VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

And that is why VIA is going with HFR. There have been many failed attempts to get HSR in Canada. And even though it probably has a perfectly valid business case, it cannot get political traction. So VIA is trying to ride a very fine line of asking for quite a lot of money, but not so much that it seems extravagant. HFR is the bare minimum VIA needs to ask for to get a good service, and hopefully once it's committed everything else is easier.

I do agree with VIA doing the HFR in Ontario. I agree that the entire Corridor should have HFR, and one day HSR. I believe the way VIA is approaching it is a sound idea.

Originally Posted by milomilo

If I, or you, or Urban Sky, or probably anyone who has contributed to this thread was king of Canada we would likely sign off on an HSR line between Toronto and Montreal on the first day. They are big cities close together - both Toronto and Montreal would be huge cities in a European context. But for whatever reason, the powers that be do not want to fund HSR, so a cheaper solution must be sought.

Actually, I would put in a HSR from Vancouver to Halifax, connecting all the major cities together. However, that most likely would cost in the Trillions. I also know it won't likely ever happen.

This goes back to why you hammer the HFR idea for AB. Start out with something palatable to a province that things they are being screwed over, but also don't want to see the government take more money from them.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Once Canadians see what good rail actually looks like (as they are probably beginning to see as GO reaches its escape velocity), they might be more receptive to funding VIA. But if VIA is just a money pit serving rural towns you have never heard of, they won't be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterC...#World_records

Instead of dreaming of TGV, why not look at something compatible with what we already have for rail infrastructure. 140mph is pretty damn fast. It would be close to what Acela can do.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I don’t expect any participant to be an expert on the subject, but it does help if we don’t have to discuss whether yellow is yellow or bright purple. That said, I certainly appreciate your new, more constructive approach to the discussions here and I'm looking forward to sharing two larger posts on which I have been working over the last few weeks, which both relate to the wonderful world of passenger rail timetabling: one will look at how the services on the CN route would have looked if VIA had been allowed to keep the Canadian on the CP route, whereas the other will look at the challenges and trade-offs when scheduling once-daily or night trains...




I admit that VIA’s timetables can be a bit difficult to read, but every PDF timetable file comes with handy explanations like these (found in the System timetable PDF on page 3):






The degree of expertise you already command only determines how much knowledge and understanding you will need to acquire to obtain the level of quality in your research you desire. Your skills and abilities will only influence how much time and efforts that learning process will take…




No offence taken and if your first name is the same as the first part of your user name on Urban Toronto, I don’t have any problem believing you your struggle, as it is a very common first name with an inversion of two letters which most people would "correct" as a typo.

One of my British friends from studying in England still calls me "John", even after sharing an apartment together for two separate years and me inviting him to my wedding. Also, most of the people here in Quebec who see my name before they call or talk to me in person assume that I’m a woman (because it is a woman’s name in French, whereas a famous inventor/printer, astronomer/mathematician and composer all can attest that it is a legit men’s name in German – let’s see who will be able to identify all three namesakes of mine to which I’m referring here [hint: they all lived in different centuries]…).

I love a challenge!

Gutenberg
Vermeer
Brahms

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I think we all can admit and agree on yellow being yellow.. I feel what we are doing is more trying to ague the name of the shade of yellow. Is it gold, or golden rod?

My attitude has remained the same. I will always want more. I am the kind of person that does not take no for an answer, but as a challenge.

To provide an analogy which also Dengler_Avenue can understand: What you've shown on pages 45 to 50 reminds me of the driver who hears a warning in the radio that there is a car driving in the wrong direction on the highway, which prompts him to reach out for his phone to call the radio station to tell them that it's not just one car, but hundreds. No matter how often your bogus claims and alleged "facts" got proven wrong, you just kept on insisting that they were correct and basically everyone else was wrong. I'm not bringing this up again to complain, but just to highlight that I do appreciate your willingness to consider the possibility that your knowledge and wisdom is subject to the same limits as it is with everyone else...

I look forward to that timetable.

These two posts won't just be timetables. They will be extensive posts about timetables, highlighting the challenges and trade-offs in finding the best timings...

My problem really is that the timetable, especially the ones that are longer than a day really are convoluted.

Lets take this one:
https://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/fil...-Vancouver.pdf

Look at the Edmonton to Vancouver run. It looks like there is 2 trains on there, but AFAIK there isn't.

Actually, there is:

• Train 1 departs Toronto year-round on Wednesdays (i.e. Day 3) and Sundays (Day 7), whereas Train 2 departs Vancouver year-round on Mondays (Day 1) and Fridays (Day 5).
• Additionally, during the summer period (end-April to mid-October), train 3 departs Edmonton on Fridays (Day 5) and Train 4 departs Vancouver on Tuesdays (Day 2)

Mind you, nothing written by any government agency/department ever really makes sense to anyone but who wrote it. We just accept it and move on.

