VIA Rail

[reaperexpress]

Agree to a very high degree with this concept. and the use of Regional Rail to add to connecting regional bus services as well.

Questions.

Peterborough. If, the big IF, HSR does not get off the ground via the route generally discussed, would and could Peterborough become part of the regional network? Rep[laing the current GO Bus connection.

Given that there's not much between Peterborough and Toronto, it would definitely be more of a Regional Express style service if GO does run anything on the line.

The status quo is that the Feds would build what they need for Intercity rail and ignore potential GO services, similarly to how the Province is ignoring intercity rail. The lack of cooperation between the two governments is detrimental to Ontarians as a whole.

Union. at what theoretical point do we stretch Unions capacity to the max?

The proposed number of trains shown here is about the same as what will likely be included in GO expansion, it's just that there would be more trains skipping stops on outer portions of lines. The status quo is probably two service types with the express trains making all stops beyond a certain station.

When Union reaches capacity again my personal opinion is that the best bang-for-the-buck would be to extend the Ontario Line to Pearson and Bramalea, replacing the local GO service there. But that's a whole other discussion that would be more suited in the Ontario Line West Extension thread.

 

[just east of the creek]

The case for Peterborough changes a lot once you delete HFR. The cost of rebuilding and maintaining the whole line then passes to whatever GO or regional service you imagine. The entry into Toronto also becomes more of an issue.

Also, what level of service do you envision? It's unlikely that GO could justify running enough trains to rival what can be done as a service model by bus.

I don't see the business case for a "token" service of one or two peak commuter trains. Or even one or two midday or evening turns. It's 90 miles to Peterboro, versus say 20 to Bolton. A lot more expensive to operate.

And.... the route does not offer much to the intermediate communities, unless you roll back more greenbelt protections and assume development along the route. If anyone in the current government proposed mid route stations, I would be very afraid.



It will happen, but not for some time yet. The capacity changes greatly when you assume run-through operations where Union effectively becomes a midpoint stop. The dwell time of trains in the depot can be greatly reduced. Certainly the base assumptions for GO Regional can be met with the current terminal if the switches and signalling are configured right.

- Paul

I cannot argue with your point re Peterborough. Although it seems like the city is becoming more aligned with the greater GTA sphere of influence in terms of the numbers of people commuting. But commuting does not necessarily equate to greater GO usage - bus or train. And as you have pointed out, the line is 90 miles or so distant and the potential stops in between (Pontypool, Burketon, Myrtle, Green River) are not really game changers, maybe not until you get to Locust Hill, and then you are into Toronto. Having said that, then why would HSR be stopping? But that's a different thread.

 

[Urban Sky]

The north mainline is definitely promising for medium-distance travel, but based on the penny-pinching rhetoric coming from Metrolinx's latest GO Expansion announcements it's safe to assume they will spend just enough on the line between Kitchener and Bramalea to accommodate the planned GO service, and not a penny more. There definitely won't be spare capacity available for Via.

I think it really starts showing that I haven’t worked on heavy rail projects in the GTHA for the last two years, but you be able to point me at what the current official plans are for the Halton Sub and other pinch points in the GO/RER/ONxpress network?

Ideally Metrolinx and Via should be collaborating to create an effective passenger rail system in southern Ontario that improves both regional rail (GO) and intercity rail (Via), rather than ignoring improvements to the latter. But in this particular case I think it does make sense for GO to fully take the Toronto-Kitchener-London corridor over. Toronto-Kitchener express trains can be extended to London without any impact on capacity on the CN mainline between Bramalea and Georgetown, or the single-tracked GO line between Georgetown and Kitchener.

Agreed, reliable service on London-Kitchener can only be offered without extending these services beyond London, though you’d probably need to triple-track the short segment from London Junction to where the London Station track starts.

Via could affordably expand capacity on the south mainline by adding second platforms at stations, enabling them to use the double track that already exists rather than being bottlenecked onto the single platforms at Ingersoll, Woodstock and Brantford stations. That would enable them to add a couple trains per day, with service via Brantford to both Sarnia and Windsor.

