VIA Rail network developments

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

[B]High-frequency rail sounds good – but does Via have to run it?
...

There’s no doubt that some of this poor performance is because Via does not own the tracks it runs on, but rather must share the tracks with the freight trains operated by the tracks’ owners. This not only limits the frequency of its service, but the timeliness of it: just 71 per cent of Via’s trains arrived on time in 2019, versus the 90 per cent-plus typical of a well-run railway.

There might well be a case, then, for building more tracks specifically for passenger trains. The question is whether it should be Via – and only Via – that operates them. It would be hard to persuade the public to abandon their cars for the train, even at the subsidized prices Via charges, so long as the service remains so … infrequent. But it’s not a given they will do so even with those expensive new tracks.

What’s needed to stimulate more traffic is not more subsidy, but better service, and the best way to improve rail service, as countries across Europe are discovering, is competition. Railways may be a natural monopoly, but the trains that run on them are not. Even if Via were a paragon of efficient, reliable service, it would make no sense to preserve it from competition. But in view of its actual performance, opening the tracks would seem the missing piece of the high-frequency puzzle.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ave-to-run-it/

Sooooo compete on new tracks that the government builds? Or on the existing tracks? Are there people vying to build intercity trains around here? Via is already competing with Air Canada/Westjet/Porter/your car/Megabus, what other competition is being asked for here?

[TransitZilla]

^ Did Andrew Coyne miss the memo about the British rail network? It has not turned out well at all. "The system now has almost 400 full-time staff called
'train delay attributers' whose job it is to argue with each other about assigning blame for a delay."

https://www.ft.com/content/05fef011-...d-fbdfffe4368d

[acottawa]

The U.K. took an extremely convoluted approach. A simple design-build-operate contract may work better. Via’s boarding and ticket verification procedures are incredibly inefficient and I couldn’t imagine a private sector operator taking that approach.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The U.K. took an extremely convoluted approach. A simple design-build-operate contract may work better. Via’s boarding and ticket verification procedures are incredibly inefficient and I couldn’t imagine a private sector operator taking that approach.

Yes but there is no magic bullet which makes it profitable. Subsidizing private sector competitors seems crazy. UK and most of Europe is much much denser which along with astronomical gas prices and the resulting lack of private vehicles makes them willing to pay far more than we would here which leads to full and frequent trains reducing costs further in a virtuous cycle.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Seems like the entire point of this announcement is to win them the seat that is opening up in Trois Rivieres.....

And hold Peterborough amongst others. The idea there will be a 2.5 hour Ottawa to Toronto train is laughably unlikely. I'd easily take 20-1 odds on that bet. Most likely is further study proves it uneconomical. If we do get something built it is likely to be value engineered out of usefulness.

[eltodesukane]

My grandfather says he heard all of this already 50 or 60 years ago when they said the TurboTrain would revolutionize train travel ... etc... etc...
I said "What are you talkin about?". He said "Look it up!".

http://spacing.ca/toronto/2015/12/09/53711/
"With a top speed of 193 km/h, it promised to slash rail travel times between Toronto and Montreal and deliver train travel into the jet age."

Meanwhile in Japan, in Europe, in China...

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by eltodesukane

My grandfather says he heard all of this already 50 or 60 years ago when they said the TurboTrain would revolutionize train travel ... etc... etc...
I said "What are you talkin about?". He said "Look it up!".

http://spacing.ca/toronto/2015/12/09/53711/
"With a top speed of 193 km/h, it promised to slash rail travel times between Toronto and Montreal and deliver train travel into the jet age."

Meanwhile in Japan, in Europe, in China...

TBH, I don’t see anything in common with Turbo train and HFR, other than that they were/are trains in Canada.

Turbo used experimental technology to run high speed, non stop trains between Toronto and Montreal twice a day on tracks shared with freight trains. The fuel costs of the gas turbine trains were high and the maintenance costs were even higher.

HFR uses existing, proven technology to run 15 trains a day, stopping at cities along the way on tracks dedicated to passenger trains. The trains may get up to 200 km/h for short sections, but the primary focus will be on frequency and reliability.

[originalmuffins]

When I first heard of high speed rail bullet trains / hyperloop between Quebec and Windsor, I was excited. We heard nothing for years. I really hope they kickstart this and get it going because with a density like Europe, this area is best suited by a bullet train.

200km/hr would significantly reduce times to go between these cities and increase travel in a post-covid world.

