VIA Rail network developments

[ghYHZ]

VIA tried an overnight train again…..the Enterprise between Toronto & Montreal as recently as 2000 to 2005……10 years after the original Cavalier had been discontinued.

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.

Early on ….there had been talk of running the train via Ottawa instead of Cornwall and a set-out sleeper and coach would have been possible. The train originally used the Budd equipment (including a Park Car Dome Observation Lounge) but after the Renaissance cars were introduced….that became more difficult with their fixed consists and coupling arrangements.

With faster daytime trains now....people just want to be home in their own beds at night. Not in a hotel room....let alone a sleeper.

[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.

[lrt's friend]

I don't know why we are discussing overnight sleeper trains. As travel times decrease, the need for them decreases. Since there was not a big enough market to support them in the past, the chances of bringing them back is zero. However, my original comment was that shorter travel times make later departures more practical. As urban rail systems develop more and more, intercity rail also becomes more practical as more urban and suburban locations become easier to access.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't know why we are discussing overnight sleeper trains. As travel times decrease, the need for them decreases. Since there was not a big enough market to support them in the past, the chances of bringing them back is zero.

Fair enough.

However, my original comment was that shorter travel times make later departures more practical. As urban rail systems develop more and more, intercity rail also becomes more practical as more urban and suburban locations become easier to access.

I don't disagree but the bigger factor is dedicated tracks. With VIA using CN's tracks, they are limited to the number of trains they can run in a day and will choose the time slots that give the biggest bang for the buck, even if it means having equipment (and employees) sit idle at other times.

With dedicated tracks, the only limit to the number of trains they can run in a day is the capacity of the tracks. As a result, running trains later into the evening becomes more feasible (and affordable).

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Fair enough.



I don't disagree but the bigger factor is dedicated tracks. With VIA using CN's tracks, they are limited to the number of trains they can run in a day and will choose the time slots that give the biggest bang for the buck, even if it means having equipment (and employees) sit idle at other times.

With dedicated tracks, the only limit to the number of trains they can run in a day is the capacity of the tracks. As a result, running trains later into the evening becomes more feasible (and affordable).

Yes, HFR and dedicated track is the key to both speeding up service and improving frequency.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

With dedicated tracks, the only limit to the number of trains they can run in a day is the capacity of the tracks.

And the demand for the service at a price point that is viable.

Originally Posted by roger1818

As a result, running trains later into the evening becomes more feasible (and affordable).

If there is sufficient demand at a viable price point.

[Urban_Sky]

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...

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...

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...

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...

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)...

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...

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.

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...

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!

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:

1. Trains in both directions don't work with your schedule,
2. Outbound train works with your schedule but return doesn't
3. Return train works with your schedule but outbound doesn't
4. 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!

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...

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

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

Originally Posted by acottawa

They seem to only have one domestic service, from Vienna to Bregenz, which is a 7.5 hour trip.

https://www.nightjet.com/en/dam/jcr:...reckennetz.pdf

Even that service is not entirely domestic, as it ventures through Germany between Kufstein and Salzburg (via Rosenheim).

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...

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!

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

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...

Under that itinerary, you would have to get up at 4:00am to catch the 5:20 train and then not get home again until 1:00am? That is a 21 hour day. Some might want to do that, but not me. Granted you could probably catch an earlier train home, but that is still a very early morning, so I would take a train the night before. I might be the exception to the rule though.

Thank you very much, but I hope that reading my signature will not affect this enthusiasm...

Actually it does...but in a positive way.

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...

Mostly to improve reliability, but as you say, that can also be done by making the schedule less aggressive and increasing dwell times. Presumably the first departure in the morning and last arrival of the day would be from/to Kingston.

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)...

It could act as late trains from Montreal to Ottawa and Toronto to Kingston and early trains in the opposite directions. My argument is there is would be more demand for trains between Ottawa and Montreal than Kingston and Montreal. Your point about it being dead between Kingston and Ottawa is well taken though. I assumed most overnight trains have a dead portion of their trip.

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.

Obviously that was a completely different era of train travel, before VIA took over from the CNR and CPR.