That’s indeed a very cheap project which CN should welcome, provided that the visionless penny pinchers at TC can be convinced. Same goes for certain smaller VIA stations along the Kingston Subdivision…

You've already seen the content of my article on the case for GO Transit taking an increased role in intercity rail in Ontario, but I'll link it here again for others' reference:
https://ontariotrafficman.wordpress.com/2024/05/26/the-case-for-regional-express-trains-in-ontario/

Thanks for sharing, I had somehow missed that, but very informative (also your article on the demise of GO service to London)! I’m not too sure about the Airport loop (i.e., digging a new tunnel for exclusive use and benefit of the S-Bahn to Bramalea), but these are mere details…

 

[lenaitch]

As I've mentioned before I don't think we can let Metrolinx off the hook for thinking like a selfish for-profit corporation. Its mandate should be to improve long distance transit in Ontario. Via Rail currently provides some very useful intercity rail services entirely within Ontario without any significant financial support from the Province. The least the Province could do is to design their infrastructure such that Via trains are able to maintain the same average speeds that they already achieved before GO expansion. If they increase GO local frequencies without providing adequate passing tracks, Via's speed will be decimated.

Perhaps one of the first things the government should do is sort out Metrolinx's mandate. It's all well and good to say they 'should' do this or that, but its reason for being should drive its funding, and right now its "Regional Transportation Area" as defined in the Metrolinx Act, does not include anything west of the region of Waterloo (or, for that matter, anything east of Northumberland County). Not only would it add clarity for funders and taxpayers alike, it might set some clearer boundaries with Ottawa in regards to VIA services.

In addition to the geographical area of responsibility, perhaps a better sense of what the concepts of 'transit', 'commuting', etc. mean. Is one train per day, regardless of travel time, a reasonable 'commute'? Dunno.

 

[robmausser]

The reason I'm only proposing modest upgrades on the Brantford line is indeed that in the longer term if Via can secure major investment in SW Ontario it would be good to direct that to the north mainline. The modest upgrades via Brantford would just be to give CN a bone to allow two daily Sarnia trains to run via the south mainline to Toronto, increasing the service on that line from 5/day to 7/day.

A bit of an aside but it affected me personally so I have to vent. As someone who used to take the Sarnia train, it was incredibly bone-headed for VIA to cancel the faster of the two trains from Sarnia, leaving just one train that meanders through the slow milk run north line.

The south route through Woodstock etc took just shy of 3 hours to Sarnia from Toronto. About the same as driving. The current one takes nearly FIVE hours.

Currently there are 4 daily trains to and from Windsor. They couldn't have routed ONE of those Windsor trains through to Kitchener and kept the faster Sarnia train to Toronto? No one takes the train in Sarnia and its a common joke because of how ridiculous it is. Its so bad, that on the odd occasion I have to take it, I always opt to transfer at London and wait for the Windsor train. Even with the 30 minute connection, its STILL faster.

To make matters worse there is no bus service to Sarnia either, so its the only option there besides flying, which is prohibitively expensive. Maybe thats why VIA decided to give Sarnia the worse option; no competition so who cares...

Its literally the reason I ended up buying a car.

 

[Urban Sky]

A bit of an aside but it affected me personally so I have to vent. As someone who used to take the Sarnia train, it was incredibly bone-headed for VIA to cancel the faster of the two trains from Sarnia, leaving just one train that meanders through the slow milk run north line.

The south route through Woodstock etc took just shy of 3 hours to Sarnia from Toronto. About the same as driving. The current one takes nearly FIVE hours.

Currently there are 4 daily trains to and from Windsor. They couldn't have routed ONE of those Windsor trains through to Kitchener and kept the faster Sarnia train to Toronto? No one takes the train in Sarnia and its a common joke because of how ridiculous it is. Its so bad, that on the odd occasion I have to take it, I always opt to transfer at London and wait for the Windsor train. Even with the 30 minute connection, its STILL faster.

To make matters worse there is no bus service to Sarnia either, so its the only option there besides flying, which is prohibitively expensive. Maybe thats why VIA decided to give Sarnia the worse option; no competition so who cares...

