VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by J81

Nobody uses that train for business for the reasons you mentioned. For leisure travellers the sleepers are really the only reason for taking that train long distance. The idea of leaving Montreal in the evening and arriving the next on the maritimes without spending money on a hotel is attractive to a lot of people. The fact the sleepers are sold out many trips during the summer proves that they are in high demand and useful. What other cost effective use of sleeper cars is there?

So again i would like you to give me an example of how you scrap it with regular trains? How does a service like that look in your mind? Im curious.

The problem for some of the routes is that they are too long with no good place to cut them. For example, the Canadian; between Toronto and Vancouver, Winnipeg would be the closest to Toronto to stop it at. As per their current schedule: https://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/fil...-Vancouver.pdf It takes a day and a half to go there. That means that someone going the entire route would be in a chair for 36 hours.

[swimmer_spe]

If everyone can go to Page 1 of this thread, you will see this was the first post.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

How does a thread for only VIA not exist?

So, with the new fractured government, with a goal of lowering our carbon footprint, do anything to make VIA be more appealing to more Canadians?

Could we see new routes in the West to appeal to them?

When people bash me for working on various plans for new routes or improving existing routes, they have gotten on the wrong thread....

So, lets have constructive posts about realistic options to improve that which exists.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

When people bash me for working on various plans for new routes or improving existing routes, they have gotten on the wrong thread....

Go away, troll, and create a separate thread dedicated to your single topic of interest (reviving daily intercity passenger rail service in Western Canada) and in which every discussion circles perpetually around your refusal to accept the evidence presented or to defend any of your equally strong and uninformed opinions with actual data!

So, lets have constructive posts about realistic options to improve that which exists.

That's what we have been unsuccessfully trying with you for at least the last 30+ pages, so now please allow us to try the same without you...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Go away, troll, and create a separate thread dedicated to your single topic of interest (reviving daily intercity passenger rail service in Western Canada) and in which every discussion circles perpetually around your refusal to accept the evidence presented or to defend any of your equally strong and uninformed opinions with actual data!


That's what we have been unsuccessfully trying with you for at least the last 30+ pages, so now please allow us to try the same without you...

Just ignore him. I'm done wasting time on his topic. Hell eventually move on to trolling his MP as he promised to do.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If everyone can go to Page 1 of this thread, you will see this was the first post.

When people bash me for working on various plans for new routes or improving existing routes, they have gotten on the wrong thread....

So, lets have constructive posts about realistic options to improve that which exists.

Since, as I mentioned in post #462 you were wrong in post #1 about the existence of other VIA Rail threads (there are 3 others in the Canada section), maybe this thread could then be renamed "VIA Rail Fantasies" and we can use one or more of the other threads to have discussions about VIA Rail news and plans. To make things clearer, maybe the threads could be renamed as follows (based on their first post):

• VIA Discussion Thread to "VIA Rail News and Discussion"
• VIA rail seemed weird when I used it to "VIA Rail Boarding Process"
• Via rail to "VIA Rail Dedicated Tracks Plan"
• VIA Rail to "VIA Rail Fantasies"

Thoughts?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by J81

Nobody uses that train for business for the reasons you mentioned. For leisure travellers the sleepers are really the only reason for taking that train long distance. The idea of leaving Montreal in the evening and arriving the next on the maritimes without spending money on a hotel is attractive to a lot of people. The fact the sleepers are sold out many trips during the summer proves that they are in high demand and useful. What other cost effective use of sleeper cars is there?

So again i would like you to give me an example of how you scrap it with regular trains? How does a service like that look in your mind? Im curious.

I don't mind keeping it for now, but if it requires costly expense to keep going - like building new infrastructure to replace that turnaround or refurbishing or replacing the rolling stock - then scrap it. Unless the service is profitable.

We can't be emotional. If the service is just there because it is nice and is not providing a cost effective means of public transportation then bin it. Keeping it just for nostalgia is unfair to Canadians that are deprived of good public transit.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I don't mind keeping it for now, but if it requires costly expense to keep going - like building new infrastructure to replace that turnaround or refurbishing or replacing the rolling stock - then scrap it. Unless the service is profitable.

We can't be emotional. If the service is just there because it is nice and is not providing a cost effective means of public transportation then bin it. Keeping it just for nostalgia is unfair to Canadians that are deprived of good public transit.

So, using the example of a 36 hour trip between Winnipeg and Toronto, what do you suggest to get rid of the sleepers?

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, using the example of a 36 hour trip between Winnipeg and Toronto, what do you suggest to get rid of the sleepers?

Again: please create a dedicated thread (or ask a mod to rename one of the existing VIA Rail threads to create one) to discuss the single topic for which there seems to be space in your mind...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Since, as I mentioned in post #462 you were wrong in post #1 about the existence of other VIA Rail threads (there are 3 others in the Canada section), maybe this thread could then be renamed "VIA Rail Fantasies" and we can use one or more of the other threads to have discussions about VIA Rail news and plans. To make things clearer, maybe the threads could be renamed as follows (based on their first post):

• VIA Discussion Thread to "VIA Rail News and Discussion"
• VIA rail seemed weird when I used it to "VIA Rail Boarding Process"
• Via rail to "VIA Rail Dedicated Tracks Plan"
• VIA Rail to "VIA Rail Fantasies"

Thoughts?