I have no idea why the night train never arrived later than 7:30am before it got cancelled in January 1990,

My guess is that Central Station was too busy to accept it during rush hour.

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...

Yup. As said before, removing the pressure for end to end service allows the trains to be better scheduled as regional trains, rather than the messy hybrid of regional and intercity trains VIA currently operates in the corridor. Mainline rail can be categorized as follows:

• Commuter Rail - Transportation from the exurbs to the city,
• Regional Rail (or stopping trains) - Transportation between cities with many stops in between (tends to be slow),
• Intercity Rail (what HFR will be) - Transportation at moderate speed between cities with few stops in between, and
• High Speed Rail - Transportation at high speed between cities with very few or no stops in between

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.

That could well be true.

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).

It could be the last train of the day along the Lakeshore to Brockville and then on to Ottawa. Ottawa has lots of unused platforms. The night train could be split in Ottawa, with half becoming the first train to Montreal and the other half remaining behind to let people alight at their leisure (potentially getting off as soon as it arrives if they so choose).

Equipment is certainly another concern, especially after the departure of the Renaissance fleet...

That is a huge concern. That link says 2021, but I have read more recent articles that say some of VIA's corridor fleet (Renaissance?) is retiring in 2019, before the new trains become available. (ref)

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

You seem to only include CN's timetables. Did the CPR not have trains between Toronto and Montreal? Also, you are showing day trips to Toronto. I would expect before 1970, few in Montreal would have reason to go to the sleepy town of Toronto for the day, but it might be more common for people in Toronto to want to go to the big city of Montreal.

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

Even that service is not entirely domestic, as it ventures through Germany between Kufstein and Salzburg (via Rosenheim).

Fair enough.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Under that itinerary, you would have to get up at 4:00am to catch the 5:20 train and then not get home again until 1:00am? That is a 21 hour day. Some might want to do that, but not me. Granted you could probably catch an earlier train home, but that is still a very early morning, so I would take a train the night before. I might be the exception to the rule though.

I think the vast majority of people would prefer to either fly in in the morning or spending the night in Toronto.

A night train requires staying up late.the night before (probably with a departure around midnight), having a fairly short amount of time actually in bed, getting into a Toronto really early, without much to do for a few hours and limited grooming options (not necessarily leaving a good impression for the 9:00 meeting).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think the vast majority of people would prefer to either fly in in the morning or spending the night in Toronto.

To get to a 9:00am meeting, you would need to catch a 7:00 flight to Billy Bishop (earlier if to Pearson). Officially you need to get to the airport at 5:30, but you could push that to 6:00. So you would probably need to get up at 5:00am. Better than 4:00am to catch a 3 hour morning train but still not great (and an expensive hour).

A night train requires staying up late.the night before (probably with a departure around midnight),

With a split train, you could board around 11:00. Midnight was only if they ran a single train through Ottawa from Montreal.

having a fairly short amount of time actually in bed, getting into a Toronto really early, without much to do for a few hours and limited grooming options (not necessarily leaving a good impression for the 9:00 meeting).

The arrival time would be sometime around 8:30am, so you wouldn't have hours with nothing much to do. Most people would probably only need to get up at 8:00 (or 7:30 if you want a nice breakfast onboard). I don't see why you think that is really early but getting up at 5:00am to catch a flight isn't? As for grooming options, sleeper rooms have private bathrooms and most sleeper cars have showers.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

To get to a 9:00am meeting, you would need to catch a 7:00 flight to Billy Bishop (earlier if to Pearson). Officially you need to get to the airport at 5:30, but you could push that to 6:00. So you would probably need to get up at 5:00am. Better than 4:00am to catch a 3 hour morning train but still not great (and an expensive hour).



With a split train, you could board around 11:00. Midnight was only if they ran a single train through Ottawa from Montreal.



The arrival time would be sometime around 8:30am, so you wouldn't have hours with nothing much to do. Most people would probably only need to get up at 8:00 (or 7:30 if you want a nice breakfast onboard). I don't see why you think that is really early but getting up at 5:00am to catch a flight isn't? As for grooming options, sleeper rooms have private bathrooms and most sleeper cars have showers.

Lots of office workers are used to getting up at 6something, so getting up an hour early on one day probably isn’t a big problem for most people.

How slow do you want this train to go if it leaves Ottawa at 11 and gets to Toronto at 8:30? Such a slow train would be highly disruptive to other operations on the line.

Sleeper rooms are not cheap and almost certainly will cost a lot more than a hotel room, and even the crapiest of hotels has a better bed and shower than you will find on a train.

[Urban_Sky]

Re: Corridor trains

Originally Posted by roger1818

With dedicated tracks, the only limit to the number of trains they can run in a day is the capacity of the tracks. As a result, running trains later into the evening becomes more feasible (and affordable).

Originally Posted by acottawa

And the demand for the service at a price point that is viable.

I would offer "availability of fleet" as another constraint limiting service expansion...

Originally Posted by roger1818

Under that itinerary, you would have to get up at 4:00am to catch the 5:20 train and then not get home again until 1:00am? That is a 21 hour day. Some might want to do that, but not me. Granted you could probably catch an earlier train home, but that is still a very early morning, so I would take a train the night before. I might be the exception to the rule though.

We are talking about two different passengers:

1. A Toronto-based passenger which leaves his home early for a 9am appointment in Ottawa. Without the early train, he would probably take the 7:10 AirCanada flight from YYZ to YOW (as the first flight of the day from any Toronto Airport).
2. An Ottawa-based passenger which returns from a dinner in Toronto at 9pm. Without the late train, he would take Porter's last flight from YTZ to YOW at 21:55.

In both cases, they can avoid accommodation costs by taking other transport options...

Originally Posted by roger1818

It could act as late trains from Montreal to Ottawa and Toronto to Kingston and early trains in the opposite directions. My argument is there is would be more demand for trains between Ottawa and Montreal than Kingston and Montreal. Your point about it being dead between Kingston and Ottawa is well taken though. I assumed most overnight trains have a dead portion of their trip.

Yes, in the way they are operated in Europe they do, but that's one of the contributing factors why they disappear or are replaced by day trains without any Sleeper accommodation, such as this ICE train, which originates in Dortmund at 9pm and seems designed to connect from late planes at Düsseldorf (10pm) and Frankfurt (midnight) or to early planes Stuttgart (3am) or Munich, where it arrives at 6am after making many stops which are not usually made by ICE trains (such as Wiesloch-Waldorf or Ludwigsburg) and even a detour via Karlsruhe, more mimicking an Inter-Regional train than a HSR train, presumably in an attempt to maximise the number of O-Ds served:


Interestingly, there are also trains which start in the middle of the night, such as this ICE which leaves Cologne at 03:19 and arrives Munich at 08:07 (there is also an ICE which leaves Hamburg at 03:04 and arrives Munich at 11:27 - though you can transfer to a more direct train in Fulda, which makes you already arrive 09:38 in Munich):

Originally Posted by roger1818

It could be the last train of the day along the Lakeshore to Brockville and then on to Ottawa. Ottawa has lots of unused platforms. The night train could be split in Ottawa, with half becoming the first train to Montreal and the other half remaining behind to let people alight at their leisure (potentially getting off as soon as it arrives if they so choose).

I don't know what timings you are thinking of, but given that nobody wants to arrive after 2am or depart before 5am, the only way to avoid a dead zone is having a layover during that period - and Kingston appears to me as the only logical location for such a layover...

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is a huge concern. That link says 2021, but I have read more recent articles that say some of VIA's corridor fleet (Renaissance?) is retiring in 2019, before the new trains become available. (ref)

There are only 2 Renaissance trainsets operating on the Corridor every day (one doing 20MQ and 37QMF and the other one doing 24FMQ and 29QM), so that might be less dramatic than one thinks...

Originally Posted by roger1818

You seem to only include CN's timetables. Did the CPR not have trains between Toronto and Montreal? Also, you are showing day trips to Toronto. I would expect before 1970, few in Montreal would have reason to go to the sleepy town of Toronto for the day, but it might be more common for people in Toronto to want to go to the big city of Montreal.

