VIA Rail network developments

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Ottawa-Toronto line has seen massive ridership increases in past few years. Every time they add a new trip ridership increases to fill it. Clearly price isn't keeping people away.

This demonstrates that if we get Montreal-Toronto travel times down to similar levels that increases in ridership should also be achieved. Our goal should be to get travel times back down to 3hrs 59m as was the case in the Turbo days or better. Traffic congestion is much worse than in the late 60s and 70s.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I am not sure why “people travel on weekends” is a difficult concept to understand.

HFR (as described by Via) adds a lot of capacity on off-peak hours. It adds little capacity in peak hours (where service is pretty much hourly already). If the objective is to lure people out of their cars then there needs to be financially competitive trains when people want to travel.

You don't see cheap tickets on weekends because they all have been sold to people who actually travel on weekends.

I regularly travel to Toronto to see parents (Friday night - Monday morning) and rarely pay more than $50 each way. It's just became a habit to buy tickets 3-4 weeks in advance.

It's pretty much the same as in Europe. Just checked tickets for 3hr 20min Thalys ride Amsterdam-Paris, for this Friday night it would cost 204 CAD, one month from now - 83 CAD. Same train, same class.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

You don't see cheap tickets on weekends because they all have been sold to people who actually travel on weekends.

I regularly travel to Toronto to see parents (Friday night - Monday morning) and rarely pay more than $50 each way. It's just became a habit to buy tickets 3-4 weeks in advance.

It's pretty much the same as in Europe. Just checked tickets for 3hr 20min Thalys ride Amsterdam-Paris, for this Friday night it would cost 204 CAD, one month from now - 83 CAD. Same train, same class.

Yes, that is all right. But the hypothesis presented was that HFR would lead to significant numbers of people transitioning from driving, but I have yet to see a credible mechanism being presented on how this would happen. If the point of HFR is to be more convenient for existing train users then that is fine but they should just say that.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, that is all right. But the hypothesis presented was that HFR would lead to significant numbers of people transitioning from driving, but I have yet to see a credible mechanism being presented on how this would happen. If the point of HFR is to be more convenient for existing train users then that is fine but they should just say that.

I think you should tell us what your expectations are to get you to use rail service. Please be as specific as possible.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think you should tell us what your expectations are to get you to use rail service. Please be as specific as possible.

We (two people) will be travelling to Toronto on the 21st and returning the 22nd. A reasonably convenient itinerary (Train 45 there, Train 646 back) on an “escape” fare is $309.62. Gas and parking is about $100. I don’t expect the train to be the same as gas, but 3x more is a fairly significant premium, particularly considering the restrictions on an escape fare. On a door-to-door basis driving is comparable to the proposed HFR travel times (and I live fairly close to the train station).

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by acottawa

We (two people) will be travelling to Toronto on the 21st and returning the 22nd. A reasonably convenient itinerary (Train 45 there, Train 646 back) on an “escape” fare is $309.62. Gas and parking is about $100. I don’t expect the train to be the same as gas, but 3x more is a fairly significant premium, particularly considering the restrictions on an escape fare. On a door-to-door basis driving is comparable to the proposed HFR travel times (and I live fairly close to the train station).

Then you didn't plan properly, so that's on you. I bought those same tickets at half the price a while back and it's still possible to get cheap tickets if you plan ahead. From what you posted you didn't plan ahead enough.

[YOWflier]

I believe the rail proponents are trying to get acottawa et al out of their cars. That's actually on them.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

We (two people) will be travelling to Toronto on the 21st and returning the 22nd. A reasonably convenient itinerary (Train 45 there, Train 646 back) on an “escape” fare is $309.62. Gas and parking is about $100. I don’t expect the train to be the same as gas, but 3x more is a fairly significant premium, particularly considering the restrictions on an escape fare. On a door-to-door basis driving is comparable to the proposed HFR travel times (and I live fairly close to the train station).