Its literally the reason I ended up buying a car.

Certainly sucks to live in Sarnia without a car, but have you counted the number of CM(A)s in the Corridor alone, which is larger than Sarnia? Even Chatham-Kent is larger and Windsor has more than 4 times Sarnia’s population, whereas Sarnia is only the fourt-largest population center along the TRTO-GUEL-KITC-LNDN-SARN route:

List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[micheal_can]

Perhaps one of the first things the government should do is sort out Metrolinx's mandate. It's all well and good to say they 'should' do this or that, but its reason for being should drive its funding, and right now its "Regional Transportation Area" as defined in the Metrolinx Act, does not include anything west of the region of Waterloo (or, for that matter, anything east of Northumberland County). Not only would it add clarity for funders and taxpayers alike, it might set some clearer boundaries with Ottawa in regards to VIA services.

In addition to the geographical area of responsibility, perhaps a better sense of what the concepts of 'transit', 'commuting', etc. mean. Is one train per day, regardless of travel time, a reasonable 'commute'? Dunno.

Metrolinx's problem was The ONR's problem.that was fixed when it was moved to MTO. Maybe keeping Metrolinx's scope and coverage area as is and using another agency (possibly ONR or some other agency like it) for intercity transportation would be a good idea.

 

[robmausser]

Certainly sucks to live in Sarnia without a car, but have you counted the number of CM(A)s in the Corridor alone, which is larger than Sarnia? Even Chatham-Kent is larger and Windsor has more than 4 times Sarnia’s population, whereas Sarnia is only the fourt-largest population center along the TRTO-GUEL-KITC-LNDN-SARN route:

List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I mean the proof is in what you said, Windsor is 4 times Sarnia, and they have 4 trains while Sarnia has 1.

However, if deciding between two services to cancel, the 5 hour train that crawls through the hinterland, or the train that takes 3 hours and reasonably competes with automobile travel, which one would you cancel? I still stand by they made a mistake.

I think even with 3 "express trains" and one slower, Windsor would be sitting pretty good. If someone really still wanted to get from Sarnia to say, Kitchener, they could still transfer in London, the reverse of what I do to speed up the travel to Toronto.

Thats also disregarding the fact that at one time, there were 4 trains to Windsor and 2 to Sarnia, so had they canceled the current Sarnia train and kept the faster one, its not like there would have been more VIA traffic on the CN line. They could have just had the train through Kitchener terminate at London, if they didnt want 2 trains to Sarnia.

Now, the issue probably is that CN doesn't want to give that slot back for the 5th train on their mainline, after over a decade of not having it.

 

[rbt]

Speaking of improving VIA service in SWO. Would a snow squall cause delays with VIA service?

Yes. I was on Train 78 on Monday which was delayed by ~5 hours due to, among other things, CN closing a portion of track near Ingersoll due to snow/ice. It didn't seem like very much snow to me (it wouldn't have reached the top of the track) but I guess something else was sensitive to it. They opened a single track and another VIA Train to London was the first to go through.

As a bonus, the subway was long closed by the time we got to Union so that last mile was a longer journey too.

That said, it was warm, snack/water, and washrooms worked fine.

 

[Urban Sky]

Yes. I was on Train 78 on Monday which was delayed by ~5 hours due to, among other things, CN closing a portion of track near Ingersoll due to snow/ice. It didn't seem like very much snow to me (it wouldn't have reached the top of the track) but I guess something else was sensitive to it. They opened a single track and another VIA Train to London was the first to go through.

As a bonus, the subway was long closed by the time we got to Union so that last mile was a longer journey too.

That said, it was warm, snack/water, and washrooms worked fine.

My understanding is that the main reason for the line closure was a level crossing collision involving a CN freight train:

Freight train hit a car between London and Ingersoll around 12:30 am, bunch of switch issues as well.

