HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2181  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2021, 9:53 PM
bikegypsy's Avatar
bikegypsy bikegypsy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 982
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
That makes sense. Should we apply this logic to other modes of transportation as well? Should we monitor our driving speeds to match our population? How about flying? Planes out of YUL are slower than the ones out of CDG?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2182  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 2:11 AM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikegypsy View Post
That makes sense. Should we apply this logic to other modes of transportation as well? Should we monitor our driving speeds to match our population? How about flying? Planes out of YUL are slower than the ones out of CDG?
It isn't about monitor our driving speeds but about building transportation infrastructure. Would you build a large international airport in a small, remote town? Would you build a controlled access, divided highway for the sole purpose of connecting two small communities?

HSR is very expensive to build. The higher ridership from the higher populations means that the cost of building the high speed line can be divided among more riders.

Also don't forget that the 1 hour travel time between Paris and Lille is the fastest non-stop train, but not the only option. They also have slower regional trains that take over 2 hours. This full gambit of options is possible because of the high demand due to the large populations.

The other difficulty getting funding for HSR is because while half of Canada's population lives within the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, half the voting public does not and thus do not care if there is HSR in the corridor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2183  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 4:56 AM
acottawa acottawa is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
You are missing the point. One of the fundamental principles that HFR is based on is that demand between Mtl-Ott and Ott-Tor is combined with demand between Mtl-Tor to help boost frequency. The bypass only works at times of day when demand is high enough that trains on separate Ott-Tor and Mon-Tor can filled reliably. I expect that would only be 2 to 4 trains a day, each way (4 to 8 trains total). The remainder of the passengers would be rerouted through Ott.



It helped CN, yes. VIA's on time performance dropped.



The solution is to build their own dedicated track either in their own ROW or by



The solution is for VIA to build their own track that they have complete control over on the short stretches CP's ROW that they need. Could this be done along the Lakeshore? Possibly, but it would be ridiculously expensive.

One of the things the announcement did say they need to do is negotiate a deal to get in and out of Toronto and Montreal. There are several options on the table for this and this is likely the reason for the wide price range.



It looks like HFR trains will not be traveling through Coteau according to Transport Canada's map.



I am pretty sure VIA could either purchase or get a long term lease on QGRY's Trois-Rivières Sub without too much difficulty.



Near identical freight requirements, but Belleville Sub would have more than double the passenger train requirement.
They have clearly realized that routing Toronto Montreal trains through Ottawa is not feasible, which is why Winchester is suddenly appearing on HFR maps. They are not going to make a major investment and the run two trains a day. It is reasonable to expect roughly the same ratio as exists now, which roughly reflects the relative demand.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2184  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 11:45 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikegypsy View Post
So to whom will this appeal?
Business travelers want to be in the system asap and sipping coffee and eating croissants in the lounge knowing all they have to do is show up at the gate on time. A family going on a holiday will drive to YUL if not fly out of YOW directly. And budget travelers will use the bus, which brings them directly to YUL.
This appeals to the same folks who take the Air France or Lufthansa bus pre-Covid.

It's not for domestic or cross-border travel. But it opens up a bit more competition by making it easier to access airlines that aren't part of a Joint Venture with Air Canada or WestJet.

It's not really for business travelers. Air Canada has them over a barrel in Ottawa. And really should take them for every penny possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2185  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 11:52 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoTrans View Post
I agree, the magic time to get to Montreal should be 1 hour.
Magic time for what?

1 hr would be great for making the two cities commutable. But that also requires several billion dollars.

1:45 or less is more than fine. It's competitive with driving. Realistically, nobody will fly this, other than for a feeder service. So who exactly would a faster service target?

Also, who would be able to afford a faster service? I think all the folks calling for HSR forget how much those HSR tickets cost without substantial subsidies in Europe and Asia.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2186  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 12:05 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
You are missing the point.
You're not going to convince folks who see any improvement in VIA services as a threat to their point banking with corporate travel.

Once HFR is built, plenty of corporate travel policies (especially the big Kahuna in town) are going to mandate any terminating trips in Toronto and Montreal take the train. Heck, some of those easier to access fares in Montreal, might join the policies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2187  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 12:11 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikegypsy View Post
That makes sense. Should we apply this logic to other modes of transportation as well? Should we monitor our driving speeds to match our population? How about flying? Planes out of YUL are slower than the ones out of CDG?
Speeds don't scale. But other things certainly do with population. How many A380s does Air Canada fly out of Montreal vs. Air France out of Paris? Do they serve the same number of destinations? Surely everything is the same right, because market size is irrelevant?

