VIA Rail

[DirectionNorth]

You are correctly naming the culprit for the unfortunate naming of the LRT station serving VIA Rail's Ottawa station (and much more serious misjudgments), but it's certainly not VIA's fault for not having renamed the station to fit within Ottawa's rigid LRT station naming conventions. Cities all over the world have coped with name-less train stations when naming their LRT stations. Ottawa is the notable exception by nothing else than choice.


You only have to look at Montreal to see what happens if you let non-experts and politicians design transportation infrastructure and networks, with a new combined highway-and-rail bridge built for many billions (but with specifications so flimsy which preclude most heavy rail applications) and a tunnel which has been converted from open heavy rail standard to a closed Light Metro system (just at the very moment where a High Speed Rail project was planned which would suffer near-fatal blows to its business case if it couldn't use that tunnel). Similarly, Ottawa instead on choosing the one LRT consortium which failed to achieve "the minimum technical score to qualify for the project" at its own peril...


Let's just stick to "train station" and urban rail networks Canada (from East-to-West):

The STM calls its subway service "Métro" (i.e., not a "train" service) and its stops "Stations" (i.e., not a "train station"):

Spoiler

View attachment 591114

The REM calls its service "light rail transit" and its stops "REM stations":

Spoiler

View attachment 591121View attachment 591120

The TTC calls its subway services "Subway Lines" and its stops "Stations" or "Stops" and its streetcar services "Streetcar Lines" and their stops "stops":

Spoiler

View attachment 591126View attachment 591127View attachment 591146View attachment 591147

Edmonton calls its LRT service "LRT" and its stops "LRT stations":

Spoiler

View attachment 591129

Calgary calls its LRT service "CTrain" and its stops "CTrain stations":

Spoiler

View attachment 591128

Finally, Translink calls Vancouver's Light Metro network "SkyTrain" and its stops "SkyTrain Stations":

Spoiler

View attachment 591130

As we can see with these seven urban rail networks across Canada, no Canadian city refers to any of its urban rail networks as a "train" service and their stops as "train stations".

Conversely, there actually is one rail service in this country, which does call its services a "train" service and their stops "train stations":

Spoiler

View attachment 591175View attachment 591164View attachment 591165

Therefore, the claim that naming any of Ottawa's LRT stations "Train Station" would have been confusing for any Canadian resident appears to me as a fabricated claim to somehow excuse the bizarre refusal of the City of Ottawa and its transit operator OC Transpo to name its LRT station at Tremblay Road after the only train station which serves the actual city (as opposed to Fallowfield station which serves its Barrhaven suburb). And just to be sure, there are many valid alternatives to "Train Station", such as calling it "VIA Rail Station", "VIA Rail" or even "Tremblay (VIA Rail Station)"...

You have one very important omission: Ottawa calls its RT stations "O-Train station."

Personally, I like the O-Train branding, and it makes sense given the separate modes the OLRT uses.

My understanding is that "train station" is a North American term, whereas "rail station" is used in the rest of the anglosphere (and beyond):

Spoiler

View attachment 591161

Not sure what exactly your definition of "major city" is, but if we have a look at the main train stations in those CMA cities which have more than 300,000 inhabitants, the main rail station of only seven out of these 15 cities have a name attached:

City	Main train station	Specific Station Name
Toronto	Toronto Union Station	Union Station
Montreal	Montreal Gare Centrale	Gare Centrale
Vancouver	Vancouver Pacific Central	Pacific Central
Ottawa-Gatineau	Ottawa train station	none
Calgary	no passenger rail service	none
Edmonton	Edmonton train station	none
Quebec City	Quebec Gare du Palais	Gare du Palais
Winnipeg	Winnipeg train station (according to VIA) Winnipeg Union Station	Union Station
Hamilton	Hamilton GO Centre	GO Centre
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo	Kitchener train station	none
London	London train station	none
Halifax	Halifax train station	none
St. Catharine's-Niagara	St. Catharine's train station	none
Windsor	Windsor train station	none
Oshawa	Oshawa train station (according to VIA) Durham College Oshawa (according to GO Transit)	Station name sponsorship by nearby university (not acknowledged by VIA Rail)

That would still be easier to navigate for visitors unfamiliar with the city than "Tremblay"...

