Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
I am not sure that a straight-line extrapolation based on three years results is an effective way to project future results.
|
I never claims that my extrapolation to 2030 (where revenues would have caught up to costs on the revenues if the trends observed between 2014-2017 could be sustained) was a dependable prediction. Nevertheless, it suggests that the
claim that HFR could make the Corridor self-sustaining by 2030 is not completely absurd...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
It is less about distance and more about travel time. With a 3.5 hour trip, you would need to catch a 5:00 am train (or earlier) to get to your destination in time for a 9:00 am meeting. For tourists, a sleeper train allows you to "save"* a night's accommodation and sleep while you travel (3.5 hours is a good chunk of your day).
* admittedly, the cost would be paid the the railway instead.
[...]
Once again, not optimal, but what time would they need to get up to catch train 50, which departs Toronto at 6:40 and doesn't arrive until 11:29?
[...]
Are you talking about HFR, as there currently is no 5am train to Ottawa from Toronto? Even if there was, that would likely mean getting up at 4am (or earlier) to catch the train. As I said above, even if it didn't split, you could sleep until 6am (to depart at 6:30), and if it did, you could sleep in until 7:30 or 8am.
|
Yes, I am talking about HFR and the travel time between Toronto and Ottawa is projected at 3:10 hours. You are right that for tourists the train would save the cost of one Hotel accommodation, but for everyone else the presence of a 9pm and 5:20am train would allow to be either be back home in bed by 1am or to arrive in time for a 9am meeting, which means that the night train no longer saves any accommodation costs for them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
Great to have you in the discussion!
|
Thank you very much, but I hope that reading my signature will not affect this enthusiasm...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
To be fair, many of those connections would be broken with Kingston as a hub, unless some trains continued past Kingston. Even if they didn't, you would likely get a decent connection in Kingston though.
|
I don't see the point in artificially braking connections in Kingston. Nevertheless, the absence of pressure to minimise the end-to-end travel time might allow to add a dwell time of, say, 15 minutes to act as a buffer for delays, while timings in general could be less aggressive...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
I agree that without a split train, Ottawa would end up with a departure later than optimal and an arrival earlier than optimal, but that is better than having the train bypass Ottawa and provide that compromised service to Cornwall instead.
[...]
This way they can have a nice leisurely breakfast at a restaurant in Ottawa and still get to the office in plenty of time for that 9:00 meeting or get in line for tickets to tour Parliament and watch the changing of the guards.
[...]
True, but you will serve the early-commuter market from Ottawa to Montreal (effectively replacing train 22). The eastbound train could overnight in or near Ottawa, on track that VIA owns, saving the need to lease a siding from someone else.
|
As I wrote back in
Post #1148, a night train will only be viable if it also acts as a late-evening train, then stops at a train station during the dead hours of 2am-5am (thus minimising staff costs), before doubling as an early-morning train. By having the train arrive in Ottawa, your train essentially runs empty between Kingston and Ottawa, as you can't fill much beds with tourists alone (which actually tend to enjoy the scenic views of Lake Ontario which they would miss on a night train and which is the kind of sight for which they have chosen Canada as a vacation destination in the first place)...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
Given that there are no early morning trains from Kingston to Ottawa or Montreal, I don't understand why that would be considered a valuable commuter route.
|
Such a morning train existed between Brockville and Montreal as train 26 until
1958 and between Belleville and Montreal between
April 1967 and
October 1968 as train 650, but both trains only arrived Montreal after 9am, rendering it rather useless for commuting purposes. I have no idea why the night train never arrived later than 7:30am before it got cancelled in
January 1990, but during the brief return as the "Enterprise" it arrived at 8:00am (changed to 8:10am in
October 2002), which made commuting from Brockville (5:25) and Cornwall (6:26) somewhat feasible. I'd still be sceptical about night trains ever returning between Montreal and Toronto, but I think the only remotely realistic chance is by leaving Kingston around 5:30 and arriving Montreal around 8:30, so that the train can at least attract some commuters and at least
Kingston's mayor seems to expect that there will be such a train once HFR is in place...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
If coming from home, they could shower the evening before and eat breakfast in the station.
|
I'm afraid that nowadays, intercity travellers expect a standard which is somewhat comparable with a standard Hotel/Motel room and that includes having time for a shower and breakfast before checking out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
An interesting report. Admittedly I haven't read all of it yet, but from what I have read, many of the issues there don't apply (or won't apply): - Travel times between Toronto and Montreal (and to a lesser extent Ottawa) will still be long enough to make it work (no plans for HSR anytime soon).
- if we get HFR, conflicts with freight aren't an issue,
- Conflicts with commuter rail will still be an issue in Toronto and Montreal (unless VIA builds its own stations) though it could act as the first train of the day from Ottawa to Montreal and from Peterborough (or Tweed) to Toronto, which VIA would probably want anyway.
