VIA Rail

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

You have not explained your above mentioned point. On one hand you say that you don't disagree that smaller cities should not have service but you say it makes more sense to provide service in a different market. The point here is that relatively speaking there is lots of service in the corridor, even though it is inadequate but no daily service anywhere west from Toronto. Why are any points between Toronto and Vancouver regardless of their size not entitled to passenger rail service. You wonder why the West feels alienated. This is a classic example. The total funding envelope needs to be expanded, but not at the expense of providing service on a reasonable basis through out the country.

You cannot say that Regina does not deserve service because it only has 228,928 people. It is the travel demand between Calgary and Regina, including the points in between. Here is a list of all the cities that you say do not deserve to have the service back that they once had in order that we can service towns on the current route from Winnipeg to Edmonton that for the most part have populations less than 10,000. Why does this make sense? Are the northern prairies any more scenic than the southern?

Calgary 1,336,000
Brooks 14,451
Medicine Hat 63,260
Swift Current 16.604
Moose Jaw 33,890
Regina 228,928
Brandon 48,859
Portage la Prairie 13,304
Winnipeg 808,419
Total 2,563,685 Note: this is not a small number in comparison with service currently provided on some Via routes.

Some of these potential travellers would also access rail service to Red Deer and Edmonton.

This is about addressing western alienation, climate change and providing accessible public transport. Nobody is suggesting running trains on a daily basis to smaller towns.

The reason that my statements probably don't make sense to you is that I'm you're thinking in terms of whether or not locations "deserve" rail service (just like the Toronto suburbanites) and I'm not. I don't consider it a relevant part of the discussion. What's important to me is which locations make the most sense for rail service in terms of things such as the greatest increase in ridership kilometers and pollution reduction in proportion to the investment. I agree it's about addressing climate change, but I'm not as interested in the causes of "western alienation" or "accessible public transport" because there are other ways to address those things besides railways which aren't necessarily the best (or even a good) solution for them.

I've never said that Regina or any of the other places don't "deserve" rail service, because I think every single part of the country deserves it. Every town and city in Canada is wonderful and deserves all the best of every type of infrastructure. But with limited funds, I want to see the funds get priority where they'll get the best returns.

[J81]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I mean running Metrolinx trains on the proposed corridor, not the current one. Perhaps using the type of trains that we are currently using for UPX will do?

Metrolinx is a commuter rail service which has no interest presently in operating long distances. Their trains are not spec’d to run long distance. Especially not the UPX trains which coincidently are garbage. If VIA gets their HFR corridor built as well as the new trainsets itll be interesting to see how well its used. Not much along that corridor aside from peterborough

[J81]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I believe portions of The Canadian also fill this role in Northern Ontario, particularly in Northwestern Ontario.

Indeed it does.

[J81]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If VIA will be using dedicated tracks, I wonder what the actual frequency limit will be? Even if there was just one or two commuter specials heading into town in the morning and the reverse again in the evening, it could help a lot of people.

Also, do we know what the HFR route would be through the GTA? I'm assuming it wouldn't be using the LSE corridor as that would present potential capacity problems as RER and/or Smart Track ramps up.

Are you asking if there will be commuter specials on the HFR route? Id say the chances are good there will be at least one. There currently is a few early trains into Union from east and west that bring commuters in from as far as Kingston and London which arrive at Union around 830am. Most return on evening trains.

As far as i know after the old CP line gets to Agincourt Yard a new route will have to be created to connect with the line that currently goes up the Don Valley.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The reason that my statements probably don't make sense to you is that I'm you're thinking in terms of whether or not locations "deserve" rail service (just like the Toronto suburbanites) and I'm not. I don't consider it a relevant part of the discussion. What's important to me is which locations make the most sense for rail service in terms of things such as the greatest increase in ridership kilometers and pollution reduction in proportion to the investment. I agree it's about addressing climate change, but I'm not as interested in the causes of "western alienation" or "accessible public transport" because there are other ways to address those things besides railways which aren't necessarily the best (or even a good) solution for them.

I've never said that Regina or any of the other places don't "deserve" rail service, because I think every single part of the country deserves it. Every town and city in Canada is wonderful and deserves all the best of every type of infrastructure. But with limited funds, I want to see the funds get priority where they'll get the best returns.

So, let's leave the 4th largest city void of any intercity train service?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, let's leave the 4th largest city void of any intercity train service?

As a resident of that city, yes. We have no need of a milk run to Regina or Swift Current, we can just drive or fly. What might be useful are trains to Edmonton or Banff, but that's not what you're talking about and the provincial government can do it.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by milomilo

As a resident of that city, yes. We have no need of a milk run to Regina or Swift Current, we can just drive or fly. What might be useful are trains to Edmonton or Banff, but that's not what you're talking about and the provincial government can do it.

If the Calgary-Edmonton run can be done provincially, I can’t see why Toronto-Ottawa run can’t be done provincially either (in case HFR by Via falls apart).

