I assume you meant to say "zero through trains to Windsor or Sarnia", but it was already CN which stopped routing any Toronto-Windsor trains via Kitchener (back in 1964!) and that had been only one single eastbound night train in most years.
Concerning Toronto-Kitchener-London-Sarnia (TKLS) trains, these trains didn't even exist prior to October 1961 (April 1963 for eastbound services) and again, it was still during the CN years (October 1973) that they were effectively eliminated when CN switched the Kitchener route to RDC service only, leaving only one single westbound TKLS train:
I did misspeak about Kitchener instead of Windsor, and I think we can agree that the service pattern changed over the decades. I stand corrected about when and by whom the Kitchener service moved to RDC's.
It would be interesting to know what the traditional through ridership was through London, versus the transfer ridership. I wonder if ridership followed the changes in service, or vice versa.
I would expect that VIA would try to keep the maximum people in a single seat. Logically, with today's population that would imply some T-K-L-W runs.
Transferring between mainline trains is not like transferring from LRT to subway. If the connection is timed loosely, the end to end trip time suffers. If the connection is timed tightly, lateness on one leg forces the connection to be held, making it late also.... or people are left behind. A tight connection is hugely stressful for passengers, who are watching their watches, and then rushing from one platform to another, with luggage, down stairs and up again. I have done that too often in Europe to enjoy the experience. And London has limited platform width.
Here comes again your conspiracy theory that there is some secret mechanism (presumably hidden somewhere in the CN-VIA TSA contract) which would automatically void a substantial part of VIA's current Lakeshore slots the very second VIA opens a parallel line which shifts most Montreal/Ottawa-Toronto traffic away from the Kingston Subdivision, accompanied by some just as unsubstantiated speculation about VIA's intended Lakeshore frequencies post-HFR...^^
You are correct, my concern is completely without supporting data.....except.....for the 1981 timetable you cited for Toronto-London. Where are all those trains today? Forty intervening years where VIA was trimmed back, and back again, is my point.
I'm sticking by my conspiracy theory. CN is remarkably accommodating of VIA east of Toronto, but that is very likely because they appreciate that a tribunal would not accept their desire to shed the sole passenger route that links Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal. But when VIA has its own parallel route, and the question is serving the smaller communities rather than the main cities.....they may feel they have more leverage.
And, I'm not confident that VIA has contractual language that would maintain the 100/95 mph top speed after HFR. Or prevent CN from taking some sections of double track out of service, particularly east of Brockville.
While CN runs plenty of freight on the Kingston line, they run higher volumes on the rest of their transcontinental network with plenty of single track. They will want full return on any excess capitalization that supports VIA.
We can agree to differ on this.... a cheap bottle of wine bought today will have aged to perfection before we know. It's a safe wager
I struggle to imagine a single justification for skipping any of the stops
@roger1818 listed in his little ridership table which would still remain valid after these stops no longer inconvenience the major markets (e.g. MTRL-TRTO or OTTW-TRTO)...
I may not have made that point well. VIA does a clever job of spreading local stops across its trains, such that a particular train stops only once or twice, thereby preserving the express timings and effectively giving the local stops "express" service. Post HFR, I imagine there will be few express timings. As already discussed, the timings will suffer. The question is, does that slower timing matter?
I'm strictly a guy in the bleachers, but I'm still hung up on trip time. Highway timings are highly variable with lots of horror stories.... but auto users have a funny way of remembering their best driving time and believing their next trip will be that good. VIA needs to provide service which is demonstrably faster than the auto, period, or the auto will prevail.
- Paul
