VIA Rail

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by roger1818

As shown in post #1167, the Ocean had a Variable Operation Ratio of just under 50% and that is using Renaissance equipment, which is by far the most expensive equipment to use (as explained in post #539). More economical equipment would boost the Ocean's Variable Operation Ratio significantly.

The question is how much will it cost? If you look at the corridor fleet renewal program, it is costing $989 million to build the 32 trainsets, or about $31 million per trainset, which I assume to have 1 locomotive and 6 coaches. If we assume the locamotive portion of the trainset is $11 million ref (that is USD, but lets assume par), that means each coach costs about $3.3 million. Now sleepers will likely cost more than a coach. I don't know how much more, but I can't imagine it being more than 50% more, so lets say $4.5 million. If so, they could buy a 20 car train for about 90 million (they can use their existing F40PH-2 locomotives that are being refurbished). This is probably an over estimate though.

If you consider VIA is spending $22 million per year on Variable operating expenses using Renaissance equipment. With modern equipment, that would go down significantly. Similarly, with modern equipment, the revenue generated would likely go up significantly. As result, the Ocean would likely come close to paying its own variable expenses, similar to The Canadian.

Thanks for putting that into numbers. I assume we'd need at least 2 of these trains, so it would be spending ~$180M to reduce, but not eliminate subsidy on rail line that provides questionable utility to a tiny number of users. It doesn't seem like a good use of money to me.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

As shown in post #1167, the Ocean had a Variable Operation Ratio of just under 50% and that is using Renaissance equipment, which is by far the most expensive equipment to use (as explained in post #539). More economical equipment would boost the Ocean's Variable Operation Ratio significantly.

The question is how much will it cost? If you look at the corridor fleet renewal program, it is costing $989 million to build the 32 trainsets, or about $31 million per trainset, which I assume to have 1 locomotive and 6 coaches. If we assume the locamotive portion of the trainset is $11 million ref (that is USD, but lets assume par), that means each coach costs about $3.3 million. Now sleepers will likely cost more than a coach. I don't know how much more, but I can't imagine it being more than 50% more, so lets say $4.5 million. If so, they could buy a 20 car train for about 90 million (they can use their existing F40PH-2 locomotives that are being refurbished). This is probably an over estimate though.

If you consider VIA is spending $22 million per year on Variable operating expenses using Renaissance equipment. With modern equipment, that would go down significantly. Similarly, with modern equipment, the revenue generated would likely go up significantly. As result, the Ocean would likely come close to paying its own variable expenses, similar to The Canadian.

Ideally, if Via could get into a plan where after each new fleet contract is filled, a new one is started and older equipment gets refurbished and moved to the other routes, what you suggest may be possible. As I understand it, the Renaissance fleet is garbage, so we are stuck with waiting for the new fleet to come in.

When a coach is refurbished, it could be converted to a sleeper. This would allow a new fleet of sleepers. I doubt via is thinking that long term.

Originally Posted by J81

If Halterm does in fact get its wish and the Ocean can no longer turn on the pier then VIA will have to adjust the service. I feel the most likely scenario is running the Ocean 2 trips per week as far as Moncton and either bussing or running a “bridge” train to Halifax after it arrives. By doing it this way they can run a single consist on the Ocean which as ive stated before would allow them to scrap the Ren sets and run 1 HEP consist.

Also, once the new corridor trainsets arrive it will free up corridor HEP equipment to be used on other services as well as the F40 locomotives. I could see a lot of this equipment being utilized on the transcon services.

I hope it is not converted to a bus. That would be the worst. I wonder if they could go all the way to Truro instead. Then it is much shorter. Having an RDC do the ~100km route would be reasonable.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Because the public doesn't care. When HFR finally becomes real, the public perception of rail will change and the demand for inter-city rail investment will go up. What's critical here is not how many cities or jurisdictions are covered. It's how many trips can be facilitated by rail as quickly as possible. I really want to see Calgary-Edmonton enter the discussion, despite the capital costs of new corridor. It's the other obvious corridor beyond Quebec-Windsor.