Here's some articles and the official statement from VIA on their website:

https://corpo.viarail.ca/index.php/e...frequency-rail

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hig...ject-1.6090930

Here's the proposed network, less stops for better speeds between cities. Similar to what Japan does, they may have multiple lines which are Fast-Faster-Fastest (aka for this it would be one that does all those stops and one that only does the major city stops)

[Richard Eade]

I wonder if it would be possible to turn the HFR VIA train at Union Station (Toronto), and interline it with the UP Express, so that there can be a frequent train link from Ottawa to YYZ. That might pull some people onto the train – although, perhaps, at the expense of YOW. The idea of the new HFR VIA should be to make connections; and make them as direct as possible. Yes, a person can take the HFR VIA from Ottawa to Union Station and then transfer to the UP Express, but removing that transfer would improve the connection.

It does not look as if it would be possible for the HFR VIA train to easily get to YUL – although, I think that that should also be a goal since it would connect both Quebec and Ottawa to a/another major international 'hub' airport.

Since it is the take-off and landing that use the most fuel for a short flight, removing the jump from YOW to either YYZ or YUL by air, and replacing it with a direct electrified train trip, makes environmental sense.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by originalmuffins

When I first heard of high speed rail bullet trains / hyperloop between Quebec and Windsor, I was excited. We heard nothing for years. I really hope they kickstart this and get it going because with a density like Europe, this area is best suited by a bullet train.

IMHO, hyperloop falls under the category of a technology of the future that always will be.

As for high speed rail, the thing is, from what I have seen, the countries that have successful HSR, built it off of a frequent and reliable intercity passenger rail system, which they continue to maintain. Canada doesn't have a frequent and reliable passenger rail system that we can build off of, so skipping that step seems foolhardy. HFR will be that first step.

HSR gets all the glory but it is intercity rail that is the backbone of the system.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes but there is no magic bullet which makes it profitable. Subsidizing private sector competitors seems crazy. UK and most of Europe is much much denser which along with astronomical gas prices and the resulting lack of private vehicles makes them willing to pay far more than we would here which leads to full and frequent trains reducing costs further in a virtuous cycle.



And hold Peterborough amongst others. The idea there will be a 2.5 hour Ottawa to Toronto train is laughably unlikely. I'd easily take 20-1 odds on that bet. Most likely is further study proves it uneconomical. If we do get something built it is likely to be value engineered out of usefulness.

Of course it would never be profitable. But it might be cheaper and more efficient.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I wonder if it would be possible to turn the HFR VIA train at Union Station (Toronto), and interline it with the UP Express, so that there can be a frequent train link from Ottawa to YYZ. That might pull some people onto the train – although, perhaps, at the expense of YOW. The idea of the new HFR VIA should be to make connections; and make them as direct as possible. Yes, a person can take the HFR VIA from Ottawa to Union Station and then transfer to the UP Express, but removing that transfer would improve the connection.

It does not look as if it would be possible for the HFR VIA train to easily get to YUL – although, I think that that should also be a goal since it would connect both Quebec and Ottawa to a/another major international 'hub' airport.

Since it is the take-off and landing that use the most fuel for a short flight, removing the jump from YOW to either YYZ or YUL by air, and replacing it with a direct electrified train trip, makes environmental sense.

Hoping that HFR pushes the REM extension to VIA's Dorval station quicker. If they did extend HFR to Pearson as well, then three of four of the major airports on the route would be connected. Ottawa would once again be far behind other major Canadian cities, not only by not having VIA service to its airport (which isn't really feasible, and that's fine), but an absolutely embarrassing three train transit link.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Of course it would never be profitable. But it might be cheaper and more efficient.

This article about the HFR proposal from 2015 indicated that VIA was expecting the ridership boost from HFR to substantially reduce or potentially eliminate their need for operating subsidies.

https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2016/03...ontreal-ottawa

BTW, the above link also includes a video from the then-CEO of VIA... one of his slides forecast travel times as follows:

Tor-Ott: 2h30
Ott-Mtl: 1h20
Tor-Mtl: 3h45

• Video Link

(4:04 of video)

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Hoping that HFR pushes the REM extension to VIA's Dorval station quicker. If they did extend HFR to Pearson as well, then three of four of the major airports on the route would be connected. Ottawa would once again be far behind other major Canadian cities, not only by not having VIA service to its airport (which isn't really feasible, and that's fine), but an absolutely embarrassing three train transit link.

