability, and less revenue. This bypass idea is nuts.
Allandale25
Senior Member
roger1818
Senior Member
Why do people keep assuming that the CP mainline would be the only option? Be it strawman arguments or just poor short term memory, it gets tiring when people keep bringing up fake arguments to prove their point.