This is how the European Rail Timetable (the timetable resource for all independent train travels in Europe and beyond, formerly published by the famous and now bankrupt travel company Thomas Cook and now by its editors themselves) covers the Canadian, in case you find that presentation much clearer.

Note: This is from the Summer 2019 Edition and the travel dates for trains 3 and 4 (train numbers are missing for the Vancouver-Edmonton runs, for whatever reason) therefore relate to the 2019 rather than the 2020 summer season, but you can buy the most recent timetable here.

I know I have a very steep learning curve. That is why I aks for the facts, and the why they are there. Kinda like looking at a fact that there was less deficit on the southern route, yet it got cancelled. I now understand that it is not that simple, nor that logical.

How often do I need to explain this until you understand that this “fact” is just one of the many beliefs you insist on holding onto? So, once again:

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

So just to be very clear, I have never provided any financial data concerning the situation in 1990 nor concerning the CP route. All I did is approximating the subsidy need of a certain service by extrapolating the per-train-km subsidy (of figures provided in VIA’s Annual Report 2018) of whichever VIA service is the closest equivalent of whatever theoretical service we are looking at. Therefore, the only reason why my estimated subsidy need for the Canadian operating at the same 2.5 trains per week, but over CP rather than CN, would be 2.4% less ($47.7 vs. $48.9 million) is that the distance is 2.4% less (4,360 vs. 4,466 km). However, there are too many factors determining the costs and revenues of a service to make any safe assumptions about which route would have required the lower subsidy need to operate.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Yes, that is no typo. Don't get me started on how many government IDs and other documents are wrong.

My wife has wrestled with the authorities for many years to remove the hyphen in her first name (separating her actual first name from the last name of her mother) so that her documents would only show the first name by which she is known by all her friends and family, but she only succeeded with the provincial authorities, which means that all provincial documents (driving license, marriage certificate, health insurance card and university degrees) only show her real first name, whereas all federal documents (most importantly: her passport, but also her birth certificate issued by a different province) show the unwanted hyphen and second name. This forces her whenever she is asked to provide her full name (for instance, at the Notary or whenever she opens a bank account) to inquire which document it has to match with…

You cannot please everyone. The goal is to please enough people to get it done. That will be the real challenge.

The problem is that this includes fiscally (and politically) conservative politicians, which at any given time reliably sit either in the government or the official opposition. In order to convince them, you need to understand their values and concerns, regardless of the extent to which you share or despise them…

I am not assuming anything. I bet with enough digging and paperwork, I could get everything you have delivered. I almost wonder what you do there that you can make this much sense of it all.

You can look me up on LinkedIn (by clicking on my user name and then “visit Urban_Sky’s homepage”). Basically, I started in the Strategy department, where I (among many other things) analyzed public and internal data to support the Executives in making the case for HFR and to secure the approval for the now on-going fleet renewal in the Corridor. However, I switched departments one year ago to be closer to Operations…

Some things just make businesses work better, together. Who cares what we measure things in as long as it is consistant.

I refuse to use imperial measurements as much as possible, because I perceive them as arbitrary and illogical, but the fact that distances (along a rail line) and speeds are measured with the same units on both sides of the border significantly facilitates cross-border operations.

It is interesting, Via likes incremental, but positive changes. No one is going to beat an airplane from gate to gate. The only way to do that is true HSR. That likely won't happen for a while, if ever. However, getting the train to travel faster, and have less delays will get the train closer to that of a plane.

Nobody lives or works within walking distance from an airport gate. Therefore, the travel time from-gate-to-gate is meaningless (therefore, passenger rail is generally considered competitive against the plane if rail travel time does not exceed 3-4 hours:

Market share of rail vs. air in function of rail travel time

Source: Börjesson (2014)

Also, given that the car accounts for maybe 80% of the domestic intercity travel market (expressed in passenger-miles) whereas the plane accounts for maybe 5%, the car is the much more attractive target to steal passengers from, especially as the investments required to beat the car are only a small fraction of that required to beat the plane…

Via seems to love doing incremental improvements. If they didn't we would have HSR. But for a variety of reasons, we have improvements, but not drastic ones.

Wrong, we would have less than what we have today and certainly not the 10 frequencies we have between Toronto and Ottawa, because why would you seek funds to improve infrastructure, which you hope will soon become obsolete by building HSR lines?

So, my goal would be to figure out how much of an improvement is enough. Maybe a train that travels 60mph is enough. Maybe it is 90mph. Or, maybe it is simply not going to be competitive regardless of service.

Provided that money is not a constraint, you can make any passenger rail service competitive against the car and the bus. Especially in the West, however, there is the risk that even the ridership a “competitive” passenger rail service would attract could not justify the massive funding need required to improve the infrastructure to allow competitive speeds…

The one thing the other parties all have in common is a desire to cut emissions. One feel good way is passenger rail.