Also, when speed was relevant, why didn't the Concorde serve Montreal or Ottawa regularly?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2188  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 6:10 PM
Hybrid247 Hybrid247 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,196
I would say the shortest travel time we can get for Ott-Mtl, the better, since it would also help shorten the overall Tor-Mtl trip time. Obviously 1 hour would cost far too much to achieve, but perhaps aiming for closer to 1.5 hours isn't such a tall ask?

If I'm not mistaken 1h40-1h45 travel time would equate to an average speed of around 100-110 kph. If we could get that up to 120kph, it would mean the max travel Tor-Mtl time would be about 4h05 and as low as 3h50.

Surely the money it would cost for a new track along the Winchester sub could be better spent on better upgrades for the Ott-Mtl VIA tracks, especially since they would ultimately serve far more passengers than the express service?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2189  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2021, 6:19 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
The Ecotrain study had the trains on the Winchester Sub under the fastest option, but then heading up a new ROW between Avonmore and Casselman to get to Ottawa.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2190  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2021, 3:23 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
They have clearly realized that routing Toronto Montreal trains through Ottawa is not feasible, which is why Winchester is suddenly appearing on HFR maps. They are not going to make a major investment and the run two trains a day. It is reasonable to expect roughly the same ratio as exists now, which roughly reflects the relative demand.
I was suggesting 4-8 trains a day (2-4 each way). I agree they wouldn't make a "major investment" for that level of service, but they might make a minor investment. As I said, CP recently tore up about 60 km of double track leaving about 45 km of passing tracks because they believe that it is adequate after upgrading the automatic block signaling system to a single-track CTC (the same as the Belleville Sub). By signing a deal with CP to let VIA rebuild the double track as it was before CP tore it up (though maybe upgrade it to Class 5 or 6) on the condition that VIA can have exclusive access to the rebuilt track for set time periods during the day. Outside of those hours, CP would be able to use the double track to compensate for the reduce capacity from not having sidings during those hours.

The way I see it, there are three main ways VIA can obtain Dedicated Track.

1. Own both the track and the ROW.
This is the preferred option as VIA will retain full control in perpetuity. It may not always be feasible though. This would include ROWs VIA already owns (like the Alexandria and Beachburg Subs), abandoned ROWs they repatriate, and existing ROWs they are able to purchase. The Havelock Sub east of Havelock will almost definitely be in this category and the remainder of the Havelock Sub as well as the Trois-Rivières Subs might also be included.
2. Own the track on a leased ROW.
This would be an option where VIA wants to build their own dedicated track on a ROW that they are unable to purchase from the owner (likely mainline track). This is a likely option for the Belleville Sub east of Glen Tay as well as the Winchester Sub. An example of this is the ANR here in Ottawa. The ANR owns and maintains the track on the Renfrew Sub and the City of Ottawa owns the ROW.

Of course the big risk in this is that at the end of the lease, if a new lease cannot be negotiated, the ownership of infrastructure remaining on the ROW would transfer to the owner of the ROW. To avoid this risk, another option is to acquire land to create a ROW adjacent to the other ROW. This would be expensive in urban areas but could be affordable in rural areas (VIA would then own the ROW).
3. Lease the track
This is different from what VIA currently does as they would have complete control over the track instead of having their trains inserted into the host railway's schedule. An example of this is the GEXR leased CN’s Guelph Subdivision for 20 years (from 1998 to 2018).

The lease could be 24/7 or it could be for certain, pre-determined times of day, to allow the host railway to run trains at other times. This is the least optimal option, but could work when VIA doesn't need the track all day and the host railway can spare the capacity (possibly with upgrades).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2191  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 11:43 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,209
High-frequency passenger service 'positive' for Smiths Falls, but many questions remain

Blair Crawford, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Jul 15, 2021 • 1 hour ago • 4 minute read




The mayor of Smiths Falls sees “nothing but positive” for the town as the plans for a high-frequency rail service from Ottawa to Toronto takes one step closer to reality.

“For Smiths Falls, it’s incredibly positive news,” says Mayor Shawn Pankow. “And it’s something that will enable us to continue to transform our community. We would serve as a hub.”

And though the announcement last week by the federal government is an incremental one — “the first steps in preparing for the procurement process” in what is in all likelihood an election year — Pankow said he’s optimistic the decades-old dream of improved passenger service will come true.

“This is high priority for the current government. Beyond the benefits of increasing the service for their customers, the greening initiative of hybrid trains, the reduced emissions, getting people off highways and onto rail — it has a lot of positives,” he said. “I think it’s essential.”

