cplchanb
Senior Member
well maybe this can incentivize via to upgrade to high platform....maybe not....
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Urban Sky
Senior Member
No amount of “incentivizing” will change that capital funding decisions are made in Ottawa, not Montreal...
roger1818
Senior Member
It always amazes me how many people think VIA has a blank cheque from the federal government to spend as much as they want.
cplchanb
Senior Member
i guess i shouldve put the /s/ in the end... i guess time for via to be denationalized.?? /s/
nfitz
Superstar
If private business can't operate most bus services in Canada any more (pre-covid) without losing money, then how would a private company run trains?
Divas S.
Active Member
badly.
robmausser
Senior Member
So true, VIA is seen by the government and was set up as a sort of bare minimum service as a public need when the private rail companies ditched rail service after the car took over.
This mentality continues to this day within the political sphere, VIA is seen as simply trains on life support, just enough service for people who can't afford a car, like a public welfare program.
Meanwhile in Asia and Europe, high speed rail is thriving.
I don't directly blame VIA in any way, but I somethings think that it and Amtrak actually stymied the advancement of HSR in North America, as it created this mentality and political ideology that trains were dead and this service was simply rail on life support, for the good of the people, rather than seeing trains as the future of transportation.
crs1026
Superstar
Certainly, VIA (and Amtrak) have been positioned by government and the pols with agendas other than ensuring and optimising their success. Can’t hold that against VIA.
I admire the folks at VIA for their ability to remain positive and keeping up forward momentum in the face of sustained apathy and outright opposition. There are lots of good things being done to be proud of.
One sees occasional bursts of internal Stockholm syndrome, but given a choice between being oppositional at the wrong moment and playing into political adversaries, versus toeing the party line and keeping thing moving forward, I can’t say I would do otherwise. Everyone has to defend and execute their boss’s dumbest ideas at times.
VIA is positioning well around its “hills to die on”.... eg justifying a new corridor fleet, creating a positive future for the ON-QC corridor, preparing for end-of-life for the long distance fleet.
To abuse a cliche - it’s a Cinderella story waiting to happen, but Princes are hard to find. All we can do is keep kissing frogs and hope one turns up.
- Paul
Last edited:
roger1818
Senior Member
It came more from a previous twitter post linked here and the later was more of a confirmation:
The caption "The first Siemens Venture Cars" clearly isn't true as even Siemens says, "Siemens Mobility worked closely with Virgin Trains USA (formerly Brightline) during a rigorous design process that led to the Venture trainset. The first of five four-car trainsets from the initial order was delivered in December 2016." Now if it had said, "The first Siemens Venture Cars for Amtrak" then okay (though technically they aren't being bought by Amtrak) or just remove the word first all together, that would have been fine.
Don't get me wrong, I do agree it is interesting news and worth sharing. I also get that Twitter makes it challenging to get the full message across. The thing about buying train cars is there is a lot of room for customization. While the shell remains largely the same, look and feel can be customized to meet the railway's needs. I am not sure that what VIA will be getting will be any closer to what Amtrak is getting as compared to what Brightline has.
It is true that the Venture coaches are based on Siemens Viaggio Comfort coaches (which are used by ÖBB Railjet). It seems as though they were initially classified as a subset of the Viaggio brand, but when they saw there was a market for a North American variant beyond Brightline, Siemens decided to create the Venture brand for the North American variant.
The issue of overhead bins seems to be a hot button topic on this forum and I am not going to touch it.
Maverick7
New Member
One of the biggest problems that must be overcome is that of perception, in that most Canadians firmly believe that passenger rail is an antiquated and no longer relevant form of transportation, which couldn't be further from the truth!
Passenger trains in North America are portrayed on TV and in movies as being old, dreadfully slow, unreliable and worn out, while cars are shown in commercials as plying carefree on the open road with absolutely no traffic whatsoever, when reality dictates otherwise in that congestion and travel times continue to increase year-to-year.
The other prevailing misconception regarding passenger rail is that only high speed rail should be considered for this country's needs and nothing else.
Most Canadians believe that only high speed rail should be envisaged for use in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor, for example, while totally dismissing modernized passenger rail in the form commonly referred to as either higher-speed or high-performance type rail, where regular intercity trains operate frequently at maximum speeds of 177 kph (110 mph) or more on dedicated tracks, thereby cutting travel times substantially, increasing convenience and reliability, while dramatically reducing both construction costs and end-user fares in comparison to high speed rail.
And here's the kicker! The vast majority of Europeans (about 90 percent) actually travel by regular intercity or regional trains, not high speed trains.
Therefore, the Federal Government's timely approval of Via Rail's HFR (high frequency rail) project would indeed provide two thirds of the benefits of HSR, at one third of the cost.
I, for one, would love to take an HFR train with a rock-solid travel time of 3 hours, 15 minutes between Toronto and Ottawa; or 2 hours and 10 minutes between Montreal and Quebec City! That's easily much faster than driving and could even sway air travelers towards passenger rail!
With these impressive travel times, one can only imagine how Via Rail's ridership would increase by leaps and bounds with an HFR system in place, considering that prior to this pandemic, Via Rail's ridership had seen a phenomenal increase of over 30 percent over the past five years, while still operating some equipment that is 70 years old.
In light of the financial constraints placed on Via Rail, including its inability to expand its business case due to having to operate mostly on freight-owned tracks, I certainly can't blame Via Rail for the almost hopeless situation it is presently facing.
Via Rail's HFR project can be constructed in a very short time frame and also provides the relevance
of substantially reduced carbon emissions in comparison to either driving or flying.
By continuing to delay this crucial HFR project, it will be extremely difficult for this country to reach its climate change emissions targets.
As such, our Federal Government must act now on HFR, rather than continuing to further an agenda of endless recurring studies, as evidenced in the past five years.
This government's ambiguity and indecision on HFR, may otherwise result in the eventual, complete disappearance altogether of our national passenger rail system.
In sharp contrast, other advanced countries are actually expanding their passenger rail infrastructure and services so as to provide a viable alternative to both driving and flying.
We'll just have to wait and see as to what will transpire on budget night as to whether Via Rail's HFR will again be sidelined for political reasons.
NY99
Active Member
wait what? since when?
I feel like this is one of those things rail advocates keep telling themselves so often that they’re sure it’s true... but there’s zero evidence to suggest it
Like I’m sure improving inter-city rail probably isn’t the highest thing on most people’s priority list, but polls have consistently shown high support for it.
Anecdotally, I’ve heard nothing but enthusiastic support for better rail from people who usually don’t give two shits about transportation issues.
the rest of your comment is great and I didn’t mean to dunk on u, I just see this take a lot, and I feel like it’s a big misread of public opinion.
Last edited:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Add the words “non-HSR intercity” into “passenger rail” and the statement becomes painfully accurate. Just let the fact that there are 7.2 Canadians for every trip made by VIA in a given year (5,007,753 passengers in 2019 spread across a population of 35.8 million in Canada) sink for a moment and you will realize how obscurely small that niche which VIA serves still is...
PS: For the US, that figure is even worse: 10.3 Americans for every trip made by Amtrak (32,017,686 passengers in FY 2019 spread across a population of 329.2 million)...
Xav
Active Member
If CNR was still a crown corporation maybe things would be different today. No?
NY99
Active Member
Part of that is the fact that Canada is a huge, sparsely populated country. High-quality passenger rail is pretty much only economically viable in the Quebec City-Windsor region. If you live elsewhere, you’re likely never going to see anything above a minimal level of service.
Unless Canada’s population drastically increases, we’ll never truly see rail usage per capita reach those of European countries.
That doesn’t mean we can’t make that figure a lot better, though.
Idk why I’m writing so much, my only point is that governments just need to build the infrastructure and people will come. The current popular view of train travel isn’t what’s keeping people from using it.