If you have some spare time, I highly recommend watching TVO's documentary about the Via train from Sudbury to White River known as the Budd car. The documentary is called TRIPPING Train 185.
If you have some spare time, I highly recommend watching TVO's documentary about the Via train from Sudbury to White River known as the Budd car. The documentary is called TRIPPING Train 185.
A daily service means that you are not at the mercy of the transportation you choose. What if those 2 days doesn't work for you, would you take it or find another mode?
I actually meant meant splitting the line so that two daytime services were possible. Sleeper trains are horrendously costly for passengers and the taxpayer and make the train quite useless for local people.
But there are certain trade offs to living in remote areas without road access.
Go back a page or so and I asked whether this would cause a slight bump in tourism.
I've watched it too (we get TVO on cable here in NB).
A well done production. I think the documentary reinforces the importance of local non corridor rail service in Canada. It might not be high volume, but, for those who use it, it is an essential service with no real viable alternative.
I actually meant meant splitting the line so that two daytime services were possible. Sleeper trains are horrendously costly for passengers and the taxpayer and make the train quite useless for local people.
But there are certain trade offs to living in remote areas without road access.
OK..using Urban Sky's timetable, where would be a good split? What would be a good timeline for the train to run? I am not apposed to splitting it up. Just remember that those people coming from more than 12 hours a day may spent the money for the sleepers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad
I've watched it too (we get TVO on cable here in NB).
A well done production. I think the documentary reinforces the importance of local non corridor rail service in Canada. It might not be high volume, but, for those who use it, it is an essential service with no real viable alternative.
The biggest surprise was how low passenger numbers get in the winter. As low as 3.... I am guessing most close up their camps for the winter, including the commercial ones.
I apparently created this timetable template already three years ago for you, but I don't think I ever got the chance to show it to you:
Note: travel times derived from the 1989-04-30 (Sudbury-SSM: 1977-04-24) VIA timetable
Maybe you want to play around a bit with the departure times at either end and let us know which departure times (at either end) you think would work out the best for your daily service...
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
I actually meant meant splitting the line so that two daytime services were possible. Sleeper trains are horrendously costly for passengers and the taxpayer and make the train quite useless for local people.
But there are certain trade offs to living in remote areas without road access.
Using the above timetable
Toronto - SUdbury 6 hours
Sudbury - SSM 4 hours
SSM - Thunder Bay 14 hours
Thunder Bay - Winnipeg 8 hours
Toronto -Winnipeg 32 hours
So, if 12 hours is about the most without a sleeper service, then Toronto -SSM, SSM - Thunder Bay, and Thunder Bay - Winnipeg would make sense.
It could be set up so that each meet each other in their termini stations allowing a through trip, albeit no sleepers.
I do not know if there would be savings in not running sleepers.
Using the above timetable
Toronto - SUdbury 6 hours
Sudbury - SSM 4 hours
SSM - Thunder Bay 14 hours
Thunder Bay - Winnipeg 8 hours
Toronto -Winnipeg 32 hours
So, if 12 hours is about the most without a sleeper service, then Toronto -SSM, SSM - Thunder Bay, and Thunder Bay - Winnipeg would make sense.
It could be set up so that each meet each other in their termini stations allowing a through trip, albeit no sleepers.
I do not know if there would be savings in not running sleepers.
To me they should run the Canadian for European tourists on the CP line with sleepers.
They should run bud cars on daytime routes for people in isolated communities on the CN line not connected to the provincial highway networks.
To me they should run the Canadian for European tourists on the CP line with sleepers.
They should run bud cars on daytime routes for people in isolated communities on the CN line not connected to the provincial highway networks.
Sure, but where do you get the missing RDCs from to form a second consist (recall that the distance between Capreol and Winnipeg is three times that between Sudbury and White River) and where between Capreol and Sioux Lookout do you find a Hotel in walking distance from a rail station with sufficiently high capacity to accommodate a few dozen passengers and crew members every 2-4 nights?
Sure, but where do you get the missing RDCs from to form a second consist (recall that the distance between Capreol and Winnipeg is three times that between Sudbury and White River) and where between Capreol and Sioux Lookout do you find a Hotel in walking distance from a rail station with sufficiently high capacity to accommodate a few dozen passengers and crew members every 2-4 nights?
