VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Lets have a look at those three routes (west to east):

1. Amtrak Cascades

Arguably the most successful of the three. It connects:

Portland: 2.5 million,

Seattle:    4 million, and

Vancouver: 2.5 million

over a total distance of about 550 km (nicely within the sweet spot for rail). As a result, all three can feed off of each other (those travelling from Portland to Vancouver share the same train as those travelling from Portland to Seattle and those from Seattle to Vancouver. That means each train does triple service, making more frequent departures feasible. Frequent service along most of the corridor means investment in improved infrastructure justifiable.

It is also helpful that Vancouver is on the boarder, so customs and immigration (in both directions) can be done in the station, similar to flying.

2. The Maple Leaf

The only reason this route works is because it connects Canada's largest city (5.9 million) with USA's largest city (20.3 million). It also runs along the Empire Service corridor, which has frequent service, for most of the way. This justifies investment in improved infrastructure. Other than that, it is a roundabout route with a big delay in the middle at the boarder since there are multiple stops on both sides of the boarder, preventing people from clearing customs at a station.

As I said before, I believe it will be eventually split into 2 routes, with only one of them crossing the boarder. We might even see all Empire Service trains to Niagara Falls, NY continue to Niagara Falls, ON (with customs facilities there). The two stations are only about 700m from each other. Significant upgrades would be needed to add customs facilities, but I could see Niagara Parks Commission subsidizing this. It would then be left up to VIA (or GO Transit) to provide connecting service on to Toronto.

3. The Adirondack

This route connects Canada's second largest city (4.1 million) with USA's largest city (20.3 million). It does use a bit of the Empire Service corridor, but is mostly on track that it is the only passenger train on, so there is little incentive to upgrade the infrastructure (it could potentially share track with a Montreal-Boston train, which would help).

From what I gather (maybe someone can confirm), customs facilities have been built in Gare Central, but they haven't received approval for use. Once that happens, it would help.



Lets look at those (in your order):

4) Toronto-Chicago

As I said before, Toronto-Detroit with connecting services on to Chicago makes sense, but the thickening of the boarder makes having through service impractical. Last year there was an interesting article in the Windsor Star titled, "Amtrak seeks federal help to restore Detroit to Toronto rail service." Not sure why it would be Amtrak and not VIA though.

5) Halifax-Boston

First of all, with only 317 thousand, I would not consider Halifax a major city. You also end up with the same issue of multiple stops in both countries, resulting in a long delay at the boarder. If anything, it would be St. John-Boston with connecting service on to Moncton (and maybe Halifax). I am not sure how feasible that would be though.

One of the things about visiting the Maritimes is it is a destination where you will want a car while you are there. You could rent one, but for a family vacation, you might as well drive then.

Winnipeg-St Paul (I assume this is your number 6?)

Similar to Halifax, with a population of 780 thousand, I still wouldn't call Winnipeg a major city, though it is closer. I am also curious what intermediate communities with decent populations are there? It looks to be mostly farmland to me. As a result, you will end up with a long, 747 km route with nothing in between. Any remote communities that once relied upon this train has long since found alternate modes of transportation.

The other thing to look at is, is there any synergy between the two cities (do a lot of people want to travel between the two cities?), or is it just a slow route to Chicago?



The one thing it could add is a shorter route. If it could be done as a daytime route (a big if) that would keep the costs down, as sleeper trains are expensive to operate. The difficult part is getting the travel time down, especially at the boarder. The answer may be that it isn't possible.

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'm really not an expert, nor am I from the area. I hope that some of the Winnipeg forumers can chime in. From the sounds of it, it's mostly a long-weekend destination for shopping, entertainment, etc. I haven't heard of the reverse.

I figure that there must also be demand for intermediary trips, such as Grand Forks- or Fargo-Minneapolis.

This is where other people who know certain areas better have shown once again that my suggestions are not far fetched as they seem. There is talk of extending the Downeaster and Vermonter into Canada again. Amtrak sees it as a good idea. There is talk of connecting Toronto to Detroit. I would think extending it to Chicago would be a better idea. As far as Winnipeg, it might work too.