An REM extension to Dorval will be impacted by the track choice for HFR. If HFR uses the CP track, then VIA will have trains on both the CP and CN tracks and the station will have to be designed accordingly.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

This article about the HFR proposal from 2015 indicated that VIA was expecting the ridership boost from HFR to substantially reduce or potentially eliminate their need for operating subsidies.

https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2016/03...ontreal-ottawa

BTW, the above link also includes a video from the then-CEO of VIA... one of his slides forecast travel times as follows:

Tor-Ott: 2h30
Ott-Mtl: 1h20
Tor-Mtl: 3h45

• Video Link

(4:04 of video)

They seemed to have dropped that claim.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Hoping that HFR pushes the REM extension to VIA's Dorval station quicker. If they did extend HFR to Pearson as well, then three of four of the major airports on the route would be connected. Ottawa would once again be far behind other major Canadian cities, not only by not having VIA service to its airport (which isn't really feasible, and that's fine), but an absolutely embarrassing three train transit link.

I posted this idea on the HSR thread a few years back, a rail bypass that could maybe shave 15 minutes off the Toronto-Montreal route with a stop at YOW. Either the Airport Line 4 could be extended to Hurdman via the SE transitway, or Line 3 could split at Hurdman down to the AltaVista parkway corridor to merge with Line 4 for a direct to downtown link.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I wonder if it would be possible to turn the HFR VIA train at Union Station (Toronto), and interline it with the UP Express, so that there can be a frequent train link from Ottawa to YYZ.

The feds, Queen's Park and airport authority have been looking at this for the last few years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearso...Transit_Centre



The feds have talked about the CIB possibly funding its construction. And that's probably a pre-requisite to extending HFR westward. If it happens, UP Express would be replaced with just GO RER and VIA HFR serving the airport. VIA would probably run HFR as a through service at Union and terminate at Pearson.

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

That might pull some people onto the train – although, perhaps, at the expense of YOW. The idea of the new HFR VIA should be to make connections; and make them as direct as possible. Yes, a person can take the HFR VIA from Ottawa to Union Station and then transfer to the UP Express, but removing that transfer would improve the connection.

It does not look as if it would be possible for the HFR VIA train to easily get to YUL – although, I think that that should also be a goal since it would connect both Quebec and Ottawa to a/another major international 'hub' airport.

Since it is the take-off and landing that use the most fuel for a short flight, removing the jump from YOW to either YYZ or YUL by air, and replacing it with a direct electrified train trip, makes environmental sense.

YYZ isn't going to draw for YOW. With or without HFR. YUL on the other hand will be less than 1.5 hrs from Tremblay. With trains running every 30-60 mins. And connecting with a single stop on REM. So 2-2:15 hrs from downtown Ottawa to the check in counter at Dorval with HFR and REM. It becomes really possible to cross-shop flights out of YUL then. Especially for international flights where connections would be required anyway.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I posted this idea on the HSR thread a few years back, a rail bypass that could maybe shave 15 minutes off the Toronto-Montreal route with a stop at YOW. Either the Airport Line 4 could be extended to Hurdman via the SE transitway, or Line 3 could split at Hurdman down to the AltaVista parkway corridor to merge with Line 4 for a direct to downtown link.

It's an idea. But I don't get why the feds would be motivated to spend several hundred million or even a billion trying to service YOW. It's not a major hub like YUL or YYZ. And it's very much out of the way, unlike the other two.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

This article about the HFR proposal from 2015 indicated that VIA was expecting the ridership boost from HFR to substantially reduce or potentially eliminate their need for operating subsidies.

https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2016/03...ontreal-ottawa

BTW, the above link also includes a video from the then-CEO of VIA... one of his slides forecast travel times as follows:

Tor-Ott: 2h30
Ott-Mtl: 1h20
Tor-Mtl: 3h45

Those travel time estimates have been substantially changed in later years as their analysis went on.

See the ones here:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...for-extending/

Toronto-Ottawa: 3:15h
Ottawa-Montreal: 1:33h
Montreal-Toronto: 4:45h
Montreal-Quebec: 2:10h

[Truenorth00]

The Ottawa HFR announcement is here if anybody wants to watch it:

https://m.facebook.com/plugins/video...75424784455%2F

Trip time of 3 hrs from Ottawa to Toronto as per the Minister. And up to triple the number of trains.

[Truenorth00]

From La Presse: