News   Apr 01, 2026
Transit Progress and Tall Towers Made Headlines in March, 2026
 266     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
News Roundup for April 1, 2026
 334     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 519     1 

VIA Rail

micheal_can said:
I think it was Christmas 2019, or 2018, the Canadian train was over 24 hours late. It think it was about 48 hours late. It was due to an engine failure out of Toronto. They were stopped in Capreol till a new one could be sent up to bring them the rest of the way to Vancouver.

So, yes, I would love all of these emails telling me my train is delayed. That would mean that I have a train.
Click to expand...
It's not just emails, it's cumulatively days of your life lost because of things that are outside of your control*. For most people, a train is just a method of transportation. To go further, most people only care about frequency and price. The only thing a train does better than a bus is its capacity and sometimes its comfort unless it's an unrenovated HEP 2 (yes, I did not include the ability to avoid congestion for reasons listed in post 9100).

Since Greyhound's shutdown, the only form of public transportation between Toronto and London Ontario has been the two trips that VIA had been operating. If the money used to fund those two trains could be diverted towards four busses I would support it because having higher frequencies is more convenient (London had 12 daily busses and 5 daily trains before COVID for comparison).**.

@micheal_can If you could make the same choice for your city pair in Northern Ontario, which would you pick (2 trains or 4 busses), and justify your answer (economically, socially, I like trains)?

I'm not sure where to fit this in, but I am very much supportive of VIA becoming an integrated bus/train operator like GO Transit given what has happened to Greyhound. There are some trains like 85/88 (which gets stuck on the single track between London and St. Mary's daily), which could be far more effectively operated by busses.

*This is meant to illustrate that train travel is just like any other form of transportation, there are benefits and downsides to all methods of transportation. Some members here seem to think that trains are the holy grail to solving everything. Nonetheless, Greyhound is far less competent than VIA, but I'd prefer it if GO operated SWO services but, that's a conversation for a different time (hint: imo intra-provincial routes should be funded by the provinces they operate in. It's not fair that Albertans are subsidizing service between Toronto and Niagara Falls/Kingston/London or routes within Arctic Ontario).

**Yes I know this is not possible without creating significant difficulty when it comes time to resume operations post COVID given that crews would need to be retrained etc. Also unlike northern Ontario, the commuter trains in SWO pre-pandemic 82/83/75 could not be replaced with busses given that they are always full with hundreds on board thus justifying the use of trains as a transportation method. But if ridership does not recover, conversation to busses should seriously be considered given how inconvenient two trains a day is.
 
This may be off topic just a bit, but it does fit the theme.

In my opinion, the decision to cut the Northlander was the right one and there is no justification to see its return. How this relates to VIA is that routes that serve low-density communities are much better served by bus. It is something that we should be considering. Instead of trying to get rail service to more communities on more routes, in the majority of cases, better bus servics is the way to go.
 
littlewill1166 said:
It's not just emails, it's cumulatively days of your life lost because of things that are outside of your control*. For most people, a train is just a method of transportation. To go further, most people only care about frequency and price. The only thing a train does better than a bus is its capacity and sometimes its comfort unless it's an unrenovated HEP 2 (yes, I did not include the ability to avoid congestion for reasons listed in post 9100).

Since Greyhound's shutdown, the only form of public transportation between Toronto and London Ontario has been the two trips that VIA had been operating. If the money used to fund those two trains could be diverted towards four busses I would support it because having higher frequencies is more convenient (London had 12 daily busses and 5 daily trains before COVID for comparison).**.

@micheal_can If you could make the same choice for your city pair in Northern Ontario, which would you pick (2 trains or 4 busses), and justify your answer (economically, socially, I like trains)?

I'm not sure where to fit this in, but I am very much supportive of VIA becoming an integrated bus/train operator like GO Transit given what has happened to Greyhound. There are some trains like 85/88 (which gets stuck on the single track between London and St. Mary's daily), which could be far more effectively operated by busses.

*This is meant to illustrate that train travel is just like any other form of transportation, there are benefits and downsides to all methods of transportation. Some members here seem to think that trains are the holy grail to solving everything. Nonetheless, Greyhound is far less competent than VIA, but I'd prefer it if GO operated SWO services but, that's a conversation for a different time (hint: imo intra-provincial routes should be funded by the provinces they operate in. It's not fair that Albertans are subsidizing service between Toronto and Niagara Falls/Kingston/London or routes within Arctic Ontario).