More gong shows in the Corridor Nov 30

groups.io

However, that would have been almost 2 hours after your train (78x02) passed Ingersoll:

Intercity Rail Map

Live map of Amtrak and VIA Rail Canada trains

asm.transitdocs.com

 

[rbt]

My understanding is that the main reason for the line closure was a level crossing collision involving a CN freight train:

That would be a fair reason to close it. The announcements weren't very specific other than saying CN closed that section of track and had a crew working on it. I'm 99% certain we cleared the area by 11:10pm (I msg'd my wife saying we were moving again). The delay was compounded by the engineers hitting their time limit and getting swapped out at Brantford.

However, that would have been almost 2 hours after your train (78x02) passed Ingersoll:

Indeed. Based on the stated12:30am time we were in Brantford by then. The same message includes "bunch of switch issues" so that was likely it.

Either way, the point that a snow squall can mess up VIA schedules applies even if its just due to vehicle drivers being in stuck in the way.

 

[reaperexpress]

I think it really starts showing that I haven’t worked on heavy rail projects in the GTHA for the last two years, but you be able to point me at what the current official plans are for the Halton Sub and other pinch points in the GO/RER/ONxpress network?

Official? No, because they're not public yet. All we can do is hope they reveal them in or before September when ONxpress officially takes over.

Agreed, reliable service on London-Kitchener can only be offered without extending these services beyond London, though you’d probably need to triple-track the short segment from London Junction to where the London Station track starts.

Yeah I figure they'd need to add a track in London. There does seem to be enough space.

Thanks for sharing, I had somehow missed that, but very informative (also your article on the demise of GO service to London)! I’m not too sure about the Airport loop (i.e., digging a new tunnel for exclusive use and benefit of the S-Bahn to Bramalea), but these are mere details…

Yeah I just threw that in there because the GTAA proposed rail tunnels to a new "Union North" hub at Pearson in their masterplan. I agree it's pretty fanciful. More realistically there would be two branches, one to Bramalea and one to Pearson, in which case the RE trains would also stop at Pearson Junction to provide airport access.

 

[Urban Sky]

Via could affordably expand capacity on the south mainline by adding second platforms at stations, enabling them to use the double track that already exists rather than being bottlenecked onto the single platforms at Ingersoll, Woodstock and Brantford stations. That would enable them to add a couple trains per day, with service via Brantford to both Sarnia and Windsor.

That’s indeed a very cheap project which CN should welcome, provided that the visionless penny pinchers at TC can be convinced. Same goes for certain smaller VIA stations along the Kingston Subdivision…

I’ve been reminded in the meanwhile that virtually all these stations alomg the Dundas and Kingston Subdivisions already have a platform on the second (outer) track and whereas priority is understandably given to boarding from the main platform (at the closer track), trains can stop at the outer track, provided that passengers crossing the inner track are protected as required by Rule 107.

Why exactly would, say, creating another side platform with a passenger tunnel like in DORV or KGON increase capacity? The chances of freight traffic on the closer track exactly during the 5 times 5 minutes a VIA train seems to be rather low to me at a given day, so the inconvenience to CN should be rather manageable…

Official? No, because they're not public yet. All we can do is hope they reveal them in or before September when ONxpress officially takes over.

I’ve seen multiple comments from people who I don’t believe to have the kind of insider knowledge I enjoyed until two years ago that the infrastructure plans for key bottel necks of however the GO Expansion project is called by now have been significantly descoped. I’m just wondering if there are any publicly accessible documents or newspaper articles which suggest this or do these claims just originate from the grapevine…?

 

[Urban Sky]

A bit of an aside but it affected me personally so I have to vent. As someone who used to take the Sarnia train, it was incredibly bone-headed for VIA to cancel the faster of the two trains from Sarnia, leaving just one train that meanders through the slow milk run north line.

The south route through Woodstock etc took just shy of 3 hours to Sarnia from Toronto. About the same as driving. The current one takes nearly FIVE hours.

Currently there are 4 daily trains to and from Windsor. They couldn't have routed ONE of those Windsor trains through to Kitchener and kept the faster Sarnia train to Toronto? No one takes the train in Sarnia and its a common joke because of how ridiculous it is. Its so bad, that on the odd occasion I have to take it, I always opt to transfer at London and wait for the Windsor train. Even with the 30 minute connection, its STILL faster.

