VIA Rail

[lenaitch]

I stand corrected (I had received my information from Wikipedia, but checking further, you are right). Having said that, even with the MTO responsible for the highways, they are both provincial agencies and if Metrolinx can prove that investments in them can reduce investments in highways, it amounts to the same thing (though admittedly there is more political maneuvering).



That is why I said "easier said than done." It impossible though. Not everything needs a door to door delivery in 7-8 hours, and if money could be saved by shipping it overnight instead, many industries would do it. The key would be partnering with the railways to provide a cost competitive option (something like CP's former Expressway rail service, but backed by the government to help keep costs down).

Hitting the rails - Truck News

MILTON, Ont. - Canadian Pacific Railway kicked off what it calls "the future of long-haul freight transportation" last month with the inauguration of its new Expressway intermodal service linking Mont...

www.trucknews.com

To keep the gatekeepers happy, I moved the discussion here if anybody is interested.

General railway discussions

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/cn-cp-kansas-city-southern-railway-bid-1.6041729

urbantoronto.ca

 

[lenaitch]

High speed freight. Interestingly, if VIA was willing, they could have studied that as part of the HFR plan, to see if that could get extra revenue. There's all kinds of formats from dedicated freight trains to postal trains to quick swap cargo containers on passenger trains. This comes to mind too:

SNCF TGV La Poste - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Like the old 'silk trains'.

Silk Train

Silk Train, the term used to describe CPR cargo trains carrying expensive shipments of Oriental raw silk. The trains sped from Vancouver to merchants in eastern...

www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca

 

[Darwinkgo]

If the freight railroads want to lease extra capacity, I'm sure VIA/the private owner/operator of the tracks will oblige.

 

[crs1026]

If the freight railroads want to lease extra capacity, I'm sure VIA/the private owner/operator of the tracks will oblige.

You mean VIA would lease space on its HFR line to freight? I would bet that won’t happen, because a) the track’s banking profile and siding lengths will not be freight friendly and b) I’m sure CN and CP (and the courier companies) will achieve (have already lobbied for?) some sort of non-compete restriction on the HFR line. And c) there’s still plenty of capacity there, so it may be moot.

- Paul

 

[rbt]

If VIA is going to take another decade just building Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal, and a decade after that getting to Windsor, there are real costs to the province. Queen's Park should be asking if they can do it better.

Metrolinx is 5 years into GO Electrification and not yet awarded the tender which is expected to be around 10 years to construct. It also took 3 years got an Ontario Northland railway business plan (not even an EA).

I'm not sure Ontario could finish a project like that any faster; too many distractions with higher political value.

 

[roger1818]

You mean VIA would lease space on its HFR line to freight? I would bet that won’t happen,

It depends which section you are talking about. I wouldn't be surprised if part of the agreement for VIA to purchase the section of the Havelock Sub that is still active will include a condition that CP be allowed to continue to use the tracks. In theory VIA could build parallel tracks on the same ROW, but in this specific case I think CP would prefer offloading the maintenance costs to VIA (since CP only runs 3 trains a week) and would benefit from a higher operating speed (not HFR speeds but more than 10 mph).

 

[TRONto]

Metrolinx is 5 years into GO Electrification and not yet awarded the tender which is expected to be around 10 years to construct. It also took 3 years got an Ontario Northland railway business plan (not even an EA).

I'm not sure Ontario could finish a project like that any faster; too many distractions with higher political value.

Metrolinx seems to be moving faster under the current government so it wouldn't surprise me if the electrification tender is around the corner.

I think that the province should build the HSR to a final length of Windsor - Kingston/Ottawa and pay VIA to run it. This model is used in the US with Amtrak and would make VIA much more useful in Ontario. Thoughts?

 

[Allandale25]

Metrolinx seems to be moving faster under the current government so it wouldn't surprise me if the electrification tender is around the corner.

I think that the province should build the HSR to a final length of Windsor - Kingston/Ottawa and pay VIA to run it. This model is used in the US with Amtrak and would make VIA much more useful in Ontario. Thoughts?

As in, you believe it will be faster than than what's on the April 2021 IO procurement schedule?

Right now the GO electrification page just says "The successful proponent team will be responsible for selecting and delivering the right trains and infrastructure to unlock the benefits of GO Expansion. The contract is in a multi-year procurement process, and currently teams are completing the bids that will close in 2021. Construction will get underway in 2022/3."

 

[Darwinkgo]

You mean VIA would lease space on its HFR line to freight? I would bet that won’t happen, because a) the track’s banking profile and siding lengths will not be freight friendly and b) I’m sure CN and CP (and the courier companies) will achieve (have already lobbied for?) some sort of non-compete restriction on the HFR line. And c) there’s still plenty of capacity there, so it may be moot.

- Paul

Why? It might not be 'friendly', but it will be ok. Lighter freight unit trains can likely use it just fine at the very least. Only use it in one direction.

You're thinking of the HFR as a specialist service for freight between Montreal and Toronto, and that somehow there will be another operator that will operate - why would that be the case? I am thinking of it as 1 more track. You don't need sidings if every train on it is operating in the same direction.

