VIA Rail

[crs1026]

That is the crux of a govt run operation. It's at the whim of the political winds.
That's why private railways are always much more stable regardless of the downsides

As much as I don’t like the progress and direction (or lack thereof), this project is actually fairly CPC-proof.

The P3 format takes things out of a space where the project can be criticized as growth in government, or as a non-profit generating boondoggle. It also massages the cash flow to a more bottom line sensitive optic. (Cosmetically, perhaps….but if it works….). So I don’t believe they will oppose it on principle or simply from a subsidy/cost perspective, although they may apply a bit of pragmatism in scope.

The biggest risk is that the Cons will bristle at the amount of consultation required or the quiet “gives“ that will no doubt be part of that process. While the Liberals rejoice in being seen as “inclusive” and consultative and conciliatory (again, more cosmetics than reality sometimes) the Cons will want to show that they are in charge and not diverted by opposition ( mumble Ford mumble…). So the “consultation” process could be botched, or simply degenerate into a legal battle with a virtual stalemate (similar to the pipeline morass). The biggest impact may be pace.

At the end of the day, the Cons will be left with various proposals and demand from air and highway transport, and once those price tags are apparent, HxR may not look so bad.

- Paul

 

[DSC]

As much as I don’t like the progress and direction (or lack thereof), this project is actually fairly CPC-proof.

The P3 format takes things out of a space where the project can be criticized as growth in government, or as a non-profit generating boondoggle. It also massages the cash flow to a more bottom line sensitive optic. (Cosmetically, perhaps….but if it works….). So I don’t believe they will oppose it on principle or simply from a subsidy/cost perspective, although they may apply a bit of pragmatism in scope.

The biggest risk is that the Cons will bristle at the amount of consultation required or the quiet “gives“ that will no doubt be part of that process. While the Liberals rejoice in being seen as “inclusive” and consultative and conciliatory (again, more cosmetics than reality sometimes) the Cons will want to show that they are in charge and not diverted by opposition ( mumble Ford mumble…). So the “consultation” process could be botched, or simply degenerate into a legal battle with a virtual stalemate (similar to the pipeline morass). The biggest impact may be pace.

At the end of the day, the Cons will be left with various proposals and demand from air and highway transport, and once those price tags are apparent, HxR may not look so bad.

- Paul

No doubt the prospect of creating a regime like in UK where the government awards operating contracts to private rail companies would appeal to many politicians as it would provide a further way to reward the likes of the now very prevalent "Friends of Doug".

 

[Dieppe]

Does anyone know how much Via pays CN for running rights & dispatching services yearly ? This has always
appeared to be a state secret.

 

[crs1026]

Does anyone know how much Via pays CN for running rights & dispatching services yearly ? This has always
appeared to be a state secret.

The granular detail is kept confidential, yes. But the overall numbers do fall out at least in approximate amounts if you look for them.

Here are a couple screen shots from VIA's last Annual Report.

While people grumble incessantly (and justifiably IMHO) about the host railways' lack of transparency, when you break down VIA's overall expenditures, the track rental number ends up being a lot less than people assume.

If you want this number, you are best advised to do some research - in VIA's official reports and policy statements, and in government documents. And as simply as reading back through earlier pages of this thread. (There are no dumb questions, but there are questions that require investing a bit of effort).

VIa renegotiated its service contract with CN not too long ago so there are likely new numbers that will come out eventually.

- Paul

 

[Dieppe]

I've read a few of Via's annual reports & this # is not clearly defined.

 

[Urban Sky]

I've read a few of Via's annual reports & this # is not clearly defined.

For what it's worth, we can approximate VIA's fuel costs for 2019 as follows by comparing its Annual Report 2019 and Sustainable Mobility Report 2019:

Metric	Value	Source
Passenger-miles in 2019	1,055,000,000	Annual Report 2019, p. 8
Passenger-km in 2019	1,700,000,000	Calculated from previous row
Liter fuel per pax-km in 2019	0.027	Sustainable Mobility Report 2019, p.46
Annual fuel consuption in 2019	45,850,000	Calculated from previous two rows
Average fuel price [$] per liter Diesel in 2019	1.22	Canada Energy Regulator
Approximate annual fuel costs [$] in 2019	55,900,000	Calculated from previous two rows

Therefore, if we make the assumption that all of VIA's "Train Operating Costs" account for track access charges only, then we know what is the maximum value of track access charges which VIA could possibly pay:

Metric	Value	Source
"Train Operations and Fuel" costs [$] in 2019	149,800,000	Annual Report 2019, p.62
Assumed annual fuel costs [$] in 2019	55,900,000	See last row of previous table
Train-miles operated in 2019	6,933,000	Annual Report 2019, p.8
Maximum-possible value for track access charge payments [$] in 2019	93,900,000	Calculated from first two rows of this table
(per train-mile)	13.54	Calculated from previous two rows

Obviously, a railroad's operating costs also include things like staff (Locomotive Engineers, On-train staff, station staff) and maintenance (staff, materials, equipment) costs, but I'll leave it to other people to speculate what part (if any) of that is included in the "Train Operations" or reported elsewhere in VIA's reporting...