Also @swimmer_spe, if it takes a train 6 hours to cover 300 km, no one’s gonna take it. I take you to mean 6 hours there and back. Then maybe some will do it, in which case, no milk run please. Service needs to run at least hourly. Ps: I didn’t know you were this involved in Urban Toronto.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

As a resident of that city, yes. We have no need of a milk run to Regina or Swift Current, we can just drive or fly. What might be useful are trains to Edmonton or Banff, but that's not what you're talking about and the provincial government can do it.

The provincial government hasn't done it, has it? What about someone wanting to go from, say Moose Jaw to Calgary? The service is not just for a local, but for those going there.

Now, before you respond with something, do you take public transit? Do you own a personal vehicle?

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

If the Calgary-Edmonton run can be done provincially, I can’t see why Toronto-Ottawa run can’t be done provincially either (in case HFR by Via falls apart).

Also @swimmer_spe, if it takes a train 6 hours to cover 300 km, no one’s gonna take it. I take you to mean 6 hours there and back. Then maybe some will do it, in which case, no milk run please. Service needs to run at least hourly. Ps: I didn’t know you were this involved in Urban Toronto.

Toronto to Montreal can be driven in about 5 hours. Depending on the departure, Via has runs that take about 5 hours to as long as almost 9 hours! That is almost double, and is most likely the milk run. They have it, so it must be busy enough to run it.

As far as Urban Toronto, well, Toronto is my capital, and I am interested in the city.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The provincial government hasn't done it, has it? What about someone wanting to go from, say Moose Jaw to Calgary? The service is not just for a local, but for those going there.

Now, before you respond with something, do you take public transit? Do you own a personal vehicle?

This isn't relevant and I shouldn't answer your red herring, but yes I have a personal vehicle. I occasionally take transit, but it isn't convenient for where I work. The important thing is I highly support public transit spending, I just only support good spending. I don't support arbitrarily only supporting rail transit where it doesn't make sense or is not cost effective.

If the government is to support transit to Moose Jaw, again, subsidizing a bus would be the better option. Given limited resources, for the same money a bus could provide faster, more frequent, more reliable services. Why would you want service that is less frequent, less reliable and slower?

No, Alberta isn't building any passenger rail. But if we made it a political priority, we would be in a fine place to build it. VIA has to beg for funding so can only focus on HFR, and we'll have to wait for that to be running before they even think about us.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

If the Calgary-Edmonton run can be done provincially, I can’t see why Toronto-Ottawa run can’t be done provincially either (in case HFR by Via falls apart).

True, but VIA is already running an intraprovincial route and it probably needs the whole Toronto-Montreal line to make it successful. So it makes sense for VIA to keep upgrading it. If they fail, maybe GO will have to step in to get it to Ottawa, and Quebec can do something on their end.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

You cannot say that Regina does not deserve service because it only has 228,928 people. It is the travel demand between Calgary and Regina, including the points in between. Here is a list of all the cities that you say do not deserve to have the service back that they once had in order that we can service towns on the current route from Winnipeg to Edmonton that for the most part have populations less than 10,000. Why does this make sense? Are the northern prairies any more scenic than the southern?

Calgary 1,336,000
Brooks 14,451
Medicine Hat 63,260
Swift Current 16.604
Moose Jaw 33,890
Regina 228,928
Brandon 48,859
Portage la Prairie 13,304
Winnipeg 808,419
Total 2,563,685 Note: this is not a small number in comparison with service currently provided on some Via routes.

Some of these potential travellers would also access rail service to Red Deer and Edmonton.

This is about addressing western alienation, climate change and providing accessible public transport. Nobody is suggesting running trains on a daily basis to smaller towns.

Go to Urban Toronto and ask Urban Sky this question, he'll let you know exactly why the Canadian runs the way it does.

I don't want to do a disservice by posting things that aren't accurate, but AFAIK the Canadian runs the way it does because VIA has a mandate both to run that tourist service, and run some mandatory services to remote communities. The single route it takes is the most efficient way of fulfilling both those roles.

If it was just running for local traffic, it likely won't run at all, so the question of whether the southern cities 'deserve' rail less than the northern ones is irrelevant. A second milk run through the south would be a waste of money.

If we are to think about reintroducing rail to the prairies (and I think we should), we have to start where there is most bang for buck. It may be home team advantage, but it seems clear to me that the obvious place for that is Calgary, and Edmonton. Calgary has opportunity for commuter rail as its rail lines are conveniently placed, and we can run lines to Banff, Lake Louise and Edmonton that would actually be useful and well used. For everything else, start running buses to gauge demand. If there is enough demand to start filling hourly trains - start doing that.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Go to Urban Toronto and ask Urban Sky this question, he'll let you know exactly why the Canadian runs the way it does.

I don't want to do a disservice by posting things that aren't accurate, but AFAIK the Canadian runs the way it does because VIA has a mandate both to run that tourist service, and run some mandatory services to remote communities. The single route it takes is the most efficient way of fulfilling both those roles.

