Rail services in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

What the hell is it with Fallowfield? Does that literally mean Buttfuck nowhere field? Ditto for Aldershot.

And ditto for Dorval? All three are primarily there serve the suburbs to save people from having to go downtown only to catch a train back the way they came from. Admittedly Dorval does also serve the airport, but I expect a small percentage of people using the station are connecting to the airport.

In the case of Fallowfield it would have been better named Barrhaven (the name of the community it is attached to, rather than naming it after the road it is on).

Convenience and Speed have to be the foundation for any VIA HFR/HSR strategy.

Agreed, and there is a balance between the two. Adding a suburban station increases convenience, but decreases speed slightly. The question becomes, how many passengers do you gain by adding the station vs how many passengers you loose by slowing the train down by adding the station.

[acottawa]

Grade separations in urban areas are expensive, I am not sure why building track in an existing ROW is particularly more expensive. There are roads to being in equipment and material, nearby cement facilities, etc. Converting a snow mobile track to a railway seems like a more expensive proposition. I wonder if Via spent more in urban areas when they added new track a few years ago.

The urban sections of the Belleville sub (through Oshawa, etc) are already grade separated so they may just need to add track (not sure how many tracks the grade separations were designed for, but I suspect adding at least a second track would fit). This is unlike the Havelock where very little was grade separated. There are a few level crossings in Belleville itself, though fewer than in Peterborough.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think you're right. Another thing I think they missed the boat on was infrastructure upgrades on lines they already own from Smith Falls to Coteau (which would be useful whether HFR goes anywhere or not). There was tonnes of infrastructure money floating around the last 5 years and Via got very little (if anything).

This. I remember reading way back that the estimate for Ottawa-Montreal portion of HFR was $90 million. Let's say that was just for the portion till Coteau. Why the heck wasn't this already done?

I'll still mostly blame the politicians. But opportunities like this need to be identified and staffed to take advantage of opportunity funding when it comes.

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Whatever (if anything) ever comes out of the VIA corridor debate, I really think it is critical to maintain core to core service (i.e., Central Station, Montreal; Union Station, Toronto). Anything less would be a really shortsighted mistake. One of the primary selling points has been offering direct service. It is really perhaps the most important reason why I would take VIA from Toronto to Montreal, rather than flying. If I wanted a very annoying bus+subway/commuter train add-on at both ends, I would just fly, for about the same price.

What the hell is it with Fallowfield? Does that literally mean Buttfuck nowhere field? Ditto for Aldershot.

Convenience and Speed have to be the foundation for any VIA HFR/HSR strategy.

Centre to centre service is only under threat on the Quebec City-Montreal sector. It's fine everywhere else.

And I wouldn't be so quick to discount suburban stations. They draw riders. And in any scenario where service is improved, they might actually see higher growth rates (percentage) than the core stations. Consider how much more convenient Guildwood and Oshawa are, for millions of people, compared to either airport serving Toronto. Or how much closer Fallowfield is to tech companies in Kanata than Tremblay station.

There's two suburban stations in particular that would have substantial impact. Dorval could become a major hub for Montreal if the REM is extended to it. Making airport access for Eastern Ontario vastly better along with connections to Exo service. Similarly, if the Pearson Transit hub happens and HFR is extended through Union to terminate at Pearson, that would be huge too. I would argue even trains from Kingston should terminate at Pearson.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Grade separations in urban areas are expensive, I am not sure why building track in an existing ROW is particularly more expensive. There are roads to being in equipment and material, nearby cement facilities, etc. Converting a snow mobile track to a railway seems like a more expensive proposition. I wonder if Via spent more in urban areas when they added new track a few years ago.

The urban sections of the Belleville sub (through Oshawa, etc) are already grade separated so they may just need to add track (not sure how many tracks the grade separations were designed for, but I suspect adding at least a second track would fit). This is unlike the Havelock where very little was grade separated. There are a few level crossings in Belleville itself, though fewer than in Peterborough.

All those grade separations are a disadvantage for the Bellville sub as most are only grade separated for single track. If the track is going going over the road, you need to either widen the bridge or build a second one. Even more expensive is if the train goes under the road as you need to lengthen the bridge over the tracks, either creating a temporary detour for the road with a temporary bridge, or divert the road to a new bridge and demolish the old one.

