VIA Rail

[trebello]

Related to the Skeena, what is the purpose of keeping that train running? The route is paralleled by highways and I would imagine given the length of the consist and the potential ridership that the train is horribly inefficient compared to busses. What keeps that service alive?

It is on the opposite side of the river from the highway in many places. There are some very small communities without any road access (e.g. Dorreen and Bend), one community with only a seasonal ferry service (e.g. Usk), and a few with only a rough gravel road for access (e.g. Penny). DownieLive has a video showing some of the people using the Skeena to go get groceries (

)

 

[Bordercollie]

The Definitions section (pg. 63) of the HFR RFEOI defines "Existing VIA Services" as "Existing passenger railway services operated by VIA Rail within the Corridor until transfer of responsibility to the Private Partner."

But they will still be mandated to provide services to the areas which they are required for.

It would be nothing different than Miller being contracted out to run the YRT buses.

 

[roger1818]

But they will still be mandated to provide services to the areas which they are required for.

It would be nothing different than Miller being contracted out to run the YRT buses.

I never said that they would cut any corridor services. Outside of the corridor, the responsibility would still be on VIA, until the government decides to cut those services (who do you think sets VIA's mandate?).

 

[Bordercollie]

I never said that they would cut any corridor services. Outside of the corridor, the responsibility would still be on VIA, until the government decides to cut those services (who do you think sets VIA's mandate?).

And what would happen if those rural areas lost access to rail service?

Do you think that the general public would just sit and let that happen?

Also looks like some strike action might happen next week.
BlackburnNews.com: Strike looms at VIA Rail as unionized workers overwhelmingly approve strike mandate.

Strike looms at VIA Rail as unionized workers overwhelmingly approve strike mandate

If you plan on taking the train anywhere next week, you might want to make a backup plan.

blackburnnews.com

 

[IRT_BMT_IND]

From late 1992

The current fastest service is just over an hour slower, on the same tracks (and this was before the resignalling and 3rd track projects in the 00s).

 

[Bordercollie]

From late 1992

View attachment 412049

The current fastest service is just over an hour slower, on the same tracks (and this was before the resignalling and 3rd track projects in the 00s).

That would be faster than flying and taking a cab from the airport to downtown Montreal.

But where is the majority of the extra hour from? Is it track slots getting in and out of Montreal? P42's are also capable of 100mph running as the LRC's were.

 

[cplchanb]

From late 1992

View attachment 412049

The current fastest service is just over an hour slower, on the same tracks (and this was before the resignalling and 3rd track projects in the 00s).

such a shame...... via has gone backwards... such as exos going backwards from emu to diesel locos....

 

[kEiThZ]

That would be faster than flying and taking a cab from the airport to downtown Montreal.

Maybe in rush hour on both ends. Also, with UPE in Toronto and REM in Montreal (2025), this should get cut to a half hour from downtown to the airport in both cities. So closer to 3 hrs downtown-to-downtown by air. That said a 4 hr train would be very competitive against this, given the price of airfare.

 

[Urban Sky]

From late 1992

View attachment 412049

The current fastest service is just over an hour slower, on the same tracks (and this was before the resignalling and 3rd track projects in the 00s).

What if I told you that the fastest train between Berlin and Munich (virtually the same Euclidean distance as Toronto-Montreal: 504.2 km vs. 504.5 km) took 8:47 hours that year?

Repost from: Post #10,489

VIA Rail

Running more EV’s, using more polluting lithium batteries, is now the answer to fixing rail in the busiest corridor of the country? This incremental approach doesn’t add up to much if train trips are still going to take well over 4 hours between Toronto and Montreal. It’s a weak plan. I’ll...

urbantoronto.ca

 

[crs1026]

The tradeoff for VIA has been the ability to run more trains per day on that route. The added flexibility in choice of departure time, and the virtual certainty that there will be a train at whatever.time the traveller wishes to travel, is well worth surrendering that single fast timing per day.

I do think we need timings that fast to really win modal share in a big way, but that can only happen on a dedicated line that doesn’t have freight trains in the way.

- Paul

 

[roger1818]

From late 1992

View attachment 412049

The current fastest service is just over an hour slower, on the same tracks (and this was before the resignalling and 3rd track projects in the 00s).

It seems like someone posts this every 6 months as if they are the first to notice it. If you look at the schedule for the same time period, you will see that only 1 train a day (6 days a week) was that fast and there were only 6 trains a day to Montreal (weekdays with fewer trains on weekends). Those other trains took as long as 5h13m (train 64). I don't have either Air Canada's or Canadian Airlines' schedule for that time period, but I am sure it would have been much more frequent. Waiting for your train or airplane can be part of your travel time.

 

[roger1818]

such a shame...... via has gone backwards... such as exos going backwards from emu to diesel locos....

AFAIK, EXO (or AMT) has never run EMUs (or DMUs). They did have conventional electric locomotives pulling unpowered cars, but even then I beleive that was only through the tunnel, and since they are no longer allowed to use the tunnel, all those routes don't exist anymore.

 

[roger1818]

Maybe in rush hour on both ends. Also, with UPE in Toronto and REM in Montreal (2025), this should get cut to a half hour from downtown to the airport in both cities. So closer to 3 hrs downtown-to-downtown by air. That said a 4 hr train would be very competitive against this, given the price of airfare.

It is an uphill battle for VIA to compete with the airlines on travel time and victories will be measured in minutes, and shaving those minutes will be expensive. Where VIA can compete is in cost (on popular routes), and those savings can be significant.

 

[Bordercollie]

o run more trains per day on that route. The added flexibility in choice of departure time, and the virtual certainty that there will be a train at whatever.time the traveller wishes to travel, is well worth surrendering that single fast timing per day.

It seems like someone posts this every 6 months as if they are the first to notice it. If you look at the schedule for the same time period, you will see that only 1 train a day (6 days a week) was that fast and there were only 6 trains a day to Montreal (weekdays with fewer trains on weekends). Those other trains took as long as 5h13m (train 64). I don't have either Air Canada's or Canadian Airlines' schedule for that time period, but I am sure it would have been much more frequent. Waiting for your train or airplane can be part of your travel time.

View attachment 412109

Why was that one train so fast? Bypassing Kingston saves an hour?

 

[smallspy]

But where is the majority of the extra hour from? Is it track slots getting in and out of Montreal? P42's are also capable of 100mph running as the LRC's were.

That particular train - later named The Metropolis - had just one intermediate stop. The current trains stop more often. That's cost them a fair amount of time right there.

As well, there is a LOT more congestion on the rails today. And not just freight, either - VIA is running a lot more service to Ottawa today then they did back then. The speedier VIAs mixing in with the massive freight trains is always problematic to scheduling, and having more of both is more problematic still.

Dan