There was a company in NB storing a large number of RDCs. Not sure if they are still around. They were going to be used for the Pearson service for a while. A DMU could perform a similar function if there are no RDCs left in the world.
I count 4 motels in Sioux lookout within a km of the train station. Although I think Longlac would be a better break in service (more clear division between the Sudbury and Winnipeg hinterlands and the possibility for an Ontario Northlands connection to Thunder Bay). It has fewer motels though.
It is also unclear where the remote community passengers are going. I would suspect most are going to the closest community with regular services (e.g. Sioux, Sudbury, Winnipeg, etc.) rather than taking multi-day trips, so I am doubting the people staying overnight would be in the dozens.
There was a company in NB storing a large number of RDCs. Not sure if they are still around. They were going to be used for the Pearson service for a while. A DMU could perform a similar function if there are no RDCs left in the world.
I count 4 motels in Sioux lookout within a km of the train station. Although I think Longlac would be a better break in service (more clear division between the Sudbury and Winnipeg hinterlands and the possibility for an Ontario Northlands connection to Thunder Bay). It has fewer motels though.
It is also unclear where the remote community passengers are going. I would suspect most are going to the closest community with regular services (e.g. Sioux, Sudbury, Winnipeg, etc.) rather than taking multi-day trips, so I am doubting the people staying overnight would be in the dozens.
Maybe let’s ask a simpler question then (one which too few people posting their service ideas in this thread seem to ask themselves): What is the problem you are trying to fix? (And why is it worth replacing - or supplementing, given that you don’t seem to suggest running the “Canadian” three times a week year-round over the CP line - a relatively cheap-to-operate SUDB-WHTR service with a much more expensive CAPR-WNPG service?)
Last edited by Urban_Sky; Apr 19, 2023 at 3:17 PM.
Maybe let’s ask a simpler question then (one which too few people posting their service ideas in this thread seem to ask themselves): What is the problem you are trying to fix? (And why is it worth replacing - or supplmenting, given that you don’t seem to run the Canadian three times a week year-round over the CP line - a relatively cheap-to-operate SUDB-WHTR service with a much more expensive CAPR-WNPG service?)
1) Service for remote communities isn't convenient (middle of the night).
2) The CN route is less appealing for the European tourists that are the main users of this service and provides fewer possible economic benefits because there is nowhere to stop.
3) Attaching the European Tourist Service and the remote communities service requires running services way under capacity through the winter, wasting a lot of money and an insane amount of GHG emissions.
1) Service for remote communities isn't convenient (middle of the night).
2) The CN route is less appealing for the European tourists that are the main users of this service and provides fewer possible economic benefits because there is nowhere to stop.
3) Attaching the European Tourist Service and the remote communities service requires running services way under capacity through the winter, wasting a lot of money and an insane amount of GHG emissions.
So, run daily, shorter trains along both CN and CP routes between Winnipeg and Sudbury/Toronto to service the local service, and then have 2 trains each on the CP and CN lines a week that are Toronto -Vancouver.
There was a company in NB storing a large number of RDCs. Not sure if they are still around. They were going to be used for the Pearson service for a while. A DMU could perform a similar function if there are no RDCs left in the world.
I count 4 motels in Sioux lookout within a km of the train station. Although I think Longlac would be a better break in service (more clear division between the Sudbury and Winnipeg hinterlands and the possibility for an Ontario Northlands connection to Thunder Bay). It has fewer motels though.
It is also unclear where the remote community passengers are going. I would suspect most are going to the closest community with regular services (e.g. Sioux, Sudbury, Winnipeg, etc.) rather than taking multi-day trips, so I am doubting the people staying overnight would be in the dozens.
Vancouver Island had two trains. VIA railways pulled them back east to be refurbished. I was a conference just before COVID with the Island railway people were says they had been refurbished and were sitting in storage at VIA for a new service. A service no one looks to want to fund.
So there are at least two upgraded trains in a VIA yard somewhere.
So, run daily, shorter trains along both CN and CP routes between Winnipeg and Sudbury/Toronto to service the local service, and then have 2 trains each on the CP and CN lines a week that are Toronto -Vancouver.
