nfitz
Superstar
There is indeed talk of the HFR using the Stouffville line from Union to reach the CP line to Peterborough. Especially now that the Don valley is out, with Metrolinx building a rail yard on the track that VIA would need.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
kEiThZ
Superstar
I was referring to this hypothetical.
Broadly, what I mean is that VIA needs to have stations wherever they cross Eglinton (and Bloor-Danforth). On HFR and the current Lakeshore service. Ditto West of Union too.
roger1818
Senior Member
I saw the link to this article on SSP.
windsorstar.com
One quote of interest by Marc Magilari, spokesman for Amtrak:
Cross-border rail tunnel passenger service moves step closer
Amtrak and CP Rail have reached an agreement that would allow passenger service through Detroit River Rail Tunnel after a 50-year hiatus.
windsorstar.com
One quote of interest by Marc Magilari, spokesman for Amtrak:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I only see any chance of this happening if Ford really goes ahead with refurbishing Detroit's Michigan Central Station with all the border facilities needed to clear US and Canadian customs. And even then, I only see existing VIA trains extended to Detroit, where passengers would clear customs before boarding / after detraining a VIA train in Detroit.I saw the link to this article on SSP.
Cross-border rail tunnel passenger service moves step closer
Amtrak and CP Rail have reached an agreement that would allow passenger service through Detroit River Rail Tunnel after a 50-year hiatus.
One quote of interest by Marc Magilari, spokesman for Amtrak:
In order to allow for sufficient time to clear customs (and account for delayed inbound trains) a transfer time of 90-120 minutes seems desirable. If we look at the pre-Covid schedules (and assume that VIA trains still serve the station in Walkerville, with a 15 minute dwell time and a 45 minute travel time onwards to Detroit), this would result in a transfer time of 3 hours Eastbound, but 6 hours Westbound:
Not that easy to schedule convenient connections in Detroit with only three trains operating to Chicago, but I believe I read that Amtrak wants to increase that to six round-trips, which should provide for much more flexibility...
Northern Light
Superstar
There's been nothing specific on restoring the train depot components to active use, that I'm aware of; but to be clear, the project of restoring the building is well under way and has been for some time.
Ford has also expressly suggested retaining some future ability for train service, though by no means as a major station (they contemplated removing several tracks/platforms as I recall, but don't hold me to that)
To be clear, I defer to your knowledge in this area, but ask sincerely:
Why would it be organized that way?
The Maple Leaf doesn't unload all its passengers to be picked up by a separate train (though the customs situations is terrible and there is a crew change).
Amtrak runs (relatively) seemless service on the west coast to Vancouver and to Montreal.
There's clearly a customs issue to work out; but I would imagine using a single train set and switching crews if required).
{***
By no means am I opposed to have VIA start a run in Detroit, if the business case is there and travel times can be reliable; but that's not what I was imagining in terms of an Amtrak service to Toronto.
As noted, I'm imagining this differently.
I also imagine, if VIA were to service Detroit, it would make far more sense to return the station to its original site and then transfer to owned trackage along existing or new connections as appropriate.
Serving Walkerville would seem cumbersome, but perhaps that's just me.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Because it's logistically simpler and more robust. The main advantages are that Via service is less vulnerable to delays at the border and it allows for a physical separation of customs areas in the station without the need to physically shunt a train from one track to the other. Keeping each train in a single customs zone improves security and border control.
Additional advantages include:
- Via equipment is permitted to operate 100 mph (161 km/h) in Canada, Amtrak equipment is only permitted 79 mph (127 km/h)
- Allows Via crews to stay in Via equipment (and Amtrak in Amtrak), simplifying crew training and certification.
As you mentioned, the existing situation in Niagara Falls is terrible and should not be emulated.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
^I’m not optimistic about Windsor-Detroit, because
a) the customs process, as noted, is problemmatic.
b) even with reconstruction, at best the approach to both Windsor and Detroit, and the passage between these termini, will be slow speed -this plus customs layover will make for slow trip times
c) much of the investment needed in track etc is in Canada, and while Amtrak may have capital at the moment, it’s unlikely that it would be allowed to spend it on this side of the border, and there is no sign that Ottawa is willing to fund on this side….hence the hint that Ontario might have to do so
d) a single train per day looks nice on the map, but as a matter of modal share it’s only a cosmetic victory.… a single Dash-8 carries as many people.