Why would there be non-compete? We're talking here about CN and CP leasing the space! It is in their best interest.

And there might be plenty of capacity today. But that doesn't mean there will be for the life of the tracks. Just because it isn't a day 1 consideration, doesn't mean it won't be forever.

 

[p_xavier]

You mean VIA would lease space on its HFR line to freight? I would bet that won’t happen, because a) the track’s banking profile and siding lengths will not be freight friendly and b) I’m sure CN and CP (and the courier companies) will achieve (have already lobbied for?) some sort of non-compete restriction on the HFR line. And c) there’s still plenty of capacity there, so it may be moot.

- Paul

They already do on their own tracks.

 

[TRONto]

As in, you believe it will be faster than than what's on the April 2021 IO procurement schedule?

View attachment 324227

Right now the GO electrification page just says "The successful proponent team will be responsible for selecting and delivering the right trains and infrastructure to unlock the benefits of GO Expansion. The contract is in a multi-year procurement process, and currently teams are completing the bids that will close in 2021. Construction will get underway in 2022/3."

Looks like we are good then. Under the Liberal government, it seemed like there was a lot of waffling (political interference?) instead of making decisions and going forward.

 

[crs1026]

Why? It might not be 'friendly', but it will be ok. Lighter freight unit trains can likely use it just fine at the very least. Only use it in one direction.

You're thinking of the HFR as a specialist service for freight between Montreal and Toronto, and that somehow there will be another operator that will operate - why would that be the case? I am thinking of it as 1 more track. You don't need sidings if every train on it is operating in the same direction.

Why would there be non-compete? We're talking here about CN and CP leasing the space! It is in their best interest.

And there might be plenty of capacity today. But that doesn't mean there will be for the life of the tracks. Just because it isn't a day 1 consideration, doesn't mean it won't be forever.

Protecting turf is a very central theme for freight railroads. I can't imagine CP giving up the line without a clause in the sale document retaining the right to routing for any on-line freight business, present or future. Similarly I expect they would require a clause that keeps CN and any other hypothetical operator off the line altogether. Generally other operators only muscle into a railroad's former territory under specific regulated circumstances, and usually only after a challenge before the regulator.

As to track wear and tear, the section west of Havelock is the straighter part of the route. Sure, freight can coexist, but at some cost. I'm sure the commercial terms will ensure that VIA doesn't incur the cost for the heavy bulk cargo that CP currently carries. East of Havelock would certainly be costlier because of all the curves which VIA needs to bank aggressively. Freight will add to the maintenance cost there. Axle loadings are commonly maxed out for today's cargoes - there is really no "light" freight out there. Even road-weight containers are stacked, after all.

I would like to see rail used for packet/mail delivery, but even if it's remunerative it's not VIA's highest priority while HFR is in startup/growth mode. Freight/postal terminals are no longer colocated with rail terminals. Once you've loaded the trailer to haul to the train interface point, it might as well stay on the road. Not my preference, but I see it as unlikely that anyone would make the investment needed - sorting is high tech.

- Paul

 

[Allandale25]

Looks like we are good then. Under the Liberal government, it seemed like there was a lot of waffling (political interference?) instead of making decisions and going forward.

This has been discussed and debated in the GO Electrification thread. I certain amount of preliminary/EA/TPAP work was required from 2014-2018 to get to the RFP stage which is when the PCs have been in power. The PCs did pass the Moving Transit Faster Act to deal with stuff to make construction faster. I'm not sure what more could have been done between 2014-2018 to speed up the EA/TPAP/RFQ process, although a TPAP addendum was required so I guess it could be argued that it could have been avoided. That said, I think the RFQ/RFP had already launched when the TPAP addendum happened and it was a result of feedback from the bidders on tweaks needed. Did I get pretty close with this brief overview @crs1026 ? I feel like you've commented on this extensively in the past.

Bringing this back on topic, the TPAP addendum looked at the Scarboro Rail Grade Separation but Metrolinx decided it wasn't needed. I wonder if VIA will now require it for HFR and it'll be part of the overall project budget.

 

[roger1818]

Correct me if I a

Protecting turf is a very central theme for freight railroads. I can't imagine CP giving up the line without a clause in the sale document retaining the right to routing for any on-line freight business, present or future. Similarly I expect they would require a clause that keeps CN and any other hypothetical operator off the line altogether. Generally other operators only muscle into a railroad's former territory under specific regulated circumstances, and usually only after a challenge before the regulator.

The question is if such a clause would be legal. AFAIK, federally regulated railways can't prohibit others from operating on their track outright. They are allowed to charge a reasonable fee for doing so, and covering the cost of track wear and tear certainly would be considered reasonable. I am not sure that the benefits would outweigh the risks for VIA though, so I can't see them actively pursuing this.

 

[Allandale25]

VIA Rail Canada annual meeting offers few forward-looking details - Trains

MONTREAL— Against a backdrop assuring continued service interruptions, VIA Rail Canada released its annual pre-recorded public meeting last week, with brief reports from Chairman Francoise Bertrand, President and CEO Cynthia Garneau, and Chief Financial Officer Marie-Claude Cardin. The meeting...

www.trains.com