VIA Rail

[Floppa]

I wonder what effect on aviation this will have. I'm guessing very little, as there's already very little plane traffic within the corridor except for connecting flights. Even if trains are cheaper (they currently aren't) are most people really going to go through the additional time and inconvenience of a modal switch just to save a few bucks?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Floppa

I wonder what effect on aviation this will have. I'm guessing very little, as there's already very little plane traffic within the corridor except for connecting flights. Even if trains are cheaper (they currently aren't) are most people really going to go through the additional time and inconvenience of a modal switch just to save a few bucks?

There was a lot of plane traffic in the corridor in the before time. Air Canada and Porter had hourly flights from Ottawa to Toronto and Westjet had multiple flights a day. Connecting flights were a big chunk but there were also a lot of people headed to Toronto.

I can’t see HFR cutting into the connecting flight business (at least to Toronto). Besides the 3ish hour difference in travel time, airlines more or less throw in the Ottawa leg for close to free if you’re flying internationally so a train would be more expensive. Plus there is no advantage to doing check in and security in Toronto over Ottawa (in fact the opposite, both are usually faster and easier in Ottawa). Also there is the hassle of hauling luggage onto a train, across Union Station, onto the UP, etc.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There was a lot of plane traffic in the corridor in the before time. Air Canada and Porter had hourly flights from Ottawa to Toronto and Westjet had multiple flights a day. Connecting flights were a big chunk but there were also a lot of people headed to Toronto.

I can’t see HFR cutting into the connecting flight business (at least to Toronto). Besides the 3ish hour difference in travel time, airlines more or less throw in the Ottawa leg for close to free if you’re flying internationally so a train would be more expensive. Plus there is no advantage to doing check in and security in Toronto over Ottawa (in fact the opposite, both are usually faster and easier in Ottawa). Also there is the hassle of hauling luggage onto a train, across Union Station, onto the UP, etc.

Toronto-Ottawa is more than just passengers flying from and through Pearson.

A 3 hr HFR travel time is plenty competitive with air, especially for those not doing same day return, and especially given that the train stations are more convenient in both cities. Once you add up the travel to the airport and pre-boarding, the savings from air travel fall to about 1.5 hrs. There's a lot of personal travelers and employers who will forego air fare at these travel times, if train fares stay even close to where there are today.

I expect Porter to cut at least a quarter of their flights to Ottawa post HFR. Those flying to Pearson might keep their schedule and downgauge.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Toronto-Ottawa is more than just passengers flying from and through Pearson.

A 3 hr HFR travel time is plenty competitive with air, especially for those not doing same day return, and especially given that the train stations are more convenient in both cities. Once you add up the travel to the airport and pre-boarding, the savings from air travel fall to about 1.5 hrs. There's a lot of personal travelers and employers who will forego air fare at these travel times, if train fares stay even close to where there are today.

I expect Porter to cut at least a quarter of their flights to Ottawa post HFR. Those flying to Pearson might keep their schedule and downgauge.

I could see it maybe cutting into the Westjet traffic (people who are price sensitive), but people flying porter are already willing to pay a premium to reduce travel time (it is almost always cheaper to fly to Pearson). I can’t see people willing to pay a premium to save a 30 minute UP ride willing to double their travel time.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I expect Porter to cut at least a quarter of their flights to Ottawa post HFR. Those flying to Pearson might keep their schedule and downgauge.

A fair number of the Porter routes to the Maritimes make pit stops in Ottawa along the way. I have found that on the flights out of Moncton, about half the passengers get off in Ottawa, with the remainder carrying on to Billy Bishop. Usually most of these seats are reoccupied by passengers bound from Ottawa to Toronto. Your calculus therefore might be a little off.

There is no question that HFR will eat into the number of air passengers in the Montreal/Ottawa/Toronto triangle (which is the whole idea), but the dip in the number of flights might be less than you anticipate.

[casper]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I could see it maybe cutting into the Westjet traffic (people who are price sensitive), but people flying porter are already willing to pay a premium to reduce travel time (it is almost always cheaper to fly to Pearson). I can’t see people willing to pay a premium to save a 30 minute UP ride willing to double their travel time.

Not certain that is true. I think WestJet has a good percentage of their traffic connecting through Pearson.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I could see it maybe cutting into the Westjet traffic (people who are price sensitive), but people flying porter are already willing to pay a premium to reduce travel time (it is almost always cheaper to fly to Pearson). I can’t see people willing to pay a premium to save a 30 minute UP ride willing to double their travel time.

Pearson traffic is composed off two groups: transit traffic and origin-destination traffic from the Western GTA. The first group HFR can't touch. The second is a very minor impact without HFR extending west of Union.

People pay a premium for Porter to fly from the downtown core. But it's not just total travel time. YTZ is literally more convenient for the entire eastern half of the GTA. Especially by transit. And the premium gets offset by the added cost of UPE for a better comparison. Faster rail service to/from Union is absolutely a challenge to them. With pre-boarding and travel to/from the airports, Porter will get you from Union to Parliament Hill in ~2.5 hrs. HFR would take about 4 hrs. There's definitely a group of people for whom saving that 1.5 hrs of travel time, while losing productive time on the train, is not worth the additional cost of air fare. And for somebody traveling to/from the Eastern GTA? Rail might actually be just as fast as air.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

A fair number of the Porter routes to the Maritimes make pit stops in Ottawa along the way. I have found that on the flights out of Moncton, about half the passengers get off in Ottawa, with the remainder carrying on to Billy Bishop. Usually most of these seats are reoccupied by passengers bound from Ottawa to Toronto. Your calculus therefore might be a little off.

You're assuming that every Porter flight continues on to the Maritimes. This isn't the case. Also, with Porter now building a hub in Ottawa, their services to the Maritimes won't be dependent on a market originating in Toronto.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

There is no question that HFR will eat into the number of air passengers in the Montreal/Ottawa/Toronto triangle (which is the whole idea), but the dip in the number of flights might be less than you anticipate.

Toronto-Ottawa is the only segment where rail is marginally competitive with air. There was hope for Montreal-Quebec City. But the intended 2.5 hr travel time won't be competitive with air.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Pearson traffic is composed off two groups: transit traffic and origin-destination traffic from the Western GTA. The first group HFR can't touch. The second is a very minor impact without HFR extending west of Union.

People pay a premium for Porter to fly from the downtown core. But it's not just total travel time. YTZ is literally more convenient for the entire eastern half of the GTA. Especially by transit. And the premium gets offset by the added cost of UPE for a better comparison. Faster rail service to/from Union is absolutely a challenge to them. With pre-boarding and travel to/from the airports, Porter will get you from Union to Parliament Hill in ~2.5 hrs. HFR would take about 4 hrs. There's definitely a group of people for whom saving that 1.5 hrs of travel time, while losing productive time on the train, is not worth the additional cost of air fare. And for somebody traveling to/from the Eastern GTA? Rail might actually be just as fast as air.



You're assuming that every Porter flight continues on to the Maritimes. This isn't the case. Also, with Porter now building a hub in Ottawa, their services to the Maritimes won't be dependent on a market originating in Toronto.



Toronto-Ottawa is the only segment where rail is marginally competitive with air. There was hope for Montreal-Quebec City. But the intended 2.5 hr travel time won't be competitive with air.

Via still hasn’t released a route map so we don’t know where a stop may be in the suburbs, but it is hard to see HFR being convenient for the Eastern GTA. They will lose connections go GO at Oshawa and Guildwood. There might be a TTC connection at Eglinton, but that doesn’t help the Eastern GTA much.

Going to a customer that is clearly time sensitive and not particularly price sensitive, and telling them you have an option that takes 60% longer does not seem like a good marketing strategy.

There will be some price sensitive airline customers for whom 4.5 hours is too long but 3.5 hours isn’t who would likely want to switch. But those are not porter customers.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Via still hasn’t released a route map so we don’t know where a stop may be in the suburbs, but it is hard to see HFR being convenient for the Eastern GTA. They will lose connections go GO at Oshawa and Guildwood. There might be a TTC connection at Eglinton, but that doesn’t help the Eastern GTA much.

Going to a customer that is clearly time sensitive and not particularly price sensitive, and telling them you have an option that takes 60% longer does not seem like a good marketing strategy.

There will be some price sensitive airline customers for whom 4.5 hours is too long but 3.5 hours isn’t who would likely want to switch. But those are not porter customers.

One would hope they will connect it with the Agincourt GO.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Via still hasn’t released a route map so we don’t know where a stop may be in the suburbs, but it is hard to see HFR being convenient for the Eastern GTA. They will lose connections go GO at Oshawa and Guildwood. There might be a TTC connection at Eglinton, but that doesn’t help the Eastern GTA much.

Wrong. Driving and transit to Eglinton station is still faster than either YTZ or YYZ. Especially, if the "Eglinton" station is co-located at Kennedy Station with the Bloor-Danforth-Scarborough subway, Eglinton LRT and Stouffville GO. They also have the option of adding a 905 station accessible by the 407, in Markham.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Going to a customer that is clearly time sensitive and not particularly price sensitive, and telling them you have an option that takes 60% longer does not seem like a good marketing strategy.

There will be some price sensitive airline customers for whom 4.5 hours is too long but 3.5 hours isn’t who would likely want to switch. But those are not porter customers.

I think your assumption on the proportion of customers who are so price sensitive that they will always pay to fly, is generous. A lot of the time flying is sort of default, just because it's much faster than driving. The current rail option is all but irrelevant to corporate travel. The schedule isn't convenient. Travel time is long. Reliability is poor.

We'll see how the marketshare evolves when there's a more practical rail offering as the middle option. Certainly experience from elsewhere shows door-to-door difference of less than 2 hrs can draw from the airlines, with the share increasing as the difference gets less.

[rbt]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

People pay a premium for Porter to fly from the downtown core. But it's not just total travel time. YTZ is literally more convenient for the entire eastern half of the GTA.

Before HFR launches, perhaps even before it goes to tender, Porter will have new Jets in service (likely hub'd at Pearson for connections) and may even have abandoned YTZ due to high operating costs (fixed-fee terminal charges were onerous before the pandemic).

I agree HFR will likely have more impact on roadway travel than flights, at least initially, but comparing against current day Porter is a poor starting point as Porter in 2025 is going to be a very different animal.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by rbt

Before HFR launches, perhaps even before it goes to tender, Porter will have 20+ new Jets in service and may even have abandoned YTZ due to high operating costs.

I agree HFR will likely have more impact on roadway travel than flights, at least initially, but comparing against current day Porter is going to result in a broken prediction either way.

Here is where comparing us to other locales would make sense. What mode elsewhere tend to suffer the most when HFR is brought online?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by rbt

Before HFR launches, perhaps even before it goes to tender, Porter will have new Jets in service (likely hub'd at Pearson for connections) and may even have abandoned YTZ due to high operating costs (fixed-fee terminal charges were onerous before the pandemic).

I agree HFR will likely have more impact on roadway travel than flights, at least initially, but comparing against current day Porter is a poor starting point as Porter in 2025 is going to be a very different animal.

Porter sees the writing on the wall more clearly than some of the folks here apparently.

They can't grow at YTZ. Pressure to close YTZ is actually growing with the UPE in place now. And politics may delay HFR for a term or two. But it's getting to the point that it's almost inevitable somebody will push this through eventually.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Here is where comparing us to other locales would make sense. What mode elsewhere tend to suffer the most when HFR is brought online?

HFR would be the regular intercity rail service in most of Europe and Asia. Those mostly steal from driving. But they most certainly do impact air services wherever door-to-door travel times are competitive.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Wrong. Driving and transit to Eglinton station is still faster than either YTZ or YYZ. Especially, if the "Eglinton" station is co-located at Kennedy Station with the Bloor-Danforth-Scarborough subway, Eglinton LRT and Stouffville GO. They also have the option of adding a 905 station accessible by the 407, in Markham.