It is. Why not work on a proposal to present to the government to do something? I feel that that corridor would make sense as the next route to add to the Via system. I do wonder if just getting something running on a stable schedule would be good enough. Yes, an HFR would be best, but if it is not possible at this time, something running on existing infrastructure, building the case for a new HFR. A good middle ground would be if Via bought the CP line between Calgary and Edmonton, and still allow some freight as needed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Thanks for putting that into numbers. I assume we'd need at least 2 of these trains, so it would be spending ~$180M to reduce, but not eliminate subsidy on rail line that provides questionable utility to a tiny number of users. It doesn't seem like a good use of money to me.

This is why we should do as I suggested - replace older fleet with a continual replacement of the fleet with new contracts when the old ones are fulfilled.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Unfortunately, Roger1818 is absolutely correct in stating that the only way to gain a slot for a night train is to forgo one slot currently taken by a day train, as there are no more slots available through bottle necks like Coteau, Durham Junction or into Toronto Union Station.

A few questions about this. First of all, what is Durham Junction? Is it basically Oshawa station, where GO Transit currently runs on their own parallel track?

Also, how does VIA's dedicated tracks resolve the bottle necks at Coteau? Some of the old maps seemed to indicate that VIA would switch to CPR's track at de Beaujeu, but newer maps seem to show VIA continuing to use CN's Cornwall Subdivision. If VIA wants to run 17 HFR trains plus 6 regional trains to Kingston via Cornwall (for a total of 23), that is significantly more trains than the current 12 trains a day (6 to Ottawa and 6 to Toronto not via Ottawa).

Similarly at Toronto Union Station, VIA will have 17 HFR trains plus 10 trains from Kingston compared to the current 17 trains a day (10 from Ottawa and 6 from Montreal and 1 originating in Kingston).

If we want HFR to succeed, those bottle necks need to be resolved. I'm sure there are solutions, I am just not sure what they are.

The only way to avoid displacing day trains is to replace them and that means swallow trains #651 (like the “Enterprise” did), 650, 22 and 39. On a plus side, this automatically adds Ottawa onto the route.

The effect on routes 651 and 22 would be insignificant. It would mean making routes 650 and 39 run later, which would certainly be more of an issue. Of course all of these issues go away with dedicated tracks (assume the issues I previously mentioned are resolved).

As you can see there certainly is no night train timetable which could fit all Corridor markets which might have enough demand potential to fit at least one sleeper, just like there is no less certainly no demand to operate two separate night train services. Therefore, a revival of night trains in the Corridor seems highly unlikely, regardless of whether HFR gets implemented or not...

One possible solution would be to run it as a quasi split service as follows:

• Westbound: not only have a train in Montreal a a sleeper car (and maybe a coach) connected to station power (or batteries) in Ottawa that passengers could board earlier in the evening. When the train arrives in Ottawa from Montreal, it picks up the car(s) and carries on to Toronto.
• Eastbound: Have one train from Toronto with an extra sleeper car (and maybe a coach) bound for Ottawa. When it gets to Ottawa, they get dropped off and the train continues on to Montreal.

This way there would only be one train each way but both Ottawa and Montreal have good departure and arrival times. As an added benefit, there would be a late night train from Montreal to Ottawa, which some might find useful. It would also (post HFR) result in an early morning train from Peterborough to Toronto.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

A few questions about this. First of all, what is Durham Junction? Is it basically Oshawa station, where GO Transit currently runs on their own parallel track?

Also, how does VIA's dedicated tracks resolve the bottle necks at Coteau? Some of the old maps seemed to indicate that VIA would switch to CPR's track at de Beaujeu, but newer maps seem to show VIA continuing to use CN's Cornwall Subdivision. If VIA wants to run 17 HFR trains plus 6 regional trains to Kingston via Cornwall (for a total of 23), that is significantly more trains than the current 12 trains a day (6 to Ottawa and 6 to Toronto not via Ottawa).

Similarly at Toronto Union Station, VIA will have 17 HFR trains plus 10 trains from Kingston compared to the current 17 trains a day (10 from Ottawa and 6 from Montreal and 1 originating in Kingston).

If we want HFR to succeed, those bottle necks need to be resolved. I'm sure there are solutions, I am just not sure what they are.



The effect on routes 651 and 22 would be insignificant. It would mean making routes 650 and 39 run later, which would certainly be more of an issue. Of course all of these issues go away with dedicated tracks (assume the issues I previously mentioned are resolved).



One possible solution would be to run it as a quasi split service as follows:

• Westbound: not only have a train in Montreal a a sleeper car (and maybe a coach) connected to station power (or batteries) in Ottawa that passengers could board earlier in the evening. When the train arrives in Ottawa from Montreal, it picks up the car(s) and carries on to Toronto.
• Eastbound: Have one train from Toronto with an extra sleeper car (and maybe a coach) bound for Ottawa. When it gets to Ottawa, they get dropped off and the train continues on to Montreal.

This way there would only be one train each way but both Ottawa and Montreal have good departure and arrival times. As an added benefit, there would be a late night train from Montreal to Ottawa, which some might find useful. It would also (post HFR) result in an early morning train from Peterborough to Toronto.

As I understand it, the former Corridor night trains would wait at stations throughout the route. Maybe a thru train from Windsor-QC is in order. It is long enough that the overall time would be over the night. Depending on needs, another one that goes between Toronto-Montreal via Ottawa does make sense as well.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Thanks for putting that into numbers. I assume we'd need at least 2 of these trains, so it would be spending ~$180M

True. I was thinking one train would be enough. Having said that, I did significantly over estimate the costs in several places, so I doubt if it would actually be that expensive (a more realistic cost for 2 trains would likely be in the neighbourhood of $100-150M).

Originally Posted by milomilo

to reduce, but not eliminate subsidy on rail line that provides questionable utility to a tiny number of users. It doesn't seem like a good use of money to me.

If it was operating at a close to cost recovery basis, your statement that it "provides questionable utility to a tiny number of users" is highly suspect. The only way for it to come close to recovering its cost is for it to be well used. As others on this thread have said, it is quite full between Montreal and the NB boarder.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Ideally, if Via could get into a plan where after each new fleet contract is filled, a new one is started and older equipment gets refurbished and moved to the other routes, what you suggest may be possible. As I understand it, the Renaissance fleet is garbage, so we are stuck with waiting for the new fleet to come in.

When a coach is refurbished, it could be converted to a sleeper. This would allow a new fleet of sleepers. I doubt via is thinking that long term.

Converting a coach to a sleeper would be a kludge at best. The biggest problem would be the windows as the required spacing would be different. Yes you could plug them and then cut new ones, but that would not only look ugly, but be a potential source of leaks.

The reality is the change in design wouldn't be cheap. It isn't like the military where you have troops that you are paying anyway who can do the work. You will be paying a contractor to do everything. By the time all is said and done, it would probably cost almost as much as buying purpose built sleepers and the retrofit would result in an inferior product.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It is. Why not work on a proposal to present to the government to do something? I feel that that corridor would make sense as the next route to add to the Via system. I do wonder if just getting something running on a stable schedule would be good enough. Yes, an HFR would be best, but if it is not possible at this time, something running on existing infrastructure, building the case for a new HFR. A good middle ground would be if Via bought the CP line between Calgary and Edmonton, and still allow some freight as needed.

That is where I disagree with you. Something isn't always better than nothing. Without any upgrades, I wouldn't be surprised if it took as much as 6 hours. If so, no one would use it (for reference the Red Arrow, ranges from 3 to 4 hours to from Edmonton South, depending on the time of day). If it isn't being used, there will be no incentive to make it better, but instead, it will just be cancelled again.

Your plan would be the perfect way of killing all hope of ever having good rail service in the west.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

As I understand it, the former Corridor night trains would wait at stations throughout the route. Maybe a thru train from Windsor-QC is in order. It is long enough that the overall time would be over the night. Depending on needs, another one that goes between Toronto-Montreal via Ottawa does make sense as well.