 

[crs1026]

(per train mile)	13.54	Calculated from previous two rows

Obviously, a railroad's operating costs also include staff (Locomotive Engineers, On-train staff, station staff) and maintenance (staff, materials, equipment) costs, but I'll leave it to other people to speculate what part (if any) of that is included in the "Train Operations" or reported elsewhere in VIA's reporting...

Compare this to the per-mile revenue that CN gets from a single car of lumber or grain, or a single container load of scotch....and you will see why passenger trains get the treatment they do - in life, you get what you pay for.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

https://www.reddit.com/r/ViaRail/comments/10fcbnk

Another article said that VIA cannot restore service for train 651 until the new trains are in service.

Frankly if they really wanted to they could lease GO rolling stock and make it happen.

 

[Urban Sky]

Frankly if they really wanted to they could lease GO rolling stock and make it happen.

Frankly, if the provincial government really wanted to, they would ask Metrolinx to provide the rolling stock and LEs (since it’s easier to qualify LEs for new routes than for new locomotives) to VIA and make it happen.

 

[Bordercollie]

Frankly, if the provincial government really wanted to, they would ask Metrolinx to provide the rolling stock and LEs (since it’s easier to qualify LEs for new routes than for new locomotives) to VIA and make it happen.

And then VIA would "pay" Metrolinx for running the service?

When VIA ran the service did trains layover in the WYE near the cement plant? They don't have shore power there so they just leave the locomotive idling?

Metrolinx would need to put crews in hotel at Kingston which would be unique for them, unless they can shuttle crews from Oshawa to Kingston at 3am and then again in the evening. Hotels would probably be cheaper but would that require a modified agreement?

 

[smallspy]

Frankly if they really wanted to they could lease GO rolling stock and make it happen.

GO barely has enough equipment for the trains that it is already running.

How then would they supply trains - nevermind crews, which are also still in short supply - to VIA?

Dan

 

[Bordercollie]

GO barely has enough equipment for the trains that it is already running.

How then would they supply trains - nevermind crews, which are also still in short supply - to VIA?

Dan

I think there are still trains in storage in various places such as Hamilton GO, the siding in Whitby by the 401, and some other places.
Yes crews are a problem, just think that there is a solution to this rather than putting our hands up and saying "sorry we tried, the end".

 

[smallspy]

I think there are still trains in storage in various places such as Hamilton GO, the siding in Whitby by the 401, and some other places.

There are cars in storage, sure. That's because GO has not returned to running all of the trains to the same lengths that they were before COVID.

Cars can't really go too far without engines and cab cars, however.

Yes crews are a problem, just think that there is a solution to this rather than putting our hands up and saying "sorry we tried, the end".

There is a solution. It's called hiring people.

Which they are doing as much as they can.

What you seem to fail to appreciate is that it takes at minimum 3 years before a new hire is allowed to touch a throttle. It is a minimum of a full year before a new hire is allowed into the cab as a running trade. These things take time to happen. You can't just snap your fingers and say "abracadabra" and voila, more people to run trains.

There's also the issue of the fact that you can't hire people who aren't applying. This is still an ongoing issue not just with Metrolinx, but with many organizations.

Dan

 

[Bordercollie]

There are cars in storage, sure. That's because GO has not returned to running all of the trains to the same lengths that they were before COVID.

Cars can't really go too far without engines and cab cars, however.


There is a solution. It's called hiring people.

Which they are doing as much as they can.

What you seem to fail to appreciate is that it takes at minimum 3 years before a new hire is allowed to touch a throttle. It is a minimum of a full year before a new hire is allowed into the cab as a running trade. These things take time to happen. You can't just snap your fingers and say "abracadabra" and voila, more people to run trains.

There's also the issue of the fact that you can't hire people who aren't applying. This is still an ongoing issue not just with Metrolinx, but with many organizations.

Dan

Does that three years still apply if they were previously qualified at CN or another company?

 

[Urban Sky]

Does that three years still apply if they were previously qualified at CN or another company?

No, and VIA only hires already qualified LEs, but that pool is limited by the number of LEs who are already qualified and in the active working force…