VIA Rail

[crs1026]

Would those restrictions apply if VIA purchased additional coaches and all trains were over 32 axles?

No, they would not apply. VIA has managed to cobble together a small number of 32 axle trains, and these are not restricted..... but reconfiguring the entire fleet would leave VIA with too few trainsets to meet their needs.
So yes, More cars would make all trainsets 32 axles and the restrictions would not apply.

- Paul

 

[bpbpbpbp]

The problem, especially with CPKC is they are very busy and adding slots would be challenging for them, With enough money, anything is possible. The question would really be how much?

Do we know how much VIA pays CN to use their rails? And is it even fair that they pay at all, seeing as passenger service was their responsibility legally once upon a time, and a favour was done by having those services removed from their jurisdiction?

Also I might sound silly here, but do you think VIA could go to CP and say “hey, you legally had to run this train, we took the costs of your hands, we ran out of money then but we want this train back now, you’re lucky you don’t have to pay for the trips,” could that help in any way lol

 

[kEiThZ]

No, they would not apply. VIA has managed to cobble together a small number of 32 axle trains, and these are not restricted..... but reconfiguring the entire fleet would leave VIA with too few trainsets to meet their needs.
So yes, More cars would make all trainsets 32 axles and the restrictions would not apply.

- Paul

Sounds like a good reason for a top up order.....

 

[lenaitch]

Random question, if VIA suddenly decided that it was interested in bringing back routes that they cut years ago, like the Canadian on the CP route thru Calgary or a Havelock train (obviously not possible how it was originally with the Don Branch being out of order and the sub being a slow line), and if they were willing to fork up the money for the necessary infrastructure and stations and whatnot, would the be able to? Would the freight railways play ball, seeing as these were routes that they previously were forced to handle by the government, but had them taken off their hands by the creation of VIA?

VIA gets to provide the service, and buy the equipment, that Cabinet says it can. It has no legislated mandate to wave around.

No, they would not apply. VIA has managed to cobble together a small number of 32 axle trains, and these are not restricted..... but reconfiguring the entire fleet would leave VIA with too few trainsets to meet their needs.
So yes, More cars would make all trainsets 32 axles and the restrictions would not apply.

- Paul

The devil in me says; 'or until CN moves the goalposts'.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

Sounds like a good reason for a top up order.....

The purchase of Siemens Ventures was to secure VIA's Corridor future. Imagine the current Federal government, up to its eyeballs in issues that are important to every Canadian such as tariffs, pipelines, housing, inter-provincial trade, artificial intelligence, jobs, pensions, increasing defence and NATO spending, border security, the drug war, etc., shelling out millions for additional equipment to satisfy a bully of a host railway in a very profitable but very small part of VIA's national network. Especially since it was announced that federally-funded institutions and Crown corporations like the CBC and VIA are expected to propose their own cuts under the Liberal government’s sweeping efforts to find $25 billion in annual savings from the federal budget in the next three years. And as someone wisely said, then CN moves the goalposts.

 

[Trackside_Treasure]

Random question, if VIA suddenly decided that it was interested in bringing back routes ... seeing as these were routes that they previously were forced to handle by the government, but had them taken off their hands by the creation of VIA?

CP did not have all routes liberated from them with the creation of VIA. Remember, VIA's Canadian continued to operate on CP rails until 1990. If anything, the headache of.passenger operations were removed by VIA cost-wise, yet continued on CP (and CN) rails likely with just as much opposition from them as when the railways tried to shed passenger trains in the1960s and 1970s.

 

[crs1026]

Under current laws, an operating passenger entity (VIA is only one) can propose to operate on a freight railway, and there is a process via the CTA to test whether that is appropriate and what conditions will apply.

Practically speaking, VIA operates at the pleasure of the Minister, and only where Ottawa provides funding. So what VIA might want to do is not really germaine, as VIA is kept on a very short leash.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

Sounds like a good reason for a top up order.....

It would take two years. Not enough time before the LRC's are retired.

 

[roger1818]

It would take two years. Not enough time before the LRC's are retired.

And the shunt enhancers that would be required for shorter trainsets will likely be available in a similar timeframe at a greatly reduced cost.

 

[roger1818]

Do we know how much VIA pays CN to use their rails? And is it even fair that they pay at all, seeing as passenger service was their responsibility legally once upon a time, and a favour was done by having those services removed from their jurisdiction?

We have discussed this before, but CN was a crown corporation at the time that VIA was created. VIA was actually created by spinning off CN's passenger rail division. VIA quickly realized that to operate efficiently, they would also need to take over CP's passenger division. While passenger service was by no means a money maker for CP, they were receiving subsidies from the federal government, so weren't bleeding money like the railroads south of the boarder were. As a result, while they were almost certainly more than happy to be rid of the responsibility, they were in a strong position to negotiate favorable terms, as VIA needed their routes more than CP needed to divest them.

When CN was eventually privatized in the 90's, VIA was well established as the passenger carrier, so the obligation for CN to provide passenger service was not included in the deal. If anything, the Mulroney government was likely more concerned about getting top dollar for CN than ensuring the long term viability of passenger rail.

 

[ManyQuestions]

Scrapping has continued with an LRC east of the Glen Fraser gone as well. Cars are parked with doors open letting snow inside.

Turns out the split venture set was a regular 5 car with the engine removed.

 

[nfitz]

VIA gets to provide the service, and buy the equipment, that Cabinet says it can. It has no legislated mandate to wave around.

The biggest issue is money. Solve that, and the rest is just beaucracy.

And with the budget operating budget cut that VIA took in the most recent budget, we are still in the "which service will VIA cut next" stage that we've been in for about a half-century.

 

[lenaitch]

The biggest issue is money. Solve that, and the rest is just beaucracy.

And with the budget operating budget cut that VIA took in the most recent budget, we are still in the "which service will VIA cut next" stage that we've been in for about a half-century.

Meh. Chicken or egg. If the government decides that VIA will provide 'x' service, it is implied that it would be funded to do so.

 

[nfitz]

Meh. Chicken or egg. If the government decides that VIA will provide 'x' service, it is implied that it would be funded to do so.

True. But something that I don't recall ever happening. We've had 50 years of the opposite from the likes of Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien, Martin, Harper, Trudeau (I think - would have to check that one), and now Carney.

 

[kEiThZ]

The purchase of Siemens Ventures was to secure VIA's Corridor future. Imagine the current Federal government, up to its eyeballs in issues that are important to every Canadian such as tariffs, pipelines, housing, inter-provincial trade, artificial intelligence, jobs, pensions, increasing defence and NATO spending, border security, the drug war, etc., shelling out millions for additional equipment to satisfy a bully of a host railway in a very profitable but very small part of VIA's national network. Especially since it was announced that federally-funded institutions and Crown corporations like the CBC and VIA are expected to propose their own cuts under the Liberal government’s sweeping efforts to find $25 billion in annual savings from the federal budget in the next three years. And as someone wisely said, then CN moves the goalposts.

I concede your point. I'm military. I know the pressures the government is facing. But we also have a government that is hyperfocused on delivery. How much would 32 coaches cost to get them over the 32 axle limit? I can't imagine the government would balk at $100M in capital spend, if it dramatically reduces operational problems for VIA. Surely, some bureaucrat can sell this.