I don’t see any reason to run the European Tourist Trains on the CN track in Northern Ontario if they are running another service for remote communities. It is of limited interest to tourists. It is my understanding that CP’s Canadian was always more popular than CN’s Supercontinental.
I don’t see any reason to run the European Tourist Trains on the CN track in Northern Ontario if they are running another service for remote communities. It is of limited interest to tourists. It is my understanding that CP’s Canadian was always more popular than CN’s Supercontinental.
The current Toronto - Winnipeg
Eastern Time
Toronto, ON 09:55
Washago, ON 12:25
Parry Sound, ON 14:27
Sudbury Jct, ON 16:57
Capreol, ON 17:22
8.5 hrs
Laforest, ON 8:48
McKee's Camp, ON 9:01
Felix, ON 19:21
Ruel, ON 19:28
Westree, ON 19:45
Gogama, ON 20:18
Foleyet, ON 22:44
Elsas, ON 23:38
Oba, ON 01:38
Hornepayne, ON 02:29
9 hr
Hillsport, ON 04:05
Caramat, ON 04:55
Longlac, ON 05:34
Nakina, ON 06:13
Auden, ON 07:19
Ferland, ON 07:56
Mud River, ON 08:05
Armstrong, ON 09:17
Collins, ON 09:47
Allanwater Bridge, ON 09:26
Central Time -1 hour
Flindt Landing, ON 09:42
Savant Lake, ON 09:59
Sioux Lookout, ON 11:25
10 hr
Richan, ON 13:05
Red Lake Road, ON 13:41
Canyon, ON 14:10
Farlane, ON 14:47
Redditt, ON 15:23
Minaki, ON 15:44
Ottermere, ON 16:01
Malachi, ON 16:07
Copelands Landing, ON 16:09
Rice Lake, ON 16:12
Winnitoba, MB 16:26
Ophir, MB 16:31
Brereton Lake, MB 16:49
Elma, MB 17:10
Winnipeg, MB 19:30
8 hr
Total ~36 hours
There are 4 sections that are each about 9 hours. If you were to go to a non overnight set up, the only place that would make sense to make the halfway point is Hornepayne. Or each of the 4 legs can be done separately. Or, truncate it at the Sudbury downtown station and then make the 2 end in Sioux Lookout.
There was a company in NB storing a large number of RDCs. Not sure if they are still around. They were going to be used for the Pearson service for a while. A DMU could perform a similar function if there are no RDCs left in the world.
That would have been IRSI in Moncton, but these RDCs are long sold or scrapped. VIA tried to buy some back from Trinity Rail Express of Dallas, but was outbid by AllEarth Rail of Burlington. The only other FRA-compliant DMUs would be the Nippon Sharyo's also used on the UP Express, but they are no longer in production. Therefore, there are no open production lines for FRA-compliant DMUs, which is why bidding wars for 70 years old rolling stock are even possible...
Quote:
I count 4 motels in Sioux lookout within a km of the train station. Although I think Longlac would be a better break in service (more clear division between the Sudbury and Winnipeg hinterlands and the possibility for an Ontario Northlands connection to Thunder Bay). It has fewer motels though.
I said "between Capreol and Sioux Lookout". It's 17.5 hours (by the count of @swimmer_spe) between those two cities (with a non-negligible chance of it becoming 24 hours and beyond), which means that at least the on-train staff has to layover somewhere inbetween.
Quote:
It is also unclear where the remote community passengers are going. I would suspect most are going to the closest community with regular services (e.g. Sioux, Sudbury, Winnipeg, etc.) rather than taking multi-day trips, so I am doubting the people staying overnight would be in the dozens.
Sioux Lookout only seems to have a "Health Center", not a hospital, and I would also imagine that the range of specialists available in Sudbury is also somewhat limited, meaning that you'd have to go to Winnipeg or Toronto in many cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
1) Service for remote communities isn't convenient (middle of the night).
2) The CN route is less appealing for the European tourists that are the main users of this service and provides fewer possible economic benefits because there is nowhere to stop.
3) Attaching the European Tourist Service and the remote communities service requires running services way under capacity through the winter, wasting a lot of money and an insane amount of GHG emissions.
1) It really depends on what the reason for travel is. I can imagine that in many cases, people rather spend the night (in coach) on the train than having to pay for accommodation before and after their appointments. Also, the prospect of having to switch mode of transportation in Capreol and Sudbury (how do you travel between these two cities, if the train may arrive many hours late?) is rather daunting.