CN and CP had a pool agreement between 1933 and October 1965, which is basically a codeshare agreement (multiple decades before the air industry "pioneered" their "air alliances") in which the railroads pooled their equipment in jointly operated trains and accepted rail tickets from either railroad. Therefore, all CP trains on the pool routes (TRTO-OTTW, TRTO-MTRL and MTRL-QBEC) are included in CN's schedules (and v.v.), but I've included the CP timetable from April 1960 below, which shows that the 08:30 departure operates only during summer (Pool #7/#8), while the only trains using the CP lines were the respective night trains from Toronto to Ottawa (Pool #33/#34 via Havelock Sub) or Montreal (Pool #21/#22 via Belleville Sub):

Source: CP timetable effective 1960-04-24

Concerning the timings of the trains, they were mostly identical in both directions. Note, however, that the 08:30 departure just mentioned (Pool #7) operates 45 minutes later (not: earlier) in the opposite direction)...

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think the vast majority of people would prefer to either fly in in the morning or spending the night in Toronto.

A night train requires staying up late.the night before (probably with a departure around midnight), having a fairly short amount of time actually in bed, getting into a Toronto really early, without much to do for a few hours and limited grooming options (not necessarily leaving a good impression for the 9:00 meeting).

I agree, even though to be fair, the night train could already start receiving passengers at, say, 21:00, as the rail stations are much less busy at that time than at the arrival-side (i.e. around 08:30). However, this of course increases operating (labour) costs further...

Originally Posted by acottawa

How slow do you want this train to go if it leaves Ottawa at 11 and gets to Toronto at 8:30? Such a slow train would be highly disruptive to other operations on the line.

Agreed, unless you let it layover at Kingston between 1:30 and 5:30am. "Making Kingston the hub" might require an additional platform, anyway...

Originally Posted by acottawa

Sleeper rooms are not cheap and almost certainly will cost a lot more than a hotel room, and even the crapiest of hotels has a better bed and shower than you will find on a train.

Agreed for intercity sleepers, though some luxury rail cruises try to match the comfort offered in regular hotels...

[Urban_Sky]

Re: The Canadian

Originally Posted by roger1818

Wrong thread to discuss this, but where I do see value in replacing some of the overnight trains with daytime trains is in Western Canada. It would be much cheaper to run a series of regional trains with coaches and it would better serve the communities that currently only get service in the middle of the night. Frequencies along each leg could be adjusted to meet the demand (some busier legs could get daily service while others continue to only get a couple trains a week). Some legs might still require overnight service where there isn't a good city to terminate the train.

VIA would loose some of the tourists who want to take the train across Canada, but I question how much value that adds to the Canadian economy as many just stay on the train most of the time flying in and out of the end points so it does little to foster much domestic tourism.

The schedule could be designed to allow packages to be built that has people stay in hotels along the way. This would greatly enhance tourism in those cities, especially if they stay an extra night in some cities.

I would say that reorganising the Canadian still falls under "VIA Rail network developments", but I'm not sure what benefit could be possibly achieved, which would justify destroying the only market the Canadian can serve remotely adequately, given the punctuality, travel times and not at last: frequencies available for the transcontinental service.

I'm assuming that the point you are trying to make is something like this...

Originally Posted by esquire

It really is more of an antique curiosity at this point, especially now that service is down to 2x a week most of the year.

All that said, I suspect the atrocious cost recovery of the service means that it's more likely that service will end with the lifespan of the HEP fleet, whenever that may be. Or at the very least some old castoff Amtrak equipment could be purchased to keep the service running at some sort of minimal level. I'm not that optimistic.

...and as frequently as I hear this claim, I don't believe that this is an accurate reflection of the reality, because back in 2014, the Canadian recovered 45.9% of its operating costs and required a subsidy of $55.5 million, compared to 55.9% and $172.2 million on the Corridor,...