I decided to dive into my timetable database for you to compare the May 2004 with the May 2005 schedules:

Basically, what happened is that prior to May 2005, VIA operated a very different morning schedule on weekdays and weekends, where the morning train from Sarnia would operate on weekdays via Brantford (Train 82) and on weekends via Kitchener (Train 682). In May 2005, Train 682 became daily (and was renumbered 84), which was the opportunity to systemize the timetable by operating the early morning Sarnia train daily via Kitchener, like it already operated on weekends. Nevertheless (and as you already remarked), a connection was offered in London to transfer between Train 84 and 70, which lasted until November 2021 (when the departure time of Train 84 in Sarnia was delayed at the request of Metrolinx from then 06:10 to 08:40):

Train #	May 2004 (weekdays)	May 2004 (weekends)	May 2005 (weekdays)	May 2005 (weekends)
86	05:25 LNDN 06:44 KITC 08:20 TRTO		05:20 LNDN 06:41 KITC 08:20 TRTO
82	05:25 SARN 06:34 LNDN 07:26 BRTF 08:25 LNDN		05:25 SARN 06:34 LNDN 07:26 BRTF 08:25 LNDN
682 (May 2005: 84)		06:10 SARN 07:18 LNDN 08:40 KITC 10:05 TRTO	06:45 SARN 07:44/54 LNDN 09:11 KITC 10:52 TRTO	06:45 SARN 07:44/54 LNDN 09:11 KITC 10:52 TRTO
70	06:00 WDON 07:58 LNDN 08:59 BRTF 10:04 TRTO	06:00 WDON 07:58 LNDN 08:59 BRTF 10:04 TRTO	06:00 WDON 07:53/58 LNDN 08:59 BRTF 10:15 TRTO	06:00 WDON 07:53/58 LNDN 08:59 BRTF 10:15 TRTO

And for what it's worth, offering a SARN-TRTO train via Brantford rather than Kitchener was really an anomaly, which only lasted from June 1998 until May 2005, as a curious deviation from the division of all SWO services into a northern (SARN-LNDN-KITC-TRTO) and southern route (WDON-LNDN-BRTF-TRTO) which has persevered since the 1990 cuts:

Spoiler

To make matters worse there is no bus service to Sarnia either, so its the only option there besides flying, which is prohibitively expensive. Maybe thats why VIA decided to give Sarnia the worse option; no competition so who cares...

Well, there actually is regular bus service between London and Sarnia (The Municipality of Strathroy-Cardoc operates a bus 2-3 times per day from London and Flixbus operates 6 times a week all the way from Toronto via London):

Spoiler

 

[reaperexpress]

I’ve been reminded in the meanwhile that virtually all these stations alomg the Dundas and Kingston Subdivisions already have a platform on the second (outer) track and whereas priority is understandably given to boarding from the main platform (at the closer track), trains can stop at the outer track, provided that passengers crossing the inner track are protected as required by Rule 107.

Why exactly would, say, creating another side platform with a passenger tunnel like in DORV or KGON increase capacity? The chances of freight traffic on the closer track exactly during the 5 times 5 minutes a VIA train seems to be rather low to me at a given day, so the inconvenience to CN should be rather manageable…

Yes they can load from the further track from the platform, across the other track. Installing an actual second platform with a tunnel/bridge increases capacity and reduces delays because it eliminates the conflict between trains in opposite directions. This is the same effect as double tracking a segment of single track.

Could the line survive with 7 Via trains per day in its current configuration? Almost certainly. But that means 2 more trains obstructing the opposite track for 5 min at 2 stations (20 min total). It would increase impacts on CN's operations so CN would likely not approve it. But if a proper second platform is built in Woodstock, Via could add 2 more trains while actually reducing the net impact on CN's operations (as well as CN's impact on Via's operations). It shouldn't be hard to see how a proper double-track operation would reduce delays for both operators compared to the status quo where the oncoming track is obstructed when loading passengers.

In practice from what I've seen they try to avoid loading across tracks, and route trains onto the track adjacent to the platform. So the impact of Via's single-platform operations is actually far more than the 5 min per stop I used in the table above.