The route has huge potential, but only if we eliminate the very things we are admitting will be baked into the design - change of trains in Detroit, inability to leverage the high speed running currently available in Michigan,, and train frequency.
If the passage to Detroit could become a 15-minute addition to current VIA schedules, then one could easily run three trains a day each way and have a much greater market penetration. Extend those train even part way across Michigan, and that market share can become even higher…. whereas, while the Ford reno will be fantastic, I can’t see many people driving to Ford and parking their cars for even a day trip. While Detroit is on the road to recovery, the siting of Ford as a terminal is unproven for today’s travellers… Detroit/Southern Michigan is still an autocentric metropolis, downtown Detroit is still intimidationg, and will be for a long time.
This sounds pesssimistic, I admit, and I’d like to be much less so, but I see these obstacles as far from being movable.
Lastly, I do not share other posters acceptance of the hub design, here and elsewhere. I agree that it permits greater operational reliability… but that’s strictly cosmetic. Dwell time is toxic to the passenger experience. If I’m going to cool my heels somewhere for 90 minutes, I might as well do it in an airport where there are more amenities. We should be fixing Niagara Falls and then using it as a model for other through services, not declaring defeat and propagating a bad model. Changing trains, especially crowded trains, is a losing proposition for the customer… a reliable service that doesn’t attract riders is no victory..
- Paul
a) the customs process, as noted, is problemmatic.
b) even with reconstruction, at best the approach to both Windsor and Detroit, and the passage between these termini, will be slow speed -this plus customs layover will make for slow trip times
c) much of the investment needed in track etc is in Canada, and while Amtrak may have capital at the moment, it’s unlikely that it would be allowed to spend it on this side of the border, and there is no sign that Ottawa is willing to fund on this side….hence the hint that Ontario might have to do so
d) a single train per day looks nice on the map, but as a matter of modal share it’s only a cosmetic victory.… a single Dash-8 carries as many people.
The route has huge potential, but only if we eliminate the very things we are admitting will be baked into the design - change of trains in Detroit, inability to leverage the high speed running currently available in Michigan,, and train frequency.
If the passage to Detroit could become a 15-minute addition to current VIA schedules, then one could easily run three trains a day each way and have a much greater market penetration. Extend those train even part way across Michigan, and that market share can become even higher…. whereas, while the Ford reno will be fantastic, I can’t see many people driving to Ford and parking their cars for even a day trip. While Detroit is on the road to recovery, the siting of Ford as a terminal is unproven for today’s travellers… Detroit/Southern Michigan is still an autocentric metropolis, downtown Detroit is still intimidationg, and will be for a long time.
This sounds pesssimistic, I admit, and I’d like to be much less so, but I see these obstacles as far from being movable.
Lastly, I do not share other posters acceptance of the hub design, here and elsewhere. I agree that it permits greater operational reliability… but that’s strictly cosmetic. Dwell time is toxic to the passenger experience. If I’m going to cool my heels somewhere for 90 minutes, I might as well do it in an airport where there are more amenities. We should be fixing Niagara Falls and then using it as a model for other through services, not declaring defeat and propagating a bad model. Changing trains, especially crowded trains, is a losing proposition for the customer… a reliable service that doesn’t attract riders is no victory..
- Paul
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Yeah. I'm not a fan of this once a day virtue signaling regional service. I honestly think all cross-border services should transfer to a VIA train at an integrated customs, immigration and transfer station on the US side. Even the Maple Leaf should terminate in Niagara Falls.
This allows VIA to substantially ramp up services to border towns without relying substantially on Amtrak. It also allows alternatives to Amtrak to develop from those cities, for onward service. For example, I imagine a bi-hourly VIA service to Niagara Falls, NY would be very popular. Might even replace bus service to Buffalo airport with easy shuttles from Niagara.
This allows VIA to substantially ramp up services to border towns without relying substantially on Amtrak. It also allows alternatives to Amtrak to develop from those cities, for onward service. For example, I imagine a bi-hourly VIA service to Niagara Falls, NY would be very popular. Might even replace bus service to Buffalo airport with easy shuttles from Niagara.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
Buffalo has reinvigorated itself to the point where an extended GO Niagara service to the downtown station would see good demand, especially on weekends. Detroit is reaching that point, especially when the Leafs and Jays play there. The bus service across the border for special events is so good (albeit jam packed) that maybe a train isn’t needed. I wonder whether a high quality bus link running direct station to station would suffice.