Source: VIA Rail Annual Report 2014
...while by 2017, the Canadian already recovered 64.8% of its operating costs and required a subsidy of only $41.2 million, compared to 65.9% and $141.7 million on the Corridor:

Source: VIA Rail Annual Report 2017

Furthermore, its cost-recovery rate actually exceeded (!) that of the Corridor during the third Quarter 2018 (i.e. the peak tourist season) by 87.6% vs. 75.6% and by even 92.0% vs. 75.0% in the third Quarter of the previous year:


Source: VIA Rail Quarterly Report Q3-2018 (p.5)

Nevertheless, one may point out that the per-passenger-mile subsidy of $0.32 in 2017 is still almost twice the corresponding figure on the Corridor ($0.18), but it's only just over one-third of the Ocean ($0.90) and less than one-eighth of the mandatory services ($2.69)...

[lrt's friend]

The good old days of rail travel were not so good, were they? Only three trains per day between Ottawa and Toronto, none following the current route via Federal and Richmond. All the trains either were routed via Bedell (near Kemptville) or via Carleton Place, neither of which are possible today.

The Montreal route is a little less clear because both CP and CN ran daily transcontinental trains through Ottawa to Montreal.

[Truenorth00]

I am most curious about two things with HFR:

1) Timeline. It’s getting ridiculous that the Liberals sat on just studying this thing for so long. And I think it’s going to be almost 3 years till the first shovels get into the ground. With at least 3 years after, for construction. I wanna see the announcement not just to know it’s going ahead, but so that we can know how long it’s going to take.

2) Capability growth capacity. I really wanna see them build this in a way that allows for improvement in speed. Built in a way which allows for sections with higher speeds as appropriate grade separations, banked curves, etc. are added.

[acottawa]

As far as I know they are still at the reviewing the business case phase. It does not seem like they have done any detailed route planning, engineering, environmental assessments, negotiations with railways and landowners, financing, RFQs, tenders, contract negotiations, etc. And all that is necessary before a shovel ever sees the ground.

I would estimate a decade at least even if they decided to proceed (and get re-elected). Infrastructure projects in this country move incredibly slowly.

But I am also not convinced they have any intention to build this or they wouldn’t be ragging the puck for so long.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

How slow do you want this train to go if it leaves Ottawa at 11 and gets to Toronto at 8:30? Such a slow train would be highly disruptive to other operations on the line.

I'm curious, have you even been reading this thread? Many have said that the Enterprise used to layover in Kingston for several hours to give people a chance to sleep. esquire was very clear about that in post #1145 and Urban_Sky has alluded to it several times.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I would offer "availability of fleet" as another constraint limiting service expansion...

True.

Yes, in the way they are operated in Europe they do, but that's one of the contributing factors why they disappear or are replaced by day trains without any Sleeper accommodation, such as this ICE train, which originates in Dortmund at 9pm and seems designed to connect from late planes at Düsseldorf (10pm) and Frankfurt (midnight) or to early planes Stuttgart (3am) or Munich, where it arrives at 6am after making many stops which are not usually made by ICE trains (such as Wiesloch-Waldorf or Ludwigsburg) and even a detour via Karlsruhe, more mimicking an Inter-Regional train than a HSR train, presumably in an attempt to maximise the number of O-Ds served:

ICE trains are a form of high speed rail. HSR is a game changer for the feasibility of overnight trains between the same cities.

I don't know what timings you are thinking of, but given that nobody wants to arrive after 2am or depart before 5am, the only way to avoid a dead zone is having a layover during that period - and Kingston appears to me as the only logical location for such a layover...

IF avoiding dead zones is imperative at all costs, then I agree. I figured that the considerable boost in traffic from Ottawa (to Montreal) in the am and to Ottawa (from Montreal) in the PM (compared to Kingston) would be worth the dead zone.

There are only 2 Renaissance trainsets operating on the Corridor every day (one doing 20MQ and 37QMF and the other one doing 24FMQ and 29QM), so that might be less dramatic than one thinks...

Nice to know. Thanks.