You're assuming HFR will use the stouville line. I have not seen anything official from Via on that. Even if there is a station at Kennedy, it is not particularly convenient to get to Kennedy from the Eastern GTA by either transit or road.

The intersection of the Havelock sub and 407 is not really in Markham, it is in the middle of a national park on the Ontario greenbelt. Seems like an unlikely place to build a car-oriented train station. Maybe you're assuming use of the stouville line will continue well north of the city with a new greenfield line to connect to the Havelock sub. Again, this is not reflected in any information Via has put out. Also, if you're on the 407 in Markham or Rouge Park then you're 20 minutes from Pearson.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

HFR would be the regular intercity rail service in most of Europe and Asia. Those mostly steal from driving. But they most certainly do impact air services wherever door-to-door travel times are competitive.

60% longer travel times are not really competitive. In Europe and Asia airports tend to be either far from the city and/or congested, so door-to-door times are much closer even if the train goes at conventional speeds.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You're assuming HFR will use the stoufville line. I have not seen anything official from Via on that. Even if there is a station at Kennedy, it is not particularly convenient to get to Kennedy from the Eastern GTA by either transit or road.

It doesn't have to be "particularly convenient". Just easier than getting to YTZ or YYZ. Which it is.

As for not using the Stoufville line
Corridor, I'm not sure how else one ends up with an "Eglinton" station in Scarborough . But sure I guess we can wait for the final routing. The only thing relevant here is the there will be a station in Scarborough and it'll be easier to get to than YYZ or YTZ, especially in Toronto traffic.

Originally Posted by acottawa

The intersection of the Havelock sub and 407 is not really in Markham, it is in the middle of a national park on the Ontario greenbelt. Seems like an unlikely place to build a car-oriented train station. Maybe you're assuming use of the stouville line will continue well north of the city with a new greenfield line to connect to the Havelock sub. Again, this is not reflected in any information Via has put out. Also, if you're on the 407 in Markham or Rouge Park then you're 20 minutes from Pearson.

I said a station in Markham accessed by the 407. Nowhere did I say it has to be at the corner of the 407 and the Havelock sub. Your zeal to defend your frequent flyer status gets the better of you sometimes.

Originally Posted by acottawa

60% longer travel times are not really competitive.

What matters is door-to-door travel times. Not the modal trip time. Somebody traveling from a tech company in Markham to a meeting in Kanata, is definitely going to find a 2.5 hr train between Eglinton and Fallowfield, a lot more worthwhile than flying.

Ultimately, we can wait for the results to see how it shakes out. I do find it amusing that public servants in Ottawa getting fat in the Maple Leaf Lounge on the taxpayer's dime feel so threatened by just one rail route.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It doesn't have to be "particularly convenient". Just easier than getting to YTZ or YYZ. Which it is.

As for not using the Stoufville line
Corridor, I'm not sure how else one ends up with an "Eglinton" station in Scarborough . But sure I guess we can wait for the final routing. The only thing relevant here is the there will be a station in Scarborough and it'll be easier to get to than YYZ or YTZ, especially in Toronto traffic.



I said a station in Markham accessed by the 407. Nowhere did I say it has to be at the corner of the 407 and the Havelock sub. Your zeal to defend your frequent flyer status gets the better of you sometimes.



What matters is door-to-door travel times. Not the modal trip time. Somebody traveling from a tech company in Markham to a meeting in Kanata, is definitely going to find a 2.5 hr train between Eglinton and Fallowfield, a lot more worthwhile than flying.

Ultimately, we can wait for the results to see how it shakes out. I do find it amusing that public servants in Ottawa getting fat in the Maple Leaf Lounge on the taxpayer's dime feel so threatened by just one rail route.

I haven't had frequent flyer status in several years. Last time I had it it was from international flights. Excluding flights routed through Toronto, I think I have flown between Toronto and Ottawa about 3 times in the last decade. I usually drive or take the train.