There are far fewer crossing along the Havelock sub and given the low traffic on them, most of them don't need to be grade separated for conventional rail. Even where grade separations are needed, the lack of (or reduced) rail traffic makes it easier since you don't have to worry as much about detours (and certainly not grade separated detours).

If we want to go to HSR, things become astronomically more expensive, regardless of the route, as all crossings need to be grade separated.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by roger1818

And ditto for Dorval? All three are primarily there serve the suburbs to save people from having to go downtown only to catch a train back the way they came from. Admittedly Dorval does also serve the airport, but I expect a small percentage of people using the station are connecting to the airport.

In the case of Fallowfield it would have been better named Barrhaven (the name of the community it is attached to, rather than naming it after the road it is on).



Agreed, and there is a balance between the two. Adding a suburban station increases convenience, but decreases speed slightly. The question becomes, how many passengers do you gain by adding the station vs how many passengers you loose by slowing the train down by adding the station.

All the times I have taken a train to Montreal (often via "Ottawa"), never once did we stop in Ottawa. It was always Fallowfield.

Are there trains that stop in Dorval and not Montreal?

And sorry for not being clear, but I am absolutely not advocating for Via to drop the suburban stops of Dorval (which I have used many, many times as I had family in the West Island), Fallowfield, etc. What I am advocating for is to make sure that these suburban stops (or other ones outside of downtown) do not become the main terminals for their metro regions, and that the downtown stations always fill that role.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

All the times I have taken a train to Montreal (often via "Ottawa"), never once did we stop in Ottawa. It was always Fallowfield.

If true, that's weird. And must be particular to Ottawa. Not an issue elsewhere. There's no trains that I know of that terminate in Dorval or Guildwood or Oshawa.

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

And sorry for not being clear, but I am absolutely not advocating for Via to drop the suburban stops of Dorval (which I have used many, many times as I had family in the West Island), Fallowfield, etc. What I am advocating for is to make sure that these suburban stops (or other ones outside of downtown) do not become the main terminals for their metro regions, and that the downtown stations always fill that role.

Depends where. Pearson airport is a far more logical terminus than Union Station in Toronto. And ideally, HFR would be extended westward through Kitchener to London or Windsor.

[MolsonExport]

I reckon that very few (proportionately) people take via as part of a travel leg that involves other travel legs with flight.

We are not France yet. But if we become like France (which would be super great), Gare du Nord is still the main hub, by a long shot, for Paris, notwithstanding stations at Charles de Gaulle Airport.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I reckon that very few (proportionately) people take via as part of a travel leg that involves other travel legs with flight.

We are not France yet. But if we become like France (which would be super great), Gare du Nord is still the main hub, by a long shot, for Paris, notwithstanding stations at Charles de Gaulle Airport.

Nobody is suggesting that Pearson would be the main hub. If Pearson became the terminus for HFR and Lakeshore East services, Union would still be the largest VIA hub, in no small part because Union is GO largest hub and the most important subway stop in the city. Extending to Pearson though would improve convenience and eliminate transfers.

Montreal/Dorval is the same story. Though I'd argue that Dorval would see substantially more traffic from Ottawa and Kingston with HFR.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

All the times I have taken a train to Montreal (often via "Ottawa"), never once did we stop in Ottawa. It was always Fallowfield.

I think that your formulation is unintentionally misleading. Many trains heading to Ottawa from Montreal/Quebec do continue on to Fallowfield and terminate there. But all trains that go to Fallowfield also stop at Ottawa Central. There are no trains which go to Fallowfield only.

I don't see a problem with trains through-running. When heading to "Toronto" or "Montreal", many passengers are actually wanting to go to Pearson or the South Shore. Having trains continue past downtown makes train travel more convenient for more people, especially when those suburban stations are well-connected with peripheral transit. It allows people to get closer to their destinations without either backtracking or having to use slower transit options for as long. I've often gotten off at Dorval to use the airport, saving me a good hour of backtracking. I've often taken BRT to Fallowfield when heading to Toronto, saving me 30+ minutes of backtracking through downtown. I've taken the train to Saint-Lambert to get closer to friends on the South Shore, and Oshawa to transfer to GO for a more direct trip to the east end of the GTA.

