VIA Rail

[someone123]

Originally Posted by roger1818

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)?

For a route like Halifax-Moncton or Moncton-SJ, train travel could easily be faster than flying or even driving. It could be the main way people get around. It was up until a few decades ago; the Maritimes had an extensive passenger rail network.

I think trains might also be more reliable in winter conditions and the Cobquid Pass in particular suffers from bad winter storms. So this would be a big advantage to a train. Unfortunately right now the train is much less reliable than driving with huge delays (well, outside of covid; I don't even think it's running right now).

[kool maudit]

Trains are a lot more relaxing than planes during corona times... not sealed/better ventilated vs. planes, less crowded, no gate and security crowding.

[swimmer_spe]

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.

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.

The Downeaster is the train running Between Boston and Brunswick ME. It used to run to Halifax.

Originally Posted by someone123

For a route like Halifax-Moncton or Moncton-SJ, train travel could easily be faster than flying or even driving. It could be the main way people get around. It was up until a few decades ago; the Maritimes had an extensive passenger rail network.

I think trains might also be more reliable in winter conditions and the Cobquid Pass in particular suffers from bad winter storms. So this would be a big advantage to a train. Unfortunately right now the train is much less reliable than driving with huge delays (well, outside of covid; I don't even think it's running right now).

The speed limit on the highway is 110km/hr. Right now, the train cannot compete with the speed.

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Trains are a lot more relaxing than planes during corona times... not sealed/better ventilated vs. planes, less crowded, no gate and security crowding.

This is why rail can expand in this time better than air travel.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Trains are a lot more relaxing than planes during corona times... not sealed/better ventilated vs. planes, less crowded, no gate and security crowding.

I'm still surprised rail hasn't caught on more since 9/11. If that didn't do, COVID won't either unfortunately.

I've used rail from Vancouver to Seattle. It's more expensive and takes longer (!!) than the bus that leaves from the same station.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I've used rail from Vancouver to Seattle. It's more expensive and takes longer (!!) than the bus that leaves from the same station.

The Vancouver-Seattle train is just sad. Slow, crappy schedule, unreliable. Connects the downtowns of two large metro areas that are less than 250 km apart, runs along a route similar to I-5 which is very congested. Emblematic of how crappy rail service is in North America. It also shows how transportation policies focused on highway development have failed since sprawl suburbs can crop up to congest practically any size of highway which is then very challenging and expensive to add capacity to. Too much highway, not enough rail.

[esquire]

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.

As has been mentioned, a Winnipeg-Minneapolis train probably wouldn't be routed through Fargo or Grand Forks.

I would not expect a train between this city pair to do very well. Business travellers fly (it's never a cheap ticket, it is quite often cheaper to buy a ticket to Atlanta or some other Delta city via MSP than it is to fly to MSP itself), and leisure travellers drive. One of the main benefits of driving is that Minneapolis is a place where having a car is helpful, so when you drive you have a car to use there. But that said, the improving rapid transit system in the Twin Cities is making a car less essential than it used to be.

Given that a train is unlikely to match the speed that a car travel between Winnipeg and Minneapolis, there has to be a cost advantage. And can an operator make a train work with low cost tickets? I don't think so.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

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.

You can have pre clearance, as you do for planes, but that requires getting rid of the milk run stops.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You can have pre clearance, as you do for planes, but that requires getting rid of the milk run stops.

That's kind of my point. Pre-clearance only really works when on one of the sides of the boarder there is only one stop. For example on the Cascades has pre-clearance in Vancouver, as it is the only stop in Canada.

In theory you could have pre-clearance at multiple stations on the route, but that adds to the cost and largely prevents domestic travel between those stations on that train. For the Maple Leaf this would be completely impractical (without splitting it into two routes) as there are too many stations on both sides of the boarder and too much domestic travel in both Countries on the route.

For the Adirondack, it could be possible but I suspect the volume traffic at Saint-Lambert would likely not be worth the expense, and they would likely just skip it and have Montreal the only stop in Canada. I gather pre-clearance facilities have been built but for some reason they are still waiting for final approval to open them. Does anyone have any insight as to why?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by someone123

The Vancouver-Seattle train is just sad. Slow, crappy schedule, unreliable. Connects the downtowns of two large metro areas that are less than 250 km apart, runs along a route similar to I-5 which is very congested. Emblematic of how crappy rail service is in North America. It also shows how transportation policies focused on highway development have failed since sprawl suburbs can crop up to congest practically any size of highway which is then very challenging and expensive to add capacity to. Too much highway, not enough rail.

The big issue is the track in Canada. If you look at the Schedule, despite pre-clearance in Vancouver it takes 2 hours to do the 62 miles from Vancouver to Bellingham and less than 1.5 hours to do the 95 miles from Bellingham to Seattle.