I have experiences both in Canada and Europe with change-en-route. At one point, the Swiss railways refused to handle high speed Italian trainsets on the Milan-Zurich run because they were not built to their electrical code (and did catch fire once or twice). The reserved seat train we had booked came to a halt in Chiasso, and we were ushered across the platform - no passport check, just a trainstitution. The Swiss trainset, of a different design, was unreserved and not even car-numbers applied. Nothing like an entire train of passengers with luggage vieing for seats with crew urging everyone to get on board quickly!
I experienced similar back in the day when CN turned its Ottawa-Brockville trains at Brockville, sending an entire Thanksgiving weekend load of customers to wait on the platform for a Montreal-Toronto train to arrive.
Maybe a pet peeve, but I really think the change-trains idea is sub-optimal for these cross-border routes.
- Paul
kEiThZ
Superstar
Should be less of an issue in this day and age with electronic bookings. They should be able to do more integrated ticketing too.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
The only way to get from Windsor Station to the tunnel is by using the Essex Terminal Railway, you would need to integrate their tracks with VIA/Amtrak CTC or dispatch. Or run their own dedicated tracks along their right of way. It's not an easy process.
roger1818
Senior Member
roger1818
Senior Member
Since it is Amtrak, not VIA, that has negotiated a deal with CP to use their tunnel, I see a more likely option would be for Amtrak to extend some of their trains to Windsor with pre-clearance facilities being built there (similar to Vancouver and Montreal).
This extension would certainly be dependant on Amtrak significantly improving their service (in both speed and frequency) between Chicago and Detroit (and maybe HFR west as well). It would also require VIA and Amtrak to work together to co-ordinate their schedules. All of this will take time and it certainly won't happen overnight.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
If we have any intention of connecting the Canadian and American passenger networks across the Ontario/Michigan border, then a customs station at Michigan Central is (from what I can tell) the only reasonable path forward. Of course it would be more ideal for Chicago-Toronto passengers to have a customs facility in Toronto, with a single-seat ride seamlessly crossing the border, but doing so would also require customs facilities at any Canadian station at which the train stops. That is a good longer term goal, but even then the first step would still be to build a customs facility in Detroit to serve all of the communities between Toronto and Detroit skipped by Amtrak's through service. If we only build a customs facility in Toronto, then everyone in southwestern Ontario would need to backtrack to Toronto to cross the border, which of course hardly anyone would do. The number of passengers lost west of Toronto could easily exceed the number of passengers to/from Toronto who are dissuaded by the travel times at the border.
The key factor which makes the Detroit hub concept more palatable than some other en-route transfers is that most passengers would want to disembark in Detroit regardless, either to go to/from Detroit, or to transfer to another service such as the existing train service to Pontiac, the planned commuter service to Ann Arbor, and the proposed Amtrak service to Cleveland via Toledo.
Conceptual services from Michigan Central station.
- I transfered the existing Pontiac Amtrak service to the future Michigan commuter rail agency, to allow through-running from Ann Arbor to Pontiac serving both of Detroit's central stations.
The primary goal stated in the above article is not to create a Chicago-Toronto rail connection, it is to create a Detroit-Toronto rail connection, with the through-traffic from other American cities being a modest bonus. The US is already planning to increase service between Chicago and Detroit, and putting Detroit on the VIA map would allow them to increase Detroit/Windsor - Toronto service too, regardless of any through passengers from Chicago.
Here's a vision of how a relatively modest service level on both sides of the border could massively increase cross-border connectivity. The idea is that every 3 hours there would be a timed meet, where all or most of the lines would arrive and dwell, facilitating transfers. To allow time to clear customs, the VIA train would be first to arrive, and last to leave.
I assumed 4 platforms in service, because Ford has stated that they are protecting the 4 southern platforms for passenger rail operations. This is rather underwhelming - I would have wanted at least 5 platforms to enable growth for the 5 services serving the station.