With the average car in Canada consuming on average 8.9 liters gasoline per 100 km and with every liter of gasoline generating 2.3 kilograms (kg) of CO2, driving a car generates on average 205 grams of CO2 per km. Assuming an average vehicle occupancy of 1.54 as reported for the United States (I unfortunately didn’t find any Canadian figure), this translates to a CO2 footprint of 133 grams per passenger-km. Compared to the figures I have approximated for VIA’s routes in post #797 by extrapolating from publicly accessible sources, the car passenger’s 133 grams per km would be twice the footprint of a VIA passenger traveling on the Corridor (64 grams) or still 1.5 times that of an average VIA passenger (88 grams), whereas the footprint of a VIA passenger on the transcontinental (189 grams) or mandatory services (374 grams) would be almost 1.5 or even 3 times that of a typical car passenger. Therefore, passenger rail is the greener choice only if its emissions spread across a large enough passenger count...

My goal is to make it actually meaningful. Which means full trains, going as fast as we can, as often as we can. What that looks like is a work in progress.

Agreed, but in order to have full trains, you need to chose a corridor which actually has the potential to fill trains, even if passengers are charged ticket prices which at the very least cover direct operating costs.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Actually, I would put in a HSR from Vancouver to Halifax, connecting all the major cities together. However, that most likely would cost in the Trillions. I also know it won't likely ever happen.

Neither should it happen, because even if you could achieve an average speed of 300 km/h (which is rather ambitious, even for HSR), it would still take 15 hours to get from Toronto to Vancouver (i.e. already too long to avoid making it an overnight trip, especially in eastbound direction: leave Vancouver at 8am, arrive Toronto at 11pm PT, which is 2am ET) and 6.5 hours to get from Toronto to Winnipeg. There is no point in building HSR infrastructure to cover distances which inevitably result in travel times beyond 3-4 hours (i.e. where rail is no longer time-competitive against the plane)…

This goes back to why you hammer the HFR idea for AB. Start out with something palatable to a province that things they are being screwed over, but also don't want to see the government take more money from them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterC...#World_records
Instead of dreaming of TGV, why not look at something compatible with what we already have for rail infrastructure. 140mph is pretty damn fast. It would be close to what Acela can do.

The problem with increasing speed is that fully grade-separating an alignment is (even before electrification) the most expensive item when building anything beyond 110 mph (177 km/h), which is the maximum speed for which level crossings are permittable in Canada (and unsurprisingly the maximum speed for HFR):

Source: Ecotrain (2011, Deliverable 6, Part 1, pp.26+49)
Notes: Conversion factor: 1.1404 (Bank of Canada), re-post from Urban Toronto

Therefore, if you go beyond 110 mph (177 km/h), it makes sense to directly go to whatever HSR allows (i.e. 300-350 km/h), as the only real cost difference between aligning for 200, 250 or 300 km/h will be the radius selected for the curves and this is close-to-impossible to change at a later stage.

Given that a chief reason for terminating passenger rail service between Edmonton and Calgary seems to have been the abundance of level crossing collisions, it seems unreasonable to assume that public acceptance for any resumption of passenger rail operations could be achieved without an alignment which mostly eliminates the need for level crossings. Unfortunately, the need for grade separating would mean that HFR cannot be implemented in Alberta at a comparable per-mile cost as in the Quebec-Windsor corridor and would escalate construction costs to a level where you either jump directly to HSR or just stick to buses…

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

To provide an analogy which also Dengler_Avenue can understand: What you've shown on pages 45 to 50 reminds me of the driver who hears a warning in the radio that there is a car driving in the wrong direction, which prompts him to reach out for his phone to call the radio station to tell them that it's not just one car, but hundreds. No matter how often your bogus claims and alleged "facts" got proven wrong, you just kept on insisting that they were correct and basically everyone else was wrong. I'm not bringing this up again to complain, but just to highlight that I do appreciate your willingness to consider the possibility that your knowledge and wisdom is subject to the same limits as it is with everyone else...

I am not beating the horse anymore. All I will say is once I have the facts in place, and can analyze them, I will still argue on some things that aren't so clear cut. It would be like asking why the Arrow got cancelled. To argue that it was only one reason is as silly as arguing that only one reason was why anything in Via routes were canceled.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

These two posts won't just be timetables. They will be extensive posts about timetables, highlighting the challenges and trade-offs in finding the best timings...

Actually, there is:

• Train 1 departs Toronto year-round on Wednesdays (i.e. Day 3) and Sundays (Day 7), whereas Train 2 departs Vancouver year-round on Mondays (Day 1) and Fridays (Day 5).
• Additionally, during the summer period (end-April to mid-October), train 3 departs Edmonton on Fridays (Day 5) and Train 4 departs Vancouver on Tuesdays (Day 2)

This is how the European Rail Timetable (the timetable resource for all independent train travels in Europe and beyond, formerly published by the famous and now bankrupt travel company Thomas Cook and now by its editors themselves) covers the Canadian, in case you find that presentation much clearer.

Note: This is from the Summer 2019 Edition and the travel dates for trains 3 and 4 (train numbers are missing for the Vancouver-Edmonton runs, for whatever reason) therefore relate to the 2019 rather than the 2020 summer season, but you can buy the most recent timetable here.

