VIA Rail network developments

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by esquire

If that's the case then that's unfortunate and makes the Renaissance fleet even more of a bungle.

Here is what Via has to say about the Corridor portion of the Renaissance fleet despite being the newest cars they own (presumably the Long Haul portion is similar):

• They have the lowest reliability of the Corridor fleet;
• Their mild steel car bodies are corroding at the roof, side sills and posts. The full extent of the corrosion is unknown without a major overhaul (i.e. “opening” vehicle);
• A major investment to the Corridor Renaissance fleet would be needed to improve their reliability and reduce their burdensome maintenance costs and to extend their useful life and marketability;

[esquire]

^ Have you guys been on the HEP fleet? I've clocked over 100,000 km on them and they pretty well feel like museum pieces these days.

I would be fine with keeping a trainset or two around in much the same way that CP has its heritage passenger train, but I think their time hauling people across the country on a regular basis should be drawing to a close. Unless the intention is to end transcontinental passenger trains when the fleet expires... in that case, rebuild away.

[lrt's friend]

The transcontinental trains are a big tourist draw. It would be foolish to eliminate them. A friend from New Mexico and myself expect to make the trip within 18 months.

[esquire]

^ I agree, I'd love to see them stay around and even to have the service improved. But all I'm saying is that once the corridor fleet is replaced, it is past due to start thinking about replacement of the transcontinental fleet too.

[McC]

"big tourist draw" is pretty relative, not big enough to come anywhere close to recouping their operating costs.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by McC

"big tourist draw" is pretty relative, not big enough to come anywhere close to recouping their operating costs.

A lot of those passengers spend a lot of money in Canada.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Have you guys been on the HEP fleet? I've clocked over 100,000 km on them and they pretty well feel like museum pieces these days.

What makes them feel like museum pieces? The finishes/fixtures? The exterior look of them? I'm not sure I see the point of scrapping highly-durable rolling stock that could receive new fixtures and finishes with less durable rolling stock that will be rusting out in 20 years.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Have you guys been on the HEP fleet? I've clocked over 100,000 km on them and they pretty well feel like museum pieces these days.

I took the train across Canada about 15 years ago. The Dining, 'Skyline, and 'Park' cars really are something special and worth saving. The interiors could potentially be updated, though you wouldn't want to change them too much.

Originally Posted by acottawa

I'm not sure I see the point of scrapping highly-durable rolling stock that could receive new fixtures and finishes with less durable rolling stock that will be rusting out in 20 years.

That is a bit unfair. The Renaissance cars weren't designed for our climate. Via could (and should) purchase cars with either stainless steel or aluminum shells to ensure they don't rust out like that. They don't need to last a century, but something like the LRCs, which will need to be retired after about 50 years of use sounds reasonable to me.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

A lot of those passengers spend a lot of money in Canada.

Sure. But do they spend enough to recoup the subsidies put into the Canadian"?

I support the Canadian as an essential service connecting some of our remote communities. But as a tourist get up, I don't think it's a huge draw for foreigners. Mostly just for Canadians who have they time and money.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by acottawa

What makes them feel like museum pieces? The finishes/fixtures? The exterior look of them? I'm not sure I see the point of scrapping highly-durable rolling stock that could receive new fixtures and finishes with less durable rolling stock that will be rusting out in 20 years.

Pretty well everything. The appearance, the creaky ride, the minimal accessibility and lack of modern amenities, the types of accommodations on offer (although VIA has started to remedy this by changing up the configuration of the Park Cars for the first time ever, apart from removing a section in the early 90s to make room for a common shower room).

The early 90s HEP upgrades were nice as they eliminated one of the more glaring weaknesses of the fleet (steam heat), but there is nothing about those cars that really says "this is a bona fide means of intercity transportation". It really is more of an antique curiosity at this point, especially now that service is down to 2x a week most of the year.

All that said, I suspect the atrocious cost recovery of the service means that it's more likely that service will end with the lifespan of the HEP fleet, whenever that may be. Or at the very least some old castoff Amtrak equipment could be purchased to keep the service running at some sort of minimal level. I'm not that optimistic.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Sure. But do they spend enough to recoup the subsidies put into the Canadian"?

I support the Canadian as an essential service connecting some of our remote communities. But as a tourist get up, I don't think it's a huge draw for foreigners. Mostly just for Canadians who have they time and money.

It's very appealing to foreigners and they make a significant part of the ridership, especially in sleeping cars. But the losses are considerable and they always have been during the VIA era. Case in point, a couple years ago the news media reported that VIA lost $475 on every passenger that rides the Canadian.

[1overcosc]

^ With sleeper tickets being around $2000, the government makes about $260 just off the sales tax from those tickets. So as long as the foreigners are spending enough to bring at least $215 into the economy we're not really subsidizing them.. and with the hotels they pay for at either end, the traffic they generate to the airports, the money they spend along the way and in Toronto/Vancouver.. we're probably good.

[esquire]

^ Yes, but not every passenger rides the train on a $2000 sleeper ticket, some are going on a $20 coach ticket. They are getting subsidized $475 as well. So if you adjust the subsidy to reflect ticket cost, the sleeping car rider is getting subsidized probably into the thousands of dollars.

Could you imagine if the feds built a five star luxury resort in the Rockies and charged $400 a night when the real cost of the service was, say, $900 a night? Even if they rationalized it by saying that they'd recoup the money from other spending by visitors, they would be crucified. Yet that's probably not too far off from what VIA is actually doing.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Yes, but not every passenger rides the train on a $2000 sleeper ticket, some are going on a $20 coach ticket. They are getting subsidized $475 as well.

Have you priced the cost of a coach ticket on the Canadian? I picked a random date in November (low season and more than 6 months out) and got a fair of $484 for Toronto to Vancouver. On top of that meals aren't included with a coach fair, so they will need to buy food on the train (which isn't cheap). Admittedly it still won't come to $2000, but its way more than the $20 you claimed.

On the other end of the spectrum, a couple purchasing a Prestige cabin for 2 on the same date is paying $4,156 each.

[esquire]

^ That doesn't change the fact that the service runs at a huge loss.

[acottawa]

It is hard to tell what portion of the subsidies are going to the tourists and what portion is going to the remote communities. Tourists don't need to make more than a few stops (Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Jasper, Vancouver) whereas the train makes about 30 stops in Northern Ontario.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ That doesn't change the fact that the service runs at a huge loss.

No, but 1overcosc's argument was the Government is making some of the loss back in taxes.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ That doesn't change the fact that the service runs at a huge loss.

Everything Via does operates at a huge loss. Corridor trains are subsidized $40 each trip (more West of Toronto).

[OCCheetos]

VIA exists as a crown corporation for a reason.
CN and CP didn't just drop their passenger services because trains were gaining in popularity. (Now they are though).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It is hard to tell what portion of the subsidies are going to the tourists and what portion is going to the remote communities. Tourists don't need to make more than a few stops (Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Jasper, Vancouver) whereas the train makes about 30 stops in Northern Ontario.

And there is the rub. As a Jack of all trades, it is doing neither well. I have often thought that it would be better as a series of shorter rotues (most of which are day trips). Locals then get daytime service instead of having their one and only train roll in at 2:00am. Tourists get to have an all (or at least mostly) daylight trip. It would likely be cheaper for Via as they wouldn't have to pay staff to sleep on the train and coach cars are much cheaper per passenger than sleepers.