News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 3.5K     11 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1.3K     3 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 2K     0 

VIA Rail

Northern Light said:
Press Release for today's announcement:

www.canada.ca

Minister of Transport announces new actions to deliver on Government of Canada’s commitment to improve passenger rail service in Southwestern Ontario

Canadians have been clear that they want faster, greener passenger rail service - and the Government of Canada is committed to making this a reality.
www.canada.ca www.canada.ca

Its Del Duca worthy..............

Advisors, studies and round tables ending in a report at the end of 2023, which may, or may not recommend extending the HFR project to Windsor.

View attachment 423919
Click to expand...
Translation: Today, the Minister of No Transport, the Somewhat Honourable Omar Alghabra, announced that the Government of a Bunch of Provinces will study whether we should study different study options that will improve VIA Rail in Southwestern Ontario. To this end, the Government of Canada will hire a bunch of overpaid consultants, who will study the best way to study the best way to deliver the political-needs of the Liberal Party in Southwestern Ontario communities. The consultants will analyze the best study options to not-degrade service in Southwestern Ontario for potential integration into a different and separate HFR study, and will deliver another study to the federal money-distributors by the end of 2023.

The Minister also reiterated that the Government of Provinces is committed to virtue signaling by "working with" (meaning we will ask them for their opinions and then ignore them) Indigenous groups and local communities to ensure that their views are heard and not acted upon. In early 2023, the Minister will "discuss" a study of a study with stakeholders.

These new actions build on more studies being done to study the overall passenger experience in Southwestern Ontario and along the Quebec City - Windsor corridor.
 
I posted this a year ago:
DirectionNorth said:
Government Press Release To Win Elections By Promising More Nothingness

July 22, 2021 Windsor, Ontario Doing Nothing To Improve Transport Canada
The Government of Canada is committed to bringing Canadian passenger rail into the early 20th century, introducing not-older-than-your-grandpa trains that we will pretend to be useful for travelers, outlined in a worthless plan without any actual vision that we won't meet anyways.

Today, our (least) favorite politicians announced yet another study in our endless cycle of studies, to maybe slightly improve (read: degrade) services in SW Ontario.

As we prepared to embark on a pretend-HFR building scheme from Toronto to Quebec City for political purposes, because this is a pre-election time of year, more studies are coming on how we can "improve" (read: cut costs) on passenger rail services west of Toronto, including London and Windsor.

The government will work with with VIA and the CIB through the HFR study office to ensure that we can do nothing except some press releases like this one, and that we can "integrate" with HFR. That is, do nothing. The Government will also negotiate with the province to identify places where we can cut service, to ensure that we "enhance" services to passenger rail services to "benefit" travellers by decreasing something ... confusion, maybe?

"There is demand for better passenger rail services in Southwestern Ontario. Putting back cancelled trains will create a nothingness as trains still use CN and CP tracks that are increasingly busy, enabling delays and politicizing of our rail network in the communities next to it. In addition, this section of VIA's services, with the highest cost-recovery ratio in the network, will continue to get a nothingness. We'll just say that economic growth came from the "improved" train."
The "Honorable" Omar Alghabra
Minister of Transport

"Resuming rail service that was previously cancelled goes hand-in-hand with throwing money away for lost causes like this one, and it is a key step in our goal to pretend to have some level of rail services between Windsor and Toronto."
Irek Kusmericzyk
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of "Employment", "Workforce Development", and "Disability Inclusion" and Member of Parliament for Windsor-Tecumseh

"Driven by our mission to do nothing, VIA Rail has been undertaking more endless studies to introduce trains that are younger than our employees which will transform the journey for nobody, because the trains are still using CN and CP tracks. The nothingness "announced" today represents yet another missed opportunity as we continue to offer no improvements in experience nor speed which connects to bulls***, while helping to do nothing in Southwestern Ontario."
Cynthia Garneau
VIA Rail Canada President and Chief Executive Officer
Click to expand...
 
DirectionNorth said:
I posted this a year ago:
Click to expand...
How will they provide more service when the current fleet replacement is a 1 to 1 ratio to what we have now? Sure its more reliable but you can only ask for so much with what you have. Unless you plan to include GO transit as part of that mix.

Also the Chatham sub is owned by VIA so the only part you need to study is how to gain track capacity between Aldershot and Chatham. Or purchase the north corridor and improve the track between Kitchener to London and then to Chatham.
 
Bordercollie said:
How will they provide more service when the current fleet replacement is a 1 to 1 ratio to what we have now?
Click to expand...
Quite a few cycles only depart in the afternoon (in lack of available slots in the morning) or have long breaks mid-day (for the same reason plus the requirement to turn trains between revenue runs). For instance, when comparing this cycling plan which was shared here before with the November 2017 schedule, you can see that Cycle #13 only departs with #44 at 14:20 and that cycles #5, #8, #12 and #14 have very long breaks in Toronto (required for turning the trains at TMC) with 3:50h between #63 (arr. 14:07) and #668 (dep. 17:57), 5:59h between #61 (arr. 11:41) and #54 (dep. 17:40), 3:53h between #51 (arr. 12:42) and #646 (dep. 16:35) and 4:15h between #43 (arr. 11:25) and #46 (dep. 15:40):

1661907002447.png


With push-pull capability being universally available on the new fleet and assuming additional slots in the morning and early afternoon, you could therefore easily operate more trains with the same number of physical trainsets...
 