I do not have a way to change it. But for the future, I would simply call it

Future Via Rail Expansions
Where discussion is about the future expansions possible. The discussion would also be around what is needed for a particular route to be added (rolling stock, personnel, etc)

It is not a fantasy thread as we would use real information and real facts, not just lines on a map.

The trolls would be those who say nothing can be done. Or who just draw lines on a map without any justification for it.

[J81]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I don't mind keeping it for now, but if it requires costly expense to keep going - like building new infrastructure to replace that turnaround or refurbishing or replacing the rolling stock - then scrap it. Unless the service is profitable.

We can't be emotional. If the service is just there because it is nice and is not providing a cost effective means of public transportation then bin it. Keeping it just for nostalgia is unfair to Canadians that are deprived of good public transit.

What if the alternative is more expensive and inefficient to run? The problem with the idea floating around on this thread about splitting up the long distance trains into shorter segments is that it does nothing for OTP. One train isnt going to leave until the previous train arrives so that the connections can be made. This happens often with the Ocean. It almost always waits for train 64 to arrive into Montreal before departing so that all the passengers from SW Ontario can connect.

Theres a reason why the Ocean has existed relatively unchanged for nearly 100 years and thats because it works best the way it is currently run. By that i mean as a single continuous train from Montreal to Halifax. Splitting it up into segments will make it more inconvenient thus lowering ridership and increasing its costs to taxpayers. Same with the Canadian. If im going on a cross Canada train trip i dont want to change trains 3 times enroute and neither do the people that use it.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by J81

What if the alternative is more expensive and inefficient to run? The problem with the idea floating around on this thread about splitting up the long distance trains into shorter segments is that it does nothing for OTP. One train isnt going to leave until the previous train arrives so that the connections can be made. This happens often with the Ocean. It almost always waits for train 64 to arrive into Montreal before departing so that all the passengers from SW Ontario can connect.

Theres a reason why the Ocean has existed relatively unchanged for nearly 100 years and thats because it works best the way it is currently run. By that i mean as a single continuous train from Montreal to Halifax. Splitting it up into segments will make it more inconvenient thus lowering ridership and increasing its costs to taxpayers. Same with the Canadian. If im going on a cross Canada train trip i dont want to change trains 3 times enroute and neither do the people that use it.

The Ocean really would be hard to split it up. Some might suggest Moncton, but that is too close to Halifax, and too far from Montreal. Maybe if other routes were added, it might make sense, but a thru train Montreal-Halifax makes the most sense.

If other services between Vancouver-Toronto were ever added, where those additional services meet, having a split might also make sense. It might be the same train that just continues but breaking it up might make things better for the schedule and the overall on time possibility, Right now, the Canadian leaves an hour after it arrives. Maybe it is extended to 4 hours. Give them different train numbers, but a passenger would stay on it. It would all depend on how it was done.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by J81

What if the alternative is more expensive and inefficient to run? The problem with the idea floating around on this thread about splitting up the long distance trains into shorter segments is that it does nothing for OTP. One train isnt going to leave until the previous train arrives so that the connections can be made. This happens often with the Ocean. It almost always waits for train 64 to arrive into Montreal before departing so that all the passengers from SW Ontario can connect.

Theres a reason why the Ocean has existed relatively unchanged for nearly 100 years and thats because it works best the way it is currently run. By that i mean as a single continuous train from Montreal to Halifax. Splitting it up into segments will make it more inconvenient thus lowering ridership and increasing its costs to taxpayers. Same with the Canadian. If im going on a cross Canada train trip i dont want to change trains 3 times enroute and neither do the people that use it.

That was the argument for the Canadian, and if it is the case for The Ocean too, fine. However, when the time comes for an expensive replacement or refurbishment of equipment, that calculus may change. And the loss of that turnaround must affect the decision too.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, using the example of a 36 hour trip between Winnipeg and Toronto, what do you suggest to get rid of the sleepers?

As I understand it, the current setup of the Canadian is the cheapest way to fulfill VIA's mandates. I have no reason to question Urban_sky on this - I'm not going to re input all his data into spreadsheets to double check, as everything he has said is logical and sourced. If there were glaring errors, it would be easy to go down a rabbit hole and pick it apart, but I have seen no evidence of errors.