**Yes I know this is not possible without creating significant difficulty when it comes time to resume operations post COVID given that crews would need to be retrained etc. Also unlike northern Ontario, the commuter trains in SWO pre-pandemic 82/83/75 could not be replaced with busses given that they are always full with hundreds on board thus justifying the use of trains as a transportation method. But if ridership does not recover, conversation to busses should seriously be considered given how inconvenient two trains a day is.
Click to expand...

I would go with 2 trains.

Let's start with it being greener, and easier to convert to all electric as the government can easily mandate it to be electricity. Northern ON power is by hydro electricity mainly, but of course since we are on the grid, we do get nuclear and other methods. Nuclear is more greener than burning diesel fuel.

Our population is aging, even faster up here in the North. Our elderly family needs to be able to still get to "the big city" for medical appointments. Due to the overall condition of the roads, buses are not nearly as comfortable as a train.

Weather is a real factor up here. Part of the issue is if a highway is closed, there is no reasonable EDR. For example, take out the French River Bridge. Now, get from one side to the other. It will take hours. The same is true for much of the major highways. An even worse one is the Spanish River Bridge on Highway 17. Get from Espanola to Narin Centre. I mapped it out, it's 8 hours! And of course, the Nipigon River Bridge. Take that out and there is no other way to get to the other side without a Passport. So, if weather closes a highway, which typically happens throughout the winter, then a more robust system that does not depend on weather needs to be used.

Here is one.... pollution... From the salt polluting the waters along the roads to the tires wearing down and adding to the particulate matter, rail doesn't have nearly the same impact.

The biggest reason is even more simple. We deserve it. We should be entitled to the same taxpayer money as a place like Toronto or Montreal. If the provincial government can subsidize a provincial rail to serve commuters in the Toronto area, why not subsidize a rail line to Cochrane at the same rate? So, if it is $1 per mile, per passenger, for GO, pay that all the way to Cochrane. I know, being fair with taxpayer money is something governments have a problem with, but, fair is fair.

Reality is ever since the beginning of Via, they have been cutting their budget to the point that outside the Corridor it is useless for much more than sightseeing. I don't see that changing any time soon.
 
Urban Sky said:
If you ask me, people who place so much importance on the availability of passenger rail service (while disdaining all other modes of public transportation), yet choose to live in a place like Sudbury, set themselves up for a life in misery. You either get over your aversion against buses or move to where train service meets your personal definition of whatever you may deem an acceptable level...
Click to expand...

You make a valid point, but I think it’s being expressed a bit mean-spiritedly. Those in remoter regions cannot expect transportation to have the form or convenience that is possible in more densely populated areas, I agree. But ”like it or move” is a bit arbitrary. As a very large country, we need to be very concerned about encouraging development in the hinterland (assuming, of course, that there are resource or other industries out there to make that investment sustainable).

The apt analogy that strikes me this morning, is owning a snowblower. My neighbour owns one, and I never have. At this precise moment as I watch him use it I’m envious, but as I do the math on price, frequency of use, and effort required to maintain and store a snowblower all year long to be ready for the odd blizzard, I still can’t justify the expense. This doesn’t mean I oppose snowblowers, there are other places where snowfall is heavier and everyone sensibly owns one. But not here in Etobicoke.

I think we would be well served to link Northern Ontario to the south by rail. For the most part, we actually have spare rail capacity to do that, if we focus on Toronto-North Bay- Timmins/Sault. However, in an environment where we haven’t even invested in Toronto-Kitchener-London or Toronto-Niagara, (both of which I can get really worked up about as missed opportunities) this may not be the time. Yet.

Whenever I think about Northern Ontario rail, I am reminded of the rail lines to Bodo Norway. Norway certainly proves that one can use rail to structure transportation in remote, sparsely populated areas. Having said that, while there are passenger trains up there, thay are not exactly on the hour - it’s a spartan, well though out but not lavish timetable. And, the Norwegian context is a light year away in terms of taxation and attitudes to public infrastructure investment.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
Urban Sky said:
If you ask me, people who place so much importance on the availability of passenger rail service (while disdaining all other modes of public transportation), yet choose to live in a place like Sudbury, set themselves up for a life in misery. You either get over your aversion against buses or move to where train service meets your personal definition of whatever you may deem an acceptable level...
Click to expand...
Not everyone shops around for places to live. Plenty of people want to live where they were born, where their friends and family are, and in a community where they feel comfortable. Places like Sudbury have seen incredible decay in train service in the last 40 years. You can't take train service away from people and then chastise them for not living somewhere with good train service.
 
micheal_can said:
None of ONR owned track is that low of speed. Someone else can give you the proper one, but it is not that slow.
Click to expand...

