News   Apr 01, 2026
Transit Progress and Tall Towers Made Headlines in March, 2026
 277     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
News Roundup for April 1, 2026
 337     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 521     1 

VIA Rail

Urban Sky said:
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...
Click to expand...

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.

Urban Sky said:
OC Transpo calls its LRT system „O-Train“ and its stops „O-Train stations“:
Click to expand...

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).
 
IMG_6703.jpeg
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…
 
Last edited:
DirectionNorth said:
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)
Click to expand...
Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".
 
Garuda said:
Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".
Click to expand...
Union is Union.

I know Winnipeg's station is also a Union station, but I doubt anyone thinks of it when saying Union Station.
 
Garuda said:
Completely agree. VIA should start referring to Ottawa Station as "Ottawa Tremblay Station". The same way they do "Toronto Union".
Click to expand...
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”:
IMG_6704.jpeg
 
Last edited:
^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
 
crs1026 said:
^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
Click to expand...
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?
 
micheal_can said:
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?
Click to expand...
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
 
crs1026 said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
micheal_can said:
You said that it would be worth it though if there were a daily train?
Click to expand...

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.

micheal_can said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
nfitz said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

Urban Sky said:
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…
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top