Not all the suburban stations are done well, especially those which don't have connections to higher-order transit. But ultimately, having them offers more options and faster door-to-door trips.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think you're right. Another thing I think they missed the boat on was infrastructure upgrades on lines they already own from Smith Falls to Coteau (which would be useful whether HFR goes anywhere or not). There was tonnes of infrastructure money floating around the last 5 years and Via got very little (if anything).

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This. I remember reading way back that the estimate for Ottawa-Montreal portion of HFR was $90 million. Let's say that was just for the portion till Coteau. Why the heck wasn't this already done?

I'll still mostly blame the politicians. But opportunities like this need to be identified and staffed to take advantage of opportunity funding when it comes.

The problem is without the rest of HFR, those upgrades would only benefit travel to and from Ottawa. As a result it becomes a dammed if you do dammed if you don't type situation as the media would eat potentially see it as self serving.

The reality is the track that VIA owns isn't the big problem. Sure upgrades can be done, but the big issue is the sections where they don't own the track.

And I wouldn't be so quick to discount suburban stations. They draw riders. And in any scenario where service is improved, they might actually see higher growth rates (percentage) than the core stations. Consider how much more convenient Guildwood and Oshawa are, for millions of people, compared to either airport serving Toronto. Or how much closer Fallowfield is to tech companies in Kanata than Tremblay station.

Not to discredit Fallowfield station (it is good for what it is), but it isn't as good for "tech companies in Kanata" as you imply. The difference in travel time to Fallowfield vs. Tremblay from the vast majority of tech companies is negligible (though bad traffic can tilt the scales towards Fallowfield slightly). The bigger factor is which station is closer to your destination. If you are travelling west (towards Toronto), Fallowfield makes more sense, but if you are travelling east (towards Montreal), Tremblay usually makes more sense.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Not to discredit Fallowfield station (it is good for what it is), but it isn't as good for "tech companies in Kanata" as you imply. The difference in travel time to Fallowfield vs. Trembley from the vast majority of tech companies is negligible (though bad traffic can tilt the scales towards Fallowfield slightly). The bigger factor is which station is closer to your destination. If you are travelling west (towards Toronto), Fallowfield makes more sense, but if you are travelling east (towards Montreal), Tremble usually makes more sense.

In my experience the people getting on/off at Fallowfield are either suburban commuters or locals getting from Barrhaven to Ottawa. None of them really strike me as Kanata techies or business travellers heading to Toronto/Montreal.

[YOWflier]

Anyone who routinely commutes by car to/from points near Ottawa central station to/from points in the south/west suburbs knows this is a painful commute during rush hour. Fallowfield station is quite useful.

[Truenorth00]

It all depends which direction you come from. If you're coming from Toronto, and are bound for Kanata, it makes no sense to go Tremblay, even if the distance is the same. The 15 mins spent on the train would get you to your destination in Kanata. Indeed, for some of that Markham-Kanata tech traffic, the suburban stations are actually the attraction. It'd be a 2.5 hr ride from the Eastern GTA to Fallowfield. That's massively competitive with air travel.

Also, people need to stop conceptualizing this in terms of current ridership. For Toronto-Ottawa and Ottawa-Montreal there would be a substantial amount of business travelers. In that sense, the stations almost become like mini-airports running hourly flights. You'll see plenty of travelers rent cars at these stations the way you would at an airport, or they way you do at HSR stations in many places. It won't just be students and seniors taking the train.

[Aylmer]

And transit to Fallowfield is quite useful too. It has an integrated BRT (and future LRT) station. When the Transitway ran all the way downtown (and when the LRT is extended to Barrhaven), it was even marginally faster to transfer at Fallowfield than to stay on the train and transfer at Central.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It all depends which direction you come from. If you're coming from Toronto, and are bound for Kanata, it makes no sense to go Tremblay, even if the distance is the same. The 15 mins spent on the train would get you to your destination in Kanata.

That is exactly what I said.

