p_xavier
Active Member
I don't do feelings.
That was my point from the get go. I would love to see the tangible gains from HFR in the current corridor as it has not been explicitely explained yet.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
That was my point from the get go. I would love to see the tangible gains from HFR in the current corridor as it has not been explicitely explained yet.
kEiThZ
Superstar
You should at least be open to what Mayor Patterson says here:
Being fixated on just one aspect (number of trains) is exactly the kind of concern trolling I was referring to earlier.
kEiThZ
Superstar
A quick look at Kingston shows how bad the current schedule is for them. Just look at Kingston to Toronto. First train departs at 1036. Last train returns at 2018. In the 9h 12 mins, you have to fit in 5h 13 mins of scheduled travel. That doesn't include pre-boarding. So realistically the very best possible schedule today allows any person doing an out and back from Kingston to Toronto, about 3-3.5 hrs in Toronto. And that's assuming their train from Kingston isn't late because of a cascading delay from Ottawa or Montreal.
There's a reason the mayors are happy to trade this for a hub in Kingston. This schedule is all but unusable for day trips. And the timings are so ridiculous that no working person would use them. It's for retirees and students.
There's a reason the mayors are happy to trade this for a hub in Kingston. This schedule is all but unusable for day trips. And the timings are so ridiculous that no working person would use them. It's for retirees and students.
David_Brown
New Member
Prior to Covid, there were several morning trains from Kingston to Toronto. I regularly used VIA from Belleville, but the current schedule is useless. There are 9 trains to Toronto most days, but the earliest one departs 11:20am. They’ve just recently reinstated a morning train to Montreal. It departs Belleville at 10:20am. Pre Covid there was an 8:30 departure.
Last edited:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Nobody forces you to anything. Nevertheless, you might one day realize that people are much more willing to do what you want them to do if you at least pretend that you recognize, respect and value the efforts and contributions they make. Psychopaths could never be so successful in manipulating others, if they didn't exploit this nature of human feelings...
Let's try an example which you mind more tangible, in which we compare two different timetable scenarios [Note: all timings I mention below refer to the last pre-covid schedules, which you can find here]:
1) A schedule where trains stopping en-route in Alexandria arrive Montreal at 12:15 (#24), 13:16 (#34), 16:15 (#26), 18:15 (#28) and 20:57 (#38)
2) A schedule where trains stopping en-route in Aexandria arrive Montreal at 08:31 (#22), 13:16 (#34) and 20:57 (#38)
Which schedule has more departures in Alexandria?
Which schedule suits your personal needs better?
Now consider that the first train leaving Kingston and Cornwall arrives in Montreal at 11:57 (#60). Or that in order to get from Brockville to Montreal in the morning, you have to leave with #41 at 06:51 and wait 1:40h in Kingston before transferring onto #60, which still arrives only at 11:57 in Montreal (i.e. after more than 5 hours for a distance of just 204 km). Or that there is no train which allows you to travel from Cobourg and Belleville between 14:26 (#644) 18:48 (#54). Or that the earliest you can arrive in Belleville or Cobourg from Montreal on a Sunday is at 14:27 or 15:04, respectively (#65). Or that the latest you get from Cobourg to Montreal on a Saturday is by leaving at 14:26 and then waiting 1h50 in Kingston for #66 (total travel time: more than 5.5 hours for 426 km distance). Let alone that the only train from Kingston to Napanee or Port Hope leaves already at 05:32, whereas the earliest train from Port Hope, Trenton Junction and Napanee arrives in Kingston at 20:09. And can you believe that there is a two hour gap in the PM peak (from #46@15:40 to #54@17:40) for trains leaving from Toronto to Kingston (!)?
