roger1818
Senior Member
No. Initially the Rocky Mountaineer used it for a while. Later they truncated the route. Not sure exactly when that happened.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Darwinkgo
Active Member
The daylight route is distinct. The long distance trip, yeah you got it.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I can see the merit in that for sure. But then I think we need to stop giving lip service to VIA as a national passenger service. Perhaps it's time for drop the Federal government's involvement and to transfer the Ontario-Quebec line to a new partnership between GO Transit and Exo. Extend Go Transit from Oshawa to the Quebec border and EXO from Montreal to Quebec City. Cancel all train service east of Quebec City. Sell off and privatize the Canadian tourist train from Toronto to Vancouver. Let Alberta pursue a Calgary to Edmonton passenger railink if they wish, same for Vancouver to Calgary. This all sounds dreadful to any fan of VIA or a national rail service, but it only reflects reality anyway.
TerryJohnson
New Member
The sad story of VIA; the federal government's total inattention to resolving the mobility gaps left by Greyhound; the REM's preemption of the Mount Royal Tunnel for strictly local use, not caring about Quebec City and barely even Laval; and the Northlander's cut by Dalton McGuinty followed by Doug Ford's much-vaunted promise to restore it by now having included neither ordering any equipment nor letting ONTC negotiate access to the CN Newmarket Sub all show us how few crumbs the rest of Canada get from the tables of the big cities already. The reality totally sucks. Let's not make it any worse.
This kind of thinking ignores the hundreds of communities across the country that the trains still connect, plus the hundreds more that would be connected if we even pursued as enlightened an attitude to public transport as the US, let alone the rest of the world, plus the moral responsibility to provide safe mobility that has now been clearly articulated, not least by the MMIWG report. Unless we get serious about rebuilding a sustainable public transportation network we're excluding the non-driving 30-40% of the population from full citizenship, we will see more and more people questioning what benefits confederation brings their province or community, and we'd better get used to floods, wildfires and derechos.
Xav
Active Member
You talk as if Via is useless, except it's not. In the Corridor, Via provides good service for a very decent price (at my firm, people going to clients in Ottawa usually take a train from Montréal, same with Quebec City).
You're right though that more provincial intervention could be good (similar to state supported services in the US).
innsertnamehere
Superstar
The reality is that there are simply very few viable rail corridors in Canada outside of the Corridor. Calgary-Edmonton is probably the one real gap.
When Canada is a country of vast distances and only a handful of major cities outside of the corridor, and of those few cities many are in the Rocky mountains with the extreme geographical constraints that come with it, there just aren't many viable options.
When Canada is a country of vast distances and only a handful of major cities outside of the corridor, and of those few cities many are in the Rocky mountains with the extreme geographical constraints that come with it, there just aren't many viable options.
robmausser
Senior Member
Yes, other than Windsor to Quebec City and Edmonton to Calgary, everything else is just a government subsidized trip. Some of this is vital, like the Churchill train (no other way to get in and out by land) and others I believe should continue to be subsidized for historical and tourism/education purposes (Canadian and Ocean) but they will never turn a profit. Unless you offer a high class service like Rocky Mountaineer, but that basically leaves out a large percentage of the public.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
When I lived in Fredericton I would have used a train between the NB capital and St. John, Moncton and Halifax.
roger1818
Senior Member
Did you not notice when you lived in Fredericton that there are no longer any tracks into the city? Rebuilding those tracks would not be a trivial exercise. In this case, buses provide faster, more frequent, more reliable and more cost effective service.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
Somewhat unrelated, if shoehorning via onto freight hasn’t/won’t work, why don’t we at least attempt to get via to build and restore rail corridors on the cheap? Is greenfield rail construction really that expensive? Why do we bother mixing freight and passenger rail at great cost when neither benefits from it. Doesn’t even have to be via, but the constant arguing of using the two freight juggernaughts’ railways seems to make any type of service increase anywhere a nightmare. I don’t mean just new track for HFR, either; there are countless abandoned right of ways across the nation that could be owned and operated by via if someone came in, bought them and laid track. Ideally it should be the feds doing this, as the negligence to protect corridors in the past is a contributing factor to the dismal state of rail transportation today.
