VIA Rail

[Urban Sky]

The problem on these wifi systems always seems to be provisioning. You get one guy trying to watch Game Of Thones in HD on netflix and the whole network takes a shit.

They need better QoS and WISH provisioning.

Streaming services already seem to be blocked:

 

[aquateam]

lol...I see. So companies, especially vertically integrated or associated ones don't produce the infrastructure at their own cost and then profit from the return of usage after? You've just "insulted" the cause d'etre of many Pension Fund investments, let alone many corporations.

Obviously you don't. That's your shortcoming, not theirs. They don't term it "venture capitalism" if there's no 'venture' to it.

Ah, thank you for explaining. It's my shortcoming to not understand the non-existent business case for your legions of hypothetical investors, willing to pour billions into a new train corridor to replace a heavily-subsidized service for an uncertain financial return. Please let me know which pension fund you manage so that I may give you my retirement savings.

Perhaps you also don't understand the definition of "Lease"? And even that is a supposition that VIA would lease. There's the distinct possibility of a vertically integrated company (construction, and acquisition of RoW, building the rolling stock, and *providing the service*) is all done within the company.

I don't know how hard this is to understand: a company only "leases" something if it can make more from leasing it than the cost to buy/make it in the first place. If VIA plans to barely break even on operating costs on a new HFR route, adding a middle man and several billion worth of capital investment to pay back is not going to improve the rate of return.

"Debt"? Many large corporations are *rich in cash*! CRRC, IIIC and others are just a few. The only reason they'd involve other investors/lenders is to spread the risk in such a way as to not stifle investment in other concerns and projects.

Whatever entity is created for HFR would carry the cost on its balance sheets, Chinese rail car manufacturers are not going to gift it several billion dollars.

May I ask you if you ever tried browsing and calling with your cell plan instead of the complimentary WiFi, for comparison purposes? I'm asking because I travel Montreal-Toronto and back maybe twice per month and I noticed that the mobile phone reception can get very spotty, especially between Brockville and Kingston. If you use your phone as a mobile hotspot (tethering) to share your cell phone data plan with other devices, you might yourself significantly limited by the availability, speed and signal strength of your cell phone network operator, especially if multiple devices are connected and/or use band-width intensive applications like streaming. Maybe the train faces the same constraints, but with even more users connected...

Streaming services are already blocked, so it is less bandwidth-intensive uses that are causing me frustration. I have noticed the bad cell reception on parts of the corridor, but on parts of the corridor with good reception the WiFi is still spotty and I resort to using my phone. I'm sympathetic if expensive land-based infrastructure would be needed, but I'm assuming it's just a question of upgrading on-board IT and paying for some sort of satellite-based service.

I unfortunately can't comment on this, but just for illustration purposes:
View attachment 125313

Thanks for providing data. That's consistent with what I was saying, for the Windsor-Quebec Corridor services (which are more profitable than their "Regional" and "Long Distance" services). Not bad for a public transit operator, but certainly not for a business. They've improved from 2012 (marginally) but are still spending $1.71 for each $1 earned.

VIA exists for reasons other than profit (reducing greenhouse gas emissions, connecting the country, economic development in areas, etc.) Believe me, I want them to succeed (I will be boarding a Via train myself shortly.) But it is beyond ludicrous to believe that their latest proposal will be funded "without a cent of government money" when a Chinese rail manufacturer will swoop in to foot the bill, leading Canadians to "howl with outrage."

 

[steveintoronto]

Ah, thank you for explaining. It's my shortcoming to not understand the non-existent business case for your legions of hypothetical investors, willing to pour billions into a new train corridor to replace a heavily-subsidized service for an uncertain financial return.

"replace a heavily-subsidized service for an uncertain financial return." VIA corridor services show an operating surplus. The chart Urban Sky posted has even improved since then. I take it you still haven't read D-S' proposal as published in many places and discussed extensively in this string?

I don't know how hard this is to understand: a company only "leases" something if it can make more from leasing it than the cost to buy/make it in the first place. If VIA plans to barely break even on operating costs on a new HFR route, adding a middle man and several billion worth of capital investment to pay back is not going to improve the rate of return.

You're rife with presumptions. For a start, where did I mention than VIA would be the only leaseholder on such a line? Commuter and freight would also use it. As it stands, VIA already leases (at a high rate) slots from CN and CP, and at a reasonable rate from Metrolinx. Ontario is proposing HSR. It's one of CRRC's specialties. The ripe opportunity for "venture" appears to have eluded you.

Whatever entity is created for HFR would carry the cost on its balance sheets, Chinese rail car manufacturers are not going to gift it several billion dollars.

It would also carry the value. And being a *vertically integrated entity* it would use it's own *well established and proven* trainsets if need be. If it (or CCCC) finances the RoW, it's highly likely to be predisposed to using its own rolling stock, since tendering wouldn't be required.

It might behoove you well to do some reading on the investment precedents already established by both these companies, but CRRC especially:

Introduction

The China Railway Rolling Stock Corporation, known as CRRC (OTC:CRCCY), was formed in 2015 with the merger of China CNR and CSR. The merger led to the creation of a firm that within China occupies a monopoly position, while internationally it is by far the largest train manufacturer. CRRC benefits from China's growing high-speed network and the country's ambitions to build an international infrastructure-backed trade network under its "Road and Belt" initiative. The company is catching up on technology with Western peers while keeping its costs under control. As a result, it has been able to win by a wide margin nine-figure contracts, such as the supply of metro cars to Boston and LA. Currently, CRRC trades at an earnings multiple between 15 and 16 while paying a dividend of more than 3%. The company's largest shareholder after the PRC is a value investor and friend of Charlie Munger, Li Lu, and his Himalaya Capital with a stake of 1.94%.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4072173-crrc-corp-monopoly-growing-railway-market

Time to buy railway stocks in China with CRRC a top pick

Railway stocks have reached their historical means in valuation, analysts say

http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1892607/time-buy-railway-stocks-china-crrc-top-pick

And this is portentous for many reasons, not least that BBD Rail (part of the Transportation Division) is up for sale again, with very few buyers interested in taking the entire division. The European operations save for a few would most certainly get snapped up by Europeans. The Cdn ones? We'll see...this isn't some wild fantasy on my part, even if it completely eludes some posters:

#Business News
September 9, 2015 / 5:07 PM / 2 years ago
Exclusive: Bombardier rejects Chinese offer for railway unit - documents

BEIJING (Reuters) - Canada’s Bombardier (BBDb.TO) has turned down a Chinese offer to buy up to 100 percent of its prized rail unit, documents seen by Reuters show, underscoring its reluctance to cede control of the unit to a state-owned Chinese buyer at this juncture.
[...]
Bombardier, which is looking to raise cash by listing a minority stake in its transport unit later this year, is attractive to Chinese players like BII, which, encouraged by the Chinese government, are seeking to acquire leading foreign technology to grow their businesses and global footprint.

Selling a majority stake would, however, expose Bombardier to political pressure in its home province of Quebec, where it generates high-paying jobs that could be lost through a takeover by a foreign buyer at a time when Canada’s economy has slipped into recession.

In the letter addressed by BII Chairman Tian Zhenqing to Bombardier’s Executive Chairman Pierre Beaudoin and not yet disclosed to the market, BII put the unit’s enterprise value – calculated as equity plus debt - at $7-8 billion.

But Bombardier’s Vice President for Mergers and Acquisitions Louis Veronneau, who was copied in the non-binding offer, rejected the proposal in a letter to Tian one week later.

“We are not exploring a transaction involving a majority stake at this juncture,” Veronneau wrote back on Aug. 21.

Excluding debt, analysts and bankers have pegged the equity value of the transportation division at about $5 billion. Much of the company’s value currently resides in its transportation business as its aerospace division has been hurt by delays and cost overruns tied to its C-Series line of commercial jets.

At Tuesday’s close, Bombardier shares had fallen 70 percent this year, and the company’s market capitalisation sits at about $2 billion, well below the equity value of the transportation unit, reflecting the struggles at its aerospace business and heavy debt load.