The trip from Windsor to Quebec City would be over 13 hours assuming no delays (and you bypass Ottawa to speed things up). My plan of picking up and dropping off sleeper cars only works when you have city pairs that are likely to fill up a sleeper. Which city pairs on that route do you see filling up a sleeper car? If you can't fill up the car, you will end up with passengers boarding or alighting in the middle of the night and thus not getting a full night's sleep.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Converting a coach to a sleeper would be a kludge at best. The biggest problem would be the windows as the required spacing would be different. Yes you could plug them and then cut new ones, but that would not only look ugly, but be a potential source of leaks.

The reality is the change in design wouldn't be cheap. It isn't like the military where you have troops that you are paying anyway who can do the work. You will be paying a contractor to do everything. By the time all is said and done, it would probably cost almost as much as buying purpose built sleepers and the retrofit would result in an inferior product.

I agree with the premise, but, there are ways around that. A simple way would be to strip off the metal cladding where windows are and put new cladding in with windows spaced where needed. This kind of work could be done relatively easy, and remove the leak problem. The cost would be much lower. Refurbishing is generally always lower cost than new. That is one of the reason GO does it to their fleet.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is where I disagree with you. Something isn't always better than nothing. Without any upgrades, I wouldn't be surprised if it took as much as 6 hours. If so, no one would use it (for reference the Red Arrow, ranges from 3 to 4 hours to from Edmonton South, depending on the time of day). If it isn't being used, there will be no incentive to make it better, but instead, it will just be cancelled again.

Your plan would be the perfect way of killing all hope of ever having good rail service in the west.

If there wasn't a finite amount of government money, I would agree with you. However, since there isn't that is why Via buying the line would be the best option. Then they can do as they need to.

Expropriating a corridor there would not go over well. So, starting with something might be better than nothing.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It is. Why not work on a proposal to present to the government to do something? I feel that that corridor would make sense as the next route to add to the Via system. I do wonder if just getting something running on a stable schedule would be good enough. Yes, an HFR would be best, but if it is not possible at this time, something running on existing infrastructure, building the case for a new HFR. A good middle ground would be if Via bought the CP line between Calgary and Edmonton, and still allow some freight as needed.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is where I disagree with you. Something isn't always better than nothing. Without any upgrades, I wouldn't be surprised if it took as much as 6 hours. If so, no one would use it (for reference the Red Arrow, ranges from 3 to 4 hours to from Edmonton South, depending on the time of day). If it isn't being used, there will be no incentive to make it better, but instead, it will just be cancelled again.

Your plan would be the perfect way of killing all hope of ever having good rail service in the west.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If there wasn't a finite amount of government money, I would agree with you. However, since there isn't that is why Via buying the line would be the best option. Then they can do as they need to.

Expropriating a corridor there would not go over well. So, starting with something might be better than nothing.

Please move this providing-daily-intercity-passenger-rail-service-in-Western-Canada discussion to the appropriate Thread, Thank You!
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=242268&page=3

Remember, I created that thread specifically for you and your obsession about that topic, so please have the courtesy to use it and join the discussion which has already started there...!

[J81]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I would treat the half-sentence I highlighted in bold as a fact, but may I ask you on what information you base all the other speculation in your post? Let's assume that the Ocean has to back up the way it came into Halifax without turning any part of its consist until at least Truro, what insurmountable problems do you anticipate?




You seem to have a pretty good grasp of the nature of the ridership on the Ocean (and the Canadian); therefore, I am surprised that you believe that anyone would consider terminating the Ocean at Moncton and to shuttle passengers by RDC (or even bus) to Halifax...


That said, the following mention quote provides me finally with a welcome pretext to plug in what would have been "Part 3" in a post I drafted almost 2 months ago, but never completed, and which I will post in a separate post below:

Its 120 miles roundtrip between Halifax and Truro. It would require hiring two more engineers just to turn the train around after every trip. The trail locomotive would have to face west on arrival into Halifax, run around the train outside the station, run to Truro and back and then run around the train again and then back it into the station and secure it. Thats a full 8 hr shift. Also, the busiest time of the day for freight traffic on the Bedford sub is between 1800 and 1000. So getting a slot from CN to run to Truro and back just to turn the train could be problematic not to mention expensive. These are not insurmountable problems but They’re expensive and can be avoided and thats why i feel some changes to the service are coming. In the long run if thats what VIA does decide to do it would be cheaper to pay CN to put the switches back in at Windsor Jct which is only 16 miles out of Halifax.

I also think connecting in Moncton is annoying and will probably drive away some people but not many. If they run the RDC or whatever consist they scrounge up everyday it could actually increase the total number of PAX. This idea has been floated for about 5 years now so its not new.

Whatever VIA decides to do things will be different.

[J81]

Originally Posted by roger1818

A few questions about this. First of all, what is Durham Junction? Is it basically Oshawa station, where GO Transit currently runs on their own parallel track?

Also, how does VIA's dedicated tracks resolve the bottle necks at Coteau? Some of the old maps seemed to indicate that VIA would switch to CPR's track at de Beaujeu, but newer maps seem to show VIA continuing to use CN's Cornwall Subdivision. If VIA wants to run 17 HFR trains plus 6 regional trains to Kingston via Cornwall (for a total of 23), that is significantly more trains than the current 12 trains a day (6 to Ottawa and 6 to Toronto not via Ottawa).

Similarly at Toronto Union Station, VIA will have 17 HFR trains plus 10 trains from Kingston compared to the current 17 trains a day (10 from Ottawa and 6 from Montreal and 1 originating in Kingston).

If we want HFR to succeed, those bottle necks need to be resolved. I'm sure there are solutions, I am just not sure what they are.

Durham jct is where the GO sub and Kingston sub ( not Cornwall sub ) converge. Its just west of Pickering jct where the York sub comes onto the Kingston sub. The GO sub runs from Durham jct to Oshawa station parallel to the Kingston sub.

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by J81

Its 120 miles roundtrip between Halifax and Truro. It would require hiring two more engineers just to turn the train around after every trip......

The idea to turn the Ocean at Truro as originally posted here and on the Cdn Public Transit Forum was to turn the train either on the way to Halifax (while occupied) or when it reached Truro on the way to Montreal the next day. Sure it will run backwards one way or the other for 64 miles....but that's only a small portion....an hour and a half of the total trip. Plus.....I'm guessing 30 to 40 minutes to wye at Truro

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by J81

Its 120 miles roundtrip between Halifax and Truro. It would require hiring two more engineers just to turn the train around after every trip. The trail locomotive would have to face west on arrival into Halifax, run around the train outside the station, run to Truro and back and then run around the train again and then back it into the station and secure it. Thats a full 8 hr shift. Also, the busiest time of the day for freight traffic on the Bedford sub is between 1800 and 1000. So getting a slot from CN to run to Truro and back just to turn the train could be problematic not to mention expensive. These are not insurmountable problems but They’re expensive and can be avoided and thats why i feel some changes to the service are coming. In the long run if thats what VIA does decide to do it would be cheaper to pay CN to put the switches back in at Windsor Jct which is only 16 miles out of Halifax.

What if I told you that approximately half of VIA’s F40 fleet have been modified to operate backwards just as well as forwards? If we assume that the second locomotive would run backwards (i.e. both locomotives would run back-to-back), you would only need a siding near the station in Halifax to have the locomotives run around the train...

I also think connecting in Moncton is annoying and will probably drive away some people but not many. If they run the RDC or whatever consist they scrounge up everyday it could actually increase the total number of PAX. This idea has been floated for about 5 years now so its not new.

I am surprised to see you writing this. I never took an RDC in Canada, but I took one in Adams/MA two years ago and I can only see rail enthusiasts consider riding for multiple hours on these trains, but certainly not golden-aged international tourists which chose the train as a “land cruise”...

Whatever VIA decides to do things will be different.

Sure, though most probably much less different than what you seem to fear...

[ghYHZ]

Back in the day ('60s & '70s).....when the Ocean (and Scotian) had through cars between Montreal and Sydney.....the Truro<>Sydney section was wyed at Truro.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I agree with the premise, but, there are ways around that. A simple way would be to strip off the metal cladding where windows are and put new cladding in with windows spaced where needed. This kind of work could be done relatively easy, and remove the leak problem. The cost would be much lower. Refurbishing is generally always lower cost than new. That is one of the reason GO does it to their fleet.

So you are suggesting they strip all of the stainless steel off of the side of the coaches and replace it with a new sheet of stainless steel? The bulk of the value of the car is in its stainless steel body (or cladding as you are calling it).

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by roger1818

So you are suggesting they strip all of the stainless steel off of the side of the coaches and replace it with a new sheet of stainless steel? The bulk of the value of the car is in its stainless steel body (or cladding as you are calling it).

Yes...not a simple exercise as swimmer_spe is suggesting! The exterior cladding is attached to the car's structural members (think wood wall studding in your home) These would have to be cut to insert windows....compromising the structural integrity of the car.

That's why you have the odd window spacing in the Ren Dining Cars. The windows were just left as-is when they were converted from the sleeper shells.

[J81]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

What if I told you that approximately half of VIA’s F40 fleet have been modified to operate backwards just as well as forwards? If we assume that the second locomotive would run backwards (i.e. both locomotives would run back-to-back), you would only need a siding near the station in Halifax to have the locomotives run around the train...


I am surprised to see you writing this. I never took an RDC in Canada, but I took one in Adams/MA two years ago and I can only see rail enthusiasts consider riding for multiple hours on these trains, but certainly not golden-aged international tourists which chose the train as a “land cruise”...


Sure, though most probably much less different than what you seem to fear...

Actually more than half have had their traction motors replaced to the point where almost all have had their traction motors replaced. As far as running around the train i stated in my post exactly what you said. Just outside the station in Halifax there is a place to run around the train. You still have to run to Truro to turn the train around as the Ren coaches face only one way.

Those “Golden Aged” tourists are the ones who most likely would be unhappy with the RDCs yes. I couldnt care less honestly. Its a 4 hour trip.

[J81]

Originally Posted by ghYHZ

The idea to turn the Ocean at Truro as originally posted here and on the Cdn Public Transit Forum was to turn the train either on the way to Halifax (while occupied) or when it reached Truro on the way to Montreal the next day. Sure it will run backwards one way or the other for 64 miles....but that's only a small portion....an hour and a half of the total trip. Plus.....I'm guessing 30 to 40 minutes to wye at Truro

You cant turn the train at Truro while occupied with passengers unless an exemption was granted to have passengers on board the train on Non Main Track.

You could get everybody off the train at Truro while the train wyes which would be an annoyance. But then the other issue is running around the train. It could be done in Truro yard provided there are two empty tracks to use but that was a rarity when i used to go in there. Not sure about now. Youre talking an hour to hour and a half job doing it like that though.

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by J81

You cant turn the train at Truro while occupied with passengers unless an exemption was granted to have passengers on board the train on Non Main Track.

You could get everybody off the train at Truro while the train wyes which would be an annoyance. But then the other issue is running around the train. It could be done in Truro yard provided there are two empty tracks to use but that was a rarity when i used to go in there. Not sure about now. Youre talking an hour to hour and a half job doing it like that though.

Certainly not insurmountable. And I'm guessing that if this was determined to be the best option and to be used on a regular basis.....those times would come down.

I know I'm talking freight here.....but I regularly see the NE quadrant of the wye being used to access the Truro yard for a CBNS set out or pick up and the old Hopewell Sub connecting track is still in place.

[J81]

Originally Posted by ghYHZ

Certainly not insurmountable. And I'm guessing that if this was determined to be the best option and to be used on a regular basis.....those times would come down.

I know I'm talking freight here.....but I regularly see the NE quadrant of the wye being used to access the Truro yard for a CBNS set out or pick up and the old Hopewell Sub connecting track is still in place.

How would those times come down? Ive been in and out of that wye hundreds of times. Ive put hundreds of trains together. I have a pretty good idea how long it takes to go in and out of Truro yard. Running around the train requires a brake test on the train. Changing the controlling locomotive also requires a whole other set of tests. Its not as quick and simple as everyone thinks. Doable yes but certainly not less than an hours worth of work and most likely more.