Xav
Active Member
So about 500km to reach those 4 areas, where about 900k people live. For comparison, Calgary-Edmonton is a 300km corridor where 3 million people live and Montréal-Ottawa-Toronto is a 600km corridor where 12.7 million people live. See where I'm going? Busses are a great solution to mobility issues in the Maritimes for now. They are more flexible, are cheaper and easier to maintain, and roads are government owned. If they're electric, it's even better. Maybe one day Southern New Brunswick and Nova Scotia will have a large enough population to sustain a train line, but right now I just don't see it.
crs1026
Superstar
I wouldn't fixate on the cost of the construction in open country. It's the terminal costs that are prohibitive.
The railways have a virtual monopoly on the corridors in urban areas where land costs can be very high.
A good example is Edmonton-Calgary, or Saskatoon-Regina-Moose Jaw, or Halifax/Saint John. Even if a disused rail line can be rehabilitated, good luck getting access for the last few miles to a proper terminal location. I'm not a fan of placing stations in the suburbs.... and if the plan requires connecting to smaller communities to add ridership (eg Edmonton-Lethbridge, Halifax-Fredericton, Regina-Prince Albert) - then there will have to be a passage from one side of town to the other.
Whatever passenger trackage and infrastructure might have existed, it's gone now. Service and connecting tracks are torn up as well, so needed trackage may have a working freight train sitting on it. The railways won't be paying to put it back, or moving their trains out of the way on the existing track.. And nobody will be expropriating the land to add a new corridor.
This is even a concern for HFR. For the lighter-ridership corridors that one might suggest, it's crippling.
- Paul
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Well you say that but Brightline was able to use existing corridors to build their infrastructure for the most part, and then elevated guideways to the airport or to Disney, so it can be done. Just a matter of will.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Since VIA's inception it hasn't had a chance when you own exceptionally little track and you have to serve these God forsaken little places purely for political reasons, .
The VIA experiment {like Amtrak} has been a failure and I don't see why it should continue hoping that somehow that scenario will change. I certainly don't think this is VIA's fault but the reality is that no matter how much they try, you can't steer a boat with both your hands tied behind your back.
Like all government services, priorities have to be set so that you get the most bang for the buck. Governments wouldn't fund a huge new stadium in Estevan, a massive new university in Parry Sound, or a new Metro in Gaspe, so why is rail any different? When you CHOOSE to live in smaller and isolated cities/towns you must accept the fact that you will not get the government services you would get in Vancouver, London, or Quebec City.. All CHOICES have consequences, good and bad and anyone who doesn't know and accept that has no grasp of reality.
The VIA experiment {like Amtrak} has been a failure and I don't see why it should continue hoping that somehow that scenario will change. I certainly don't think this is VIA's fault but the reality is that no matter how much they try, you can't steer a boat with both your hands tied behind your back.
Like all government services, priorities have to be set so that you get the most bang for the buck. Governments wouldn't fund a huge new stadium in Estevan, a massive new university in Parry Sound, or a new Metro in Gaspe, so why is rail any different? When you CHOOSE to live in smaller and isolated cities/towns you must accept the fact that you will not get the government services you would get in Vancouver, London, or Quebec City.. All CHOICES have consequences, good and bad and anyone who doesn't know and accept that has no grasp of reality.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Brightline is subsidiary of Florida East Coast Industries, which also owned the Florida East Coast Railway (the freight company which owns the line) until 2016 - which is when Brightline made the agreements for use/upgrades of the existing line. You don't need as much will when the railway is already owned by your parent company.
From what I understand, the new 200 km/h railway from Cocoa to Orlando Airport will be directly owned by Brightline itself.
Last edited: