VIA Rail

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think this is ultimately going to hinge on what the extra ridership from going faster means for the overall business case. With HSR, Alstom needs to be air travel competitive. That means an absolute maximum travel time of 3-3.5 hrs between Toronto and Montreal, via Peterborough and Ottawa. That also means fares aiming to undercut air travel, not so much aiming to replace driving.

The Alstom proposal is still very preliminary but, as it is sketched out, it doesn't really make much sense. The only city pairings that must be flight-competitive are Toronto-Ottawa and Toronto-Montreal. Everything else is either within driving distance or has trivial demand (maybe QC-Ottawa/Gatineau is on the edge). My guess is that the majority of people who fly to Montreal from Quebec City or Ottawa do so to connect on to another flight at YUL; most people for whom Montreal is the ultimate destination from those cities just drive.



So it's weird to see the Alstom proposal prioritize 300 km/h infrastructure between QC and Montreal, which offers relatively little in the way of time savings compared to a 200 km/h alignment with proper bypasses of Trois-Rivieres.

Some of it might be due to the fact that CDPQ infra is the money behind this proposal, and they'd probably invest that cap ex in Quebec rather than Ontario.

Also, 144 km/h service between Havelock and Toronto, which is an already straight alignment through flat farmland relatively far from existing development seems like a missed opportunity. It's a crude map with few details, but it seems like it'll use the old alignment through Peterborough which will force trains to stop there. I think more than 90% of all trips with Peterborough as the O/D will be for Toronto, so it would be more efficient if Peterborians could rely on a frequent train that shuttles back and forth to Union and doesn't result in time-sensitive business travelers from Ottawa or Montreal heading to Toronto being forced to make a stop there.

[Innsertnamehere]

The Havelock subdivision from about Pickering to Peterborough is actually quite windy.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The Havelock subdivision from about Pickering to Peterborough is actually quite windy.

It’s not straight as an arrow, but it has pretty gentle curves as it climbs the moraine. It’s nothing compared to the Havelock-Perth section.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The Alstom proposal is still very preliminary but, as it is sketched out, it doesn't really make much sense. The only city pairings that must be flight-competitive are Toronto-Ottawa and Toronto-Montreal. Everything else is either within driving distance or has trivial demand (maybe QC-Ottawa/Gatineau is on the edge). My guess is that the majority of people who fly to Montreal from Quebec City or Ottawa do so to connect on to another flight at YUL; most people for whom Montreal is the ultimate destination from those cities just drive.



So it's weird to see the Alstom proposal prioritize 300 km/h infrastructure between QC and Montreal, which offers relatively little in the way of time savings compared to a 200 km/h alignment with proper bypasses of Trois-Rivieres.

Some of it might be due to the fact that CDPQ infra is the money behind this proposal, and they'd probably invest that cap ex in Quebec rather than Ontario.

Also, 144 km/h service between Havelock and Toronto, which is an already straight alignment through flat farmland relatively far from existing development seems like a missed opportunity. It's a crude map with few details, but it seems like it'll use the old alignment through Peterborough which will force trains to stop there. I think more than 90% of all trips with Peterborough as the O/D will be for Toronto, so it would be more efficient if Peterborians could rely on a frequent train that shuttles back and forth to Union and doesn't result in time-sensitive business travelers from Ottawa or Montreal heading to Toronto being forced to make a stop there.

Upgrading Toronto-Havelock may benefit Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal but the marginal return may not be there, if the proposed upgrades already yield a travel time competitive with air (say 3.5 hrs Toronto-Montreal). Looks to me like what they are doing is basically building for 300 kph where fully new segments are needed. And elsewhere they're doing just enough upgrades to make the business case work (Toronto-Havelock) or induce demand (Ottawa-Montreal).

Also, different markets will have different goals.
Ottawa-Montreal and VdQ-Montreal aren't about competing with air travel (which as you note isn't likely to have substantial demand), it's probably about inducing demand and capturing drivers. Make the trip time from Ottawa to Montreal about 1 hr and it becomes possible to take flights from YUL and have exurban commutes. HSR would similarly turn Trois Rivières into a commutable exurb of both Montreal and VdQ while basically eliminating all flights between Montreal, Quebec City and Ottawa. I think integration at YUL offers real potential to basically make YUL even more popular for YOW and YQB originating passengers.

[Dwils01]

Not sure where to put this but here is inside Union Station in Toronto.

pic by me.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Dwils01

Not sure where to put this but here is inside Union Station in Toronto.

pic by me.