Of the 8/15 cities, only Ottawa and Kitchener have sort-of intercity/rapid transit interfaces, and Kitchener calls their station "Kitchener Central," but a central location is not one Ottawa is often accused of.

"Ottawa-Tremblay" is my preference, as "Ottawa Station" only makes sense in a downtown location, and "Train Station" is redundant with the system's name. ("Rail Station" is just silly)

 

[drum118]

Aug 13
Have a first hand visit of Michigan Central Station and it will require a lot of work and money to put back in the bridges, trackwork and platforms to allow VIA and Amtrak to bring back service to the station..

Did not get a look of the inside as it is only open to visitors after 5pm on Fridays and open all day on Sat. If you plan on visiting the station, you better check the scheduling for it.

I have seen it at night, but seeing it in the daylight shows how much the station and 75% of the area around it has been brought back to life. With the overpass mow open over the tunnel tracks, you can get a view of the tunnel as well the future station area.. The fence doesn't allow you to get good shots both areas unless you find a hole in the fence,

Just as I was about to leave, heard the whim of a CP train coming out of the tunnel with a KSC loco on it.

More up on my site.

 

[roger1818]

Similarly, Ottawa insted on choosing the one LRT consortium which failed to achieve "the minimum technical score to qualify for the project" at its own peril...

The link you provided was for the southern extension of the original Trillium Line (Line 2), which is under construction and expected to open later this year. None of the stations on Line 2 serve either of Ottawa's VIA Rail stations, though it does cross VIA Rail's track, which will be grade separated as part of the project.

OC Transpo calls its LRT system „O-Train“ and its stops „O-Train stations“:

Ottawa does not have an LRT system. It has a light metro system in which they shoe horned European regional rail equipment on one line and LRT equipment on the other. Experts recommended light metro equipment for the Confederation Line (Line 1), but the politicians vetoed that option, stating Ottawa was too small a city for that, so instead they had to special order extra long LRT train sets to handle the expected passenger volume (and even then have to couple 2 of them together).

 

[nfitz]

Ottawa does not have an LRT system.

Ottawa says it has LRT. https://ottawa.ca/en/resources-1/en...on-line-east-light-rail-transit-lrt-extension

Even the OCTranspo's website, calls Line 1 "electric light-rail service".

You might not like what it's officially called - but I don't think this is the forum to start pretending that's what it is called here.

 

[Urban Sky]

Based on the above, Metro refers to a closed rail transit system, which often uses a single fleet type and is entirely grade-separated, whereas Rail refers to an open type of rail transportation system, which may share its ROW with other rail (or even: non-rail) modes.

Similarly, Light refers to relatively low-capaciy rail systems, where short platform lengths and systemic infrastructure features which prevent an extension of platform, whereas Heavy refers to a rail system where platform length and thus capacity are much longer/higher.

In simpler terms, Rail is more flexible than Metro, Metro is more expensive to build than Rail and Heavy has a higher capacity than Light, which is why Light Metros are a high-cost-low-capacity solution which only really make sense as people movers at airports (where you only need to cover short distances, but can’t operate at grade), whereas Ottawa (Confederation Line) and Montreal (REM) chose such a bad fit (for urban transit applications) at their own peril…

 

[Garuda]

You have one very important omission: Ottawa calls its RT stations "O-Train station."

Personally, I like the O-Train branding, and it makes sense given the separate modes the OLRT uses.

View attachment 591185
View attachment 591186


Of the 8/15 cities, only Ottawa and Kitchener have sort-of intercity/rapid transit interfaces, and Kitchener calls their station "Kitchener Central," but a central location is not one Ottawa is often accused of.

"Ottawa-Tremblay" is my preference, as "Ottawa Station" only makes sense in a downtown location, and "Train Station" is redundant with the system's name. ("Rail Station" is just silly)

Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".

 

[micheal_can]

Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".

Union is Union.

I know Winnipeg's station is also a Union station, but I doubt anyone thinks of it when saying Union Station.

 

[Urban Sky]

Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".

Why would VIA need to align its station with whatever naming conventions OC Transpo invents? Should it rename it’s GTHA stations to add “GO” behind the station name and rename Oshawa to “Durham College Oshawa”? Where are all these other cities (especially those to which Ottawa would like to be compared to) which name a transit station serving a transportation hub after the street both are located on rather than any reference to said transportation hub or any name that hub is known as?

