Via targets private financing with eye toward speed upgrades

[rbt]

Still, the nanny state should really let us go up and wait on the platform. Particularly with the new roof.

They don't want passengers in the way while they're restocking the train; also, there isn't enough room for everybody and their baggage on the platform. It certainly isn't going to make the trains depart any earlier.

 

[dowlingm]

Even if not high speed rail, trains with cruising speeds of 200km/h and above would be nice (currently Via trains tend to cruise at 160km/h). If anything needs upgrading, it is Amtrak in the US. There is no reason why train should take 50% longer than a bus on most intercity trips.

Operating above 100mph triggers expensive upgrades like cab signalling and removal of level crossings. The Turbotrain's first run was, after all, halted by a level crossing collision but many LCs have properties developed adjacent which may mean expensive expropriations. Better to continue the current programmes to eliminate slow track switches and pinch points which reduce the speed of express services to increase the average speed of service at a more cost effective rate than increasing top speed. To my knowledge there is no diesel service north of 110mph in North America so 125mph would mean either electrification or throwing a bunch of money at EMD (not the most popular company in Canada right now) for their proposed 125mph loco. Add to this that electrification, signalling and track upgrades are all things that CN can object to in total or in part, or at least delay, within the properties VIA operates over if it will impose cost on them or interfere with them running certain types of currently viable service like double stack containers.

I think it's a pity that VIA's Corridor third track programme hasn't included more high floor platforms, either through provision of dedicated passenger tracks at stations or with gauntlet track to avoid the dreaded freight structure gauge objections. Yes I know it's more $ but one wonders how long before the CTA makes a ruling similar to that for the Renaissance stock with VIA blindsided into an expensive crash programme to make better boarding accommodation, especially now that it is making more stations unstaffed. The current situation increases dwell time, the footstools look ridiculous and even for those not mobility impaired it makes boarding awkward if one has carry on bags etc. If high floor platforms could be provided for the ARL potential white elephant, the Union rebuild should have provisioned some for VIA too - I don't believe they form part of the current plan.

 

[Long Island Mike]

DM: I have taken note myself about VIA installing high-level platforms on the Montreal-Toronto Corridor...

I feel that Dorval,Kingston and perhaps Guildwood should have them along with a dedicated platform(s) at
Toronto Union...The trouble is that GO trains would not be able to use them because GO equipment as noted
is built solely for low-level platform use...Ottawa would be another station that could use high-level platforms...

LI MIKE

 

[Voltz]

With the renovations at Union Station they should have decided to dedicate a few platforms to Via and make them High floor,

 

[Dan416]

With the renovations at Union Station they should have decided to dedicate a few platforms to Via and make them High floor,

You would think they could dedicate at least one platform to VIA...

 

[Hipster Duck]

You would think they would have thought a lot of things about the Union station upgrade! Seriously, it's just one missed opportunity after another, and really just a costly exercise in improving rush hour pedestrian flow in a more pleasant (read: mall-like) surrounding, and has little to do with reorganizing the way rail service operates.

 

[jamincan]

Keep in mind that the whole thing is complicated by the fact that Union Station is split into three separate parts (train shed, buildings, and subway station), owned by three different agencies (GO, City and TTC). How much integration is there between the different parts?

 

[BMO]

I actually don't think they should've dedicated even one platform to VIA. In the grand scheme of things most of the time it will be GO trains coming in and out of the station. They really need to have the flexibility to move between ALL of the platforms incase of emergencies or issues. Don't quote me, but I don't think the whole day is plastered with constant VIA traffic that is similar to GO traffic (especially with forecasted demands and planned service expansion). I don't see an issue with have a few ramps on some of the platforms for disable persons to get on VIA trains.

In other words why would you preclude only one operator to one of the platforms when if you keep them low-floored ALL operators can use it with accesibility ramps?

 

[Wrenkin]

But I don't think they use ramps. It's those carts. And it's annoying and sometimes difficult for even able-bodied people to get on and off the train with luggage. I don't have a cheap solution, but it's an awkward system in Canada compared to elsewhere.

 

[BMO]

But I don't think they use ramps. It's those carts. And it's annoying and sometimes difficult for even able-bodied people to get on and off the train with luggage. I don't have a cheap solution, but it's an awkward system in Canada compared to elsewhere.

Sorry, last time I took the train was something like 5 years ago, and I they used to have these ramps that went up a bit for people in wheelchairs to reach the trains. Maybe it has changed since then. Obviously it should be accessible to all people at a reasonable convenience, without forcing disabled people into the luggage compartment to board.

 

[drum118]

Platforms height is a major issue world wide for accessibility, as it and equipment are all over the place.

I have been on trains in Europe where there is almost a foot gap between the platform and the step of the coaches. Not only that, the step can be 6'' above or below the platform at the same time.

You can also find the same issues for systems using tube/metro/subway vehicles as well buses and trams/LRT.

The excess gap is caused by needing more clearance for high speed train that used the same track for local transit and intercity trains. Freight trains are an issue in NA for platforms due to their length compare to 42 cars the max I saw in Europe.

There were very few stations I visited that have the lift like NA stations and never saw anything for the rest.

There is a movement to have an area or 2 low for not only for accessibility, but for strollers and bikes on trains. It going to take decades to be 100% done due to the shear numbers in Europe. NA is handcuff by funding.

Can't remember the last time I used VIA, but it was to Windsor before 1990. Therefore I cannot comment on VIA or Amtrak coaches other than what I see at stations taking place.

It was the pits trying to take a suitcase on and off those Europe trains with all these issues, let alone transit to the point I will not do it again.