CN and CP had a pool agreement between 1933 and October 1965, which is basically a codeshare agreement (multiple decades before the air industry "pioneered" their "air alliances") in which the railroads pooled their equipment in jointly operated trains and accepted rail tickets from either railroad. Therefore, all CP trains on the pool routes (TRTO-OTTW, TRTO-MTRL and MTRL-QBEC) are included in CN's schedules (and v.v.), but I've included the CP timetable from April 1960 below, which shows that the 08:30 departure operates only during summer (Pool #7/#8), while the only trains using the CP lines were the respective night trains from Toronto to Ottawa (Pool #33/#34 via Havelock Sub) or Montreal (Pool #21/#22 via Belleville Sub):

Source: CP timetable effective 1960-04-24

Interesting. That was before I was born (and well before I moved to Ontario). I assume all of the trains operated by CN used Central Station and those operated by CP used Windsor Station?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I would say that reorganising the Canadian still falls under "VIA Rail network developments", but I'm not sure what benefit could be possibly achieved, which would justify destroying the only market the Canadian can serve remotely adequately, given the punctuality, travel times and not at last: frequencies available for the transcontinental service.

Yes, but do we really need a single train that runs all the way from Lake Ontario to the Pacific ocean? As it is, to make the journey from coast to coast, you would need to make two other transfers. What is the harm in increasing the number of transfers if it provides better service to the communities along the way?

The Canadian is a lovely train (I took it once and it was wonderful), but I am not convinced it service the western communities it travels through very well. I don't understand why you argue in one post that "nobody wants to arrive after 2am or depart before 5am" yet that is what the Canadian does for many communities and in this case, there is no other option for a daytime train.

...and as frequently as I hear this claim, I don't believe that this is an accurate reflection of the reality, because back in 2014, the Canadian recovered 45.9% of its operating costs and required a subsidy of $55.5 million, compared to 55.9% and $172.2 million on the Corridor,...

Source: VIA Rail Annual Report 2014
...while by 2017, the Canadian already recovered 64.8% of its operating costs and required a subsidy of only $41.2 million, compared to 65.9% and $141.7 million on the Corridor:

Source: VIA Rail Annual Report 2017

Furthermore, its cost-recovery rate actually exceeded (!) that of the Corridor during the third Quarter 2018 (i.e. the peak tourist season) by 87.6% vs. 75.6% and by even 92.0% vs. 75.0% in the third Quarter of the previous year:

Source: VIA Rail Quarterly Report Q3-2018 (p.5)

But it didn't turn a profit. Now, I don't have a problem subsidizing transportation services if it is for the better good, but the vast majority of those riding on the Canadian are foreign tourists. If a study can show that those tourists then turn around and spend enough money in Canada to make it worth the Canadian government subsidizing their vacation, then fine, but I somehow doubt that is true.

Nevertheless, one may point out that the per-passenger-mile subsidy of $0.32 in 2017 is still almost twice the corresponding figure on the Corridor ($0.18), but it's only just over one-third of the Ocean ($0.90) and less than one-eighth of the mandatory services ($2.69)...

It also has the second highest subsidy per passenger (behind only the Winnipeg-Churchill train) and the largest total subsidy ($41 million) of any route, for a train that I believe only ran three times a week at the time (it has since been cut to twice a week).

Using back of the napkin math and the Sudbury-White River train as an example. Correct me if I am wrong, but it is about 1/10 the length of the Canadian. If VIA offered similar daytime services, the same 3 days a week, strung from Toronto to Vancouver, I would guess it would cost $36,160,000 to operate, generate $2,340,000 in revenue and thus require $33,820,000 in subsidies (less than the Canadian) and transport 63,520 people. That is fewer passengers than the Canadian, but most of those loses would be in foreign tourists (though many might still use it) and instead it would provide much better service to Canadians who live along the route. I would much rather see that type of service. Now I admit my math is oversimplified, as some stretches would not do as well, but others would do much better. Combine that with service to other major cities that no longer do (like Calgary and Regina) and we could have something really interesting.

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Re: Corridor trains
CN and CP had a pool agreement between 1933 and October 1965, which is basically a codeshare agreement (multiple decades before the air industry "pioneered" their "air alliances") in which the railroads pooled their equipment in jointly operated trains and accepted rail tickets from either railroad. .........

Here's a portion of an article I had prepared for another forum:

The end of the ‘Pool Era’ and CP’s ‘Last Hurrah’ between Montreal/Ottawa and Toronto......and the beginnings of the Corridor routes we have today:

From the mid 1930s until it ended on October 31, 1965.....Passenger train schedules and equipment had been ‘Pooled’ between Toronto & Montreal, Toronto & Ottawa and Montreal & Quebec City and jointly operated by CN and CP. Tickets were honoured by either railway on the ‘Pool Trains” (Note Montreal – Ottawa trains had not been part of the pool agreement and utilized separate CN and CP routes)

By the mid '60s......CN wanted to pursue passenger trains to their full potential. CP didn't and would gradually exit the intercity market.

The very pro-passenger CN launched their new Rapido: 4 hr/59 min for the 335 miles between Toronto and Montreal.







CP took on this competition with their new Stainless Steel and Domes....The Royal York w/b to Toronto and Chateau Champlain e/b to Montreal (named after the CP Hotels in the respective cities)

Consists of the new CP trains included Budd Stainless Steel Coaches, Dining Car, Skyline Dome Coffee Shop and Park Car Dome Observation. (and still used today on VIA’s Canadian) There were also Parlour Cars converted from the Stainless Steel Coaches. The coach seats were removed and replaced with 40 Parlour Chairs; Large loose chairs facing into the centre of the car rather than the fixed swivel type.







The trains ran on CP’s Belleville and Winchester Subdivisions via Trenton and Smiths Falls…..taking 5 hrs/45 min for the 340 miles. But the faster CN Rapidos and lower fares were just too much……so after less than 3 months the new Royal York and Chateau Champlain were discontinued ……ending all CP passenger service between Toronto and Montreal.

At that time CN did not operate any passenger trains between Toronto and Ottawa. This was exclusive CP territory and with the end of the pool agreement....service was drastically reduced to a single RDC ‘Dayliner’ run each way between Toronto and Ottawa (via Peterborough) and an RDC from Ottawa connecting with the Royal York/Chateau Champlain at Smiths Falls. Particularly missed were the overnight trains between Toronto and Ottawa.

Now with the Royal York and Chateau Champlain gone…..CP also ended all passenger services between Ottawa and Toronto and since CN did not operate this route…..there were no longer any Ottawa-Toronto trains.

So being a Crown Corporation…..CN was now tasked with somehow hammering together an Ottawa to Toronto route. They had an old freight only former Canadian Northern Railway route between Ottawa, Richmond and Smiths Falls (VIA’s route today)….then onto Napanee and the new CN daytime trains started using the Ottawa – Smiths Falls segment of this route in mid January 1966. At Smith Falls....CP granted running-rights to CN so they could continue on down to Brockville to connect with their Montreal - Toronto corridor trains…..and essentially the same route VIA’s Ottawa – Toronto trains still use today.







CN’s new Ottawa – Toronto overnight train started in mid February 1966 but didn’t run via Brockville. Upon reaching Smiths Falls ….it stayed on the old Canadian Northern freight only route to a junction with the Kingston Sub at Napanee... then continued onto Toronto.

CN and CP also went their separate ways between Montreal and Quebec City. CP basically maintained their previous schedules on the route via Trois-Riviere....but CN now had their recently launched (1964) Champlain (which used the ex Reading Railroad Crusader equipment) on a fast 3hr/10min schedule via Drummondville. Until 1964, CN had not operated any through trains between Montreal and Quebec City on the route via Drumondville and Sainte-Foy which is the VIA route today. Until then, passengers changed at Levis and took the ferry across to Quebec City.







So beginning in 1965 and up until the launch of VIA....you had:

CN: Toronto - Montreal
CN: Toronto - Ottawa
CN: Montreal - Ottawa
CP: Montreal - Ottawa via Rigaud
CP: Montreal - Ottawa via Montebello
CN: Montreal - Quebec City via Drummondville
CP: Montreal - Quebec City via Trois-Riviere

On corridor routes west of Toronto that had never been Pooled....you had:

CN: Toronto-London-Windsor
CN: Toronto-London-Sarnia (Chicago)
(above train via either Brantford or Guelph)
CP: Toronto-London-Windsor (Detroit) Discontinued in the early '70s
CN: Toronto-Hamilton-Niagara Falls
CP: Toronto-Hamilton-Buffalo (via TH&B and running on CN through Oakville)