The Montreal-Halifax route would decimate the ridership on the Ocean if it were faster. It would also not add much more ridership overall in the grade scheme of things. Yes, it would connect Saint Johns, but so would the Downeaster.

For those that don't know, Amtrak and Via run the trains within their countries. Usually, it is all Amtrak equipment.

[someone123]

Halifax-Boston is really a route that favours air travel or even a ferry. It is only a 650 km distance but going around the Bay of Fundy adds about 400 km to that.

Halifax has more than 317,000 people. The 2019 estimate was 440,000 and it is going to hit 500,000 in a couple years because of suburbs not currently included in the metro (which lie directly on the main rail line). Halifax-Truro will soon be 600,000 people along an 80 km corridor. Halifax-Moncton is probably in the 800,000 range. That along with Southern NB (Moncton <-> SJ <-> Fredericton, if those lines still all exist and can be used) is a much better potential route than connections running outside of the region that have to be competitive with air travel (and the main rail line easily connects with YHZ). The complete route through the central part of the Maritimes would be on the order of 1 million people and 450 km, and would serve a bunch of towns and cities that people already travel between frequently.

[jmt18325]

Anyway - I'm really hoping that actual, functional, high speed rail between Toronto and Montreal comes out of the vision for Canada that the Liberals are working on.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by someone123

The big question to me is why we can't just have normal functional infrastructure that is maintained and incrementally improved. In Europe this includes networks of 200 km/h track and multimodal stations that connect up intercity rail with urban rail. In many countries there is also widespread electrification.

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Anyway - I'm really hoping that actual, functional, high speed rail between Toronto and Montreal comes out of the vision for Canada that the Liberals are working on.

Entirely a function of our willingness to pay for such infrastructure.

HSR is out. Liberals have barely put effort into HFR.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Entirely a function of our willingness to pay for such infrastructure.

HSR is out. Liberals have barely put effort into HFR.

Maybe not. I'm being optimistic about their new, greener vision for Canada.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Entirely a function of our willingness to pay for such infrastructure.

I agree. I don't think there's anything particularly difficult or impractical about improving rail in Canada in terms of engineering or funding requirements. In fact there's low-hanging fruit because service is so bad. But it's not a priority and there are political roadblocks.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by someone123

The big question to me is why we can't just have normal functional infrastructure that is maintained and incrementally improved. In Europe this includes networks of 200 km/h track and multimodal stations that connect up intercity rail with urban rail. In many countries there is also widespread electrification.

It’s kind of like me promising my family that I’ve got a plan to right our financial fortunes, when all I’ve really done is bought a 5 dollar lottery ticket.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Entirely a function of our willingness to pay for such infrastructure.

HSR is out. Liberals have barely put effort into HFR.

I shudder a little at the thought of HFR being scrapped for HSR, which would subsequently get bogged down and scrapped in the end anyway.

[Djeffery]

Border.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I shudder a little at the thought of HFR being scrapped for HSR, which would subsequently get bogged down and scrapped in the end anyway.

I guess there always is that risk. In that case, I'd like to see more money put into HFR.

[MolsonExport]

HSR is like power from fusion reactors. Always only 10 years away.
I will never believe any announcement of the immanency of HSR, after it having been trotted out many times by numerous governments over the years (most recently, Wynne's liberal government, which of course was cancelled when Ford took power).

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Maybe not. I'm being optimistic about their new, greener vision for Canada.

I'm 50/50. They talk a lot about green investment and then prioritize any excuse to mail out cheques over actually funding big infrastructure. Just look at their spending Pre-Covid.

Originally Posted by someone123

I agree. I don't think there's anything particularly difficult or impractical about improving rail in Canada in terms of engineering or funding requirements. In fact there's low-hanging fruit because service is so bad. But it's not a priority and there are political roadblocks.

There's just no constituency for infrastructure investment in Canada. Sadly. There's nobody saying their vote is conditional on building those trains.