I look forward to the posts.

I did not know that there is a train just between Edmonton and Vancouver. It only adds to some of my thinking - there is demand for more rail outside the Corridor.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

How often do I need to explain this until you understand that this “fact” is just one of the many beliefs you insist on holding onto? So, once again:

I did mean that the subsidy was lower for the southern route, unless I did not understand that lower number means less subsidy.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

The problem is that this includes fiscally (and politically) conservative politicians, which at any given time reliably sit either in the government or the official opposition. In order to convince them, you need to understand their values and concerns, regardless of the extent to which you share or despise them…

I agree. We have all manner of politicians that need convincing, but if 170 or more agree, then it can happen.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

You can look me up on LinkedIn (by clicking on my user name and then “visit Urban_Sky’s homepage”). Basically, I started in the Strategy department, where I (among many other things) analyzed public and internal data to support the Executives in making the case for HFR and to secure the approval for the now on-going fleet renewal in the Corridor. However, I switched departments one year ago to be closer to Operations…

So, one day, the report we are making will cross your desk. I would welcome your input. I do not deny anything you have posted, but show other ways the public (like me) can view the information.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I refuse to use imperial measurements as much as possible, because I perceive them as arbitrary and illogical, but the fact that distances (along a rail line) and speeds are measured with the same units on both sides of the border significantly facilitates cross-border operations.

Working as an engineer, I have learned to be flexible and fluent in all measurements. I can even convert most to each other.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Nobody lives or works within walking distance from an airport gate. Therefore, the travel time from-gate-to-gate is meaningless (therefore, passenger rail is generally considered competitive against the plane if rail travel time does not exceed 3-4 hours:

Market share of rail vs. air in function of rail travel time

Source: Börjesson (2014)

Also, given that the car accounts for maybe 80% of the domestic intercity travel market (expressed in passenger-miles) whereas the plane accounts for maybe 5%, the car is the much more attractive target to steal passengers from, especially as the investments required to beat the car are only a small fraction of that required to beat the plane…

Where is the busiest part of the Corridor on it?

When I fly, it is a x hour flight. That does not include time in the airport or any other time. When I drive, I view it in hours. I can get to Toronto in 4 hours. Exactly 4 hours? Nope, but it is a lie I tell myself. That is how the average traveler thinks. They don't think about the extra time.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Wrong, we would have less than what we have today and certainly not the 10 frequencies we have between Toronto and Ottawa, because why would you seek funds to improve infrastructure, which you hope will soon become obsolete by building HSR lines?

Generally, I don't think HSR will be in Canada in the next few decades. We just don't have the population for it. However, that does not mean that VIA cannot straighten curves and level hills and electrify their lines. Over time, it could reach a point that we get new equipment that would be HSR. That is the incremental changes I mean.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Provided that money is not a constraint, you can make any passenger rail service competitive against the car and the bus. Especially in the West, however, there is the risk that even the ridership a “competitive” passenger rail service would attract could not justify the massive funding need required to improve the infrastructure to allow competitive speeds…

So, we do what fits in the constraints and make incremental changes. Everything s under a variety of constraints.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

With the average car in Canada consuming on average 8.9 liters gasoline per 100 km and with every liter of gasoline generating 2.3 kilograms (kg) of CO2, driving a car generates on average 205 grams of CO2 per km. Assuming an average vehicle occupancy of 1.54 as reported for the United States (I unfortunately didn’t find any Canadian figure), this translates to a CO2 footprint of 133 grams per passenger-km. Compared to the figures I have approximated for VIA’s routes in post #797 by extrapolating from publicly accessible sources, the car passenger’s 133 grams per km would be twice the footprint of a VIA passenger traveling on the Corridor (64 grams) or still 1.5 times that of an average VIA passenger (88 grams), whereas the footprint of a VIA passenger on the transcontinental (189 grams) or mandatory services (374 grams) would be almost 1.5 or even 3 times that of a typical car passenger. Therefore, passenger rail is the greener choice only if its emissions spread across a large enough passenger count...

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Agreed, but in order to have full trains, you need to chose a corridor which actually has the potential to fill trains, even if passengers are charged ticket prices which at the very least cover direct operating costs.

