News   Apr 02, 2026
Early Work Commencing on St Clair-Old Weston Station
 1.1K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2026
Cranes Up, Foundations Underway at Peter Gilgan Mississauga Hospital
 724     0 
News   Apr 02, 2026
City Council March, 2026 Settlements: Negotiations Advance Projects Across Toronto
 1.9K     2 

VIA Rail

Urban Sky said:
I wish I could be any more specific, but the plans to improve service in Southwestern Ontario are far from dead and I am confident that most (if not: all) stations will see improved service (whether through GO or VIA) within the next decade.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that the larger plans for improvements in SW Ontario are dead - we both know that there are plans afoot - just that the specific ones for Stratford and the RDC fleet are.

We also both know that it's unlikely that we're going to see much in terms of excitement from the higher-ups for another couple of years, too.

trebello said:
Thanks, that's what I was curious about. So what that means is if there is track that has deteriorated to the point where it's difficult for VIA to run economical service, it in effectively becomes a political decision (i.e. Ottawa as to express a willingness to approach the line owner about a sale / provide capital for to purchase the line). Presumably a key passenger rail link like the one through St. Marys would generate enough political pressure for VIA or Metrolinx to buy it, if it actually came to that. Nice to hear that you think it's likely it will see improved service in the future.
Click to expand...

In fairness, it's a bit more complex than that.

VIA has purchased lines where it was prudent to do so, and when they became available, and when it aligned with their short- and medium-term future to do so. This is why they own the Alexandria Sub, the Smiths Falls Sub, and a section of the Chatham Sub.

In a situation where the quality of the line has deteriorated, VIA does have the option to request (and hopefully receive) funding to pay for improvements to the line. Again, this has happened in the past with the Guelph Sub.

But also to be considered is whether the costs vs. benefits will make sense. It's obvious that spending millions (or hundreds of millions) of dollars on the rails on Vancouver Island and the Gaspé Penninsula didn't meet that criteria - it can be deduced that the current (and future) ridership simply wasn't high enough to warrant the outlay.

Dan
 
roger1818 said:
If I had to guess, the government didn't approve the funding. The fact that VIA only ran 2 trains a day each way along that corridor (giving preference to the more direct, southern route) made it harder to justify.
Click to expand...
God I hate this line of thinking.

1. Service sucks, so there is no ridership demand. Only 2 trains a day.
2. Ask government for more funding on the line, to increase travel times, reliability, more trains per day, more ridership.
3. Funding denied, there isn't enough ridership to justify an expansion. Only 2 trains a day! And they are slow and unreliable

Circular logic.
 
robmausser said:
God I hate this line of thinking.

1. Service sucks, so there is no ridership demand. Only 2 trains a day.
2. Ask government for more funding on the line, to increase travel times, reliability, more trains per day, more ridership.
3. Funding denied, there isn't enough ridership to justify an expansion. Only 2 trains a day! And they are slow and unreliable

Circular logic.
Click to expand...

LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.
 
roger1818 said:
LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.
Click to expand...

That southern route is better in its current state, perhaps...but as with HFR to the east, the question is how much use CN will allow. The Stratford route has much more upside potential for adding more trains without conflicting with freight. As to travel time, the line west of Kitchener is largely straight with only a couple of places where it would have to remain slow. It could easily be upgraded to 100 mph. Some bridge work might be needed. At that quality, the time difference would be eliminated. Right now, speed west of Stratford is in the 60-65 km/h range, which is downright pathetic. One has to think that a single-seat ride between Guelph/Kitchener and Chatham/Windsor would have appeal.

Which reminds me - I haven't heard that CN and VIA/GO have a final agreement to increase service between Halwest and Silver - if that segment isn't available, the entire discussion is moot.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
That southern route is better in its current state, perhaps...but as with HFR to the east, the question is how much use CN will allow. The Stratford route has much more upside potential for adding more trains without conflicting with freight. As to travel time, the line west of Kitchener is largely straight with only a couple of places where it would have to remain slow. It could easily be upgraded to 100 mph. Some bridge work might be needed. At that quality, the time difference would be eliminated. Right now, speed west of Stratford is in the 60-65 km/h range, which is downright pathetic. One has to think that a single-seat ride between Guelph/Kitchener and Chatham/Windsor would have appeal.

Which reminds me - I haven't heard that CN and VIA/GO have a final agreement to increase service between Halwest and Silver - if that segment isn't available, the entire discussion is moot.

- Paul
Click to expand...
What can be done to increase track speeds west of Stratford? Installing welded rail instead of jointed rail? Refurbishment of the track bed?
 
Bordercollie said:
What can be done to increase track speeds west of Stratford? Installing welded rail instead of jointed rail? Refurbishment of the track bed?
Click to expand...

All of the above. The problem is simply decades of lack of maintenance. I haven't looked at the track too closely, but it's old jointed rail. Install new CWR for sure, probably replace a goodly number of ties, undercut the whole thing, reballast and resurface.. Likely rebuild the level crossings. Much brush grubbing to improve sightlines for level crossings. Renew culverts and drainage. I wonder what the bridge at St Mary's might need, I believe it's under a PSO.
To handle more frequent passenger service, one might add a siding or two, also.
Not much different, really, than what VIA had to do to the Smiths Falls and Brockville Subs.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
All of the above. The problem is simply decades of lack of maintenance. I haven't looked at the track too closely, but it's old jointed rail. Install new CWR for sure, probably replace a goodly number of ties, undercut the whole thing, reballast and resurface.. Likely rebuild the level crossings. Much brush grubbing to improve sightlines for level crossings. Renew culverts and drainage. I wonder what the bridge at St Mary's might need, I believe it's under a PSO.
To handle more frequent passenger service, one might add a siding or two, also.
Not much different, really, than what VIA had to do to the Smiths Falls and Brockville Subs.

- Paul
Click to expand...

That being said, I dont think CN will go to this length when refurbing the line. Its just not needed for their freight usage.
 
roger1818 said:
LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.
Click to expand...

Interesting that there was a business case for High Speed Rail, but slightly improving the line is off the table......

Hmm...
 
robmausser said:
Interesting that there was a business case for High Speed Rail, but slightly improving the line is off the table......

Hmm...
Click to expand...

Assuming you are talking about the Collenette HSR in Ontario plan, the preferred route would bypass Stratford and St. Marys, so it was not the same line but a new one.

image.jpeg
 
Last edited:
roger1818 said:
Assuming you are talking about the Collenette HSR in Ontario plan, the preferred route would bypass Stratford and St. Marys, so it was not the same line but a new one.

image.jpeg
Click to expand...

It absolutely was a new line.

My point isn't the line or what line, my point is that it is odd that is a business case and ridership for a $15 billion dollar HSR line stopping at Guelph, Kitchener and London, but not for upgrades to the GEXR line at a fraction of the cost. Hmmm...
 
robmausser said:
It absolutely was a new line.

My point isn't the line or what line, my point is that it is odd that is a business case and ridership for a $15 billion dollar HSR line stopping at Guelph, Kitchener and London, but not for upgrades to the GEXR line at a fraction of the cost. Hmmm...
Click to expand...
Has the HSR line gone out for tender?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top