I see two things:

1. If you have boxed your schedule in so tightly that only 1 train in each direction will work (can't be an hour earlier or later), your odds of getting the best fair has decreased significantly (without advance purchase).
2. Cars basically have a fixed cost regardless of the number of passengers they transport (the cost of gas, parking and maintenance are basically the same), so if you can transport 2 or more people in a car you already own, it becomes harder for public forms of transportation (train, plain or bus) to compete.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

I believe the rail proponents are trying to get acottawa et al out of their cars. That's actually on them.

If VIA HFR goes ahead, alot more people will choose the train than drive their cars. Guys like you and ACOttawa are just not willing to do the proper planning for cheaper train rides like the rest of us do so that's no way our fault, you should blame yourselves for that. The biggest rail proponents is VIA itself, so yes they need to prove they have the right plan in place for its future viability because they cant continue to share tracks with others when they have growing ridership between Ottawa and Toronto justifying their own right of way is needed.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I see two things:

1. If you have boxed your schedule in so tightly that only 1 train in each direction will work (can't be an hour earlier or later), your odds of getting the best fair has decreased significantly (without advance purchase).
2. Cars basically have a fixed cost regardless of the number of passengers they transport (the cost of gas, parking and maintenance are basically the same), so if you can transport 2 or more people in a car you already own, it becomes harder for public forms of transportation (train, plain or bus) to compete.

1. An hour earlier or later would be fine. That usually does not yield significant discounts.
2. I don’t disagree, which is why I question how HFR is supposed to lure people out of their cars.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Ontario stopped trying to force municipalities to use Presto years ago.

Where else in the world do you pay for intercity trains with a pay-as-you-go transit card?

London and Tokyo come to mind. But that's aside the point. If you have the capability to do it, why do you need other cities/regions to have done it prior? The goal here should be reduce user friction on VIA/intercity trains to the point that it's almost as easy to use as your local subway/LRT.

Is it an absolute necessity at launch? No. Should it be an option if they can pull it off? Absolutely.

In a lot of the rest of the world, intercity trains have fare paid zones that are guarded by gates/turnstiles the same way the Confederation Line stations are. Making it possible to simply tap your Presto and jump on a train to Toronto or Montreal would be huge.

Lastly, while Ontario has stopped making it mandatory, the rest of Ontario is increasingly coming along on its own. Far easier to adopt a payment system that a lot of the province is already using and that the Metrolinx will largely run for you, at low cost. Give it a decade. I expect every transit system connecting to VIA in Ontario to be using Presto. The majority are already there.

[Gat-Train]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

Then you didn't plan properly, so that's on you. I bought those same tickets at half the price a while back and it's still possible to get cheap tickets if you plan ahead. From what you posted you didn't plan ahead enough.

So buying a train ticket 3 weeks prior to departure is insufficient planning? How is that a reasonable standard? If we actually want to change people's behaviour it needs to be possible to go right up to the station and buy a ticket minutes before departure, like it is in Europe.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, that is all right. But the hypothesis presented was that HFR would lead to significant numbers of people transitioning from driving, but I have yet to see a credible mechanism being presented on how this would happen. If the point of HFR is to be more convenient for existing train users then that is fine but they should just say that.

Originally Posted by acottawa

We (two people) will be travelling to Toronto on the 21st and returning the 22nd. A reasonably convenient itinerary (Train 45 there, Train 646 back) on an “escape” fare is $309.62. Gas and parking is about $100. I don’t expect the train to be the same as gas, but 3x more is a fairly significant premium, particularly considering the restrictions on an escape fare. On a door-to-door basis driving is comparable to the proposed HFR travel times (and I live fairly close to the train station).

Originally Posted by acottawa

1. An hour earlier or later would be fine. That usually does not yield significant discounts.
2. I don’t disagree, which is why I question how HFR is supposed to lure people out of their cars.

Really hard to believe that you lived in Europe sometimes. When you lived there did everybody take the train? I am going to guess not. HFR is going to gain marketshare. How that translates to "significant" amounts of drivers being diverted depends entirely on definition. Hence, the room for your trolling here.

Arguing there is no business case unless they cater to every edge case is a strawman. I expect, with HFR, a lot of the people who would drive individually between cities, to Montreal, or Toronto or Trois-Rivieres or Quebec City will end up on the train. We'll also see a ton more intermediate destination ridership (Smith's Falls, Peterborough) which are now 1-2 hrs away from a major metro. I expect those aren't as flexible (like your example here) or multiple rider situations (couples and families) to drive. Just like they do in Europe.