That is the goal. Now to work to that goal.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Neither should it happen, because even if you could achieve an average speed of 300 km/h (which is rather ambitious, even for HSR), it would still take 15 hours to get from Toronto to Vancouver (i.e. already too long to avoid making it an overnight trip, especially in eastbound direction: leave Vancouver at 8am, arrive Toronto at 11pm PT, which is 2am ET) and 6.5 hours to get from Toronto to Winnipeg. There is no point in building HSR infrastructure to cover distances which inevitably result in travel times beyond 3-4 hours (i.e. where rail is no longer time-competitive against the plane)…

You assumed that this is for the long distance traveler. This is for the medium distance traveler. I can see Winnipeg and Halifax as being the furthest someone going to Toronto. For Vancouver, Winnipeg might be a stretch for most people. That would be an 8 hour ride.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

The problem with increasing speed is that fully grade-separating an alignment is (even before electrification) the most expensive item when building anything beyond 110 mph (177 km/h), which is the maximum speed for which level crossings are permittable in Canada (and unsurprisingly the maximum speed for HFR):

Source: Ecotrain (2011, Deliverable 6, Part 1, pp.26+49)
Notes: Conversion factor: 1.1404 (Bank of Canada), re-post from Urban Toronto

Therefore, if you go beyond 110 mph (177 km/h), it makes sense to directly go to whatever HSR allows (i.e. 300-350 km/h), as the only real cost difference between aligning for 200, 250 or 300 km/h will be the radius selected for the curves and this is close-to-impossible to change at a later stage.

Given that a chief reason for terminating passenger rail service between Edmonton and Calgary seems to have been the abundance of level crossing collisions, it seems unreasonable to assume that public acceptance for any resumption of passenger rail operations could be achieved without an alignment which mostly eliminates the need for level crossings. Unfortunately, the need for grade separating would mean that HFR cannot be implemented in Alberta at a comparable per-mile cost as in the Quebec-Windsor corridor and would escalate construction costs to a level where you either jump directly to HSR or just stick to buses…

Another possibility would be to close off some of those level crossings.

There are no simple or easy answers. However, there are good solutions to many of the issues you bring up.

[esquire]

Depressing news about increased mayhem on VIA's western trains since Greyhound intercity bus service ended

Security logs show rise in anger and violence on Via Rail’s Western Canadian trains

From January 2017 until fall 2018, when many bus routes disappeared, there was an average of less than one reported incident per month on the western trains, according to Via Rail’s security logs released to Global News through access to information legislation.

But in the 15 months that followed the Greyhound bus cancellations, the security logs list almost 50 security incidents on Western Canadian trains. This adds up to at least three incidents per month.

Many incidents involved violent or threatening actions, sometimes with weapons.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6551471/v...nce-greyhound/

[jawagord]

...... internal Via Rail statistics indicate that security incidents on the Western Canadian trains continued to escalate. From January 2017 until fall 2018, when many bus routes disappeared, there was an average of less than one reported incident per month on the western trains, according to Via Rail’s security logs released to Global News through access to information legislation.

But in the 15 months that followed the Greyhound bus cancellations, the security logs list almost 50 security incidents on Western Canadian trains. This adds up to at least three incidents per month. Many incidents involved violent or threatening actions, sometimes with weapons.

.......According to the notes,the attacker initially took his seat after passengers re-boarded the train at around 10:30 p.m. Moments later, the notes indicated that he pulled out a concealed hunting knife and held it to the throat of another man who was about to sit down, one row ahead. The other man attempted to restrain his attacker, who then started “swinging his hands aggressively,” the notes continued. The passenger was cut during the struggle.

The notes from the incident indicate several passengers subsequently ran to the front of the car to get out of the way. One of the other passengers grabbed the attacker’s wrists while another put the man in a headlock to restrain him, near the back of the car, until he collapsed and let go of the knife, said the notes.
The crew temporarily used a belt and a necktie to restrain his hands and feet, said one witness.

The Via Rail employees later replaced those restraints with zip ties, according to the notes. Normally, they would not have zip ties on board, but the crew had purchased them during a stop in Winnipeg, according to the notes, after a “traumatic” incident involving another unruly passenger on a previous trip.


https://globalnews.ca/news/6551471/v...nce-greyhound/

[esquire]

^ It sounds wild. I remember riding trains here out west in my student days in the 90s and 00s... it was very sleepy and relaxed. On occasion there would be tense moments mostly related to drunkenness in the coach cars, but they tended to be very rare and they were quickly defused. People still knew how to behave for the most part.

Quite a contrast from passenger planes where people look at a flight attendant sideways and a squad of police and air marshals descend upon them. On VIA, you could be hundreds of kilometres from the nearest town when someone acts up. Then all of a sudden someone whose job is ensuring station stops are made and meals are served properly becomes responsible for disarming someone swinging an axe?

It's a bit of a sad statement on society. For whatever reason there is just more of an edge.

[milomilo]

Did you miss the part where it started happening after the Greyhound was cancelled? The implication is pretty clear, it's not because of societal breakdown, it's because those Greyhound passengers are now on VIA trains.

If we care about the fact that undesirables that would have taken Greyhound are mixing with nice people taking VIA, we should probably invest more in public transit and get those bus routes back.

[esquire]

^ It appears that the number of incidents has increased since Greyhound service ended, but it's also pretty clear that this has been a problem for some time. The axe-swinging incident mentioned at the start of the story was in 2011.

Also, I'm not sure that I'd feel any better about misbehaviour being shunted back on to buses instead of on the train. It sure seems to me that there are some underlying social issues behind this.