Currently, there are three trains a day between Ottawa and Toronto that pass through Smiths Falls. But because VIA Rail shares the tracks with freight trains, its passenger trains often have to wait on sidings for high-priority freight to pass. The passenger trains are forced to run slower than they’re able to and are frequently pushed off schedule. VIA says the new tracks would keep trains on schedule 95 per cent of the time, compared its current 67 per cent.

The new route would roughly follow the Highway 7 corridor with stops at Fallowfield, Smiths Falls, Peterborough and Eglinton in north Toronto. The trains could run at full speed of up to 200 km/h, cutting travel time from Ottawa to Toronto by 90 minutes. VIA and the government project the service could carry up to 17 million passengers along the Toronto-Quebec City corridor by 2059, compared to the 4.8 million it now carries.

The new line, “high frequency” rather than the more expensive “high speed” service, will use cleaner electrified trains and include new stops in Trois-Rivières, and Laval as well as a stop near Quebec City’s Jean Lesage Airport.

Matti Siemiatycki, a professor at the University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute who studies megaprojects, calls the proposed high-frequency train service “interesting, ambitious and, perhaps, optimistic.”

“You have to feel for VIA,” Siemiatycki said. “They don’t own much of the track. The service is where most of their ridership is and the source of most of their revenue. (But) it’s depreciating in quality and any solution will cost billions of dollars. It’s a really unenviable position.”

VIA has been toying with the idea a new northern line away from the busy Highway 401 corridor since at least 2014. with its “Shining Waters” route, passing once busy railway centres like Peterborough, Sharbot Lake, Perth and Smiths Falls. The request for procurement proposals is expected to go out this fall.

“VIA has to do something,” Siemiatycki said. “The service is getting worse and it’s getting harder for them to attract riders. I get why they’re going for this.

“But the costs are huge,” he said, adding that he’d like to know more information about the cost vs. benefits of the line. One of the steps announced last week was to begin talks with existing rail companies to give the new passenger service access into the major centres, which Siemiatycki says will be one of the trickier problems to resolve.

“And it’s not just the long-haul tracks, it’s also the tracks into the city. That’s where a lot of the bottleneck happens,” he said. “There’s still the problem of how do you get into and out of the cities, which remains to be resolved.”

Running the trains along Highway 7 also excludes some of the largest population centres along the route, such Kingston and Belleville, although VIA’s plan does include a link along the existing route between Smiths Falls and Brockville. VIA has said existing service along the St. Lawrence from Quebec to Toronto will be maintained and even improved. Even so, Siemiatycki thinks VIA’s passenger projections are overly rosy.

“I think that’s the part of that announcement that was the most optimistic,” he said. “It would be interesting to know how the projections are being made and what they’re being based on. All this to say, I think there’s a long way to go here before anyone is riding a high-frequency train in this corridor.”

“The distances we’re talking about here, if you look at a European context, would have tens of millions of people to draw on. In China, potentially hundreds of millions of people.”

Whether passengers would be willing to switch from flying to high-frequency trains, also remains “an open question,” he said.

In Smiths Falls, Pankow remain hopeful. Reliable train service could spur population growth, even if in a post-COVID world people might only need to go into their jobs in Ottawa for a few days a week.

“It would put more pressure on housing and some of our services, but it would enable us to continue on the path of growth that we’ve been committed to for a number of years,” he said. The town would need a new railway station — something VIA has already promised — that would be centrally located in town.

“The railway has been a big part of our history and based on what we’re understanding now from VIA, it’s going to be a big part of our future,” Pankow said.

Siemiatycki remains cautious.

“Rail has always been one of those areas where the benefits tend be overpromised and the costs underestimated,” he said.

“If someone is announcing improvements to inter-city rail, it must be an election year. That’s how it’s played out over the years.”

But, he added, “I think, in principle, this is something that was going to have to be done, one way or another.”

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...estions-remain
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2192  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 1:08 PM
YOWflier's Avatar
YOWflier YOWflier is offline
Melissa: fabulous.
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: YOW/CYOW/CUUP
Posts: 2,974
Re: corporate travel policies mandating rail to Toronto and Montreal.

NJC already has rail as the “standard” mode of travel for trips < 400 KM (so covering trips to Montreal). And biz class to boot! (because it offers food so per diem savings).

But there’s “standard” and then actual standard, which is car rental.

In practice the people controlling the purse strongly encourage (read: impose) rental cars because it’s normally so much less costly. With rail, you have the fare, and then inevitable multi-direction cab fares to/from rail station and to/from end destination and to/from hotels that cause the travel costs to balloon. It becomes very difficult or impossible to justify the travel request to cost center manager.

And that’s for one traveller. Often you have multiple travellers going to the same destination, so the case becomes even weaker for rail trips.