Originally Posted by roger1818

The bigger factor is which station is closer to your destination. If you are travelling west (towards Toronto), Fallowfield makes more sense, but if you are travelling east (towards Montreal), Tremblay usually makes more sense.

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Anyone who routinely commutes by car to/from points near Ottawa central station to/from points in the south/west suburbs knows this is a painful commute during rush hour. Fallowfield station is quite useful.

I also said that:

Originally Posted by roger1818

(though bad traffic can tilt the scales towards Fallowfield slightly)

When taking the train to Montreal, most of the time I found it faster to go to Tremblay, though I do remember once being in a cab on the Queensway in a snow storm, trying to catch the train, and making a split decision at the 416 exchange to go to Fallowfield (I kept Google mapping both options). I was certainly glad that was an option as I am not sure I would have made it to Tremblay on time.

The other factor is not all trains from Montreal continue to Fallowfield, so if you are driving yourself, you are are limiting your options for your return trip if you park at Fallowfield.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

And transit to Fallowfield is quite useful too. It has an integrated BRT (and future LRT) station. When the Transitway ran all the way downtown (and when the LRT is extended to Barrhaven), it was even marginally faster to transfer at Fallowfield than to stay on the train and transfer at Central.

This is a good point. If the services were equal at both stations and LRT extended to Fallowfield, a substantial minority of riders would find Fallowfield more convenient. Far more than today. It's easy to see something like a 60/40 split in ridership developing (in favour of Tremblay).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The problem is without the rest of HFR, those upgrades would only benefit travel to and from Ottawa. As a result it becomes a dammed if you do dammed if you don't type situation as the media would eat potentially see it as self serving.

The reality is the track that VIA owns isn't the big problem. Sure upgrades can be done, but the big issue is the sections where they don't own the track.

That’s a good point, but there was so much infrastructure money floating around I don’t think any media outlet would care about a few hundred million for Via.

It takes almost an hour to get the 66 km from Smith Falls to Tremblay, in a train with a top speed of about 150kph. There”s a stop that slows things down a little, but it is often one of the slower parts of the route. That’s when it is on schedule. Often WB trains have to wait for the approach of EB trains.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is a good point. If the services were equal at both stations and LRT extended to Fallowfield, a substantial minority of riders would find Fallowfield more convenient. Far more than today. It's easy to see something like a 60/40 split in ridership developing (in favour of Tremblay).

I lived on Parkdale and always went to Fallowfield.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The problem is without the rest of HFR, those upgrades would only benefit travel to and from Ottawa. As a result it becomes a dammed if you do dammed if you don't type situation as the media would eat potentially see it as self serving.

I fail to see the problem. They could have spent $90M and cut travel time between Ottawa and Montreal by 20-25% and this would be a problem? They spent > $300M on the Kingston Sub to stand still. They would have had tangible gains for this project. And it would have been a nice proof of concept for HFR.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I fail to see the problem. They could have spent $90M and cut travel time between Ottawa and Montreal by 20-25% and this would be a problem? They spent > $300M on the Kingston Sub to stand still. They would have had tangible gains for this project. And it would have been a nice proof of concept for HFR.

I don't think they would be able to "cut travel time between Ottawa and Montreal by 20-25%" only with upgrades to the track they currently own. For an approximately 2 hour trip, that would mean shaving it by 24 to 30 minutes. Considering with HFR along the entire route, VIA hopes to save 30 minutes, on the trip, what upgrades are you proposing they do for the 124 km (of the 187 km route) that VIA owns to get 80-100% of HFR's gains?

The biggest issues with the Ottawa-Montreal route are (in no particular order):

1. waiting for freight trains when crossing CP's Winchester Sub
2. conflicts with freight trains when using CN's track
3. the slow approach into Montreal.
4. waiting for oncoming VIA trains

The first three have to wait for HFR. The fourth could be fixed with longer sidings, but the position of those sidings will change with HFR.

The only other thing VIA could do is improve the track for faster speeds, but until TC approves a standard for Class 6 track (something VIA is working on for HFR), the best VIA can do is Class 5, and so that upgrade would need to be redone with HFR.

What am I missing?