This part of Union Station ( Via is probably responsible for maintenance on this section) is in a sad state of repair. There needs to be some commercial activity in the Great Hall and Via's ticket kiosks are eye sores.

[ivegotaname]

When there is a new Atlantic country made up of former Provinces and US States we will not wait for via to have passenger routes for my area at snail pace.

A new rail line with hyper speed train would be good from my city SJ N B to anywhere

[Nouvellecosse]

Anyone hear any updates on VIA HFR/HSR progress? Usually Roger kept the thread updated but he hasn't been around much lately.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Anyone hear any updates on VIA HFR/HSR progress? Usually Roger kept the thread updated but he hasn't been around much lately.

The new CEO keeps running around doing PR. There won't be much of significance till the bid selection.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The new CEO keeps running around doing PR. There won't be much of significance till the bid selection.

I'm too impatient, I know...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm too impatient, I know...

I'm impatient on this too.

I actually do believe, one of the ways to really reduce some of the population pressures on the GTA, is to improve transport along the Corridor, facilitating growth in places like Peterborough and Kitchener and London. Even places like Perth, Smiths Falls and Casselman could grow into real ex-urban commuter towns for Ottawa.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm impatient on this too.

I actually do believe, one of the ways to really reduce some of the population pressures on the GTA, is to improve transport along the Corridor, facilitating growth in places like Peterborough and Kitchener and London. Even places like Perth, Smiths Falls and Casselman could grow into real ex-urban commuter towns for Ottawa.

That would be great for immediate goals

Long term?
HSR from Ville de Quebec to Windsor and a tie in with a US HSR at Detroit
HSR from Toronto south
HSR from Montreal south
HSR from Vancouver south to Portland
HSR Edmonton to Calgary corridor
HSR Halifax to Ville de Quebec

Very long term
HSR Minneapolis to Winnipeg
HSR Loop - Winnipeg-Regina-Calgary-Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg and Saskatoon-Regina
HSR Calgary south to US to tie into their network

HFR from secondary cities to link in with the HSR

Dreaming I know but think of how much air travel would be reduced by using electrified HSR to reduce the carbon output.

[Rico Rommheim]

I haven't followed this file for a while so pardon me if this sounds pedantic, but has VIA figured out the Montréal issue yet? Like, it seems to me that the whole project is moot If they can't make the trains go through the Mont-royal tunnel...

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

I haven't followed this file for a while so pardon me if this sounds pedantic, but has VIA figured out the Montréal issue yet? Like, it seems to me that the whole project is moot If they can't make the trains go through the Mont-royal tunnel...

Why is this essential? A western route is possible as they use now (granted needs a lot of work and is crowded). They could also terminate north of the tunnel though that seems unlikely to fly even though it's probably more central and they could link to the RER.

Anyway it's one of many on a long list making the whole project "moot".

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

That would be great for immediate goals

Long term?
HSR from Ville de Quebec to Windsor and a tie in with a US HSR at Detroit
HSR from Toronto south
HSR from Montreal south
HSR from Vancouver south to Portland
HSR Edmonton to Calgary corridor
HSR Halifax to Ville de Quebec

Very long term
HSR Minneapolis to Winnipeg
HSR Loop - Winnipeg-Regina-Calgary-Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg and Saskatoon-Regina
HSR Calgary south to US to tie into their network

HFR from secondary cities to link in with the HSR

Dreaming I know but think of how much air travel would be reduced by using electrified HSR to reduce the carbon output.

I wouldn't dare dream about the long term when we haven't even built the base yet, and we're possibly facing a government that wants to cut.

It's unfortunate that both the provincial and federal governments don't understand the value of intercity transport in the Corridor and what it could do for both the economy and quality of life (like housing). Ontario is marginally starting to understand this a bit with GO RER. But Ford still doesn't speak up about HFR. Quebec isn't doing anything significant with regional rail like RER. And their advocacy for HFR seems more focused on getting the federal government to pay for a rail connection between Montreal and Québec City than understanding the value of intercity rail more broadly.

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

I haven't followed this file for a while so pardon me if this sounds pedantic, but has VIA figured out the Montréal issue yet? Like, it seems to me that the whole project is moot If they can't make the trains go through the Mont-royal tunnel...

Not sure why losing the tunnel makes this moot. It simply splits service between TOM to the West and MQ to the east. That's a bit inconvenient. But not a deal-breaker by any means.