[milomilo]

Absolutely there are underlying issues. It seems the kneejerk respone though is "see look how awful VIA is, we should cancel it", rather than realising that VIA and previously Greyhound are not the source of the problem, and almost certainly help improve the lives of the demographics committing the crimes. The only reason the crimes are now newsworthy is the affect better off people on the VIA trains rather been contained in poor communities that no one sees or cares about.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

Also, I'm not sure that I'd feel any better about misbehaviour being shunted back on to buses instead of on the train. It sure seems to me that there are some underlying social issues behind this.

The way I feel as well.

Out of sight out of mind does not make for great social policy.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I love a challenge!

Gutenberg
Vermeer
Brahms

Vermeer seems to be rather a painter than an astronomer and mathematician, but still 2 out of 3 right! Ready for a 2nd try for #2?

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I did not know that there is a train just between Edmonton and Vancouver. It only adds to some of my thinking - there is demand for more rail outside the Corridor.

Trains 3&4 are just the reminiscence of the third weekly frequency of the "Canadian" (formerly known as "Super Continental"), which survived the 1990 cuts. This third frequency was cut in 2012 during the winter period (from then on the Canadian operated thrice-weekly only from end-April to mid-October and twice-weekly outside of that peak period). Then, in 2019 (and again in 2020), the summer-only third weekly frequency only operated west of Edmonton and therefore with a different number to avoid confusion with the two other frequencies. This was a temporary measure requested by CN, while it upgrades its rail infrastructure to enhance its capacity, as explained in VIA's most recent Corporate Plan:

In 2019 there will be a partial suspension of one peak-season frequency on the Canadian between Toronto and Edmonton. Providing passenger rail service is a joint responsibility of VIA Rail and CN as a host infrastructure owner.

Therefore, VIA Rail can only fulfill its mandate in close cooperation with CN. The partial suspension was decided in concert with CN as a solution to the current infrastructure capacity shortage which exists in Western Canada, the increasing rail traffic congestion (increasing grain and oil shipments) and the major infrastructure work programs CN’s instituting, primarily between Winnipeg and Edmonton, to increase rail traffic capacity."

Where is the busiest part of the Corridor on it?

If you assume that the service level provided by VIA's Corridor services is proportional to how busy the various routes are, then this question should be easy to answer with a timetable:

• 17 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston(-Ottawa/Montreal)
• 10 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston-Ottawa
• 6 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston-Montreal and Ottawa-Montreal
• 5 frequencies per day: London-Brantford-Toronto and Montreal-Quebec
• 4 frequencies per day: Windsor-London-Toronto
• 2 frequencies per day: (Sarnia-)London-Kitchener-Toronto:
• 1 frequency per day: Sarnia-London-Toronto and (New York City-Buffalo-)Niagara Falls-Toronto

When I fly, it is a x hour flight. That does not include time in the airport or any other time. When I drive, I view it in hours. I can get to Toronto in 4 hours. Exactly 4 hours? Nope, but it is a lie I tell myself. That is how the average traveler thinks. They don't think about the extra time.

If you had looked at the graph I posted, you would have seen that for every city-pair with a rail travel time of 3 hours or less, the rail-vs.-air market share is between 50 and 100%, whereas it is only between 5 and 50% for all city-pairs with a rail travel time of 4 hours and more. The average traveler is much more aware of the total travel time taking a plane involves than you think...

Generally, I don't think HSR will be in Canada in the next few decades. We just don't have the population for it. However, that does not mean that VIA cannot straighten curves and level hills and electrify their lines. Over time, it could reach a point that we get new equipment that would be HSR. That is the incremental changes I mean.

If only HSR freaks, ehm "advocates", like High Speed Rail Canada would get this point...!

You assumed that this is for the long distance traveler. This is for the medium distance traveler. I can see Winnipeg and Halifax as being the furthest someone going to Toronto. For Vancouver, Winnipeg might be a stretch for most people. That would be an 8 hour ride.

Unfortunately, there are no intermediary markets between Halifax&Quebec City, Toronto&Winnipeg, Winnipeg&Calgary/Edmonton or Calgary/Edmonton&Vancouver which could possibly justify HSR in any foreseeable future...

Another possibility would be to close off some of those level crossings.

There are no simple or easy answers. However, there are good solutions to many of the issues you bring up.

On a planet where we have advanced our engineering to a level where we have figured out a way to visit other planets, it is hard to imagine a rail project which can't simply rely on already well-proven solutions. Unfortunately, this doesn't mean that these solutions allow the project to remain economically viable...

Originally Posted by jawagord

...... internal Via Rail statistics indicate that security incidents on the Western Canadian trains continued to escalate. From January 2017 until fall 2018, when many bus routes disappeared, there was an average of less than one reported incident per month on the western trains, according to Via Rail’s security logs released to Global News through access to information legislation.

But in the 15 months that followed the Greyhound bus cancellations, the security logs list almost 50 security incidents on Western Canadian trains. This adds up to at least three incidents per month. Many incidents involved violent or threatening actions, sometimes with weapons.

.......According to the notes,the attacker initially took his seat after passengers re-boarded the train at around 10:30 p.m. Moments later, the notes indicated that he pulled out a concealed hunting knife and held it to the throat of another man who was about to sit down, one row ahead. The other man attempted to restrain his attacker, who then started “swinging his hands aggressively,” the notes continued. The passenger was cut during the struggle.

The notes from the incident indicate several passengers subsequently ran to the front of the car to get out of the way. One of the other passengers grabbed the attacker’s wrists while another put the man in a headlock to restrain him, near the back of the car, until he collapsed and let go of the knife, said the notes.
The crew temporarily used a belt and a necktie to restrain his hands and feet, said one witness.

The Via Rail employees later replaced those restraints with zip ties, according to the notes. Normally, they would not have zip ties on board, but the crew had purchased them during a stop in Winnipeg, according to the notes, after a “traumatic” incident involving another unruly passenger on a previous trip.


https://globalnews.ca/news/6551471/v...nce-greyhound/

I'm not sure what you think the function for highlighting text passages is for, but if you believe that a reader needs to read more than two-thirds of your quoted excerpt to get the gist of the article, then you might be underestimating the intellectual capabilities of the people you discuss with...

Originally Posted by milomilo

Did you miss the part where it started happening after the Greyhound was cancelled? The implication is pretty clear, it's not because of societal breakdown, it's because those Greyhound passengers are now on VIA trains.

If we care about the fact that undesirables that would have taken Greyhound are mixing with nice people taking VIA, we should probably invest more in public transit and get those bus routes back.

I share this sentiment and I believe that it was Trudeau's single-largest transport policy mistake to sit on his hands and watch Greyhound go out of business rather than granting them subsidies to sustain its operations for another 2 years, while building up a public agency (ideally jointly funded by federal and provincial governments) which defines bus schedules and regulates fares and tenders all services to the company demanding the lowest subsidy.

Just like roads providing an essential service to almost every community in this vast country, buses provide an essential service and there is no reason why 99% of this countries' population shouldn't have a bus (or remote train service, where tracks are not duplicated by road) stopping no more than 10 km from there home (and no fewer than once per week). And why not at least daily service to 95% of the population...?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Vermeer seems to be rather a painter than an astronomer and mathematician, but still 2 out of 3 right! Ready for a 2nd try for #2?

Those three guesses were using my own grey matter only. I probably won't be able to find another without cheating!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Did you miss the part where it started happening after the Greyhound was cancelled? The implication is pretty clear, it's not because of societal breakdown, it's because those Greyhound passengers are now on VIA trains.

If we care about the fact that undesirables that would have taken Greyhound are mixing with nice people taking VIA, we should probably invest more in public transit and get those bus routes back.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Absolutely there are underlying issues. It seems the kneejerk respone though is "see look how awful VIA is, we should cancel it", rather than realising that VIA and previously Greyhound are not the source of the problem, and almost certainly help improve the lives of the demographics committing the crimes. The only reason the crimes are now newsworthy is the affect better off people on the VIA trains rather been contained in poor communities that no one sees or cares about.

So, maybe there is more demand for Via? Maybe it should increase service?

You would think that because a private bus company could not operate that there would be even less use of trains..... But it sounds like that is not the case.

[milomilo]

There is demand for public transportation, not specifically for VIA. There are only rail lines going to select places, but roads going everywhere. So not only would only providing public transportation by rail often be very inefficient, it would also be grossly unfair.

I'm not sure exactly where those areas are that Greyhound cancelled but are now covered by VIA, but it's almost certain that they would be much better served by a cheaper bus service that could run more frequently, closer to their house, than a very expensive tourist train that runs every other day to limited places.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Trains 3&4 are just the reminiscence of the third weekly frequency of the "Canadian" (formerly known as "Super Continental"), which survived the 1990 cuts. This third frequency was cut in 2012 during the winter period (from then on the Canadian operated thrice-weekly only from end-April to mid-October and twice-weekly outside of that peak period). Then, in 2019 (and again in 2020), the summer-only third weekly frequency only operated west of Edmonton and therefore with a different number to avoid confusion with the two other frequencies. This was a temporary measure requested by CN, while it upgrades its rail infrastructure to enhance its capacity, as explained in VIA's most recent Corporate Plan:

So, twice a week, Vancouver -Toronto, and once a week Vancouver-Edmonton, but only during the winter?

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

If you assume that the service level provided by VIA's Corridor services is proportional to how busy the various routes are, then this question should be easy to answer with a timetable:

• 17 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston(-Ottawa/Montreal)
• 10 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston-Ottawa
• 6 frequencies per day: Toronto-Kingston-Montreal and Ottawa-Montreal
• 5 frequencies per day: London-Brantford-Toronto and Montreal-Quebec
• 4 frequencies per day: Windsor-London-Toronto
• 2 frequencies per day: (Sarnia-)London-Kitchener-Toronto:
• 1 frequency per day: Sarnia-London-Toronto and (New York City-Buffalo-)Niagara Falls-Toronto

It wasn't easy, but thank you for showing that.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

If you had looked at the graph I posted, you would have seen that for every city-pair with a rail travel time of 3 hours or less, the rail-vs.-air market share is between 50 and 100%, whereas it is only between 5 and 50% for all city-pairs with a rail travel time of 4 hours and more. The average traveler is much more aware of the total travel time taking a plane involves than you think...