Fine, if you don't want to it at the 407 pick a location. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relati....8779/-79.1894

Presumably an "Eglinton" station could be where whatever line they choose hits Eglinton, such as where the CP line crosses Eglinton near Leslie. Eglinton has appeared since the earliest maps, so I am not sure they put a lot of planning into it.

Stouville would have been a great option of HFR had been decided 6 years ago, they could have piggy backed on the Stouville expansion project currently underway. Now they would either have to undertake a completely new project or try to fit trains in GO's 15 minute 2-way service.

Yeah, if you're going from Markham to Kanata and there's a station in Markham then the train might be a good option, but you're probably not taking Porter (actually you're probably driving now).

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I haven't had frequent flyer status in several years. Last time I had it it was from international flights. Excluding flights routed through Toronto, I think I have flown between Toronto and Ottawa about 3 times in the last decade. I usually drive or take the train.

So mileage collector I guess. Your skepticism here on this speaks for itself. As does the gish gallop on here....

Originally Posted by acottawa

Fine, if you don't want to it at the 407 pick a location. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relati....8779/-79.1894

My personal choice would be at Donald Cousens and 14th. I don't buy the argument that it's a big deal to put up a station and a parking structure at the edge of a park. And not once has this come up as a potential issue anywhere beyond you mentioning it.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Presumably an "Eglinton" station could be where whatever line they choose hits Eglinton, such as where the CP line crosses Eglinton near Leslie. Eglinton has appeared since the earliest maps, so I am not sure they put a lot of planning into it.

If the Eglinton station is at Leslie (which I seriously doubt), another GTA East station is virtually guaranteed at that point.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yeah, if you're going from Markham to Kanata and there's a station in Markham then the train might be a good option, but you're probably not taking Porter (actually you're probably driving now).

I'm sure there are plenty who fly today. It's a 4 hr drive. And tech companies aren't in the habit of making their employees waste time sitting in a car. 2.5 hrs on a train on the other hand is productive time.

Broadly, you seem obsessed with a rather narrow set of potential converts from air to rail. Nobody is suggesting that HFR will kill flights between Toronto and Ottawa. But even a marginally competitive service will definitely pressure fares and margins enough to force some schedule consolidation. There's rotations where losing 10-15 pax, would force Porter to consolidate flights. More to the point, schedules aren't sacrosanct. If that crew and airplane can get a better return flying somewhere else, that is what the airline will do. So any scenario where rail service sees notable improvement is going to bring some reduction in air service. The only question is how much. I just happened to think Porter is the most vulnerable of the bunch.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

So mileage collector I guess. Your skepticism here on this speaks for itself. As does the gish gallop on here....

Yeah, the 1000 aeroplan points I have collected over the past decade on the Toronto-Ottawa route are a real big motivation (along with the zero Westjet points and zero porter points). At this rate I can take my dream trip to Moose Jaw in 250 years.

[rbt]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Here is where comparing us to other locales would make sense. What mode elsewhere tend to suffer the most when HFR is brought online?

IIRC, HFR tends to get a lot of voluntary (non-business) travellers. Weekend getaways, seeing family, and daily commuters (spending from their own pocket).


High Speed Rail in Europe, quite oddly, attracts a fair amount of business travel and short-haul competitor airlines end up targeting the discount tourism traveller. I think that's mostly a train capacity problem though; double the train length and halve the ticket price and discount travellers would likely use it too. Most European HSR routes are more expensive than similar flights.

Chinese HSR, despite the massive network and carrying 2.2 billion passengers/year, is getting clobbered by airline growth in largely because flying is cheaper and faster and has more frequent service. HSR services need a large affordable 3rd class cabin space to compete, or lengthen and reprice 2nd class. ~1200 passengers per train (their largest model) is still much too short, though I expect there is a physics limit for that as Shinkansen is roughly the same capacity per train and also woefully inadequate to keep up with demand.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yeah, the 1000 aeroplan points I have collected over the past decade on the Toronto-Ottawa route are a real big motivation (along with the zero Westjet points and zero porter points). At this rate I can take my dream trip to Moose Jaw in 250 years.

Wasn't referring to air miles....