Conversely, VIA only operates or serves two stations within Ottawa’s city limits and there is hardly a risk of confusion of which one is “Ottawa” and which one is “Fallowfield”.

OC Transpo can rename its station to whatever it likes. All I’m expecting them to do is to finally acknowledge the adjacent VIA Rail station somewhere in the name. As I said before, I’m agnostic anout how they do it, they can come up with a name for it, just like the city of Kitchener insists on calling the station serving their city “Kitchener Central”, whereas GO and VIA still refer to it as “Kitchener GO” and “Kitchener” respectively. You can even make a name up, just like the local tram network in the Eastern German town of Gotha did by naming their terminus “Hauptbahnhof” (main station), even though the adjacent rail station is simply called “Gotha” and seems to have never been designated as a “Hauptbahnhof”:

 

[Allandale25]

 

[crs1026]

^Transport Action is off base with this one. First, adding the desired switch is not low cost (and might compare poorly to other potential uses of the same money). Second, it will escalate operating cost.... double the inspection and maintenance cost over the one-switch arrangement. Third, the added time and effort to make the backup move does not consume enough time to affect marketability, reputation, customer experience, or operating economy

If this were a switch on a busier time sensitive corridor route - and there are some of these - I would be all over this one, but it isn't. Maybe if we ever add daily service to the Saint John - Moncton - Halifax route, this would be essential.

It is definitely evidence of how we run the long distance trains in this country on a shoe string.... but considering the Ocean's cost recovery ratio, economies of this sort are part of the business.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

^Transport Action is off base with this one. First, adding the desired switch is not low cost (and might compare poorly to other potential uses of the same money). Second, it will escalate operating cost.... double the inspection and maintenance cost over the one-switch arrangement. Third, the added time and effort to make the backup move does not consume enough time to affect marketability, reputation, customer experience, or operating economy

If this were a switch on a busier time sensitive corridor route - and there are some of these - I would be all over this one, but it isn't. Maybe if we ever add daily service to the Saint John - Moncton - Halifax route, this would be essential.

It is definitely evidence of how we run the long distance trains in this country on a shoe string.... but considering the Ocean's cost recovery ratio, economies of this sort are part of the business.

- Paul

What would be the cost of that switch replacement?
What would be the yearly maintenance and operating costs of that new switch?
How much time would it save?

 

[crs1026]

What would be the cost of that switch replacement?
What would be the yearly maintenance and operating costs of that new switch?
How much time would it save?

Can't offer definitive prices.... but.... a switch and switch heater, plus three signals, plus a signal bungalow (with radio antenna mast and power supply from the local hydro/backup) to house the circuitry, plus modifications to adjoining signals and circuitry (which would require a new signal progression scheme).... plus the engineering and installation of all of same.... is easily a couple millions.

The switch will require daily inspection (there is no doubt already a track patrol, but it's one more item on the patrol's to-do list, and CN will charge accordingly) and periodic measurement. It would be located on the main line so would be subject to wear and tear as heavy freights roll over it, necessitating periodic adjustment, welding/grinding, and likely replacement of components at some interval. The heater will require energy (propane or electricity) to keep it clear all winter. The switch is totally attributable to VIA's operation and not to freight operation, so this entire cost (labour and materials, likely plus overhead) will be billed to VIA.

The time saved would be the time spent in a backup move. The backup move requires one of the engineers to walk to the rear of the train, call the train back by radio when the switch is lined and a signal set. The train has to back up a little over one trainlength. Then the engineer has to walk forwards to the head end before the train can proceed. All this might take about five-seven minutes on average, on a trip that takes more than a day Montreal-Halifax.

Compare this investment to, say, spending the same money for a nicer platform at Moncton. The Moncton stop is where passengers are allowed off to stretch their legs while the train is serviced. They don't notice the backup move.... but a nicer platform would be noticed. That's just one comparison.... think of all the other things that VIA could do with the money that might be better uses.

Oh, and ask ML about how quick and easy it is to get a similar switch or two installed at West Harbour, Aldershot, or Bramalea.....

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

Can't offer definitive prices.... but.... a switch and switch heater, plus three signals, plus a signal bungalow (with radio antenna mast and power supply from the local hydro/backup) to house the circuitry, plus modifications to adjoining signals and circuitry (which would require a new signal progression scheme).... plus the engineering and installation of all of same.... is easily a couple millions.