VIA doesn't have to capture every traveler to succeed. They don't even have to capture most of them. Just enough to make a business case. I fully expect fares to be closer to that of Greyhound today as they start flooding capacity with HFR. Which would be in line with what non-HSR intercity rail fares are in Europe.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

London and Tokyo come to mind. But that's aside the point. If you have the capability to do it, why do you need other cities/regions to have done it prior? The goal here should be reduce user friction on VIA/intercity trains to the point that it's almost as easy to use as your local subway/LRT.

Is it an absolute necessity at launch? No. Should it be an option if they can pull it off? Absolutely.

In a lot of the rest of the world, intercity trains have fare paid zones that are guarded by gates/turnstiles the same way the Confederation Line stations are. Making it possible to simply tap your Presto and jump on a train to Toronto or Montreal would be huge.

Lastly, while Ontario has stopped making it mandatory, the rest of Ontario is increasingly coming along on its own. Far easier to adopt a payment system that a lot of the province is already using and that the Metrolinx will largely run for you, at low cost. Give it a decade. I expect every transit system connecting to VIA in Ontario to be using Presto. The majority are already there.

You can’t buy intercity trips with an Oyster card. You can use it for local trips inside London, but that is not the type of service Via is operating.

For that to work as you describe, Via would have to operate like GO with no reserved seats, and a crapshoot of whether you get a seat, which is not compatible with the type of service VIA offers, at least not on routes between Toronto and Ottawa.

Also, you either have to keep large sums on your card or load it up before buying your ticket, which is not more convenient than just buying a ticket.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Really hard to believe that you lived in Europe sometimes. When you lived there did everybody take the train? I am going to guess not. HFR is going to gain marketshare. How that translates to "significant" amounts of drivers being diverted depends entirely on definition. Hence, the room for your trolling here.

Arguing there is no business case unless they cater to every edge case is a strawman. I expect, with HFR, a lot of the people who would drive individually between cities, to Montreal, or Toronto or Trois-Rivieres or Quebec City will end up on the train. We'll also see a ton more intermediate destination ridership (Smith's Falls, Peterborough) which are now 1-2 hrs away from a major metro. I expect those aren't as flexible (like your example here) or multiple rider situations (couples and families) to drive. Just like they do in Europe.

VIA doesn't have to capture every traveler to succeed. They don't even have to capture most of them. Just enough to make a business case. I fully expect fares to be closer to that of Greyhound today as they start flooding capacity with HFR. Which would be in line with what non-HSR intercity rail fares are in Europe.

No, everyone didn’t take the train, but in many (if not most) cases the train was some combination of faster or cheaper than driving, so it was able to command a large market share. HFR proponents have yet to articulate a mechanism for acquiring market share.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

So buying a train ticket 3 weeks prior to departure is insufficient planning? How is that a reasonable standard? If we actually want to change people's behaviour it needs to be possible to go right up to the station and buy a ticket minutes before departure, like it is in Europe.

People are getting hung up on current practices. The former VIA CEO was quite clear. If HFR comes, it'll be closer to what you see in Europe. That's the entire point of hourly service.
We'll go from paying a premium last minute to paying a premium to reserve a seat in advance. This is how a lot of non-HSR intercity trains work elsewhere.

People forget that the marginal cost of adding seats is really low. A $4 million coach adds 60-80 seats, averages 1500km per day and lasts 20-30 years. And the fuel consumption per passenger is 0.5-1L/100 km. That's right. It would only cost VIA $5-6 worth of diesel to get a passenger to Toronto from Ottawa.

HFR is transformative for this very reason. You use it more like a GO Train than you do VIA today.

The current fare situation with VIA is what it is. I wouldn't expect that to stay the same with HFR.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You can’t buy intercity trips with an Oyster card. You can use it for local trips inside London, but that is not the type of service Via is operating.

For that to work as you describe, Via would have to operate like GO with no reserved seats, and a crapshoot of whether you get a seat, which is not compatible with the type of service VIA offers, at least not on routes between Toronto and Ottawa.