At the same time, three pairs of trains leave Kingston for Toronto less than 20 minutes apart:
- #43@09:13 and #61@09:26 (i.e. 13 minutes apart)
- #53@13:39 and #65@13:45 (i.e. 6 minutes apart - with both stopping in Belleville and Oshawa)
- #69@19:02 and #647@19:20 (i.e. 18 minutes apart - with both stopping in Oshawa only)
In the opposite direction, three pairs of trains leave Toronto less than 30 minutes apart:
- #66@15:15 and #46@15:40 (i.e. 25 minutes apart - with both stopping at Oshawa and Kingston)
- #646@16:35 and #68@17:00 (i.e. 25 minutes apart - with both stopping in Oshawa, but neither stopping in Kingston)
- #54@17:40 and #668@18:07 (i.e. 27 minutes apart - with both trains stopping in Guildwood, Oshawa and Kingston)
Given that reducing the end-to-end travel time is the key driver of retaining competitiveness in the primary markets (Toronto-Ottawa, Toronto-Montreal and Ottawa-Montreal - i.e. where competition from other modes like the coach and plane are the fiercest), there is a pressure to make as few intermediary stops as possible, thus squeezing the number of stops each of these intermediary stations receives. At the same time, the fact all these three primary markets are served by separate routes leads to a very high number of Express trains (causing the duplication of services I've just highlighted above), which is the main reason that there are essentially only three trains focused around the intermediary markets along the Lakeshore (and their local needs):
- #651: leaving Kingston at 05:32 and making all intermediary stops before reaching Toronto at 08:25
- #54: leaving Toronto at 17:40 and making all intermediary stops until Kingston, before running non-stop to Fallowfield, followed by a final stop in Ottawa (arr. 22:07)
- #48: leaving Toronto at 18:40 and making all intermediary stops before reaching Ottawa at 23:16
In contrast, the main contribution of HFR would be to consolidate the primary markets onto one single trunk route (Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal), thus increasing the number of frequencies offered in any of these three primary markets, without actually increasing the overall train mileage of trains serving primary markets. This allows the reorganization of the remaining Lakeshore services, by focusing on local needs without the pressure to keep end-to-end travel times (which matter little for someone living in Kingston, Belleville or Brockville) low. The result will be less overall trains travelling on the Lakeshore, but collectively they will be making many more stops, thus fostering local connectivity.
So, just to highlight what additional stops do for local connectivity: Trains 40 and 45 each make only 4 stops (Toronto-Kingston-Fallowfield-Ottawa - or v.v.), meaning that they only serve 6 (4 stops times the 3 other stops divided by two) different origin-destination pairs. Conversely, train #48 with its 14 stops at every station from Toronto to Ottawa serves 91 (14 stops times the other 13 stops divided by 2) origin-destination pairs. This means that local train #48 provides 15 times the connectivity which express trains #40 and #45 provide.
I know this was quite an extensive post, so maybe let that just sink for a moment...
PS: these are two posts with the configurations of the Siemens Trainsets which you were looking for today (I just happened to stumble over them again yesterday):
VIA Rail
The bigger question is when the feds intend to declare their commitment to the project The HFR booster community is about to get a taste of what seemed to make pro-pipeline people so mad. As the regulator you have to play coy. Even if you really want to say yes. Perhaps even more so. The...
VIA Rail
The train follows a predictable route. They lay over at stations. You can charge at the end of the line during layovers. It's not that hard. I agree, though I still think charging at most if not all stations would help. Also solar panels should help with charging, I think only thin film...
Last edited:
p_xavier
Active Member
Thanks for the links.
And for your question, the answer is 2). Daily commuting becomes a reality with better scheduling. Many, myself included, need day trips for work. Cornwall for one, could be a candidate for an early morning train for people who work in Montreal. This demand will only increase with higher home prices forcing people to live further away.
Also why can't I book a business class trip to Toronto? I can only book in economy for the Alexandria-Ottawa part. I emailed the service and they said they can't garantee the connexion, which IMO has nothing to do with booking class. Well it's more about not being able to book Alexandria-Ottawa in business, which I did last year.
And for your question, the answer is 2). Daily commuting becomes a reality with better scheduling. Many, myself included, need day trips for work. Cornwall for one, could be a candidate for an early morning train for people who work in Montreal. This demand will only increase with higher home prices forcing people to live further away.
Also why can't I book a business class trip to Toronto? I can only book in economy for the Alexandria-Ottawa part. I emailed the service and they said they can't garantee the connexion, which IMO has nothing to do with booking class. Well it's more about not being able to book Alexandria-Ottawa in business, which I did last year.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
^For a little more detail on what was said to Kingston, one can watch the City's Council discuss the VIA proposal in their meeting on 8 August 2017 (yes, that long ago). The Council discussion starts at about 1:17:30 here.