Yet Another Strawman Argument (YASA)! If you actually took the time to read my post, you would have noticed that I said:

roger1818 said:
I wouldn't trivialize the cost of maintaining track to any reasonable standard (a passenger train crawling along at 15mph (24 km/h) is not going to cut it). The Northlander ran on track that was also being used by Ontario Northland for freight. It is only economical if VIA is using it many times a day (like with HFR). For routes that will only see at most 1 train a day each way, those costs will be significantly higher than using another railway's track.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the condition today, without proper maintenance, the track will deteriorate.
 
tmlittle said:
Not everyone shops around for places to live. Plenty of people want to live where they were born, where their friends and family are, and in a community where they feel comfortable. Places like Sudbury have seen incredible decay in train service in the last 40 years. You can't take train service away from people and then chastise them for not living somewhere with good train service.
Click to expand...

Or find employment.
 
First off, out of keeping my own sanity I have blocked urban sky. With me, in the past, he does not know how to discuss anything unless you agree with him.
crs1026 said:
You make a valid point, but I think it’s being expressed a bit mean-spiritedly. Those in remoter regions cannot expect transportation to have the form or convenience that is possible in more densely populated areas, I agree. But ”like it or move” is a bit arbitrary. As a very large country, we need to be very concerned about encouraging development in the hinterland (assuming, of course, that there are resource or other industries out there to make that investment sustainable).

The apt analogy that strikes me this morning, is owning a snowblower. My neighbour owns one, and I never have. At this precise moment as I watch him use it I’m envious, but as I do the math on price, frequency of use, and effort required to maintain and store a snowblower all year long to be ready for the odd blizzard, I still can’t justify the expense. This doesn’t mean I oppose snowblowers, there are other places where snowfall is heavier and everyone sensibly owns one. But not here in Etobicoke.

I think we would be well served to link Northern Ontario to the south by rail. For the most part, we actually have spare rail capacity to do that, if we focus on Toronto-North Bay- Timmins/Sault. However, in an environment where we haven’t even invested in Toronto-Kitchener-London or Toronto-Niagara, (both of which I can get really worked up about as missed opportunities) this may not be the time. Yet.

Whenever I think about Northern Ontario rail, I am reminded of the rail lines to Bodo Norway. Norway certainly proves that one can use rail to structure transportation in remote, sparsely populated areas. Having said that, while there are passenger trains up there, thay are not exactly on the hour - it’s a spartan, well though out but not lavish timetable. And, the Norwegian context is a light year away in terms of taxation and attitudes to public infrastructure investment.

- Paul
Click to expand...

I own a snowblower, and a plow, and a bunch of shovels. My neighbour has these too. His plow broke down and we had a significant snowfall. I plowed some of his driveway to help him out. That is what neighbours do.

I live near 2 Via train lines. I don't expect hourly service on them. I expect better than 12 hours late. Just imagine Corridor trains being 12 hours late, consistently. Or being that percentage late consistently. There would be come a point where it would become irrelevant. That is what everything outside the Corridor has become.

Two changes would need to be made to make Via outside the Corridor relevant again.
First, it needs to be on time more often. If that means a schedule change that allows the 12 hours to become a normal thing, then so be it.
Second, it needs to be a daily service. If it cannot do that, it will never seen as meaningful transportation.

You talk about Timmins to the Soo. You can't get there from here. Timmins does not have rail into the city, or a station location. That''s all gone. If I understand what you mean though, you want to take the ACR line? Good idea. Why not do a circular, both directions? Start in North Bay, go up to Hearst, down to Soo, then over to Sudbury, an back to North Bay. Throw in the return of almost daily to Toronto and I would be quite happy. Not only would I, but around 300,000 residents along those lines would be too.