- It would also act as the last train of the day from Montreal to Ottawa and Toronto to Peterborough (or Tweed),
- Operating costs would be higher, but that would hopefully be offset by higher fares (especially for those with some type of sleeping accommodation),
- as for equipment, VIA already needs it for long distance services, so it can be bundled with it.
|
If you want your night train to arrive in Ottawa around 8:30am then you have to take the Lakeshore route as there will most probably be a HFR train which arrives from Toronto at that time (that would necessitate a 5:20am departure, which is only 10 minutes earlier than the first train in the other direction - #41@5:30am - currently). Equipment is certainly another concern, especially after the
departure of the Renaissance fleet...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
I tend to use use imgur and have it give me a BB Code link. If you want to use another website, copy the link to the actual image (not the page the image is displayed on) and surround that by opening and closing IMG tags.
|
Thank you so much for this suggestion. It
worked!
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
It shows that increasing frequency makes it more likely that the train will work for more people. With an infrequent schedule, there are 4 options: - Trains in both directions don't work with your schedule,
- Outbound train works with your schedule but return doesn't
- Return train works with your schedule but outbound doesn't
- Trains in both directions work with your schedule.
People will most likely only take the train under option 4, otherwise they will likely use another mode of transport in both directions. Increasing the frequency will significantly improve the odds of option 4 happening, thus increasing the number of passengers.
By having the Toronto-Montreal train also serve Toronto-Ottawa and Ottawa-Montreal, you could (in theory) actually decrease the total number of trains and still get an increase in frequency along all of those routes. Having said that, with dedicated tracks, the probability of delays decreases, decreasing scheduled travel time, allowing VIA to increase (not decrease) the number trains using the same amount of equipment and labour.
|
Exactly!
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
I agree it would be nice to see the study that was commissioned, but patience is a virtue and as long as the government officials can see it, an appropriate decision can be made.
|
I'm certain it will receive more public scrutiny than a certain multi-billion rail transit project currently which has started construction somewhere in the Corridor only 2 years after people had first learnt about it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00
Who really runs sleeper for 450km trips in the developed world? It's moronic. It's asking VIA to essentially run a hotel on wheels. And when they are subsidized that's a poor formula. Essentially asking the government to subsidize hotel service. I'd rather they put that towards better, more frequent and faster service.
|
Agreed, though the problem is more the short travel time (4h28 today, 3h10 in the future) than the distance. It's interesting to note that the night train was withdrawn in
October 1988 and thus exactly 4 years after the minimum travel time was cut from 4:45 to 3:59 in
October 1984 (in
April 1981, it had still been 5h45), but more than 1 year before the January 1990 bloodbath (cuts). Concerning Montreal-Toronto, doing this as aday trip by rail was not feasible, as the last train departed before the first train arrived. Nowadays, a day visitor can spend more than 6 hours in either city (and this number will increase further with HFR):
Source: official
VIA Rail and
CN timetables
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
If you read the report that Urban_Sky linked to, you would see that Austria still has overnight domestic trains. Given that at its widest (Liechtenstein to Slovakia), Austria is only about 575km, I would expect that most routes are well under 450km.
I agree that given limited access to tracks, overnight service is a low priority, but with dedicated tracks, we could re-consider overnight trains and see if they can be made profitable.
|
What makes night train so unusually successful in Austria is almost completely covered by the Alps, which makes driving (6h16h) between Bregenz and Vienna and even taking the
Railjet (230 km/h semi-fast HSR train) (6h50) even slower than Corridor trains here in Canada (102.3 km/h vs. 106.4 km/h average scheduled travel time on the Montreal-Toronto route):
Source:
Marysrosaries.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
|
Even that service is not entirely domestic, as it ventures through Germany between Kufstein and Salzburg (via Rosenheim).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghYHZ
I know it’s anecdotal….but I rode numerous times. The train was extensively marketed and discounts were offered such as coupons for a sleeper on the Enterprise one-way…then return by an afternoon train in VIA-1 (Business) Class but it just didn’t seem to work. The only times the trains were busy was on Fri and Sun nights and this was usually only in the coaches. On days the Enterprise connected with the Canadian....you did have a few more in the sleepers, but not many.
|
The discount coupons are also mentioned on this
Blog article and seem to have been a permanent fixture, which underlines the minimal revenue potential of night trains on the Corridor...
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
Night trains make sense if you have city pairs 7-12 hours apart where there is some restraint on the airline industry, or if you’re a backpacker on a rail pass.
For routes in the corridor they make no sense at all. You have to leave late at night, arrive too early, forego a shower, and by the time you have paid for enhanced sleeping arrangements it would have been cheaper to fly or spend the night.
|
Exactly!