Kingston's Mayor submitted a motion to Council which was unanimously supported. The Mayor's presentation in support of his motion was verbal, drawing from their meeting with the VIA CEO. No paper exhibits were put before Council and the entire discussion was verbal. The questions from Councillors were thoughtful and on point with what has been discussed here. The one point that the Mayor made which we haven't heard elsewhere is that he was confident that trip times would not be lengthened after this change.
Kingston's support was simply a letter to be included in the VIA submission to government. It was an ask of a secondary element in an HFR proposal that is still unclear four years later,
The hub style service plan, which has been said unofficially to amount to 12 trains each way between Kingston and Toronto, is unquestionably a better plan for service to the Lakeshore. The addition of the layover trains giving better early morning/late evening options will draw ridership and may prove to be among the most popular trains in this service. A frequency of 12 daily trains is quite attractive for this route. So in principle it's an easy thing to support.
My concern remains whether this is a sincere, credible path forward - or simply vapourware. The proposal gives little credence to a) just how badly Ottawa wants to extricate itself from subsidising rail passenger and b) how CN is likely to treat the service once throught T-O-M passengers aren't impacted by indifferent operations. The Kingston Hub assumes both willingness to subsidise and willingness to operate - the two things HFR is promising to eliminate. The lack of documented detail even to the City Council speaks to how flimsy the assurance VIA gave really was (and is).
I may be living in the past but I remember how VIA service looked to London in 1983. Nothing in the regulatory framework, the funding framework, or VIA's legal mandate has changed since then. The London comparison may be ancient but is quite appropriate .... if VIA is this interested in a 12-train service for the Lakeshore route, then where is its interest and explicit promotion of comparable service vision for west of Toronto, which is an even more populous route with more potential? The Kingston plan may well just be bait and switch.
The Mayor's recent statement on Youtube attracted some interesting and somewhat snarky commentary. Sadly, I'm afraid those grumps were very much on point..
I guess time will tell. I really do hope to be proven wrong.
- Paul
Kingston's Mayor submitted a motion to Council which was unanimously supported. The Mayor's presentation in support of his motion was verbal, drawing from their meeting with the VIA CEO. No paper exhibits were put before Council and the entire discussion was verbal. The questions from Councillors were thoughtful and on point with what has been discussed here. The one point that the Mayor made which we haven't heard elsewhere is that he was confident that trip times would not be lengthened after this change.
Kingston's support was simply a letter to be included in the VIA submission to government. It was an ask of a secondary element in an HFR proposal that is still unclear four years later,
The hub style service plan, which has been said unofficially to amount to 12 trains each way between Kingston and Toronto, is unquestionably a better plan for service to the Lakeshore. The addition of the layover trains giving better early morning/late evening options will draw ridership and may prove to be among the most popular trains in this service. A frequency of 12 daily trains is quite attractive for this route. So in principle it's an easy thing to support.
My concern remains whether this is a sincere, credible path forward - or simply vapourware. The proposal gives little credence to a) just how badly Ottawa wants to extricate itself from subsidising rail passenger and b) how CN is likely to treat the service once throught T-O-M passengers aren't impacted by indifferent operations. The Kingston Hub assumes both willingness to subsidise and willingness to operate - the two things HFR is promising to eliminate. The lack of documented detail even to the City Council speaks to how flimsy the assurance VIA gave really was (and is).
I may be living in the past but I remember how VIA service looked to London in 1983. Nothing in the regulatory framework, the funding framework, or VIA's legal mandate has changed since then. The London comparison may be ancient but is quite appropriate .... if VIA is this interested in a 12-train service for the Lakeshore route, then where is its interest and explicit promotion of comparable service vision for west of Toronto, which is an even more populous route with more potential? The Kingston plan may well just be bait and switch.
The Mayor's recent statement on Youtube attracted some interesting and somewhat snarky commentary. Sadly, I'm afraid those grumps were very much on point..
I guess time will tell. I really do hope to be proven wrong.
