VIA Rail

[Chadillaccc]

Calgary is still the largest city in that region, since the Vancouver - Seattle service is most definitely inter-city rail, plus WCE service to the Fraser Valley. But you're right, the Canadian isn't regular or reliable enough to really be considered.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Calgary is still the largest city in that region, since the Vancouver - Seattle service is most definitely inter-city rail. But you're right, the Canadian isn't regular or reliable enough to really be considered.

Right, I wouldn't get too upset by that metric though as having a few daily trains that take most of a day to get where you need to go (if they're even running on time) is not really any better than nothing at all. And I'd bet money that not even 10% of that Amtrak map gets built, the US is far too disfunctional for grand schemes that don't involve demolishing countries.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I wouldn't classify the Canadian as intercity rail, it's a museum piece. So anywhere west of Ontario is in the same category as Calgary really. Although if you count the Vancouver - Seattle service then I guess the stat is still correct.

I would certainly count the Amtrak Cascades service to Vancouver.

As for the Canadian, Amtrak has some long distance routes that only run 3 days a week, so that would be comparable. I would have to do more checking to see which American major cities are only serviced that way and see how they compare to Canadian cities.

Having said that, there certainly is a strong case for frequent, reliable service between Calgary and Edmonton (not just adding slow trains on existing track).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I have said this before, but the problem with getting good Amtrak service to Vancouver is getting support north of the 49th. Looking at a timetable I have from 2018, it takes 2 hours to travel the 62 miles from Vancouver to Bellingham (an average of 31 mph) and then 1 hour 26 minutes to travel the 95km from Bellingham to Seattle (an average of 66 mph).

It seems remarkable that we cannot have one semi-decent (no service interruptions and at-grade crossings, rated for reasonable peak travel speeds) intercity passenger rail corridor connecting two cities that have millions of people and are a couple hundred kilometers apart. This could be a single track with some sidings for most of its length, running along road or highway corridors.

The $110M New West rail bridge story doesn't surprise me. I think part of the problem is that the value of these projects is judged based on current use and not what is possible from these services. But transportation is not one of those areas where you invest a little and get a little. You can invest a lot and get nothing because the service is not useful, or invest a little and get a lot because you pushed it over the threshold of usefulness.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by milomilo

And I'd bet money that not even 10% of that Amtrak map gets built, the US is far too disfunctional for grand schemes that don't involve demolishing countries.

It is hard to say. With Amtrak Joe as commander and chief, they have a strong ally in a high place.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by someone123

Google says Vancouver to Portland takes 8.5 hours on the train. It is a little over 500 km.

Your options are to leave at 6:35 am and get there at 3:00 pm, give up a whole day leaving at 11:30 and arriving at 9:40, or do an overnight from 5:45 pm to 10:55 am (17h10).

This is all somewhat optimistic since the trains have historically often been late or swapped out for buses. Maybe it's gotten better lately (well, before the now 1 year old travel restrictions).

I did a day trip from Vancouver to Seattle two years ago. I wanted to do it by train, but the departure times on both ends as well as the length of time it would take to get there made it non-viable for my needs; I ended up renting a car. Bus was also not an option due to the scheduled departure times on the Seattle end, and I really don't enjoy crossing the US border by bus anyways (though my negative experiences have been more on the Canadian side upon return).

Part of the issue for me was that I was catching a Mariners game that didn't start until 7pm, and it was impossible to take in the whole game and then get back to Vancouver the same night without a car. I had to work the next day. In retrospect I should've taken two days off instead of one.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I have said this before, but the problem with getting good Amtrak service to Vancouver is getting support north of the 49th. Looking at a timetable I have from 2018, it takes 2 hours to travel the 62 miles from Vancouver to Bellingham (an average of 31 mph) and then 1 hour 26 minutes to travel the 95km from Bellingham to Seattle (an average of 66 mph).

I gather part of the problem is that even with preclearance, they still need to stop at the boarder, but the bigger problem is that there is little to no political support in Canada to help upgrade the track to allow it to travel at more than a crawl Canada.

Optimally the track needs to be re-routed away from White Rock beach (the 99 corridor would be a great alternative), but an even greater barrier to more frequent service is the the New Westminster Rail bridge (which is owned by the Government of Canada and also used by CN, CP, SRY, BNSF and VIA). It is in desperate need of replacement, but the government can't seem to come up with the money (Est. cost ~ $110 million, though that may be out of date).

Heavy freight traffic is definitely an issue there. That bridge in New Westminster probably gets 2-3 freight trains an hour; I live near the bridge and have sat and watched as multiple freight trains cross it, one after the other like a well-spaced parade.

The BNSF tracks from there through to Seattle also get heavy freight traffic, and the trains that go through White Rock aren't even the full extent of that traffic as there are some trains on the US side that don't cross into Canada; there is an oil refinery along that line a short distance south of the border near Ferndale which I understand generates a lot of rail traffic that stays on the US side.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Bus was also not an option due to the scheduled departure times on the Seattle end, and I really don't enjoy crossing the US border by bus anyways (though my negative experiences have been more on the Canadian side upon return).

The lack of preclearance for the bus is a problem, plus it is subject to regular traffic.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I did a day trip from Vancouver to Seattle two years ago. I wanted to do it by train, but the departure times on both ends as well as the length of time it would take to get there made it non-viable for my needs; I ended up renting a car. Bus was also not an option due to the scheduled departure times on the Seattle end, and I really don't enjoy crossing the US border by bus anyways (though my negative experiences have been more on the Canadian side upon return).

Part of the issue for me was that I was catching a Mariners game that didn't start until 7pm, and it was impossible to take in the whole game and then get back to Vancouver the same night without a car. I had to work the next day. In retrospect I should've taken two days off instead of one.

I don't even think VIA has the late train from Toronto to London anymore that used to allow me to catch an evening Jays game and get home that night (if you call 3am "that night" lol).

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Jealous. Calgary's is second behind Nashville in the largest cities without inter-city rail on the continent. Now we'll be the largest at least for now...


It's too bad they're not doing spur lines from Carbondale and Louisville to Nashville. Having direct connection from Atlanta to Chicago would be great. Connecting Pueblo to La Junta would also make sense, just completing a connection through Colorado, as well as St. Louis to Carbondale connecting across Illinois.. both with minimal required trackage relatively.

With that expansion plan, there will now only be one state without any service (SD), while there are currently four (SD, WY, NH, KY)

You know, if they added the southern route Calgary would have rail again.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I don't even think VIA has the late train from Toronto to London anymore that used to allow me to catch an evening Jays game and get home that night (if you call 3am "that night" lol).

That's been gone a long time. Even 15-20 years ago, I remember driving from London to Toronto instead of taking a train because the last train out of Toronto was around 8pm and I planned to stay until 9-10pm.

I have seen VIA schedules from the 80s showing later departures from Toronto to Windsor/Sarnia. I believe there were some cuts to frequency on the Corridor in the 1990 cuts, in addition to some of the more high-profile cuts elsewhere, so I wouldn't be surprised if the late-night train you're referring to was part of the 1990 cuts.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Yonah Freemark
@yfreemark
Amtrak's response to the Biden infra plan:
http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/u...-Statement.pdf

Proposes:
-30+ new routes
-20+ enhanced existing routes
-20m more annual riders
-Better service to cities like HOU, ATL, Cincy
-New service to unserved cities like Las Vegas, Nashville, Columbus, Phoenix

https://twitter.com/yfreemark/status...90375854219265



Amtrak is (still) proposing an Amtrak line between Detroit and Toronto through SW Ontario, effectively extending the Wolverine from Chicago to Toronto. Proposals from Amtrak in 2019 say that VIA could control the service from either Windsor or Walkerville. Hurdles include a new border processing facility, "slot" through rail tunnel between Detroit & Windsor, and upgrades to tracks between Windsor Tunnel Portal & Windsor/Walkerville VIA.

Enhanced service typically means increased frequency.

Seeing this plan for a stimulus package for Amtrak makes me wonder what Via could see if our government was serious for rail.

Here are my thoughts and why:

1)Build HFR. It has been on the books for a while, and has a good enough plan and will serve places like Peterborough which have no rail.

2) Pay for the work needed to reinstate the Gaspe train. The service was shut down due to track conditions. Get the work done and return the train to it.

3) Return the Dayliner on Vancouver Island. It was shut down due to track conditions. The line needs extensive work with ties and some bridge work.

4) Work with the Province of Ontario and he MTO to help fund the Notherlander service. The Ontario government is planning on bringing it back. Then add it to the Corridor service area, even though it is operated by the province.

5) Add Toronto - Sudbury to Corridor service, and have a once daily train. Right now, most air carriers have pulled out of many of the smaller airport, Sudbury included. There is a good chance that once the pandmeic is over the air carriers will return. However, may traveler may be looking for another method of travel that is better than a bus, and not so cramped as plane. Running a 2-4 car train daily would be more than plenty; considering prepandemic there was more than 4 round trip lights and as many bus trips.

6) Return passenger service back to the southern Canadian route. Keep both at 3x a week, but alternate between the CN and CP route.

Doing these 6 things would have the potential to:
- return 3 suspended routes
- add 3 new routes
- Add better service between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal
- Return service to the capital of British Columbia: Victoria
- Add Calgary, the 4th largest metro area, back to the passenger rail network.
- Have the top 18 metro areas served by rail. Calgary is the 4th, Victoria is the 15th, Regina is the 18th. Sherbrooke (19th) and Kelowna (20) would still not be on the network. (I really wanted to say the top 20)

As far as potential ridership, someone else could calculate that. I know that there is more people living along the CP mainline than the CN Mainline. As well as about 500,000 people on Vancouver Island.

Realistically speaking, HFR is about the only one that will likely be done. The others would be pipe dreams, but if we follow the Amtrak lead, it is realistic.

[esquire]

The only route outside of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor that makes any kind of sense to me as a target for investment is the Montreal-Halifax route as it has population densities high enough and distances short enough to be attractive to travellers in that region. Plus there is a culture of rail travel there where people are used to the idea of going by train and they are generally receptive to it.

Western Canada is too far gone to have any reasonable hope of capturing a significant share of intercity traffic with long distance trains. They have not been a major part of the transportation puzzle here since the 60s, and really they all but disappeared following the 1990 VIA cuts. As someone said earlier, the 2x a week Canadian is basically a rolling museum piece and not anything that resembles reliable intercity transportation. Trying to chase riders here is a waste of time and money. The only exception to that is tourist trains like the Rocky Mountaineer.

Finally, routes that have been shut down due to poor track conditions would require hundreds of millions in capital investment to rebuild the lines. Is anyone in their right mind going to spend nine figures so that fifty people a day can ride a dayliner from Victoria to Nanaimo?

[manny_santos]

That Detroit-Toronto train idea is getting some news coverage in Detroit:

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...it-to-toronto/

They mention that previous service from Detroit to Toronto involved a transfer in Welland. Sounds like they’re referring to the old CP service that ran from Buffalo to Toronto through Fort Erie and Welland.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

That's been gone a long time. Even 15-20 years ago, I remember driving from London to Toronto instead of taking a train because the last train out of Toronto was around 8pm and I planned to stay until 9-10pm.

I have seen VIA schedules from the 80s showing later departures from Toronto to Windsor/Sarnia. I believe there were some cuts to frequency on the Corridor in the 1990 cuts, in addition to some of the more high-profile cuts elsewhere, so I wouldn't be surprised if the late-night train you're referring to was part of the 1990 cuts.

No clue if and when London will get better train service to Toronto, but we do get lots of promises:

https://london.ctvnews.ca/ford-gover...ssed-1.4772107

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by esquire

The only route outside of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor that makes any kind of sense to me as a target for investment is the Montreal-Halifax route as it has population densities high enough and distances short enough to be attractive to travellers in that region. Plus there is a culture of rail travel there where people are used to the idea of going by train and they are generally receptive to it.

Both you and swimmer_spe have forgotten Calgary-Edmonton. It would be expensive to introduce a competitive, viable solution, but I would expect, if done right, it to be very successful. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any political will for the required investment. It also doesn't help that all the studies seem to be based on the assumption that we need to go to HSR from day 1. Something more like HFR that is competitive with driving in both cost and time would be a much more affordable. We need to wait for the current HFR plan to be built though, to show that it can be successful.

Western Canada is too far gone to have any reasonable hope of capturing a significant share of intercity traffic with long distance trains. They have not been a major part of the transportation puzzle here since the 60s, and really they all but disappeared following the 1990 VIA cuts. As someone said earlier, the 2x a week Canadian is basically a rolling museum piece and not anything that resembles reliable intercity transportation. Trying to chase riders here is a waste of time and money. The only exception to that is tourist trains like the Rocky Mountaineer.

Regarding The Canadian, as a viable mass transportation option, I do tend to agree. However, It does almost break even on operating costs (only when you add in the shared costs that won't go away if you cancelled it, does its losses become significant), so I wouldn't be in a rush to cancel it. Having said that, VIA will need a new long distance fleet soon, and the price of that might end up killing it though.

Overall, VIA needs to focus on shorter routes (under 800km) that have a high demand for ridership and can thus fill trains. Most of the light blue and yellow lines on that Amtrak map are exactly that. Don't forget that most small cities in the USA would be in Canada's top 10 (if not top 5). As an example, Jackson, MS (USA's 97th largest metropolitan area) is slightly larger than Kitchener–Cambridge–Waterloo (Canada's 10th largest CMA).

Also, intercity travel isn't about traveling within a city, it is about traveling between cities, so having 1 large city isn't enough, you need a second nearby city for people to travel to/from.

[biguc]

Calgary and Edmonton should be the easiest to connect. There's a healthy chain of towns between them--just start connecting them, one by one, starting from each city. Soon enough the lines will connect and you can all start running trains.

The Prairie provinces were built around the railroads. The people have forgotten it but their communities haven't.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by esquire

The only route outside of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor that makes any kind of sense to me as a target for investment is the Montreal-Halifax route as it has population densities high enough and distances short enough to be attractive to travellers in that region. Plus there is a culture of rail travel there where people are used to the idea of going by train and they are generally receptive to it.

I'll give you that the idea o adding more service there would be a good idea. However, I don't know if it is enough to really stimulate the economy of Canada enough.

Originally Posted by esquire

Western Canada is too far gone to have any reasonable hope of capturing a significant share of intercity traffic with long distance trains. They have not been a major part of the transportation puzzle here since the 60s, and really they all but disappeared following the 1990 VIA cuts. As someone said earlier, the 2x a week Canadian is basically a rolling museum piece and not anything that resembles reliable intercity transportation. Trying to chase riders here is a waste of time and money. The only exception to that is tourist trains like the Rocky Mountaineer.

Notice how some of the Canadian route is still running yet none of the Rocky Mountaineer is? I wonder why that is?

Originally Posted by esquire

Finally, routes that have been shut down due to poor track conditions would require hundreds of millions in capital investment to rebuild the lines. Is anyone in their right mind going to spend nine figures so that fifty people a day can ride a dayliner from Victoria to Nanaimo?

Let me see if I understand your issue....

You do not want the government to award a company millions of dollars, employing hundreds, maybe even thousands of workers in good paying jobs t fix some track? This isn't about the ridership as much as it is a way tog et millions back to work. It also would mean businesses that rely on rely; and there were a few on the Island that no longer use it would benefit from tracks that can allow freight to use it again.

So, you are someone who must not want millions to return to work after this is over.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Both you and swimmer_spe have forgotten Calgary-Edmonton. It would be expensive to introduce a competitive, viable solution, but I would expect, if done right, it to be very successful. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any political will for the required investment. It also doesn't help that all the studies seem to be based on the assumption that we need to go to HSR from day 1. Something more like HFR that is competitive with driving in both cost and time would be a much more affordable. We need to wait for the current HFR plan to be built though, to show that it can be successful.

I did, lets put that as number 7.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Regarding The Canadian, as a viable mass transportation option, I do tend to agree. However, It does almost break even on operating costs (only when you add in the shared costs that won't go away if you cancelled it, does its losses become significant), so I wouldn't be in a rush to cancel it. Having said that, VIA will need a new long distance fleet soon, and the price of that might end up killing it though.

Overall, VIA needs to focus on shorter routes (under 800km) that have a high demand for ridership and can thus fill trains. Most of the light blue and yellow lines on that Amtrak map are exactly that. Don't forget that most small cities in the USA would be in Canada's top 10 (if not top 5). As an example, Jackson, MS (USA's 97th largest metropolitan area) is slightly larger than Kitchener–Cambridge–Waterloo (Canada's 10th largest CMA).

Also, intercity travel isn't about traveling within a city, it is about traveling between cities, so having 1 large city isn't enough, you need a second nearby city for people to travel to/from.

The Gaspe train is just over that, at around 1100km.

The Dayliner is 225, so it meets your under 800km.
The Northlander is just under 800km, so it meets it too.
Sudbury is about 400m from Toronto is around 400km.

Remember stimulus is not about what is needed, but more what will get the economy rolling. Having good paying jobs is a great way to mve the economy forward.

[lrt's friend]

I thought I read quite recently that the track on the Gaspé peninsula is currently being repaired and it is not exclusively for passenger trains. There will be some freight as well.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Both you and swimmer_spe have forgotten Calgary-Edmonton. It would be expensive to introduce a competitive, viable solution, but I would expect, if done right, it to be very successful. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any political will for the required investment. It also doesn't help that all the studies seem to be based on the assumption that we need to go to HSR from day 1. Something more like HFR that is competitive with driving in both cost and time would be a much more affordable. We need to wait for the current HFR plan to be built though, to show that it can be successful.

I purposely didn't mention Calgary-Edmonton for the reason you mention... the political will just isn't there. Alberta could probably pull something like that off it it wanted to, and if it took the lead on a project like that Ottawa would be compelled to contribute. It wouldn't be an Ottawa-driven undertaking.

I'm certain that the time will come where we'll see some sort of competitive passenger rail option between Calgary and Edmonton but we clearly aren't there yet.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Let me see if I understand your issue....

You do not want the government to award a company millions of dollars, employing hundreds, maybe even thousands of workers in good paying jobs t fix some track? This isn't about the ridership as much as it is a way tog et millions back to work. It also would mean businesses that rely on rely; and there were a few on the Island that no longer use it would benefit from tracks that can allow freight to use it again.

You say this as though fixing up a very lightly used rail line is the only way to put people back to work. Just how many people do you think would work on rebuilding the Vancouver Island line? Is it possible that there are potentially more useful and productive transportation infrastructure projects that could be built in BC?