News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 125     0 
News   Mar 31, 2026
City Council March, 2026: Plenty of Rental, Mutli-Phase Redevelopments Approved
 1.4K     2 
News   Mar 31, 2026
Building Toronto’s Skyline Podcast Event to Feature Brad Bradford in Concord
 235     3 

VIA Rail

Urban Sky said:
Trains 650, 651 and 655 have been suspended since the first CoVid schedule, which took effect Tuesday, March 17, 2020. They were still shown in the last pre-Covid schedule (effective March 8, 2020)
Click to expand...
Thanks - I thought they were still around (pre-covid at least).

Though in post-HFR world, they could easily terminate at Smiths Falls from Toronto.

In Kingston, at most would need storage for 3 trainsets at Kingston. A GO-style refueling point would be pretty simple.
 
roger1818 said:
From my understanding, they are completely safe but just can't be refurbished again.
Click to expand...
My understanding 5 years ago, is that the fatigue of the aluminum frames was already a big concern. I'd guess by now they are one incident away from having the entire fleet permanently pulled from service.
 
I'm really getting frustrated with the lack of movement on HFR.

Is VIA even the right entity to do this? Maybe the Corridor should be given to Metrolinx/GO and ARTM/Exo. We're starting to blur the line around suburban and intercity rail service anyway.

If VIA didn't exist, I think London, Peterborough and Kingston would all be getting GO rail service of some kind already.
 
At the point, I see the lack of Corridor progress as a function of VIA running the Corridor. The feds under-resource VIA. And then put on a whole bunch of mandates on which they have to spend money. There's also the lack of coordination with GO.

Post-RER how would VIA services even work? Doesn't look like VIA has planned substantially for that. Seems to me like Corridor services should be integrated into GO as some kind of express and intercity service.
 
kEiThZ said:
At the point, I see the lack of Corridor progress as a function of VIA running the Corridor. The feds under-resource VIA. And then put on a whole bunch of mandates on which they have to spend money. There's also the lack of coordination with GO.

Post-RER how would VIA services even work? Doesn't look like VIA has planned substantially for that. Seems to me like Corridor services should be integrated into GO as some kind of express and intercity service.
Click to expand...

We might not ever all agree on the details, but the absence of a VIA Rail Canada Act that lays out what VIA is expected to achieve and what its rights/legal powers/obligations are would certainly clear the air. The absence of such an Act is the elephant in the room.

It's curious how there can be such an explicit dialog between Municipalities, Provinces, and Ottawa over who pays for what in the area of urban transit, versus how murky the dialogue about intercity passenger rail is. The transit dialogue is seized on by the pols to create drama and discord.....and it's more than a bit disfunctional.... but it gets to a clear answer, like it or not.

I do believe that Ottawa has always appreciated and enabled the vagueness around VIA. It's a way of holding one's cards to one's chest in hopes the Provinces get impatient and take things on at their own expense. Then Ottawa can swoop in and offer money (which is never a barrier in the end, for anything Ottawa does) thereby basking in the credit without any accountability for the fine details.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
Maybe I’m a pessimist, but when the VIA rep responds to criticism about the impacts of HFR with “don’t worry, it’s years away”.....

Cornwall Council gets out in front of VIA changes by voicing concerns

- Paul
Click to expand...
I don't blame the Cornwall council for this, though I'm a bit surprised by the aggressiveness of their language. Lots of smaller Ontario cities are having demographic and relevance anxieties and they know that if they want a younger population they need good connections to cities like Toronto or Montreal. This feels like them acting defensively so that if service through there does get screwed up somehow (Via: "we didn't cancel that trip, we moved it to the new line") they are pre-mobilized and ready to campaign about it.

crs1026 said:
We might not ever all agree on the details, but the absence of a VIA Rail Canada Act that lays out what VIA is expected to achieve and what its rights/legal powers/obligations are would certainly clear the air. The absence of such an Act is the elephant in the room.

It's curious how there can be such an explicit dialog between Municipalities, Provinces, and Ottawa over who pays for what in the area of urban transit, versus how murky the dialogue about intercity passenger rail is. The transit dialogue is seized on by the pols to create drama and discord.....and it's more than a bit disfunctional.... but it gets to a clear answer, like it or not.

I do believe that Ottawa has always appreciated and enabled the vagueness around VIA. It's a way of holding one's cards to one's chest in hopes the Provinces get impatient and take things on at their own expense. Then Ottawa can swoop in and offer money (which is never a barrier in the end, for anything Ottawa does) thereby basking in the credit without any accountability for the fine details.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Or, more often than not, any obligation to chip in on operating expenses.
 
M-hero_Corpo_fleet.png

The cab car looks pretty good. Can't wait to see these things enter testing in the corridor.
 
With both CN and CP in a bit of a bidding war in order to purchase Kansas City Southern. Is there an opportunity for Via Rail to try and use that large purchase to their advantage? I was thinking something to the terms of if CN completes the purchase. Agreeing to pay for some improvements along the main corridor presently from Toronto to Ottawa/Montreal in return for increased reliability/train allotments. I know they have been raked over the coals previously for this by CN but would they be in a more willing partnership position after the purchase? Subsquently, could they go to CP and attempt to work with them on some of their lines; seeing as how they may lose out on the purchase. I would assume that VIA Rail likely pays significant amounts to run on both of those lines were they do and CN could benefit from additional infrastructure and CP from additional revenue if VIA can run more trains/trains to new areas potentially. I don't know the preexisiting arrangements between the main two lines and the federal government on that issue. Does anyone see any opportunities for VIA rail in this regard at all? both competitors trying to drop big cash (debt, stock purchases etc)?
 
^Much as I would love to see some improvement, I think that putting pressure on CP/CN right now would be counterproductive. Everything related to KCs is being handled in US regulatory space, and creating a “second front” would just annoy them at a time where they are in a pretty tough race that demands their full managerial attention. Also, it would risk playing favourites between the two and that too would provoke a reaction.
The financial stakes are very high, and the impact of that can‘t help but spill over into other matters, VIA included. I’m actually surprised that CN has stayed silent about HFR given that they are affected.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top