2) Most European tourists don't know that the "Lake Superior" even exists and they come for the whole crossing-the-continent-by-train experience. They would probably prefer the scenery of Lac Superior to the endless lakes-and-trees-and-lakes-and-trees of the CN route, but it's rather unlikely to affect their decision to book a rail vacation in Canada.
3) Routing the Canadian via Hornepayne allows VIA to offer a Remote Service at an negligible incremental subsidy need or carbon footprint, as these trains operate anyways. When VIA operated a separate remote service between Capreol and Winnipeg (i.e. from 1981 to 1990), its direct operating deficit need was $6.7 million in 1988 (thus $14.8 million in today's prices) and since you like so much "fully allocated costs", these were $12.4 million in 1988 (thus $23.4 million in today's prices).
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper
Vancouver Island had two trains. VIA railways pulled them back east to be refurbished. I was a conference just before COVID with the Island railway people were says they had been refurbished and were sitting in storage at VIA for a new service. A service no one looks to want to fund.
So there are at least two upgraded trains in a VIA yard somewhere.
When you say "trains", you are actually talking about "railcars". According to my "Trackside Guide 2021", VIA has only 6 RDCs in its active fleet and that was before the most recent wave of structural damages was discovered and one of these cars was sacrificed for the testing which may or may not result in a lifting of the buffer car requirement. Also, CN and CP require minimum axle counts of 8 for all train movements, which means you can only operate RDCs in multiples. One of the 6 RDCs is an RDC-4 and has only a large baggage but no passenger compartments, which means that with the current buffer car requirements, it's only useful if operated with at least 2 other RDCs. In short, there are barely enough RDCs for the SUDB-WHTR service (most baggage service just had to be cancelled, as the RDC-4 has a mechanical issue at the moment), let alone for deploying some of them anywhere else...
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
I don’t see any reason to run the European Tourist Trains on the CN track in Northern Ontario if they are running another service for remote communities. It is of limited interest to tourists. It is my understanding that CP’s Canadian was always more popular than CN’s Supercontinental.
The "Super-Continental" fell victim of the 1981 cuts and was partly revived as the "Panorama" in 1984 (as a daily night train WNPG-SASK-EDMO, which was extended three times per week via JASP and PGEO to PRUP). One year later, the "Super-Continental" was restored, but only West of WNPG (i.e. WNPG-SASK-EDMO-JASP-VCVR). It's therefore difficult to compare the passenger and revenue figures of the Super-Continental with those the Canadian...
The current Toronto - Winnipeg
Eastern Time
Toronto, ON 09:55
Washago, ON 12:25
Parry Sound, ON 14:27
Sudbury Jct, ON 16:57
Capreol, ON 17:22
8.5 hrs
Laforest, ON 8:48
McKee's Camp, ON 9:01
Felix, ON 19:21
Ruel, ON 19:28
Westree, ON 19:45
Gogama, ON 20:18
Foleyet, ON 22:44
Elsas, ON 23:38
Oba, ON 01:38
Hornepayne, ON 02:29
9 hr
Hillsport, ON 04:05
Caramat, ON 04:55
Longlac, ON 05:34
Nakina, ON 06:13
Auden, ON 07:19
Ferland, ON 07:56
Mud River, ON 08:05
Armstrong, ON 09:17
Collins, ON 09:47
Allanwater Bridge, ON 09:26
Central Time -1 hour
Flindt Landing, ON 09:42
Savant Lake, ON 09:59
Sioux Lookout, ON 11:25
10 hr
Richan, ON 13:05
Red Lake Road, ON 13:41
Canyon, ON 14:10
Farlane, ON 14:47
Redditt, ON 15:23
Minaki, ON 15:44
Ottermere, ON 16:01
Malachi, ON 16:07
Copelands Landing, ON 16:09
Rice Lake, ON 16:12
Winnitoba, MB 16:26
Ophir, MB 16:31
Brereton Lake, MB 16:49
Elma, MB 17:10
Winnipeg, MB 19:30
8 hr
Total ~36 hours
There are 4 sections that are each about 9 hours. If you were to go to a non overnight set up, the only place that would make sense to make the halfway point is Hornepayne. Or each of the 4 legs can be done separately. Or, truncate it at the Sudbury downtown station and then make the 2 end in Sioux Lookout.
