News   Dec 05, 2025
Crowning the Week
 240     1 
News   Dec 04, 2025
Parliament Slip Construction Continues As New Community Centre, Extended Water's Edge Promenade Open
 842     1 
News   Dec 04, 2025
Proposed Tower in Fairbank PMTSA Leaps From 15 to 42 Storeys
 1.1K     2 

VIA Rail

smallspy said:
Maybe it is a bit of a incorrect statement to claim that the train's lengths were carefully arrived at.

But it isn't at all to suggest that their capacity wasn't. Because it was. They thought very long and hard about how many people the trains should carry, and balanced that against staffing factors.

And keep in mind that VIA had been working towards increasing the "operational efficiencies" of the old fleet well before the Siemens trainsets came around. Top-and-tail trains, upgrading many of the F40s to allow for reliable backwards operation, breaking away staffing rotations from equipment rotations....all of those were things that would help them utilize the equipment in a more efficient manner, and thus should have been able to set the stage for service improvements once they got a more reliable fleet into service.

Dan
Click to expand...
What modifications were required to allow the F40's to run backwards?
 
kEiThZ said:
We do know that the Corridor doesn't really lose money though. And population growth has far outstripped whatever estimate was around when the Venture contract was signed. I should think that an extra car per train shouldn't result in a net loss, even with lower off-peak yields. 7 car trains might be a reach though. Heck, they could make the added car a business car and trade some business class yield for higher net. Akin to how airlines use business reward seats (yielding nothing) to keep up loyalty. End of the day, VIA One is competing with airlines only marginally. It's VIA Economy that is basically competing with bus lines, who might complain.

I do agree that with Alto on the horizon, it might be a harder sell. But even if these additional coaches are delivered by end 2027, we're talking about a decade of service before they are competing with Alto. More than enough time to at least pay off the capital cost.
Click to expand...

I do agree, the dollars and cents case is probably favourable or close to break-even. It doesn't take that many seats filled to pay for the service worker. The added fuel and axle charges are incremental. I do wonder what the long term operating costs of inspection and maintenance and periodic repair might add up to.

The problem is that institutional, in that VIA does not really have control of its own financing, and any plan to expand will be challenged by its competitors. And the plan would have to run the gantlet of government oversight. And be sold to the public.

- Paul
 
Brief reference in Budget 2025 to VIA Rail:

1762291131439.png

1762291145150.png

1762291162276.png
 
For only $1 million? That seems....low. Wasn't there a number here where someone guessed it would be $30 million?
 
Back on March 27, 2025 VIA emailed CN:

"As CN is aware, VIA has been considering coupling Venture trains, effectively increasing their axle count from 24 to 48. VIA’s understanding is that those Double Ventures would not be subject to the restrictions imposed by CN requiring sub-32- axle Venture trains to apply CROR 103.1(f) at 308 crossings. We would respectfully ask a confirmation from CN that our understanding is correct at your earliest convenience, but by no later than March 28 at 2 p.m. as we need this information to ensure the fastest possible implementation of this new temporary operating model.

VIA intends to move forward with the implementation of the Double Ventures as soon as reasonably practicable.

Switching to a Double-Venture operating mode entails making important service reductions affecting the public as VIA will not be able to operate its current schedule. It simply does not, and will not in the foreseeable future, have enough trains and cars to do so, nor adequate infrastructure to support large numbers of Double Ventures. As such, VIA would have to implement temporary service suspensions, representing 52 trains out of the 388 trains VIA operates weekly on the Corridor."

It's clear that VIA was considering all options to circumvent the CN crossing speed reductions, despite publicly saying that this would not be a safe option!
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
Back on March 27, 2025 VIA emailed CN:

"As CN is aware, VIA has been considering coupling Venture trains, effectively increasing their axle count from 24 to 48. VIA’s understanding is that those Double Ventures would not be subject to the restrictions imposed by CN requiring sub-32- axle Venture trains to apply CROR 103.1(f) at 308 crossings. We would respectfully ask a confirmation from CN that our understanding is correct at your earliest convenience, but by no later than March 28 at 2 p.m. as we need this information to ensure the fastest possible implementation of this new temporary operating model.

VIA intends to move forward with the implementation of the Double Ventures as soon as reasonably practicable.

Switching to a Double-Venture operating mode entails making important service reductions affecting the public as VIA will not be able to operate its current schedule. It simply does not, and will not in the foreseeable future, have enough trains and cars to do so, nor adequate infrastructure to support large numbers of Double Ventures. As such, VIA would have to implement temporary service suspensions, representing 52 trains out of the 388 trains VIA operates weekly on the Corridor."

It's clear that VIA was considering all options to circumvent the CN crossing speed reductions, despite publicly saying that this would not be a safe option!
Click to expand...
I thought that by creating those permanent slow orders reduced train delays significantly. By running J trains reduced the fleet to half when you don't need that much capacity.
 
Bordercollie said:
I thought that by creating those permanent slow orders reduced train delays significantly. By running J trains reduced the fleet to half when you don't need that much capacity.
Click to expand...
Well the point is that they want zero slow orders or anything that will slow the Ventures down from max speed.
 
Trackside_Treasure said:
Back on March 27, 2025 VIA emailed CN:

"As CN is aware, VIA has been considering coupling Venture trains, effectively increasing their axle count from 24 to 48. VIA’s understanding is that those Double Ventures would not be subject to the restrictions imposed by CN requiring sub-32- axle Venture trains to apply CROR 103.1(f) at 308 crossings. We would respectfully ask a confirmation from CN that our understanding is correct at your earliest convenience, but by no later than March 28 at 2 p.m. as we need this information to ensure the fastest possible implementation of this new temporary operating model.

VIA intends to move forward with the implementation of the Double Ventures as soon as reasonably practicable.

Switching to a Double-Venture operating mode entails making important service reductions affecting the public as VIA will not be able to operate its current schedule. It simply does not, and will not in the foreseeable future, have enough trains and cars to do so, nor adequate infrastructure to support large numbers of Double Ventures. As such, VIA would have to implement temporary service suspensions, representing 52 trains out of the 388 trains VIA operates weekly on the Corridor."

It's clear that VIA was considering all options to circumvent the CN crossing speed reductions, despite publicly saying that this would not be a safe option!
Click to expand...
I assume this email was in reference to converting the J-trains 50/60 and 52/62 to Venture sets, which they did subsequently try to do.

It's also possible they were considering increasing the number of J-trains, in which case the number of trips between Toronto-Ottawa and Toronto-Montreal could remain the same, but the total between Toronto and Kingston could be cut substantially.

But if they're considering westbound J-trains, that could add massive delays to service since we know that trains can't be relied upon to arrive at Brockville at a particular time.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top