If it was just running for local traffic, it likely won't run at all, so the question of whether the southern cities 'deserve' rail less than the northern ones is irrelevant. A second milk run through the south would be a waste of money.

If we are to think about reintroducing rail to the prairies (and I think we should), we have to start where there is most bang for buck. It may be home team advantage, but it seems clear to me that the obvious place for that is Calgary, and Edmonton. Calgary has opportunity for commuter rail as its rail lines are conveniently placed, and we can run lines to Banff, Lake Louise and Edmonton that would actually be useful and well used. For everything else, start running buses to gauge demand. If there is enough demand to start filling hourly trains - start doing that.

Actually, the single route goes where it does because of politics. Why would an Edmonton MP support something that went though Calgary and not Edmonton?

Lets be honest, all public transportation is politics. The west hasn't mattered in Canadian politics for so long that it is virtually ignored. Maybe it is time to change that.

Part of me has half a mind to work on a study that could be submitted to the government to change the Canadian and Ocean to daily services, as well as add the old Dominion service.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Actually, the single route goes where it does because of politics. Why would an Edmonton MP support something that went though Calgary and not Edmonton?

Actually, you made that up. No one cares about VIA here, because the practical reality is it does not exist in either city as a viable transportation method. Will you address the other points I made, or are you going to keep bringing up things that are irrelevant?

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Actually, you made that up. No one cares about VIA here, because the practical reality is it does not exist in either city as a viable transportation method. Will you address the other points I made, or are you going to keep bringing up things that are irrelevant?

I heard that one major factor is that the rail track follows a very convoluted path entering Edmonton. Do you happen to have a map showing the path? I’d like to see for myself.

[milomilo]

If you search for Canadian rail atlas you'll find a useful tool, it shows all the active railways in Canada and their ownership.

Yes, the paths are convoluted as they are no longer set up for passengers but for freight. Running a line from Calgary to Edmonton will be quite hard as there is nothing at the Edmonton end to link into, Calgary is easy at least though.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by milomilo

If you search for Canadian rail atlas you'll find a useful tool, it shows all the active railways in Canada and their ownership.

Yes, the paths are convoluted as they are no longer set up for passengers but for freight. Running a line from Calgary to Edmonton will be quite hard as there is nothing at the Edmonton end to link into, Calgary is easy at least though.

Lol I give up. Even if it’s possible to find a rail link into Edmonton downtown, it’s too built up to slip in a major passenger rail station.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by esquire

On the list of issues triggering western alienation, the lack of passenger rail service would have to be somewhere around page 20.

I absolutely agree. Using VIA to negate supposed Western Alienation is exactly what VIA shouldn't be doing and is one of the main reasons VIA is in the shape it's in.

VIA should, under no scenario, be governed with politics in mind which unfortunately it is. Politics is why we have rail service to every corner of the country regardless of financial or economic considerations. There are only 2 places were any rail service can be justified...…..Calgary/Edmonton and The Corridor. Unfortunately, due to politics, those areas are starved of funds so we can spend all our tax dollars on service to Prince Rupert and Churchill.

ALL routes outside those 2 corridors should be completely axed and buses should be used which not only would make far more financial sense but also provide far superior service to many more people. The only exceptions that MAY be justified is running the Canadian and Atlantic routes in the high tourism summer. Due to politics, VIA is forced to provide some service to most Canadians and the result is that no one gets served well.

[Dengler Avenue]

Well let’s start with the ones in Quebec first. If you are successful in axing those in Quebec, the rest is just a piece of cake.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Actually, you made that up. No one cares about VIA here, because the practical reality is it does not exist in either city as a viable transportation method. Will you address the other points I made, or are you going to keep bringing up things that are irrelevant?

I didn't make it up....

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The loss of the Calgary VIA service has NOTHING to do with being a crown corporation nor Ottawa as it was very much the result of an action taken by an Albertan, namely Don Mazonkowski.

He was the Minister of Transportation during the Mulroney administration when the VIA cuts took place. One of the Western routes had to go and logic would dictate that the Southern/Calgary route would be the one that would still operate but logic was trumped by politics. Mazonkowski represented an Edmonton riding and hence the northern route was chosen to guarantee his re-election.

I know it's fashionable to blame Ottawa for all of Albertans woes but VIA choosing the northern route was very much a consequence of an Albertan.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

If you search for Canadian rail atlas you'll find a useful tool, it shows all the active railways in Canada and their ownership.

Yes, the paths are convoluted as they are no longer set up for passengers but for freight. Running a line from Calgary to Edmonton will be quite hard as there is nothing at the Edmonton end to link into, Calgary is easy at least though.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Lol I give up. Even if it’s possible to find a rail link into Edmonton downtown, it’s too built up to slip in a major passenger rail station.

https://rac.jmaponline.net/canadianrailatlas/

There you go.