The switch will require daily inspection (there is no doubt already a track patrol, but it's one more item on the patrol's to-do list, and CN will charge accordingly) and periodic measurement. It would be located on the main line so would be subject to wear and tear as heavy freights roll over it, necessitating periodic adjustment, welding/grinding, and likely replacement of components at some interval. The heater will require energy (propane or electricity) to keep it clear all winter. The switch is totally attributable to VIA's operation and not to freight operation, so this entire cost (labour and materials, likely plus overhead) will be billed to VIA.

The time saved would be the time spent in a backup move. The backup move requires one of the engineers to walk to the rear of the train, call the train back by radio when the switch is lined and a signal set. The train has to back up a little over one trainlength. Then the engineer has to walk forwards to the head end. All this might take about five-seven minutes on average, on a trip that takes more than a day Montreal-Halifax.

Compare this investment to, say, spending the same money for a nicer platform at Moncton. The Moncton stop is where passengers are allowed off to stretch their legs while the train is serviced. They don't notice the backup move.... but a nicer platform would be noticed. That's just one comparison.... think of all the other things that VIA could do with the money that might be better uses.

Oh, and ask ML about how quick and easy it is to get a similar switch or two installed at West Harbour, Aldershot, or Bramalea.....

- Paul

Thank you for helping me with this.

You said that it would be worth it though if there were a daily train?

As far as ease and speed, since this is not a place that sees the extreme traffic the GTA sees, I'd imagine it might be easier, especially if Via is paying for it.

 

[crs1026]

You said that it would be worth it though if there were a daily train?

Yes, but only if it were a daily train (or three) where the time saved was a big enough impact on timekeeping to justify the expense.

Just running the Ocean daily wouldn't do it. There are places in the corridor (Montreal is the best example) where trains make backup moves as part of their regular routine. Even that is innocuous. It may look a bit rinky-dink to the observer, but it works. Cheaper and works is sometimes superior to elegant but costlier.

As far as ease and speed, since this is not a place that sees the extreme traffic the GTA sees, I'd imagine it might be easier, especially if Via is paying for it.

If there were more trains competing for track and time around Moncton, there might be more pressure to streamline the station stop. But I don't foresee that any time soon.

- Paul

 

[roger1818]

Ottawa says it has LRT. https://ottawa.ca/en/resources-1/en...on-line-east-light-rail-transit-lrt-extension

Even the OCTranspo's website, calls Line 1 "electric light-rail service".

You might not like what it's officially called - but I don't think this is the forum to start pretending that's what it is called here.

Certainly the politicians like to call it an LRT because of the small town attituded within this city. Just because you paint an orange red, it doesn't become an apple, regardless of how much you beleive oranges are extravegent and apples are more trendy.

View attachment 591705
Based on the above, Metro refers to a closed rail transit system, which often uses a single fleet type and is entirely grade-separated, whereas Rail refers to an open type of rail transportation system, which may share its ROW with other rail (or even: non-rail) modes.

Similarly, Light refers to relatively low-capaciy rail systems, where short platform lengths and systemic infrastructure features which prevent an extension of platform, whereas Heavy refers to a rail system where platform length and thus capacity are much longer/higher.

In simpler terms, Rail is more flexible than Metro, Metro is more expensive to build than Rail and Heavy has a higher capacity than Light, which is why Light Metros are a high-cost-low-capacity solution which only really make sense as people movers at airports (where you only need to cover short distances, but can’t operate at grade), whereas Ottawa (Confederation Line) and Montreal (REM) chose such a bad fit (for urban transit applications) at their own peril…

Thank you for the definition. In Ottawa, Line 1 is completely fenced off (except at stations) and fully grade separated, and the "The three downtown subway stations have 120-metre (390 ft) platforms; the remainder are 90 metres (300 ft) with provisions for future expansion."

Line 2 is also fenced off (except at stations) and when it opens again, it will only have a level crossing at the Walkley Diamond. The line is occasionally used to transport rail cars to the NRC's Rail vehicle impact ramp research facility, so it is built to acomodate heavy rail vehicles. The main line will have extended platforms to accomodate the 80m FLIRT trains (the airport branch will only accomodate the 40m Coradia LINT trains).

So while people who don't know any better do call it an LRT, the only thing LRT about it is the Line 1 trainsets, which is a large part of why there have been so many issues.