“BII and BT (Bombardier Transport) will have an incomparable synergetic relationship, and the combination will create a globalized world-class rail industrial group running the whole industrial chain,” Tian wrote, adding he would keep management teams intact.

Tian said BII planned to fund the acquisition with cash reserves and possibly debt. The letter also said BII had gained “strong support” to complete the transaction from Chinese authorities.
[...]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-railway-unit-documents-idUSKCN0R90VI20150909

Since 2015, the Cdn economy has bounced back, but unfortunately, it's now slipping again, and CAD FX is going down. Acquisition costs for outsiders also goes down.

I leave it there for now...

 

[kEiThZ]

Agreed, but assuming that nobody here seems able to name a railway anywhere in the world which provides a reliable internet connection stable enough for video streaming to all its customers free of charge, is it really reasonable to expect VIA Rail to be the first railway to do that - even if it was one of the first railways in the world to provide on-board WiFi when the service started in 2003 (see quote below)?

And kudos to VIA for leading on this front. But that doesn't take away from my point (and that of others). It's one of VIA's few competitive advantages. And the fact that this "perk" cannot be reliably delivered detracts from VIA's pitch, particularly to the business set.

According to this 2006 article, VIA Rail relies on a mixture of cell phone networks (with explicit mention of Bell) and satellite services:

Dunno if they've ever studied alternate providers. But they certainly should.

However, despite my limited knowledge about communications technology, I would expect that satellite technology is better adapted to air travel, given the absence of trees, bridges or tunnels as potential obstructions...

Some of the airlines actually use terrestrial networks. Not satellite. Either way, it's not something that would be hard to get an assessment on.

Amtrak has decent wifi on some of their trains (I believe they are slowly rolling out systemwide). Maybe VIA should chat with them.

 

[steveintoronto]

Amtrak has decent wifi on some of their trains (I believe they are slowly rolling out systemwide). Maybe VIA should chat with them.

Maybe not...

How to Fix Flaky WiFi on Amtrak
Scott AckermanMay 30, 2017
The solution to slow and unreliable Amtrak WiFi
Lets call a spade a spade – Amtrak wifi is awful. It’s so bad it’s a practically a meme. Do any of these recent headlines sound familiar to you:

• The Why of Sucky Wifi on Amtrak Trains
• Wifi Woes Plague Amtrak on Northeast Corridor
• Amtrak Wifi: So Slow It Might as Well Not Exist
• We Tested Amtrak’s Wifi, and It’s Worse Than You Thought

The problem is that you need to connect to the internet while on the train. You need to work. You need to send emails. You need to check Facebook just to keep you from going crazy from being on the train.

The good news is that there is a cure for your Amtrak internet problems, and it’s easier than you think.

Bad Internet Connections Are Not All About Amtrak
Amtrak wifi is bad. There’s no sugar coating it. But, your phone or tablet is also part of the problem. By default, your IOS and Android can only use one internet connection at a time. If you are connected to wifi, everything is going through the wifi, no matter how spotty the signal or how slow the connection.

Speedify Changes the Way Your Device Connects
Speedify is an easy to use app you can download from the App App Store or from Google Play that works in the background on your device, managing your internet connections. It allows your device to connect to the web through both your wifi and cell signal at the same time. By using two connections simultaneously, you are able to send and receive much more data much faster. [...]

http://speedify.com/blog/how-to/fix-flaky-amtrak-wifi/

The problem is a good part technical, and that's the environment with obstructions and 'shaded' areas and spots. Any kind of RF reception is going to be intermittent and phase (thus data integrity) stressed unless there's a system in place beyond the normal methods used for fixed location intercommunication.

One of the answers might be trackside hard-wire feed, but I digress. The problem can be addressed, at an increased cost to the traveller. Serious blackout areas can't be addressed at any price at this time, at least not in the WiFi realm.

[...]
In his speech, Umberto Malesci shared data on the current levels of passenger satisfaction with on-board WiFi when travelling on trains and mass transit in the US, Latin American, Europe and China. The data showed that on average more than two thirds of passengers are currently unsatisfied by the onboard WiFi connectivity provided by rail operators and mass transit agencies.