And then there’s same day vs multi-day trips, where multi-day weakens the case further.

I’ve seen it countless times that car rental may as well be the standard. The written standard is as weak as it gets in actual practice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2193  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 1:26 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
It often comes down to where you're going and what you're doing. I've carpooled in a rental SUV with 3 others from Ottawa to Quebec City. The car pooling avoided 4 plane tickets and gave us a local vehicle. Since we were in suburban Quebec City, it was more sensible anyway to have a vehicle. But I've also flown into Pearson and grabbed a rental car for another suburban meeting.

I could see somebody traveling to downtown Toronto or Montreal insisting on going by rail. Post-HFR, there should and probably will be stricter guidance on avoiding flights to Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City. And depending on fares and gas rates (with higher carbon taxes), it may actually be cheaper to send 2-3 travelers by train and then rent a car at the destination station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2194  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 1:33 PM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac888yow View Post
In practice the people controlling the purse strongly encourage (read: impose) rental cars because it’s normally so much less costly. With rail, you have the fare, and then inevitable multi-direction cab fares to/from rail station and to/from end destination and to/from hotels that cause the travel costs to balloon. It becomes very difficult or impossible to justify the travel request to cost center manager.
In the Crowns that I am familiar with, it's actually the opposite. Driving, whether in your own car or in a rental, is strongly discouraged, largely for liability reasons. Employees are required to look at trains as a first option.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2195  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 1:43 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
In the Crowns that I am familiar with, it's actually the opposite. Driving, whether in your own car or in a rental, is strongly discouraged, largely for liability reasons. Employees are required to look at trains as a first option.
Will confirm this. VIA is filled with department bureaucrats if you look hard enough.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2196  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 1:44 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
In the Crowns that I am familiar with, it's actually the opposite. Driving, whether in your own car or in a rental, is strongly discouraged, largely for liability reasons. Employees are required to look at trains as a first option.
I think a key measure might be getting business-economy fare differential closer to the meal rates. Not quite down to 20 bucks. But if it's say a $40 difference between economy and business and $21 of that difference is recovered from not paying out for a meal, then the train gets more attractive, because your moving time is literally productive meal time.

In any event, I suspect a lot of it will also be a push by federal workers themselves to prefer rail travel over driving and flying. Especially if there are more folks in Ottawa who do live car free.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2197  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 2:05 PM
YOWflier's Avatar
YOWflier YOWflier is offline
Melissa: fabulous.
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: YOW/CYOW/CUUP
Posts: 2,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
In the Crowns that I am familiar with, it's actually the opposite. Driving, whether in your own car or in a rental, is strongly discouraged, largely for liability reasons. Employees are required to look at trains as a first option.
Interesting. I can definitely confirm the personal car restriction, but I’ve never seen rental restriction and actually the exact opposite.

There’s no question trains are full of gov bureaucrats, but I’ll hazard a prediction that the proportion of those vs car commuters is tiny relative to rental car commuters. Would be interesting to see stats.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2198  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 5:01 PM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
I think a key measure might be getting business-economy fare differential closer to the meal rates. Not quite down to 20 bucks. But if it's say a $40 difference between economy and business and $21 of that difference is recovered from not paying out for a meal, then the train gets more attractive, because your moving time is literally productive meal time.

In any event, I suspect a lot of it will also be a push by federal workers themselves to prefer rail travel over driving and flying. Especially if there are more folks in Ottawa who do live car free.
Yeah, good point. With dynamic pricing, it's hard to know exactly what the supplement is for business, or how much is the meal and how much is the extra space.

You're probably right, some of this comes down to choice, or a desire to be more environmentally friendly. I do think that the Montreal route is very competitive with driving if you are going down for the day and you destination is somewhere central. I'd much rather avoid rush hour and get some work done on the trip (read watch sports highlights).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2199  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 5:35 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
Yeah, good point. With dynamic pricing, it's hard to know exactly what the supplement is for business, or how much is the meal and how much is the extra space.

You're probably right, some of this comes down to choice, or a desire to be more environmentally friendly. I do think that the Montreal route is very competitive with driving if you are going down for the day and you destination is somewhere central. I'd much rather avoid rush hour and get some work done on the trip (read watch sports highlights).
Agreed. When I worked for a company based in Old Montreal, I much preferred taking the train over driving as I could work on the train and include it in my work day. A departure around 8 or 9 am would have been optimal for that reason. Unfortunately I had to choose between a 06:30 and 10:17 departure at the time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2200  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2021, 6:19 PM
Nowhere Nowhere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 228
Any news about what will happen now that the tunnel under the Mont Royal can't be used by VIA because of the REM ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:48 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.