The biggest problem is the track that winds along the coast, especially at Crescent Beach in White Rock. There has been talk for years about diverting it to follow the 99 corridor, but nothing ever gets done. Part of the problem is the track is owned by BNSF and the service is operated by Amtrack (both American), so neither the Canadian or BC governments want to help, yet the American government won't want to pay to upgrade track in Canada. After all, what could go wrong when you have train tracks along a popular, public beach?

To quote PHrenetic, "NoJoy!"

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

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

I'm in the Maritimes and have never heard that.....and actually it was the Gull that ran between Boston-Saint John-Halifax. In later years you had to change trains in Saint John to continue onto Halifax. The Gull made it's last run in 1960.

You'd have to go back to the 1930's to find the Down Easter (spelling)......with a through sleeper between New York (GCT) and Halifax NS via Worcester on Summer Fridays. It was added to the Boston-Halifax Pine Tree Acadian





Ferry service between New England and Nova Scotia is much more practical than a train. The Maritimes are a vacation destination and people want their cars, trailers and RVs.

CN launched the Bluenose Ferry back in 1956 on the 6 hour, 98 nautical mile between Bar Harbor Maine and Yarmouth Nova Scotia.





By the 1980's there was also Cruise type Ferries running between Portland Maine and Yarmouth (185 miles taking 10 1/2 hours) Portland is 100 miles from Boston. After the 9-11 attacks and then the Passport requirement.....tourism between the US and Canada dropped off considerably and the Portland run was discontinued for several years.





The service was restarted......then up until 2 years ago Bay Ferries was using a High Speed Cat Ferry taking 6 hrs between Portland and Yarmouth. The Ferry Terminal has now been relocated up the Maine coast back to Bar Harbour from Portland and the Cat Ferry will now do the run to Yarmouth in 3 1/2 hrs. (the Cat is not running this year due to Covid)


https://www.ferries.ca/thecat/overview/

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by someone123

This is correct, and they are much smaller than major metropolitan areas, but one point that is sometimes missed is that the Maritimes have a higher than normal proportion of rural residents, and many of those live in towns that are actually pretty easy to serve along a single route. Counting only the cities underestimates the total market of a rail route pretty significantly around the central part of the Maritimes.

For example Truro CA is about an hour north of Halifax and has 45,000 people yet towns like that tend not to get considered at all. I think Truro has a stop on the Ocean route. Rural Kings County NS actually has a higher population density than the Fredericton CMA and 60% as many people. Part of Hants County NS is getting added to the Halifax CMA next census period and people in that area would be able to take the train too.

For fun, I made a map using the population data of "larger" communities from this Wikipedia page. I colour coded the markers based on population (red x > 100,000, Orange 50,000 > x > 100,000, and Yellow 10,000 > x > 50,000). I also changed the marker based on if it currently has rail or bus service (most places with rail service also have bus service and they often share a station). I didn't include with the communities in Newfoundland and Labrador as they are out of scope for this project, but I did add communities, Prince Edward Island, since they do appear on this view, but I didn't include the in my analysis.

I then overlaid the various Rail Right Of Ways (thanks swimmer_spe for permission to use his map data). I truncated them at the Quebec and Maine boarders. I also added a layer for the Saint John-Digby Ferry.

The first projection only shows the existing passenger service on the Ocean. Notice how it not only connects the two largest cities, but it also connects half of the larger communities in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.


(Click to enlarge)

The second projection adds the Active ROWs (and the ferry) that could (in theory) have passenger service added to them without too much difficulty. Note how each branch only adds one community with larger population. Some thoughts about this:
[LIST=1][*]If commuter or regional service were added from Truro to Halifax (separate from the Ocean), it might make sense to extend it to New Glasgow since it is a short extension that adds significant ridership.[*]While adding service to Saint John might be worth while on its own, it wouldn't connect to any other communities with larger population. It should also be noted that the ferry to Digby, which would be a shorter option than existing rail routes (with appropriate connecting services).[*]Shortening the Ocean to use the Napadonogan Sub, would significantly reduce the population served.


(Click to enlarge)

I did include a layer which shows some of the Abandoned ROWs. To see everything and play with the different layers use the following link.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?m...dY&usp=sharing

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ghYHZ

I'm in the Maritimes and have never heard that.....and actually it was the Gull that ran between Boston-Saint John-Halifax. In later years you had to change trains in Saint John to continue onto Halifax. The Gull made it's last run in 1960.

You'd have to go back to the 1930's to find the Down Easter (spelling)......with a through sleeper between New York (GCT) and Halifax NS via Worcester on Summer Fridays. It was added to the Boston-Halifax Pine Tree Acadian
[/url]

I know it was the Gull when it ran the whole length. I am referring to the existing Amtrak service, then if extended could reach Halifax. It could keep it's current name, or, they could call the extended service a different name.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I know it was the Gull when it ran the whole length. I am referring to the existing Amtrak service, then if extended could reach Halifax. It could keep it's current name, or, they could call the extended service a different name.