Fluidmesh presentation discussed operational uses for wireless train-to-ground communications as well, including rail-related applications of the Internet of Things. The need to constantly improve passengers’ safety and security create the needs for broadband data and video streaming from trains that increase the demand for on board and train to ground wireless networks.

The paper authored by Fluidmesh and Sirti is available in the proceedings of the 11th edition of the World Congress on Railway Research (WCRR). Anybody interested in receiving a copy of the paper presented at WCRR 2016 can contact the authors via email at wcrr2016@fluidmesh.com.

https://www.fluidmesh.com/wireless-trackside-high-speed-trains-wifi/

[...]
Although Wi-Fi has become ubiquitous in other settings, ranging from coffee shops to city hall, wireless networks on trains have lagged. This stems from the difficulty of maintaining connectivity for mobile devices that are hurtling down rail tracks at 80 miles per hour, and is also partially because of the limited return on investment of public-transit Wi-Fi deployment. Still, many transit agencies are beginning to explore or implement Wi-Fi, not only as a service to passengers, but also as a way to link business systems such as mobile ticketing, digital signage and security camera monitoring.
[...]

https://statetechmagazine.com/article/2016/04/wi-fi-rails-trains-access

WiFi at odds with industry in transport networks stand-offs
By
Caroline Gabriel March 28, 2017

As all kinds of vehicles become wirelessly connected, there are mounting tensions between the WiFi community and the industry stakeholders, from carmakers to train operators. The heritage of high walls between vertical industries’ own private networks and open public wireless is feeding into conflicting views on future standards, now that the telco and transport sectors are coming together.

For instance, the US national rail operator Amtrak is asking the FCC for a waiver on certain conditions for the WiFi network it plans to build along its premium Northeast Corridor route. But WiFi players claim this might cause problems for other users, highlighting the stand-off between verticals’ need for connectivity that is optimized for their particular needs, and the requirement to provide good quality wireless for all consumers.

Amtrak wants the FCC to let it operate trackside network (TSN) as a fixed point-to-point system in the UNII-1 and UNII-3 bands, on its most heavily used route, which connects Washington DC to Boston via New York. About 750,000 passenger trips per day take place on this line, and the WiFi service is struggling.

The rail operator currently uses WiFi built around in-train access points which are supported by multiple concurrent 3G and 4G links, supplied by the four main MNOs, and aggregated by a single control unit in one ‘brain car’. This brain car has antennas on its roof which support backhaul to Amtrack’s East Coast data center. However, this system is complex and overloaded, and the rail company is also concerned that, if grandfathered unlimited data plans cease, it will either face high monthly fees or have to restrict usage.

Its solution is to build its own private TSN – a trend which is seen in many verticals, including rail transport, round the world. The UK’s rail infrastructure operator, Network Rail, for example, has said it would be keen to take advantage of 5G capabilities for its TSN, but lacks confidence that the MNOs will be able or willing to support all the required capabilities – such as ultra-reliability – on their public networks.
[...]

http://wi-fi360.com/2017/03/28/wifi-at-odds-with-industry-in-transport-networks-stand-offs/

WI-FI in via rail trains? : toronto - Reddit

I'm surprised that anyone claiming to be an "engineer" doesn't grasp this...

 

[Urban Sky]

MORE DEPARTURES BETWEEN TORONTO AND OTTAWA
Monday, October 30th 2017


Toronto, October 30, 2017 - Starting November 5,VIA Rail will be offering 20 weekday departures between Toronto and Ottawathanks tothe addition of a 10th round-trip,giving Canadians even more options for their travel. As well, a new evening departure from Toronto to Kingston will be added, along with additional stops in Trenton Junction and Guildwood.

“For the third time in three years, new departures will be added between Toronto and Ottawa,allowing more passengers to make the sensible choice to leave their cars at home. With each added frequency, VIA Rail sees a significant increase in ridership. On this popular segment, the number of travellers has increased by 40% since 2014. With this addition, we will be able to serve more Canadians, help reduce the carbon footprint of their journeys, and improve our financial performance,”said VIA Rail President and Chief Executive Officer Yves Desjardins-Siciliano. [...]

http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-...-2017-more-departures-between-toronto-and-ott

 

[cplchanb]

http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-...-2017-more-departures-between-toronto-and-ott

nice to see a service increase but as a typical driver, what incentive does via have that could make me choose them over my convenient car? its most likely going to be cheaper on gas roundtrip, its faster, i can go whereever i want....
i'm afraid in the grand scheme of things, whatever service increases they introduce means little to none unless they make a firm decision and implement HFR and new trains that can competitively compete with the car

 

[Urban Sky]

nice to see a service increase but as a typical driver, what incentive does via have that could make me choose them over my convenient car? its most likely going to be cheaper on gas roundtrip, its faster, i can go whereever i want....

I don’t know, but I’ve heard about people who allegedly prefer watching Lake Ontario and the countryside pass by the window or watching a video (downloaded prior to the trip or streamed from the on-board entertainment system), getting some work done, having a nap, a snack or drinks (even alcoholic ones!) or a conversation with the stranger sitting next to you over being stuck bumper-to-bumper on the 401 and having nothing but equally frustrated drivers to look at. Nevertheless, I agree that driving is seductively cheap once you’re ignoring all those pesky fixed costs which come along with car ownership...

 

[SamStar]

http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-...-2017-more-departures-between-toronto-and-ott

Good news ! There will almost be hourly service from 9:30 am to 6:30 pm !

 

[MisterF]

I don’t know, but I’ve heard about people who allegedly prefer watching Lake Ontario and the countryside pass by the window or watching a video (downloaded prior to the trip or streamed from the on-board entertainment system), getting some work done, having a nap, a snack or drinks (even alcoholic ones!) or a conversation with the stranger sitting next to you over being stuck bumper-to-bumper on the 401 and having nothing but equally frustrated drivers to look at. Nevertheless, I agree that driving is seductively cheap once you’re ignoring all those pesky fixed costs which come along with car ownership...

Not just car ownership, but the cost of driving as well. It always amazes me that people rate the cost of a trip in the price of gas alone when the reality is that each kilometre driven has a real financial cost in wear and tear. The costs of driving are significantly more than just gas.

 

[steveintoronto]

Not just car ownership, but the cost of driving as well. It always amazes me that people rate the cost of a trip in the price of gas alone when the reality is that each kilometre driven has a real financial cost in wear and tear. The costs of driving are significantly more than just gas.

That's best realized when giving up owning a car. Quite a number of my friends, some of them quite well-off financially, remark on what a massive savings it's been, and how ultimately, life's a lot more flexible. When you need a car, rent it. Since you have savings from not owning, you can rent something a little nicer than you owned, and without the constant possibility of some unforeseen expense flying through the windshield.

 

[kEiThZ]

Not just car ownership, but the cost of driving as well. It always amazes me that people rate the cost of a trip in the price of gas alone when the reality is that each kilometre driven has a real financial cost in wear and tear. The costs of driving are significantly more than just gas.

Marginal cost. That's why. Nobody it's buying a car exclusively for long distance. They are buying it for local utility and using it occasionally for long distance trips. So they don't consider wear and tear for one trip to be substantial. And really when the average life of a car is 250k+, it really isn't. Given the average cost of an oil change and tire wear, were talking $40-50 for the average roundtrip from Toronto to Montreal. And that's deferred cost, they only pay when they actually do maintenance. Ironically, electric cars will actually make this cheaper.

You'll find that those who travel for business usually, will consider all costs.

You also discount the value of time and schedule flexibility substantially. A car offers a ton of flexibility. Leave when you want. And get there faster. This is why HFR needs to be hourly and at least 10% faster than real world driving times to be competitive.

 

[MisterF]

Marginal cost. That's why. Nobody it's buying a car exclusively for long distance. They are buying it for local utility and using it occasionally for long distance trips. So they don't consider wear and tear for one trip to be substantial. And really when the average life of a car is 250k+, it really isn't. Given the average cost of an oil change and tire wear, were talking $40-50 for the average roundtrip from Toronto to Montreal. And that's deferred cost, they only pay when they actually do maintenance. Ironically, electric cars will actually make this cheaper.

You'll find that those who travel for business usually, will consider all costs.

You also discount the value of time and schedule flexibility substantially. A car offers a ton of flexibility. Leave when you want. And get there faster. This is why HFR needs to be hourly and at least 10% faster than real world driving times to be competitive.

People may consider maintenance costs to be marginal but they're wrong. CAA estimates that the per kilometre cost of maintenance and tire wear is roughly half the cost of gas, depending on the vehicle (ranging from 45-65% for the three vehicles in the document). So if your trip costs $100 in gas the true cost is more like $150. I don't know about you, but I'd say that adding 50% to the cost of anything is pretty substantial.

Driving to Montreal is rarely faster than taking the train. Sure, it's theoretically possible to do it in 5 hours but between traffic and meal/washroom breaks it's hardly common. The speed boost of HFR would be a benefit but frequency, reliability, and a predictable schedule would be just as important, IMO.

Nobody's going to deny the flexibility of driving but that wasn't really the point of my post.

 

[cplchanb]

People may consider maintenance costs to be marginal but they're wrong. CAA estimates that the per kilometre cost of maintenance and tire wear is roughly half the cost of gas, depending on the vehicle (ranging from 45-65% for the three vehicles in the document). So if your trip costs $100 in gas the true cost is more like $150. I don't know about you, but I'd say that adding 50% to the cost of anything is pretty substantial.

Driving to Montreal is rarely faster than taking the train. Sure, it's theoretically possible to do it in 5 hours but between traffic and meal/washroom breaks it's hardly common. The speed boost of HFR would be a benefit but frequency, reliability, and a predictable schedule would be just as important, IMO.

Nobody's going to deny the flexibility of driving but that wasn't really the point of my post.

well, isnt that the main factor that hfr needs to combat against to begin with? Were not in asia or europe so trains wont cost less than $50 minimum per direction on a normal day so right off the bat its almost the cost of the above stated cost for cars. Factor in the fact that you wont need another form of transport once youre there, and the exponential bonus if one is carpooling and youve made up the cost difference plus more. Sure overseas where everything is so convenient and closely integrated that you hope off a train and cheap transit is readily available, but unfortunately this is Canada and via rail so far is barely holding onto the market share. Ill admit that its improving but it needs a well planned out and implemented hfr/new trains quick or risk decline in the coming years now that EVs and hybrids are becoming more suitable for distance driving.

 

[MisterF]

well, isnt that the main factor that hfr needs to combat against to begin with? Were not in asia or europe so trains wont cost less than $50 minimum per direction on a normal day so right off the bat its almost the cost of the above stated cost for cars. Factor in the fact that you wont need another form of transport once youre there, and the exponential bonus if one is carpooling and youve made up the cost difference plus more. Sure overseas where everything is so convenient and closely integrated that you hope off a train and cheap transit is readily available, but unfortunately this is Canada and via rail so far is barely holding onto the market share. Ill admit that its improving but it needs a well planned out and implemented hfr/new trains quick or risk decline in the coming years now that EVs and hybrids are becoming more suitable for distance driving.

I'm not sure what your point is. If the cost of the train and driving are similar, so what? Each mode isn't for everyone. Some people will find it more convenient to drive while others will find it more convenient to take the train or fly. Downtown to downtown travel is extremely inconvenient for driving. In any case, all I was saying with my post is that driving is more expensive than most people give it credit for. Us not being Asia or Europe is in no way relevant to that point.

What Via is counting on with its proposal is simply that a higher percentage of people will choose the train. Again, not being Europe or Asia is completely irrelevant to that goal. Intercity rail can be very successful on this continent if we give it anywhere close to the same investment as we give highways. The last mile situation is improving with GO RER, Ottawa's LRT, REM in Montreal, etc.