The below timetables are purely to illustrate the concept for timed meets, and the times of day at which they might occur. Any of these time slots may actually be occupied by other train movements and/or not be approved by the host railway. Travel times between Detroit and Windsor are also significantly reduced compared to current trackage.
I made these fantasy timetables a while ago and am not entirely satisfied with them, the dwell time for VIA should be much higher to provide a larger margin of error for passengers transferring through customs.
The key factor which makes the Detroit hub concept more palatable than some other en-route transfers is that most passengers would want to disembark in Detroit regardless, either to go to/from Detroit, or to transfer to another service such as the existing train service to Pontiac, the planned commuter service to Ann Arbor, and the proposed Amtrak service to Cleveland via Toledo.
Conceptual services from Michigan Central station.
- I transfered the existing Pontiac Amtrak service to the future Michigan commuter rail agency, to allow through-running from Ann Arbor to Pontiac serving both of Detroit's central stations.
The primary goal stated in the above article is not to create a Chicago-Toronto rail connection, it is to create a Detroit-Toronto rail connection, with the through-traffic from other American cities being a modest bonus. The US is already planning to increase service between Chicago and Detroit, and putting Detroit on the VIA map would allow them to increase Detroit/Windsor - Toronto service too, regardless of any through passengers from Chicago.
A service with connections in Detroit will certainly not be very fast, but neither are the alternatives. Wait times at the roadway bridges are often long and unpredictable, and plane passengers also need line up to clear customs. Both of those delays would tend to be well under the 90 minutes likely to be scheduled for a transfer in Detroit, but much of that time could be spent wandering around the new amenities at Michigan Central, which will include shopping and parks.
Indeed Canada needs to be fully on board to make this happen, primarily to upgrade the Essex Terminal trackage for passenger use. However, the US could fund most or even all of the capital work to reactivate Michigan Central Station and build a customs facility.
If we do decide to go through with upgrading the Essex Terminal trackage, we should indeed aim for a lot more than just a single connection per day. Perhaps one train per day could run non-stop from Detroit to London to avoid the reverse move, but other trains should also be extended across the border.
Here's a vision of how a relatively modest service level on both sides of the border could massively increase cross-border connectivity. The idea is that every 3 hours there would be a timed meet, where all or most of the lines would arrive and dwell, facilitating transfers. To allow time to clear customs, the VIA train would be first to arrive, and last to leave.
I assumed 4 platforms in service, because Ford has stated that they are protecting the 4 southern platforms for passenger rail operations. This is rather underwhelming - I would have wanted at least 5 platforms to enable growth for the 5 services serving the station.
The below timetables are purely to illustrate the concept for timed meets, and the times of day at which they might occur. Any of these time slots may actually be occupied by other train movements and/or not be approved by the host railway. Travel times between Detroit and Windsor are also significantly reduced compared to current trackage.
I made these fantasy timetables a while ago and am not entirely satisfied with them, the dwell time for VIA should be much higher to provide a larger margin of error for passengers transferring through customs.
The station access in Detroit is certainly an important consideration. In addition to looking into options such as extending the streetcar along Michigan Ave to the station, it's worth noting that people also have the option of taking a taxi/ridershare to the station. The cost of those services makes them impractical for access to regional stations (*cough* London at 05:20 *cough*) but even Americans are accustomed to travelling to a car-centric wasteland (a.k.a. airport) without using their own personal vehicles, as part of a long-distance trip.
Given that so many passengers will be embarking/disembarking at Detroit regardless of how the customs is set up, I would argue that Detroit is actually is a more promising place to demonstrate an international rail terminal than Niagara Falls. Niagara could then use Detroit as a model.
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
We're veering well into the hypothetical here, but...
Keep in mind that at this time only one of the two bores of the tunnel is being used - the northerly one.
I don't know what the condition of the southern bore is right now (I don't believe that it has been used since the early 1990s), but it seems to me that barring any major structural issues it would make more sense to dedicate it to any hypothetical cross-border VIA service as its clearances have not been raised like they have on the northern bore. And considering the proximity of the tunnel entrance to the station, therefore it would make more sense to me to have a separate platform (or platforms) on the south side of the mainline dedicated to this hypothetical cross-border service. Doing so would allow for more freedom of scheduling with the freights, as they wouldn't be directly interfacing with them as much.
Dan