- Paul
roger1818
Senior Member
Agreed. The other consideration is, having two trains 5 minutes apart and then the next train 1h55 later might statistically be hourly train service, but in practice, it isn't. This is an example of how the trains are optimized for service to Ottawa and Montreal, not the lakeshore.
Also, just before COVID (January 2020) I did an analysis of the number of eastbound trains arriving (departing in the case of Toronto) at each of the Lakeshore stations weekdays, and came up with the following Totals. I then added an assumed new number of arrivals post HFR and showed the percent increase (or decrease if negative) in the number of arrivals.
Station | No. of Arr. | New Arrivals (after HFR) | Percent increase (decrease) |
Toronto (Dep) | 15 | 12 | -20.0% |
Oshawa | 14 | 12 | -14.3% |
Kingston | 13 | 12 | -7.7% |
Cobourg | 9 | 12 | 33.3% |
Belleville | 8 | 12 | 50.0% |
Brockville | 7 | 12 | 71.4% |
Guildwood | 5 | 6 | 20.0% |
Cornwall | 5 | 6 | 20.0% |
Port Hope | 3 | 6 | 100.0% |
Trenton Jct. | 2 | 6 | 200.0% |
Napanee | 2 | 6 | 200.0% |
Gananoque | 1 | 6 | 500.0% |
As you can see, even though there is a 20% reduction in the number of departures from Toronto (which actually represents a 29.4% reduction in trainsets since trains 50&60 as well as 52&62 run split service) only Oshawa and Kingston would have reduction in the number of arrivals. All of the other stations would see an increase in the number of arrivals, some a significant increase.
Admittedly the results would be a little different westbound as eastbound two pairs of trains run split service, where as westbound more trains run back to back instead.
My assumptions for this were:
- The 12 trains west of Kingston and 6 trains east to each of Montreal and Ottawa shown on Mayor Paterson's map are each way.
- Half of the trains will be “express” and only stop at the larger stations and half will be regional and stop at all stations.
- All trains to Montreal stop in Cornwall.
p_xavier
Active Member
If that is the planned service, than yes service will be much better. I assume a similar service pattern for Québec City-Drummondville-Montréal corridor?
kEiThZ
Superstar
I get the concern and skepticism. But jeez, cynicism like this is why nothing ever gets done in this country anymore.
And again, I absolutely detest the fact that literally the 11 million residents of Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal have their interests held hostage to those of the one million living on Lakeshore. If anybody thinks this is reasonable, then I submit we should allow the same thing locally in Toronto. I want to give full veto over the entire RER project, to anybody who lives along a GO line in Toronto. I am so done with this nonsense.....
Last edited:
roger1818
Senior Member
HFR should help with this. With service optimized for the "Lakeshore" rather than service optimized for TOM travel, there would likely be early morning trains that leave Kingston bound for Ottawa and Montreal (the later of which would stop in Cornwall) The thing that is stopping VIA from doing this today is limited capacity due to all of the trains on the corridor optimized for TOM travel.
robmausser
Senior Member
yes exactly. Lakeshore will become more milk runny with the express trains on HFR tracks now.
rbt
Senior Member
Seems appropriate. If they're being forced to travel at freight speed by CN then Via might as well make a large number of stops while doing it.
roger1818
Senior Member
I suspect they some faster "express" trains and some slower stopping or regional trains. The definition of express might be a bit different from today though, as they probably won't have any non-stop trains from Kingston to Toronto (like trains 40, 43 and 45 prior to COVID), but they may have some trains with only a few (1-3) stops. It is also unlikely they will have any trains on the Lakeshore that don't stop in Kingston (like trains 68 and 646).
crs1026
Superstar
Well, the never getting anything done (except the promising) is what breeds the cynicism in the first place….0Chicken and egg it seems.
If there are only enough resources to serve one of T-O-M or Lakeshore, I quite agree - the metro needs must prevail. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect transparency around that point - if that’s the government’s position, then say so, and be accountable to the people that you are removing service from.
I don’t applaud Metrolinx very iften, but I very much like their approach to detailed, discoverable business cases. If we had similar on the table for HFR, we would know what we are debating.
- Paul