The name is a red herring. What is at issue is your ascertain that,

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

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

regardless of the name used. While in theory it could be done, I can't find any evidence that such an extension is even being considered by Amtrak.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

The name is a red herring. What is at issue is your ascertain that,
regardless of the name used. While in theory it could be done, I can't find any evidence that such an extension is even being considered by Amtrak.

I have been looking for the reference that I saw a few years ago. I cannot find it either. Maybe it is the same thing as the discussions on HSR in Canada.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by someone123

The Vancouver-Seattle train is just sad. Slow, crappy schedule, unreliable. Connects the downtowns of two large metro areas that are less than 250 km apart, runs along a route similar to I-5 which is very congested. Emblematic of how crappy rail service is in North America. It also shows how transportation policies focused on highway development have failed since sprawl suburbs can crop up to congest practically any size of highway which is then very challenging and expensive to add capacity to. Too much highway, not enough rail.

A problem with the rail network in the Vancouver area is that all CN, VIA and Amtrak traffic must use the New Westminster bridge over the Fraser River. It’s a single track swing bridge, and from my observations, the bridge is open to let ships pass a fairly significant amount of the time. It is possibly one of the worst bottlenecks in Western Canada’s rail network, and has basically not been upgraded since 1904.

Fun fact: Prior to the opening of the Patullo Bridge in the 1930s, the New Westminster bridge was also used by non-rail traffic. There was a second deck above the railway tracks that was used by automobiles, horse-drawn vehicles, and pedestrians.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

A problem with the rail network in the Vancouver area is that all CN, VIA and Amtrak traffic must use the New Westminster bridge over the Fraser River. It’s a single track swing bridge, and from my observations, the bridge is open to let ships pass a fairly significant amount of the time. It is possibly one of the worst bottlenecks in Western Canada’s rail network, and has basically not been upgraded since 1904.

Fun fact: Prior to the opening of the Patullo Bridge in the 1930s, the New Westminster bridge was also used by non-rail traffic. There was a second deck above the railway tracks that was used by automobiles, horse-drawn vehicles, and pedestrians.

How could that problem be fixed?

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by roger1818

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



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.

I agree with you on this. Even when the border wasn't thickened, customs clearance at the border was the thing that often created delays for the International on the Sarnia/Port Huron route. With more frequent service from Toronto to Windsor/Detroit and Detroit to Chicago it would not be a big issue for people going the full length of the corridor as customs clearance in Detroit would eliminate delays for most people. In order to make clearance in Detroit work you would need to have multiple frequencies to reduce the cost of providing customs clearance.This could be done for the Canadian portion of the route by routing all Via trains to Detroit as there final destination/origin. There are already multiple daily trains ( ex covid) on both Amtrak and Via so the costs to do this would be building a new station in Windsor, and a Cdn customs facility in Detroit and improving some existing track infrastructure. These improvements would increase reliability dramatically.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Trains are a lot more relaxing than planes during corona times... not sealed/better ventilated vs. planes, less crowded, no gate and security crowding.

Even before COVID, trains were a hell of a lot more pleasurable than flying for short and mid range distances.

Believe it or not there was a time when people actually looked forward to flying. That was when you weren't crushed in like sardines, you got a meal even on the shortest of trips, pillows, no lineups or endless and painful security clearances, for intra-national flights you only had to be at the airport 30 to 45 minutes before departure not 3 hours, and you basically just walked on your flight after you get your boarding pass.

In the last 40 years we have seen so much or our lives change and technology has made our lives so much easier in so many ways but air travel sticks out as a glaring exception. Air travel has become nothing short of Chinese water torture.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Even before COVID, trains were a hell of a lot more pleasurable than flying for short and mid range distances.

Believe it or not there was a time when people actually looked forward to flying. That was when you weren't crushed in like sardines, you got a meal even on the shortest of trips, pillows, no lineups or endless and painful security clearances, for intra-national flights you only had to be at the airport 30 to 45 minutes before departure not 3 hours, and you basically just walked on your flight after you get your boarding pass.

In the last 40 years we have seen so much or our lives change and technology has made our lives so much easier in so many ways but air travel sticks out as a glaring exception. Air travel has become nothing short of Chinese water torture.

Which is why we might be in the rebirth of traveling by train. Instead of thinking it has to compete with air, why not look at it as "can this be done in a day". That is why the Corridor works well, it can be traveled end to end in a day.

[Truenorth00]

Nobody travels end to end in the Corridor by train. I'd be surprised if even 1% of Corridor tickets are Windsor to Quebec City. Anybody going that far is driving for vacation or flying for business. This is exactly why HFR is needed. It expands the range of train users.

Edit: I don't think current schedules even allow end-to-end travel without overnighting in Montreal or Toronto.