VIA Rail

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The good thing is, the places where HFR or HSR will be built are places that don't have old growth forests. That seems to be the big one now.

They'll find something to complain about. The anti-pipeline crowd will move their circus over to the railway.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

They'll find something to complain about. The anti-pipeline crowd will move their circus over to the railway.

They are planning to build a highway through the Holland Marsh and there is some noise from environmentalists.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by milomilo

They'll find something to complain about. The anti-pipeline crowd will move their circus over to the railway.

Just a quick comment about where the "anti-pipeline circus" actually targeted railways: the blockades last year were not motivated by any pseudo-environmental fight against windmills, but the countless grievances of indigenous groups which have seen (to name just one example) the decision of this country's highest court confirming that indigenous land titles do exist in the province and need to be established by its institutions ignored for almost a quarter-century:

In 1991, a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en rights had been extinguished at the time of Confederation. The case went through the B.C. Court of Appeal and ultimately to the Supreme Court of Canada, which in a landmark 1997 decision, confirmed Indigenous title exists in B.C. but said a new trial would be required to settle the claims. A new trial has not been held.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/b...em-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-protests-bc/

The shameful history of being subjected to institutionalized racism and cultural genocide sets indigenous protestors and their non-indigenous supporters diametrically apart from treehugging anti-HS2 protestors "defending" so-called "ancient woodlands" against a very sensible and badly needed rail project with a very small environmental impact compared to the do-nothing scenario...

[swimmer_spe]

Once the new fleet arrives for the Corridor, what will happen with the surplus engines? I know the coaches are going to be scrapped. I have heard people talk of them going to GO, or to be used with the Northlander service. Are there older engines that they will retire and replace with these?

[Bread_Kaczynski]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Just a quick comment about where the "anti-pipeline circus" actually targeted railways: the blockades last year were not motivated by any pseudo-environmental fight against windmills, but the countless grievances of indigenous groups which have seen (to name just one example) the decision of this country's highest court confirming that indigenous land titles do exist in the province and need to be established by its institutions ignored for almost a quarter-century:


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/b...em-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-protests-bc/

The shameful history of being subjected to institutionalized racism and cultural genocide sets indigenous protestors and their non-indigenous supporters diametrically apart from treehugging anti-HS2 protestors "defending" so-called "ancient woodlands" against a very sensible and badly needed rail project with a very small environmental impact compared to the do-nothing scenario...

Nothing says "progressive" quite like simping for literal monarchs.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

What the hell is that signature...

[MolsonExport]

the hallmarks of a banned forumer under a new alias.

Lakelocker, probably.

[Bread_Kaczynski]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

What the hell is that signature...

Relax bro, it's just a meme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm647h2I_m8

[swimmer_spe]

I have been able to find out that air traffic between Calgary and Edmonton, pre pandemic was about 1000 passengers. That would be about 20 Via Coaches. That would be only 4 5 car trains. Not horrible, but not enough for a HSR or even HFR. That is if everyone switched to the train. However, with the potential of 365,000 yearly passengers, that is up there with most of the Corridor stations. Even at 100,000, that would still put them amongst the top 10 busiest stations.

[casper]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I have been able to find out that air traffic between Calgary and Edmonton, pre pandemic was about 1000 passengers. That would be about 20 Via Coaches. That would be only 4 5 car trains. Not horrible, but not enough for a HSR or even HFR. That is if everyone switched to the train. However, with the potential of 365,000 yearly passengers, that is up there with most of the Corridor stations. Even at 100,000, that would still put them amongst the top 10 busiest stations.

Is that 1,000 passengers O&D traveling between the two cities as a local trip or does that include connecting passengers. I would expect a good percentage of people on the Calgary-Edmonton route to be people connecting in Calgary to their final destination/origin. Those connecting passengers are not going to switch to a train.

The train is likely to pull passengers from the bus as well.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by casper

Is that 1,000 passengers O&D traveling between the two cities as a local trip or does that include connecting passengers. I would expect a good percentage of people on the Calgary-Edmonton route to be people connecting in Calgary to their final destination/origin. Those connecting passengers are not going to switch to a train.

The train is likely to pull passengers from the bus as well.

That is number of seats on planes that do both directions. So, a plane of 100 seats, doing both ways is 100.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by casper

Is that 1,000 passengers O&D traveling between the two cities as a local trip or does that include connecting passengers. I would expect a good percentage of people on the Calgary-Edmonton route to be people connecting in Calgary to their final destination/origin. Those connecting passengers are not going to switch to a train.

The train is likely to pull passengers from the bus as well.

I would think that a decently priced and conveniently scheduled train would also pull people from cars to rail. Depending on the purpose of the trip and where in each city you are coming or going as well

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That is number of seats on planes that do both directions. So, a plane of 100 seats, doing both ways is 100.

I don't have access to old schedules, but 1000 seats per day seems low to me, pre-pandemic. There are over 400 seats each way tomorrow on AC and WS, how much smaller is the schedule right now than 2 summers ago?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I would think that a decently priced and conveniently scheduled train would also pull people from cars to rail. Depending on the purpose of the trip and where in each city you are coming or going as well

I agree. Although, I don't see it being high enough to warrant the money for HFR, yet. Maybe move some of the old Renaissance cars that are still in runable shape to there for a pilot program. Once the need becomes obvious spend the money on cars for it. I am thinking a 4 car train starting each day in both Edmonton and Calgary, running back and forth roughly every 4 hours, 4 times a day could be enough to build the ridership. That would be about 800 round trip seats a day.

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I don't have access to old schedules, but 1000 seats per day seems low to me, pre-pandemic. There are over 400 seats each way tomorrow on AC and WS, how much smaller is the schedule right now than 2 summers ago?

Well, considering that Alberta is further along in their opening up, I'd say less than you might think. Being at half the capacity right now doesn't seem too far off.

[Truenorth00]

Aviation and rail markets are distinct. Comparing a 40 min flight to what would be a 4 hr train ride isn't going to give you a gauge of demand for a 4 hr train ride. It does, however, show what the market for HSR might be.

To get a gauge of demand for a regular slow rail service using shared freight tracks, look at them bus traffic. And then subtract if slower than the bus or driving.

The reality is that routes like Calgary-Edmonton have to be designed to be at least faster than driving to succeed. And they will have to depend substantially on commuter markets. Especially from Red Deer and an ex-urban commuter market between Calgary and Edmonton themselves. There's probably a reasonable business case. But it ain't happening without substantial interest from the provincial government.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Aviation and rail markets are distinct. Comparing a 40 min flight to what would be a 4 hr train ride isn't going to give you a gauge of demand for a 4 hr train ride. It does, however, show what the market for HSR might be.

To get a gauge of demand for a regular slow rail service using shared freight tracks, look at them bus traffic. And then subtract if slower than the bus or driving.

The reality is that routes like Calgary-Edmonton have to be designed to be at least faster than driving to succeed. And they will have to depend substantially on commuter markets. Especially from Red Deer and an ex-urban commuter market between Calgary and Edmonton themselves. There's probably a reasonable business case. But it ain't happening without substantial interest from the provincial government.

I am not suggesting HSR. Even HFR is not realistic for the amount of flights. I also know that the competition will be between the cars and buses on the roads. However, comparing air travel is important when they are so close. Flights include the need to be an hour early for them, trains not so much. So, your 40 minutes now is almost 2 hours. Getting a downtown station in Edmonton would make the argument even harder as now you have to get downtown. If the train can have an average speed along the entire trip at 90km/hr or higher, that would mean that the trip times between all modes would be about the same door to door.

Remember, HFR will not mean that AC or WJ will stop their flights between Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal. Maybe someone can show whether air travel between them has dropped dramatically pre pandemic. I doubt that air travel will reduce much when HFR opens. Even with HSR, I doubt we would see a dramatic drop.

So, where is this traffic coming from? I think it is in part due to the fact that populations are increasing and that is driving the filling of seats on all modes. Having more means more options and more space for more people.

[Truenorth00]

The closer the city pair the less the flying, the more the competition to rail becomes driving and buses. So for Calgary-Edmonton, looking at air traffic won't provide any reasonable gauge of demand. Keep in mind that while flying may take 2 hrs with pre-boarding and post arrival, driving between the YEG and YYC takes about 2.5 hrs. So the alternative to flying won't be a train. It'll be a car. The only way a train can be competitive is if it can do city centre to city centre in under 3 hrs. And airlines can actually streamline pre-boarding to compete. So 2.5 hrs should be the goal.

As for HFR, it was never pitched as or meant to compete with air. But there happen to be certain sectors where the travel times from downtown to downtown are close enough to be competitive. Toronto-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec City come to mind,as two sectors where airlines will lose some passengers.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The closer the city pair the less the flying, the more the competition to rail becomes driving and buses. So for Calgary-Edmonton, looking at air traffic won't provide any reasonable gauge of demand. Keep in mind that while flying may take 2 hrs with pre-boarding and post arrival, driving between the YEG and YYC takes about 2.5 hrs. So the alternative to flying won't be a train. It'll be a car. The only way a train can be competitive is if it can do city centre to city centre in under 3 hrs. And airlines can actually streamline pre-boarding to compete. So 2.5 hrs should be the goal.

Downtown to downtown is about 3 hours to drive. I agree, aim for the 2.5 mark. It it achieved 3 hours that would still be competitive enough. The bigger challenge is getting it to downtown Edmonton.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

As for HFR, it was never pitched as or meant to compete with air. But there happen to be certain sectors where the travel times from downtown to downtown are close enough to be competitive. Toronto-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec City come to mind,as two sectors where airlines will lose some passengers.

Some here have pitched it as being faster than flying or it wont work. There are people on here who are in the HFR/HSR or don't do it. I say get it going at a reasonable speed, at a reasonable frequency to be relevant. The key will be to get departures to work for people doing business trips in the other city.

[Truenorth00]

There's no absolutes.

Even HSR routes elsewhere haven't eliminated flying without mandates (as France is now doing). It's all about modal shift. And to that end we also know how much modal shift will move based on travel time. Lastly, in our favour, given how expensive flying is in Canada, rail doesn't have to be faster end-to-end than air to compete very strongly. The price difference can move share.


I've shown the math before for Toronto-Ottawa downtown-to-downtown. Flying is 2:45 hrs (via Billy Bishop) to 3 hrs (via Pearson). HFR would be about 3:45hrs with pre-boarding and post-arrival LRT ride. There are some for whom that 45-60 min will be worth the airfare. There are many for whom it won't. Just as importantly HFR will create a truly distinct option against driving and bussing. So it should gain market share from the top and bottom.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's no absolutes.

Even HSR routes elsewhere haven't eliminated flying without mandates (as France is now doing). It's all about modal shift. And to that end we also know how much modal shift will move based on travel time. Lastly, in our favour, given how expensive flying is in Canada, rail doesn't have to be faster end-to-end than air to compete very strongly. The price difference can move share.


I've shown the math before for Toronto-Ottawa downtown-to-downtown. Flying is 2:45 hrs (via Billy Bishop) to 3 hrs (via Pearson). HFR would be about 3:45hrs with pre-boarding and post-arrival LRT ride. There are some for whom that 45-60 min will be worth the airfare. There are many for whom it won't. Just as importantly HFR will create a truly distinct option against driving and bussing. So it should gain market share from the top and bottom.

The only absolute is that people will make their choice based on their own reasons. Some people would still pick flying over trains no matter what. However, throughout Canada, we need to look for places that Via could serve better outside of the W-QC corridor. C-E makes a good argument for a daily train going both ways a few times a day. Once it is running, find ways to make it better. Whether that be the frequency, departure times, the coaches or the speed; work on ways to make it worth looking at.