I saw that. But my question remains unanswered. Where does Toronto -Montreal lie?

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

If only HSR freaks, ehm "advocates", like High Speed Rail Canada would get this point...!

See, I am a reasonable freak. I know there is no good reason to spend trillions on something when it is not needed. Billions, maybe....

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Unfortunately, there are no intermediary markets between Halifax&Quebec City, Toronto&Winnipeg, Winnipeg&Calgary/Edmonton or Calgary/Edmonton&Vancouver which could possibly justify HSR in any foreseeable future...

If we are building it on a new ROW, Fredericton and Moncton would be good intermediarys.

Between Toronto-Winnipeg, Sudbury, SSM, and Thunder Bay would make sense.

Saskatoon and Regina also make sense.

Kelowna or Kamloops as well as Abbotsford make sense too.

However, I also know that the reality is, we are going to build it between the largest cities first. That does mean Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

On a planet where we have advanced our engineering to a level where we have figured out a way to visit other planets, it is hard to imagine a rail project which can't simply rely on already well-proven solutions. Unfortunately, this doesn't mean that these solutions allow the project to remain economically viable...

So, that dirt road that has a level crossing, putting a barrier to prevent people crossing would not work? Would it also not be economically viable? For that matter, dump a couple of dump truck loads of dirt and be done with it.

Obviously, there is more to it than that, but for some places, it might be that simple. One of the many things I will be working on.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I share this sentiment and I believe that it was Trudeau's single-largest transport policy mistake to sit on his hands and watch Greyhound go out of business rather than granting them subsidies to sustain its operations for another 2 years, while building up a public agency (ideally jointly funded by federal and provincial governments) which defines bus schedules and regulates fares and tenders all services to the company demanding the lowest subsidy.

Just like roads providing an essential service to almost every community in this vast country, buses provide an essential service and there is no reason why 99% of this countries' population shouldn't have a bus (or remote train service, where tracks are not duplicated by road) stopping no more than 10 km from there home (and no fewer than once per week). And why not at least daily service to 95% of the population...?

But yet you are against putting daily rail out there?
See this is where you loose me. I start respecting you and your information, and then you seem to almost argue against exactly what you are for.

You are not for a subsidy, unless it is for buses, roads and airports. But not trains.... which you work for.....

[esquire]

Global again delivering the embarrassing truth about VIA's western services.

Via Rail said lengthy delays on its flagship train were an international ’embarrassment’

https://globalnews.ca/news/6591508/v...-the-canadian/

If you go back further in time, the scheduled trip from Toronto to Vancouver is about nine hours slower today than it was under CP Rail some 100 years ago.

And that’s if you’re lucky.

The reality — according to frequent rail travellers, employees and even Via Rail itself — is that the on-time performance of The Canadian has gotten so “terrible” that Via can no longer offer viable transportation options for residents in many regions of Canada.

These regions include major cities with Via Rail stations such as Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton and Vancouver.

Excessive delays have left some Via Rail trains as many as 43 hours — nearly two days — behind schedule, with passengers immobilized on tracks for extended periods.

It does seem to me that a day of reckoning is drawing near for VIA's western services. The service has become so bad that the federal government needs to either fix it or just give up on it altogether. Right now we’re pouring lots of money into this service for what appears to be little discernible benefit relative to subsidies for highways and aviation.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

There is demand for public transportation, not specifically for VIA. There are only rail lines going to select places, but roads going everywhere. So not only would only providing public transportation by rail often be very inefficient, it would also be grossly unfair.

I'm not sure exactly where those areas are that Greyhound cancelled but are now covered by VIA, but it's almost certain that they would be much better served by a cheaper bus service that could run more frequently, closer to their house, than a very expensive tourist train that runs every other day to limited places.

Think of the trains like the major highways. They run between the major cities. The bus can service the more rural areas and bring the passengers to a rail line so they can go to the big cities.

That is forward thinking. That is how Mass Transit in the world is done. I hope one day, Canada does the same.

[milomilo]

They're not analogous at low service levels. The bus provides better service for low demand routes, and definitely provides better service if a bus exists and a railway doesn't.

Why do you think it is fair for public transit only to be given to those that live near train stations?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

They're not analogous at low service levels. The bus provides better service for low demand routes, and definitely provides better service if a bus exists and a railway doesn't.

Why do you think it is fair for public transit only to be given to those that live near train stations?

I don't.

Read my whole thing. Read it again. I do think there should be buses serving lower ridership areas.