I personally have little opinion on the continued existence of the Canadian - I don't think it is valuable for public transit, but if it brings in tourism money, fine. It's such a small amount of money that it's not worth spending too much time discussing. But its existence is also irrelevant to future public transit. If you had a blank slate and were designing a passenger rail network from scratch, you wouldn't put any trains on that route until all the other more deserving routes got rail first.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

As I understand it, the current setup of the Canadian is the cheapest way to fulfill VIA's mandates. I have no reason to question Urban_sky on this - I'm not going to re input all his data into spreadsheets to double check, as everything he has said is logical and sourced. If there were glaring errors, it would be easy to go down a rabbit hole and pick it apart, but I have seen no evidence of errors.

I personally have little opinion on the continued existence of the Canadian - I don't think it is valuable for public transit, but if it brings in tourism money, fine. It's such a small amount of money that it's not worth spending too much time discussing. But its existence is also irrelevant to future public transit. If you had a blank slate and were designing a passenger rail network from scratch, you wouldn't put any trains on that route until all the other more deserving routes got rail first.

I agree that much of the Canadian route isn't the best for much more than tourists. That is why adding the CP route, plus going through SSM might be better. Mind you, that would be much longer of a route.

I feel adding a route between Calgary and Edmonton would be the best thing to go after next. The challenges are to make it safe and efficient and frequent enough to be useful.

I do think that all routes should be looked at and improved so they are no longer useful for just tourism.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I agree that much of the Canadian route isn't the best for much more than tourists. That is why adding the CP route, plus going through SSM might be better. Mind you, that would be much longer of a route.

I feel adding a route between Calgary and Edmonton would be the best thing to go after next. The challenges are to make it safe and efficient and frequent enough to be useful.

I do think that all routes should be looked at and improved so they are no longer useful for just tourism.

Eventually, the lower priority routes should be looked at. However if you start with them, rather than the routes that have the greatest chance of success on their own merits, then everything will end in failure. What VIA is trying to do is both to get a firm financial footing, so that it is less at the mercy of the federal government, and to become important to enough users that cutting it back becomes politically unfeasible.

This is why all their effort has to go towards making HFR successful - without HFR there can be no Calgary - Edmonton route, no CP route etc. HFR will give ~10+ million Canadians access to intercity passenger rail that is actually good, and they might then actually support expanding it.

Anywhere outside of the corridor will remain with a raw deal when it comes to VIA for quite some time, but short of a political revolution, there is not enough political capital (or money) to push for VIA service in Alberta and HFR at the same time. I think VIA have the right plan here - all in on HFR.

[J81]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The Ocean really would be hard to split it up. Some might suggest Moncton, but that is too close to Halifax, and too far from Montreal. Maybe if other routes were added, it might make sense, but a thru train Montreal-Halifax makes the most sense.

If other services between Vancouver-Toronto were ever added, where those additional services meet, having a split might also make sense. It might be the same train that just continues but breaking it up might make things better for the schedule and the overall on time possibility, Right now, the Canadian leaves an hour after it arrives. Maybe it is extended to 4 hours. Give them different train numbers, but a passenger would stay on it. It would all depend on how it was done.

Moncton is the only place it makes sense though as ive stated. There is an easy place to turn the train 5 miles from the station. RDCs or push pull consist to bridge the gap to Halifax.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Eventually, the lower priority routes should be looked at. However if you start with them, rather than the routes that have the greatest chance of success on their own merits, then everything will end in failure. What VIA is trying to do is both to get a firm financial footing, so that it is less at the mercy of the federal government, and to become important to enough users that cutting it back becomes politically unfeasible.

This is why all their effort has to go towards making HFR successful - without HFR there can be no Calgary - Edmonton route, no CP route etc. HFR will give ~10+ million Canadians access to intercity passenger rail that is actually good, and they might then actually support expanding it.

Anywhere outside of the corridor will remain with a raw deal when it comes to VIA for quite some time, but short of a political revolution, there is not enough political capital (or money) to push for VIA service in Alberta and HFR at the same time. I think VIA have the right plan here - all in on HFR.

HFR for the Corridor does make sense, and yes, should be completeted before anything else. If there was a potential HFR for the Calgary-Edmonton route, that would be ideal.

I think once this mess is all over and the dust settles, the government may look at investing outside of the Corridor.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by J81

Moncton is the only place it makes sense though as ive stated. There is an easy place to turn the train 5 miles from the station. RDCs or push pull consist to bridge the gap to Halifax.

Where are you going to get them from? Right now there aren't many left out there.

I do agree that some sort of push-pull setup is needed to solve the issue of the loss of the loop.

[Urban_Sky]

The question whether daily intercity passenger rail could or should be revived across Western Canada has long deserved its own, dedicated thread.

Here it finally is:

Could daily intercity passenger rail service be revived across Western Canada?

Now please refrain from further polluting this thread with any more discussions about that topic and return to the other discussions some of us were trying to have here.

Thank you!

[J81]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Where are you going to get them from? Right now there aren't many left out there.

I do agree that some sort of push-pull setup is needed to solve the issue of the loss of the loop.

There are 3 sitting in working condition at the maintenance centre in Montreal right now not doing anything. Plus there are close to a dozen more at both Toronto and Montreal that could be refurbished if need be.