[Rico Rommheim]

Too bad. They should have widened that tunnel.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

That would be great for immediate goals

Long term?
HSR from Ville de Quebec to Windsor and a tie in with a US HSR at Detroit
HSR from Toronto south
HSR from Montreal south
HSR from Vancouver south to Portland
HSR Edmonton to Calgary corridor
HSR Halifax to Ville de Quebec

Very long term
HSR Minneapolis to Winnipeg
HSR Loop - Winnipeg-Regina-Calgary-Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg and Saskatoon-Regina
HSR Calgary south to US to tie into their network

HFR from secondary cities to link in with the HSR

Dreaming I know but think of how much air travel would be reduced by using electrified HSR to reduce the carbon output.

How much air travel would it reduce? HSR makes sense for trips in the 200-900 km range. Shorter than that most people will drive or use commuter rail or drive. Longer than that it still makes way more sense to fly.

[Nouvellecosse]

Some of those are decent distances for HSR, especially if one considers that people wouldn't necessarily to riding from end to end. Like going from QC to Windsor wouldn't make sense for many people as a 1000+ km trip, but it would serve lots of intermediary trip segments. Hfx to QC would be a stretch given the cost and low population but investment in enhanced conventional service could be attractive. As it stands, The Ocean only runs 3x per week to Montreal and it takes about twice the time it would to drive. Even with sleeper service you have to do better than that for anyone not a tourist. The only person I know who takes it the whole distance for transportation has a fear of flying. But you don't really need HSR just to compete with driving times.

Conventional trains on high quality tracks can have a cruising speed of up to 177km/h. That means that if the route isn't overly circuitous (like the current one), stops are quick, and there isn't too much interference from other rail traffic, then the average speed can easily rival a highway. So if the frequency and cost is reasonable, the extra comfort and safety would be quite appealing.

[casper]

Originally Posted by acottawa

How much air travel would it reduce? HSR makes sense for trips in the 200-900 km range. Shorter than that most people will drive or use commuter rail or drive. Longer than that it still makes way more sense to fly.

The train from Vancouver to Seattle (and on to Portland) is just over 200 km. It is not unusual to see that sell out especially in cruise season. I get them impression that as a good number of people for live in the US fly into Seattle and then take transit to downtown Seattle to connect onto the train to/from Vancouver. In addition to that there is all the local traffic between Vancouver and Seattle. It is also a special case in driving can be unpredictable as the length of time to pass through the board is unpredictable.

I use to frequently travel to Cologne. Would fly into Frankfurt from Canada head down to the station under the airport and on to the train. Again another aprx 200 km trip.

I could see Pearson working the same way as Frankfurt. Having multiple trains to secondary cities in southern Ontario within say 500 km to provide local connection to longer distance flights. The one problem, is Pearson is a spur line and an afterthought to all of this.

Downtown and airports are "unique" to some extent as having high concentrations of people that if they want to do those 200-500 km trips by road need to rent a car or if they are coming in from an outlying area are going be charged some fairly higher parking fees.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by casper

The train from Vancouver to Seattle (and on to Portland) is just over 200 km. It is not unusual to see that sell out especially in cruise season. I get them impression that as a good number of people for live in the US fly into Seattle and then take transit to downtown Seattle to connect onto the train to/from Vancouver. In addition to that there is all the local traffic between Vancouver and Seattle. It is also a special case in driving can be unpredictable as the length of time to pass through the board is unpredictable.

I use to frequently travel to Cologne. Would fly into Frankfurt from Canada head down to the station under the airport and on to the train. Again another aprx 200 km trip.

I could see Pearson working the same way as Frankfurt. Having multiple trains to secondary cities in southern Ontario within say 500 km to provide local connection to longer distance flights. The one problem, is Pearson is a spur line and an afterthought to all of this.

Downtown and airports are "unique" to some extent as having high concentrations of people that if they want to do those 200-500 km trips by road need to rent a car or if they are coming in from an outlying area are going be charged some fairly higher parking fees.

Both Seattle-Vancouver and SW Ontario are slow because they run far below the top speed of conventional rail. Both need rail that functions at conventional speeds. A conventional train should be able to do Vancouver-Seattle in a little over an hour, and such a service would probably be better than a HSR service with a lot of tunneling given the high number of tourists that probably want to see something, a high speed train probably wouldn't be much faster anyway. There is also a need for a more efficient border clearing system, which again doesn't require HSR.