tmlittle said:
Not everyone shops around for places to live. Plenty of people want to live where they were born, where their friends and family are, and in a community where they feel comfortable. Places like Sudbury have seen incredible decay in train service in the last 40 years. You can't take train service away from people and then chastise them for not living somewhere with good train service.
Click to expand...
I live in a house on the lake, and got it for under $500k. I hunt, fish, snowmobile, etc. Not many places along the Corridor suits my needs or wants. If I could take a train to Toronto for the weekend, I would. Having passenger rail close by isn't a deciding factor in my life. Never has been and never will be. Doesn't mean it shouldn't exist and be better.
 
crs1026 said:
You make a valid point, but I think it’s being expressed a bit mean-spiritedly.
Click to expand...
tmlittle said:
You can't take train service away from people and then chastise them for not living somewhere with good train service.
Click to expand...
I have created a new thread called Lack of meaningful Passenger Rail service outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor and responded to you there, as the present discussion does not belong into this thread for at least four reasons:

1) Not all these corridors were historically served by VIA (or CN and CP in pre-VIA days). For instance, Ontario Northland and the Algoma Central Railroad operated passenger rail service in Ontario, while BC Rail operated in British Columbia.
2) VIA is not the only current operator of intercity passenger rail service in Canada. For instance, Ontario Northland still operates the Polar Bear Express, the Keewatin Railway Company operates in Northern Manitoba and Tshiuetin Rail Transportation operates through Northern Quebec and Labrador.
3) The operation of at-least-daily passenger rail services outside densely populated areas (the so-called "Regional services"), were eliminated from VIA's mandate with the January 1990 cuts*, meaning that VIA would not be able to restore daily non-corridor passenger rail service even if it wanted.
4) VIA is not the only operator which could operate daily non-corridor passenger rail services, as any level of government can contract whatever operator they deem suitable.

* Due to a lawsuit by the BC government, service on Vancouver Island was spared from its termination unlike all other "Regional services". Nevertheless, the lawsuit was eventually dismissed and service was terminated when the tracks had become unsafe to operate on.

Nevertheless, my argument can be summarized as follows:
Urban Sky said:
And to stay in Paul's picture: what @micheal_can has been doing here and on Skyscraper Page for the last few years is equivalent to demanding that the public pays for your housing you can't afford (which is a civic right and public obligation), but insisting that it has to be a mansion with 9 bedrooms and as many bathrooms...
Click to expand...

Similarly, repeatedly complaining in this thread about the total lack of daily public transport in the Greater Sudbury Area while refusing to count intercity bus service as part of a public transport service would be equivalent to me whining every month about the lack of any Metro service in Montreal, just because I refuse to count any vehicle operating with rubber tire as a rail service.


Therefore, I invite everyone who has previously sent me private messages with subject lines like "How do you endure @Micheal_can?" or has expressed his exasperation about how @micheal_can keeps dragging the discussions in the respective "VIA Rail" threads of Urban Toronto and Skyscraper Page towards the source of his eternal misery and join me in reporting any posts which repeat (or respond to) the ever-same complaints about the lack of at-least-daily passenger rail in Sudbury or anywhere else outside the Corridor by using the "Report" function to kindly ask our helpful UT team to move it into a more appropriate thread.

@AlvinofDiaspar, would it be possible to kindly move the following posts into the new thread Lack of meaningful Passenger Rail service outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor?

#9,089
#9,090
#9,091
#9,092
#9,093
#9,094
#9,095 (Actually, you can delete this post of mine, as moving this discussion would obviate the very reason for that post)
#9,096
#9,097
#9,098
#9,099
#9,100
#9,101
#9,102
#9,103
#9,104
#9,105
#9,106
#9,107
#9,109
#9,112
#9,114

***

Now, if we could return to discussions which actually relate to the topic of this thread...
 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1362797228109271042


Recommendations #1 – Commitment to High Frequency Rail (HFR)

RAC encourages the Government to launch VIA Rail’s High Frequency Rail (HFR) project once the exploratory work and additional analysis are completed, as it represents a key infrastructure initiative that will contribute to a more sustainable economic recovery for Canada. HFR is a shovel-worthy project that will boost Canadian’s economic growth while reducing GHG emissions by 10 Mt (or 14 Mt if electric) over 30 years, which is equivalent to removing 10% of cars from the road for one year in Canada. By implementing and operating this new service within its entire network, VIA will better connect Canadians in the most populous region of the country by increasing train frequencies, shortening trip times, and providing more reliable service. Recommendation: Launch VIA Rail’s HFR project in order to create employment, stimulate sustainable growth and leverage the environmental benefits of moving more passengers by rail.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top