Urban Sky
Senior Member
I was replying to your absurd claim that prices were now in the $400-range:
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Oh sorry. That was for two people return. My apologies. I meant flying is $400 one way per person.
Last edited:
roger1818
Senior Member
High-frequency rail: Reimagining the way we live and travel
On July 6, the federal government announced its intention to proceed with the first steps in the preparation of the procurement process for the High Frequency Rail …
www.thewhig.com
Allandale25
Senior Member
High-performance rail service is a solid intercity solution for Canada
Canada can have a network of modern, swift, affordable and efficient passenger trains, like virtually every other industrialized nation. Yet it doesn’t. In the 1970s, both the American and Canadian passenger train systems were taken over by their federal governments. Since then, Canada has...
policyoptions.irpp.org
Northern Light
Superstar
High-performance rail service is a solid intercity solution for Canada
Canada can have a network of modern, swift, affordable and efficient passenger trains, like virtually every other industrialized nation. Yet it doesn’t. In the 1970s, both the American and Canadian passenger train systems were taken over by their federal governments. Since then, Canada has...
From the article linked above; a table that I think might spark some discussion:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Population in Canada, 2019: 37.4 million
VIA Ridership in 2019: 5,007,753 (i.e. 133.9 annual trips per 1000 Canadians)
Population in the United States, 2019: 329.1 million
Amtrak ridership in FY 2019: 32,519,241 (i.e. 98.8 annual trips per 1000 Americans)
As long as Amtrak's per-capita ridership is one-quarter lower than that of VIA (despite a much more favorable operating environment like enforceable rights towards its host railroads and the NEC being entirely in public ownership), I'm really puzzled as to why rail fans keep looking enviously to our Southern Neighbor (of all passenger railway networks available in the world!) to get inspiration for their turnaround strategies...
Northern Light
Superstar
Your stats, are, of course valid. But your curiosity puzzles me.
Rail Fans, as potential passengers are fans of more service.
That's all that's being articulated here; more service equals greater ridership; better service equals greater ridership.
They are, in fact, making the VIA HFR case, and simply using the Amtrak numbers to buttress that to extend the argument to other Canadian services outside the corridor.
The argument's logic is sound.
A lower dollar investment (vs high speed rail) can achieve a material gain in ridership and help rebuild a more robust passenger rail service.
The Amtrak example is the only implemented example (on select routes) in North America.
Its relatable; and avoids the "but we're not Europe or we're not China/Japan etc." argument.
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
They may add more trips by then. Which should open up seats.
The trainmaster? On 72 told me that they are coming back in August but I haven't seen an announcement yet.
ManyQuestions
Active Member
I've also noticed that there it is much more difficult to get lower priced tickets tickets than before the pandemic. I think this might be because they eliminated the cheapest ~$60 OTT-MTL rt tickets and the rest are selling out much earlier because afaik capacity is still a quarter of the pre-pandemic levels on this route given reduced frequencies and no aisle seats. Whatever the reason, I have transitioned to making almost the entirety of my now nearly semi-weekly trips by car to save money. It's just hard to justify spending over double the full-trip cost to travel with VIA with the limited frequencies and the need to book even further in advance, especially now that I have easier access to a car.
I only bring this up because these personal observations have really proved to me that HFR is a good idea, especially if it can lead to lower ticket prices than HSR. While the lowest possible travel times are great for marketing and prestige, speeds are not the only factor in mode selection and will be less important than flexibility on shorter routes such as my regular OTT-MTL trip. Of course this isn't to say that HSR would be bad, I understand that it could in theory reduce ticket costs if all CAPEX if paid by the government and not infrabank loans, but I now have a greater appreciation of lower speed rail and really hope that VIA will introduce flexible tickets if they can get HFR built.
I only bring this up because these personal observations have really proved to me that HFR is a good idea, especially if it can lead to lower ticket prices than HSR. While the lowest possible travel times are great for marketing and prestige, speeds are not the only factor in mode selection and will be less important than flexibility on shorter routes such as my regular OTT-MTL trip. Of course this isn't to say that HSR would be bad, I understand that it could in theory reduce ticket costs if all CAPEX if paid by the government and not infrabank loans, but I now have a greater appreciation of lower speed rail and really hope that VIA will introduce flexible tickets if they can get HFR built.
ManyQuestions
Active Member
I'm surprised that they included route like Regina-Winnipeg and Regina-Calgary without considering current local political projects like Montreal-Sherbrooke and Toronto-North Bay. The latter seem significantly more likely to be potentially reintroduced, but ofc all would be interesting.
https://www.latribune.ca/actualites...e-est-lancee-28d148a0d9738a7181b7f8c20621ca4a
Le retour sur les rails
CHRONIQUE / Cette semaine, il y a eu l’annonce pour le TGF entre Québec et Toronto, puis une somme de 450 000 $ a été allouée pour étudier la faisabilité du train Montérégie-Estrie, sans parler du projet en Gaspésie, le REM à Montréal ou le tramway à Québec. Visiblement, on souhaite remettre le...
www.latribune.ca
Darwinkgo
Active Member
Relatively frequent on the CP mainlines west of Winnipeg - just aren’t going to happen without twinning. 4 frequencies a day if they operated at freight speed displaces 1/6th of the freight traffic. More at higher speed.
roger1818
Senior Member
The one column that is missing in this table (and the table for US corridors) is the population. Ridership is driven by demand and population is a decent indicator of potential demand (though there are other factors).
ManyQuestions
Active Member
This is why I think that Edmonton-Calgary-Banff and maybe Montreal-Sherbrooke are likely to be the only viable new VIA routes, even though that is still fairly unlikely. If those routes can't get built with frequent service then i don't really see much point in further expanding rail into more regions that can barely support bus networks, even though I live in a town that lost regular passenger rail service in 92 that I would use if reinstated. The replacement bus network is faster and more frequent than the former train yet it still suffers from extremely low ridership simply due to low population density.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
I could see some sort of Moncton-Halifax train or maybe Saint John-Moncton-Halifax, but even that is tenuous.
roger1818
Senior Member
I would add Vancouver-Seattle (and on to Portland) to the list (249 (plus 299) km and metro populations of 2.5, 4.0 and 2.8 million respectively). Prior to COVID, Amtrak was running 2 trains a day between Vancouver and Seattle. To increase that, significant (and very expensive) upgrades would be necessary through White Rock and across the Fraser River. Hardly a value proposition if they are only wanting to add two additional trains a day like the table suggests. Now if they could go to 8 or more trains a day, then the economics could be different.
One puzzle is this is listed as a "Former VIA Rail route" on the table. Did VIA ever operate a train on this route?