Last edited:
Urban Sky said:
Quite a few cycles only depart in the afternoon (in lack of available slots in the morning) or have long breaks mid-day (for the same reason plus the requirement to turn trains between revenue runs). For instance, when comparing this cycling plan which was shared here before with the November 2017 schedule, you can see that Cycle #13 only departs with #44 at 14:20 and that cycles #5, #8, #12 and #14 have very long breaks in Toronto (required for turning the trains at TMC) with 3:50h between #63 (arr. 14:07) and #668 (dep. 17:57), 5:59h between #61 (arr. 11:41) and #54 (dep. 17:40), 3:53h between #51 (arr. 12:42) and #646 (dep. 16:35) and 4:15h between #43 (arr. 11:25) and #46 (dep. 15:40):

View attachment 424027

With push-pull capability being universally available on the new fleet and assuming additional slots in the morning and early afternoon, you could therefore easily operate more trains with the same number of physical trainsets...
Click to expand...
So the issue is to secure more track time between Aldershot and the beginning of the Chatham Sub?
 
Urban Sky said:
Once the new fleet has been delivered, the availability of slots over third-party infrastructure will be the main constraint against increasing frequencies…
Click to expand...
Is there any space for additional tracks along the Dundas Sub to London? I would think longer passing tracks would be required on the Chatham sub to provide more service, but the ROW so that isn't that hard. Would be nice to remove some slow orders around Ingersoll to make the trip faster.
 
Bordercollie said:
Is there any space for additional tracks along the Dundas Sub to London? I would think longer passing tracks would be required on the Chatham sub to provide more service, but the ROW so that isn't that hard. Would be nice to remove some slow orders around Ingersoll to make the trip faster.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure wether the results from the partial triple-tracking the Kingston Sub were convincing enough to give the “pay and pray” approach another try…
 
Last edited:
Urban Sky said:
I’m not sure how convincing the results from the partial triple-tracking the Kingston Sub were to give the “pay and pray” approach another try…
Click to expand...
Would they be better off buying the north corridor and making improvements to it? If CN is willing to sell.
 
Urban Sky said:
I’m not sure how convincing the results from the partial triple-tracking the Kingston Sub were to give the “pay and pray” approach another try…
Click to expand...

I prefer the idea of VIA-owned track; but understanding that is unlikely along certain track sections, I don't think the option of paying for additional passing track/twin track/triple track etc should be viewed badly.

The problems on the Kingston sub were that the money didn't buy what was advertised originally (less track than was supposed to be delivered); and the associated outcomes (priority/slots etc were diminished by having built less track)

The key to any such investment is that a fixed transfer from VIA/Gov't of Canada to CN (or CP if applicable) must buy a guaranteed result. Slots, priority, and 'x' km of new track.

No change orders, no changes in project budget, no exceptions on deliverables. If 100M is supposed to improve reliability, shave 20M off travel time or allow 2 extra frequencies it must do just that, and no one gets paid until it does.
 
Northern Light said:
I prefer the idea of VIA-owned track; but understanding that is unlikely along certain track sections, I don't think the option of paying for additional passing track/twin track/triple track etc should be viewed badly.

The problems on the Kingston sub were that the money didn't buy what was advertised originally (less track than was supposed to be delivered); and the associated outcomes (priority/slots etc were diminished by having built less track)

The key to any such investment is that a fixed transfer from VIA/Gov't of Canada to CN (or CP if applicable) must buy a guaranteed result. Slots, priority, and 'x' km of new track.

No change orders, no changes in project budget, no exceptions on deliverables. If 100M is supposed to improve reliability, shave 20M off travel time or allow 2 extra frequencies it must do just that, and no one gets paid until it does.
Click to expand...
If the consultant is smart they would put that as part of the terms of the deal.
 
The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if the Minister’s “we are going slow” announcement was intended to prod Ontario.

Hiring a SW Ontario czar to sort out what’s needed may not be a bad idea in that it creates a forum where Ottawa and Queens Park can integrate their plans outside of a purely political Minister-to-Minister forum.

To my mind, putting the Kitchener-Stratford line in full public control is a critical part of strategy. That reduces the CN-pax conflict to a short stretch of track in Peel-Halton and ten miles from London Jct to Komoka.

However, an Ottawa-Ontario joint plan is the paramount strategic objective.

The biggest risk is if two different planning efforts clash - there may not be enough capacity created in the Kitchener-Bramalea expansion to meet both GO and VIA aspirations. One would also expect Ottawa and Ontario to agree on cost sharing for both investment and operations.

If this new consultant can mesh GO and VIA planning, that’s a good thing. On the other hand, if Ottawa goes it alone, while ML is planning 2WAD to Kitchener with perhaps a Baden-Kitchener-Breslau Guelph local service emerging, there may not be enough track for HFR and a lot of time will be wasted.

There are certainly some things that need to be planned. London needs a better station with a more bus-train hub fuctionality. One wonders if the current location is optimal with respect to London’s transportation planning.

- Paul
 
DirectionNorth said:
Translation: Today, the Minister of No Transport, the Somewhat Honourable Omar Alghabra, announced that the Government of a Bunch of Provinces will study whether we should study different study options that will improve VIA Rail in Southwestern Ontario. To this end, the Government of Canada will hire a bunch of overpaid consultants, who will study the best way to study the best way to deliver the political-needs of the Liberal Party in Southwestern Ontario communities. The consultants will analyze the best study options to not-degrade service in Southwestern Ontario for potential integration into a different and separate HFR study, and will deliver another study to the federal money-distributors by the end of 2023.

The Minister also reiterated that the Government of Provinces is committed to virtue signaling by "working with" (meaning we will ask them for their opinions and then ignore them) Indigenous groups and local communities to ensure that their views are heard and not acted upon. In early 2023, the Minister will "discuss" a study of a study with stakeholders.

These new actions build on more studies being done to study the overall passenger experience in Southwestern Ontario and along the Quebec City - Windsor corridor.
Click to expand...
Its so infuriating that these career politicians are holding the country and via hostage with these stupid studies. studies is a keyword for deferment
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top