Also, you either have to keep large sums on your card or load it up before buying your ticket, which is not more convenient than just buying a ticket.

Have purchased National Rail tickets with my Oyster. Oh well.

Seems to me that your imagination is limited entirely to traveling Ottawa-Toronto by train. I see HFR and hourly (or better) service increasing the commuter sheds of Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City massively. Is it really that much of a stretch to imagine a commuter from Peterborough to Toronto or Smith's Falls to Ottawa using Presto to pay? Or their Opus card on their daily Trois Rivières-Quebec City commute? It's not essential. But it would be pretty easy for VIA to pull off and one less point of friction.

As to the issue of seat reservations, welcome to how it is in a lot of the world, where reserving a specific seat in advance commands a premium. You're usually guaranteed space, not specific seats. I expect that is the model VIA moves to with HFR. Like I said, think Greyhound, but faster.

Originally Posted by acottawa

No, everyone didn’t take the train, but in many (if not most) cases the train was some combination of faster or cheaper than driving, so it was able to command a large market share. HFR proponents have yet to articulate a mechanism for acquiring market share.

We've been over this. At this point, you're just trolling because you don't want to accept the arguments.

Frequency and cost. That's how they gain marketshare. Costs closer to Greyhound levels today thanks to a sharp reduction in marginal costs and a massive increase in asset utilization. And a schedule on par with GO Train lines today.

Looking at how VIA works today to divine how HFR would work is pointless. Look at how regular non-HSR inter-city lines work elsewhere. And you start getting a better conceptual idea. A simple example: Dorval. There's people who take the train there today. But if the schedule was hourly, the trip took was closer to 1 hr and the fare was closer to $40 roundtrip, I would expect ridership to increase by multiples, as flying out of YUL becomes substantially more convenient.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Seems to me that your imagination is limited entire to traveling to Toronto by train. I see HFR and hourly (or better) service increasing the commuter sheds of Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City massively. Is it really that much of a stretch to imagine a commuter from Peterborough to Toronto or Smith's Falls to Ottawa using Presto to pay?

As to the issue of seat reservations, welcome to how it is in a lot of the world, where reserving a specific seat in advance commands a premium. You're usually guaranteed space, not specific seats. I expect that is the model VIA moves to with HFR. Like I said, think Greyhound, but faster.



We've been over this. At this point, you're just trolling because your don't want to accept the arguments.

Frequency and cost. That's how they gain marketshare. Costs closer to Greyhound levels today thanks to a sharp reduction in marginal costs. And a schedule on par with GO Train lines today.

If Via wants to implement a European model of fixed prices, premium reservations, luggage challenges, directly access to cars, standing on trains, etc. then that is fine, but they have not announced that plan and frankly they don’t need HFR to do that, and I suspect it would alienate a lot of their core clients (seniors, politicians, military, students, etc).

You’re projecting all of your hopes and dreams onto the Via proposal without any textual evidence from any information that has been made public or rational basis for doing so. Either you have access to a large trove of classified documents on this subject or you have gone full Potvin.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

If Via wants to implement a European model of fixed prices, premium reservations, luggage challenges, directly access to cars, standing on trains, etc. then that is fine, but they have not announced that plan and frankly they don’t need HFR to do that, and I suspect it would alienate a lot of their core clients (seniors, politicians, military, students, etc).

You’re projecting all of your hopes and dreams onto the Via proposal without any textual evidence from any information that has been made public or rational basis for doing so. Either you have access to a large trove of classified documents on this subject or you have gone full Potvin.

I'm going off what YDS has said, Urban Sky @ UT and several other presentations say. You're right, I could be completely wrong. But I don't see how VIA gets to their projected 9.9 million ridership on HFR without that kind of service. That's 2.25x total ridership for VIA today. If you have an idea how they get that kind of ridership without near European levels of service, I'd like to hear it.

[OttawaSteve]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Where else in the world do you pay for intercity trains with a pay-as-you-go transit card?

The Netherlands. A single card for national rail and all local transit. Load specific travel products or pay as you go.

https://www.ns.nl/en/travel-information/traveling-with-the-ov-chipkaart