Originally Posted by milomilo

I shudder a little at the thought of HFR being scrapped for HSR, which would subsequently get bogged down and scrapped in the end anyway.

Yep. This is the closest we've gotten to actual shovels in the ground for a dedicated Intercity passenger rail line in half a century. I would oppose any talk of HSR. Build HFR and then upgrade it to HSR bit by bit.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

HSR is like power from fusion reactors. Always only 10 years away.
I will never believe any announcement of the immanency of HSR, after it having been trotted out many times by numerous governments over the years (most recently, Wynne's liberal government, which of course was cancelled when Ford took power).

Part of the problem is that we're always looking to go from zero to hundred. This is not how HSR evolved elsewhere. They built regular rail networks and upgraded portions to high speed standards. Sometimes corridors were upgraded to add capacity. The speed benefit was secondary.

I wouldn't trust any government that talks about high speed rail at this point. Especially since none of them ever talk about how they'll pay for it.

[jmt18325]

Guys, I really want to talk about trains here.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Guys, I really want to talk about trains here.

As do the rest of us. But there's this dude that keeps saying the only trains we should discuss are the ones he's interested in....

He was supposed to go to his MPs office and show 'em who's boss after doing all his research. But apparently he has a "life" and can't spare 30 mins (no issues trolling got hours though....). And that is why we'll never have a train from Boston to Halifax.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Sadly living in Canada there is very little to do with trains to discuss most of the time.

It shouldn't be that way. But like I've said earlier, this is part of a broader pattern in this country of underinvestment in infrastructure. It's not just intercity rail.

And quite frankly I don't think any of this gets fixed until we have an honest discussion in Canada about what kind of infrastructure we want and how much we are willing to pay for it.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Guys, I really want to talk about trains here.

Me to, so lets get back on track.

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I figure that there must also be demand for intermediary trips, such as Grand Forks- or Fargo-Minneapolis.

Except the original route of the Winnipeger bypassed Grand Forks and Fargo and if you look at the Open Railway Map, there is no direct route from Winnipgeg to Grand Forks (and on to Fargo). If there was, having the Empire Builder split at Grand Forks to Winnipeg might make sense. Looking at its schedule though, it would end up being overnight service, which would make clearing customs fun (if it wasn't done in Winnipeg). I doubt if demand would be worth the cost of building new, dedicated track though.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is where other people who know certain areas better have shown once again that my suggestions are not far fetched as they seem.

If you read the followup, Aylmer said:

Originally Posted by Aylmer

From the sounds of it, it's mostly a long-weekend destination for shopping, entertainment, etc. I haven't heard of the reverse.

though it was prefixed by:

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I'm really not an expert, nor am I from the area.

(the original post was based on his partner being from Winnipeg)

Having regular train service for a trip that is "mostly a long-weekend destination" would unlikely be viable or a green option.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

There is talk of extending the Downeaster and Vermonter into Canada again. Amtrak sees it as a good idea.

Re: Downeaster

Can you provide a reference? That is the first I have heard of it and Google searches turn up nothing. The only proposed extensions I can find are to Lewiston–Auburn, Rockland, and Westbrook. Of these, Lewiston–Auburn is the only one that would move the yardstick at all towards Canada, but even then, not by very much.

Re: Vermonter (originally Montrealer)

Yes, there are plans for the return of the Montrealer, and I gather it is largely waiting for the preclearance facilities in Montreal to open ref. This is an alternative to the Adirondack and has many of the same things going for it, and being a very short extension of an existing route on existing track and would be easy to achieve. This is low hanging fruit that could easily be achieved.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

There is talk of connecting Toronto to Detroit.

Yes. That is what I said. It is only in the talk stage though and there are significant obstacles.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I would think extending it to Chicago would be a better idea.

How so? Did you even read my reasons as to why this won't be viable? Stating something to be true without any argument as to why is not a good argument.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The Montreal-Halifax route would decimate the ridership on the Ocean if it were faster.

