News   Apr 02, 2026
City Council March, 2026 Settlements: Negotiations Advance Projects Across Toronto
 636     1 
News   Apr 02, 2026
News Roundup for April 2, 2026
 370     0 
News   Apr 02, 2026
Mount Celeste
 381     1 

VIA Rail

Would there be any utility in creating a rail connection at Gananoque/Kingston. Would there be significant savings in this routing for a NY/Toronto line, vs the round the lake route?

It looks like there is a ~40 Km gap between the rail lines around Fort Drum and the rail lines on the Canadian side.

**Edit**

On review the travel distance would not be significantly shorter. So that's a big no.
 
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Would there be any utility in creating a rail connection at Gananoque/Kingston. Would there be significant savings in this routing for a NY/Toronto line, vs the round the lake route?

It looks like there is a ~40 Km gap between the rail lines around Fort Drum and the rail lines on the Canadian side.
Click to expand...
My standard four questions to help us assess any such suggestions would be:

1) What is the problem I identified?
2) Why do I believe that the problem needs to be addressed?
3) What solution do I see for the problem?
4) Why do I believe that my solution addresses the identified problem better than the Status Quo and/or a solution which someone else has proposed?

Quick reminder also that if train/car miles were such a significant cost driver for freight railroads, CN and CP most likely would have kept their Sudbury/Capreol-Ottawa/Montreal links rather than routing all traffic via Toronto…
 
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Would there be any utility in creating a rail connection at Gananoque/Kingston. Would there be significant savings in this routing for a NY/Toronto line, vs the round the lake route?

It looks like there is a ~40 Km gap between the rail lines around Fort Drum and the rail lines on the Canadian side.
Click to expand...

The short answer is, it would be hugely expensive and not particularly marketable.

That chart shows that the current revenue from the Maple Leaf is $24.6M. How much can one afford to spend to double that ?

The Maple Leaf is an extension of a train that is likely to run anyways, and with a state subsidy at that. It runs on a high quality freight line that has the necessary capacity, has seen considerable investment to deliver the passenger capacity, shares the overhead for stations etc with other trains on that route. It runs through major population centers so enjoys local ridership which shares cost with the cross border business.

The remaining rail lines through Fort Drum and upper New York state are only secondary lines, would need considerable upgrading, and take circuitous routes through no particularly large population centers.

Sorry, but this is a complete non-starter.

- Paul
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Would there be any utility in creating a rail connection at Gananoque/Kingston. Would there be significant savings in this routing for a NY/Toronto line, vs the round the lake route?

It looks like there is a ~40 Km gap between the rail lines around Fort Drum and the rail lines on the Canadian side.
Click to expand...
As the resident "fantasy"poster... I don't see what savings it would give other than a direct connection to the USA from Kingston.
 
As much as I hate airports and like the idea of creating alternatives to air travel, we have to keep the big picture of VIA's international routes in mind. The total ridership of the Maple Leaf only replaces one slot at JFK or La Gardia.

The market may more be intermediate local towns where the effort to reach an airport is greater. But even there - I can see Hamilton offering enough direct flight capacity to the Big Apple that folks from Welland or Grimsby are not likely to benefit from an international train.

Just getting these routes to the point where a single train (or two) is sustainable is a steep slope. Routes that offer an extension to an existing corridor have the most potential... routes where the cross border train stands on its own will be harder to justify.

Maybe one day Buffalo-Albany-New York will justify HSR and be air competitive. But not in my lifetime.

- Paul
 
New York Central had through service New York City to Clayton NY and Morristown/Ogdensburg NY, which were linked to Canada by ferry.

And NYC had a direct Montreal-Utica train via Malone that connected to points west on the Water Level Route,

- Paul
 
micheal_can said:
Without an existing rail bridge, the cost to do it would not even be worth exploring. Due to the Seaway height restrictions, that bridge would become very expensive. Even in my fantasy world, this is a dead thing.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, the only existing rail crossing of the St. Laurence Seaway "between Montreal and Toronto" is at Coteau. :rolleyes:
 
Siemens set 12 en route.

1705030346898.png
 
Something I wasn't sure of so i'd ask here: I know the LRC's had an exception to go 100MPH on the Class 5 rail, it was not typical. The typical max speed is 95MPH I believe for other passenger rail. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_regulations_in_Canada#cite_ref-18)

Now, its only 5MPH, but do the Venture sets have an exception to go 100MPH as well? Since their top speed is 125MPH?

Or must they abide by the 95MPH limit as well.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top