I agree, Hornepayne would be an obvious location for a layover, but it would require splitting CAPR-WNPG in 3 segments and would mean that the trip from SLKT via HNPN, CAPR/SUDB to TRTO would take 3 full days. Oh, and I have yet to locate any type of accommodation in Hornepayne, as everything Google Maps shows seems to be Lodges many kilometers outside the actual village...
Last edited by Urban_Sky; Apr 20, 2023 at 4:25 AM.
1) It really depends on what the reason for travel is. I can imagine that in many cases, people rather spend the night (in coach) on the train than having to pay for accommodation before and after their appointments. Also, the prospect of having to switch mode of transportation in Capreol and Sudbury (how do you travel between these two cities, if the train may arrive many hours late?) is rather daunting.
2) Most European tourists don't know that the "Lake Superior" even exists and they come for the whole crossing-the-continent-by-train experience. They would probably prefer the scenery of Lac Superior to the endless lakes-and-trees-and-lakes-and-trees of the CN route, but it's rather unlikely to affect their decision to book a rail vacation in Canada.
1) Northern Travel Grant is a thing. It permits anyone living in Northern ON to claim travel expenses for healthcare. So, someone traveling to Toronto, or even Sudbury could claim all the costs and get the money back in full.
2) Most European tourists would likely want to do both to say that they have done both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban_Sky
I agree, Hornepayne would be an obvious location for a layover, but it would require splitting CAPR-WNPG in 3 segments and would mean that the trip from SLKT via HNPN, CAPR/SUDB to TRTO would take 3 full days. Oh, and I have yet to locate any type of accommodation in Hornepayne, as everything Google Maps shows seems to be Lodges many kilometers outside the actual village...
When you say "trains", you are actually talking about "railcars". According to my "Trackside Guide 2021", VIA has only 6 RDCs in its active fleet and that was before the most recent wave of structural damages was discovered and one of these cars was sacrificed for the testing which may or may not result in a lifting of the buffer car requirement. Also, CN and CP require minimum axle counts of 8 for all train movements, which means you can only operate RDCs in multiples. One of the 6 RDCs is an RDC-4 and has only a large baggage but no passenger compartments, which means that with the current buffer car requirements, it's only useful if operated with at least 2 other RDCs. In short, there are barely enough RDCs for the SUDB-WHTR service (most baggage service just had to be cancelled, as the RDC-4 has a mechanical issue at the moment), let alone for deploying some of them anywhere else...
Vancouver Island use to have 2 RDCs. They ran one year round. In the summer they would couple the two together for extra capacity.
The tracks on the island were not well maintained by CP Rail. They gave them to a non-profit that had asperations of restoring rail service. Around 2018-2019 I was told by the non-profit that the old RDC that VIA use to operate had been taken back east for a full refurbished that was now complete and once the government agreed to provide money they would start operating them again. I don't know if at that point they were still owned by VIA or the non-profit.
Yes, that group is still waiting for the government to announce that funding. Many expect the announcement to never come, but that is a different story.
Vancouver Island use to have 2 RDCs. They ran one year round. In the summer they would couple the two together for extra capacity.
The tracks on the island were not well maintained by CP Rail. They gave them to a non-profit that had asperations of restoring rail service. Around 2018-2019 I was told by the non-profit that the old RDC that VIA use to operate had been taken back east for a full refurbished that was now complete and once the government agreed to provide money they would start operating them again. I don't know if at that point they were still owned by VIA or the non-profit.
[…]
These RDCs were certainly owned by VIA and transferred to the mainland after the suspension of operations on Vancouver Island. I have no trouble believing that they operated in singles, as not correctly releasing signals are not really a concern with the extremely light train volumes on Vancouver Island, but they prevent VIA from operating single RDCs (or locomotives) on CN or CP mainlines and with the current Buffer Car requirements, you can only transport passengers if you operate them as at least triples. With only 5 cars left (after the 6th was sacrificed for the structural testing, I’ll leave you with doing the maths of how many separate trainsets VIA can currently build and simultaneously operate with such a tiny fleet…
Prev
Linear Mode