If you go back and read the post from those who have taken The Ocean, most of the people board/alight it west of Moncton. The Atlantic wouldn't be attractive to them as it would require a transfer.

Also, I would propose that the Atlantic not go all the way to Halifax, but go back to its roots (when operated by CP) and end at Moncton. This is mostly because the extension would make it too long for daytime service.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It would also not add much more ridership overall in the grade scheme of things.

I disagree. A shorter, daytime train would be more affordable and more comfortable than an overnight train. This would be attractive to those who currently use other modes of transport. If it had to be overnight, then I would agree that it wouldn't be viable.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Yes, it would connect Saint Johns, but so would the Downeaster.

I assume you mean Saint John, not St. John's.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

For those that don't know, Amtrak and Via run the trains within their countries. Usually, it is all Amtrak equipment.

That is true for the Maple Leaf. AFAIK, Amtrak operates the Cascades and Adirondack in/out of Vancouver and Montreal respectively.

[rocketphish]

I've moved the hyperloop discussion to a new thread. Please try to keep the talk in this thread on-topic.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=243680

[someone123]

The old Montreal to Saint John rail service is really from another time and that ended back in the 1970's or 80's. Saint John and Montreal used to be relatively larger and more important cities, the border was less strict, and affordability of flights was poor.

These days most of the people who want to go from SJ or Moncton or Halifax to Montreal will fly. No surprise that the Ocean is mostly used by folks in rural areas who still have limited local flight options. The Ocean is probably not even competitive with bus service for people living in Moncton or Halifax who want to go to Montreal since it goes nowhere near the best domestic route (TCH). Maritime Bus runs a service to Quebec.

If rail service for the Maritimes is a goal then service of shorter distances where flights are relatively uncompetitive through the main corridors is the best option by a huge margin. Contemplating rail service from Boston to Saint John or Moncton is kind of like debating running a train from Minneapolis to Regina or Saskatoon but then stopping there because going to Calgary or Edmonton would be too long. I suppose such a service could be useful but it seems odd and unlikely to be the best potential route. Furthermore a NB-Boston train would mostly run through the US, and it would not get funding from NS. Also, I believe there is already a train from Boston to Brunswick ME.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by someone123

The old Montreal to Saint John rail service is really from another time and that ended back in the 1970's or 80's. Saint John and Montreal used to be relatively larger and more important cities, the border was less strict, and affordability of flights was poor.

These days most of the people who want to go from SJ or Moncton or Halifax to Montreal will fly. No surprise that the Ocean is mostly used by folks in rural areas who still have limited local flight options. The Ocean is probably not even competitive with bus service for people living in Moncton or Halifax who want to go to Montreal since it goes nowhere near the best domestic route (TCH). Maritime Bus runs a service to Quebec.

Those are very valid points. It really comes down to cost vs. time. Flying is certainly the fastest option, but it isn't the cheapest. The question is if there is demand for an affordable service that is both faster and cheaper than driving (but obviously not as fast as flying)?

Originally Posted by someone123

If rail service for the Maritimes is a goal then service of shorter distances where flights are relatively uncompetitive through the main corridors is the best option by a huge margin.

I certainly do agree. As you said previously, the demographics of the Atlantic provinces is significantly different from those in the prairies. The points in between the cities are well populated. This works in favour of train service, as it can stop at those places along the way and expect to pick-up/drop-off a decent number of people. In the prairies, the population density drops off a cliff once you get outside of city limits, so you only have the demand between the big cities.

Originally Posted by someone123

Contemplating rail service from Boston to Saint John or Moncton is kind of like debating running a train from Minneapolis to Regina or Saskatoon but then stopping there because going to Calgary or Edmonton would be too long.

That's the problem with international service. If you can't have people clear customs at a terminal station, you end up having to have the train stop and wait until everyone clears customs at the boarder. If one person is having issues, everyone has to wait.

Originally Posted by someone123

I suppose such a service could be useful but it seems odd and unlikely to be the best potential route. Furthermore a NB-Boston train would mostly run through the US, and it would not get funding from NS.

Agreed.