VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

You are right, until you have numbers to back your claims, there is no point debating it any further.

Yet others will. I respect your desire to stop arguing one way or the other.

Originally Posted by roger1818

No. There are a few different bus lines in Saskatchewan. A quick Google had me find: Rider Express, KCTI Travels, and Affordable Rides.

Oh, I did not know. I will look into those more.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Even with no bus service, as long as there are highways, it would be best to start with that.

And they have good data on usage.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Agreed, which is why it’s so expensive.

Yup.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Also frequency of service and cost.

Hence the "etc". I know there are many things that play into it.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ir maybe not. People will only pay so much in time, money and convenience for a bit more comfort.
Buses have the same or fewer security issues as trains.
Blizzards only happen a few days a year. Sure the rains may have more riders those days but will they still be popular on days that there isn’t a storm?

Each mode has the good and bad of each. The goal is to show that there is room for rail and it will fit within the current needs. However, the bigger goal is to show whether it can. Maybe it can't.

Originally Posted by roger1818

The key is can you convince enough people that the mix is that it’s worth the price, time, and reduced convenience (I’d the frequency is low)? I have my doubts.

The ones to convince are the decision makers and the future riders.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I wis you the best of luck and look forward to reading your results. The key is backing up your results with real data.

That is the plan.

[Dengler Avenue]

Oh yea, by the way, if you need help with any advanced data analysis, let me know. Since we’ve PM-ed each other so often, though, we may need to find another way to do it (or else we will run out of space in no time).

As for the other report... hehehe do you really need to ask? It’s something we used to advocate together.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Oh yea, by the way, if you need help with any advanced data analysis, let me know. Since we’ve PM-ed each other so often, though, we may need to find another way to do it (or else we will run out of space in no time).

As for the other report... hehehe do you really need to ask? It’s something we used to advocate together.

PM me your email and we can do it through emails. Likely doing a Google docs so that many of us can contribute.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

PM me your email and we can do it through emails. Likely doing a Google docs so that many of us can contribute.

Are there others that have already joined?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I think this horse has been beaten to a bloody pulp. It is time to work on a business plan for it that can show who is right. If it is no worse than existing service, then it might be worth doing.



Wait, I thought there is no bus service in Saskatchewan. So, having no service on bus, but service on rail means that it automatically would be better. Therefore your argument about going Calgary-Winnipeg is moot.

There is much that would need to be factored into returning any service to any route. This includes, but is not limited to: rolling stock, stations, rail upgrades, employees, and more.

Better is a great argument. But you have to define better. It is not just about speed. Comfort, amenities, security clearance issues, weather issues, etc can make one mode better than the others.
Would you ride something that takes longer, but is more comfortable? Maybe.
Would you ride something that allows you to take things and not worry about the security issues? Maybe.
What about making sure you get there even in the blizzard? Maybe.

It is not just about speed, or just about profitability, or any one issue. It is about the right mix.

My goal is to dive into the stats and see what they show. Maybe they show everything more than what we have would be worse, maybe they show everything I have suggested and more are better than the Corridor. I am going into this with the need for the numbers to show me something, not for me to skew them my way. Once I have compiled it, it could show me you are right. If so, I will accept that, and even admit it.

Speed isn't the only thing that makes an intercity transit line better or worse than another, but it is one of the most important things, along with reliability, frequency and price. A train running on a non-upgraded CP line from Calgary - Edmonton would not even be close to competing with a bus on those metrics, so whether it is more comfortable is fairly irrelevant.

To expand on why it would be worse on all of those metrics:

• Speed - I do know exactly how fast the trains on the CP line go, but they do not appear to be going faster than 100km/h (and probably slower). So a VIA train could not go faster than that, and will probably be held up. And they often seem to be not moving at all. You also have to factor in that that the Edmonton end has no downtown station, so add another ~15 minutes to get downtown. A bus can travel close to 110km/h for most of the route.
• Reliability - Obvious, CP don't care about VIA trains, it's their line and they will prioritise their own
• Frequency - Trains are much bigger, more expensive to buy and run and there will be limited slots, so they can't be run as often
• Price - Given all that we know, it's obvious a same capacity rail line will have higher operating costs than a bus. So either ticket price must be higher, or massive subsidy must be given

[milomilo]

Plus, remember why they shut the Calgary - Edmonton route in the first place; because of all the accidents at level crossings (or at least that was the final straw). You'll have to price fixing all those in just to get to your base scenario rail. Whereas running buses has virtually no capital costs, you can just lease buses and run them, or contract out a service.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Are there others that have already joined?

Yes.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Speed isn't the only thing that makes an intercity transit line better or worse than another, but it is one of the most important things, along with reliability, frequency and price. A train running on a non-upgraded CP line from Calgary - Edmonton would not even be close to competing with a bus on those metrics, so whether it is more comfortable is fairly irrelevant.

To expand on why it would be worse on all of those metrics:

• Speed - I do know exactly how fast the trains on the CP line go, but they do not appear to be going faster than 100km/h (and probably slower). So a VIA train could not go faster than that, and will probably be held up. And they often seem to be not moving at all. You also have to factor in that that the Edmonton end has no downtown station, so add another ~15 minutes to get downtown. A bus can travel close to 110km/h for most of the route.
• Reliability - Obvious, CP don't care about VIA trains, it's their line and they will prioritise their own
• Frequency - Trains are much bigger, more expensive to buy and run and there will be limited slots, so they can't be run as often
• Price - Given all that we know, it's obvious a same capacity rail line will have higher operating costs than a bus. So either ticket price must be higher, or massive subsidy must be given

Ah, I see you want to keep beating the pulverized horse.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Plus, remember why they shut the Calgary - Edmonton route in the first place; because of all the accidents at level crossings (or at least that was the final straw). You'll have to price fixing all those in just to get to your base scenario rail. Whereas running buses has virtually no capital costs, you can just lease buses and run them, or contract out a service.

Another one that likes to continue to pummel the pulverized horse.

So, you are telling me that the current Corridor service has no level crossings?

[milomilo]

If we are correct, why should we not continue to explain how?

You ignored virtually everything I wrote in that post to use the least important point to disagree on. Yes, level crossings exist on other lines. But if for whatever reason the ones on the Calgary - Edmonton line were more dangerous, then reinsatating that rail service is likely going to require fixing them. But that is the least important part of my argument.

Do you disagree with my reasoning of why a train would be worse than a bus on the four most important metrics?

[J81]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Speed isn't the only thing that makes an intercity transit line better or worse than another, but it is one of the most important things, along with reliability, frequency and price. A train running on a non-upgraded CP line from Calgary - Edmonton would not even be close to competing with a bus on those metrics, so whether it is more comfortable is fairly irrelevant.

To expand on why it would be worse on all of those metrics:

• Speed - I do know exactly how fast the trains on the CP line go, but they do not appear to be going faster than 100km/h (and probably slower). So a VIA train could not go faster than that, and will probably be held up. And they often seem to be not moving at all. You also have to factor in that that the Edmonton end has no downtown station, so add another ~15 minutes to get downtown. A bus can travel close to 110km/h for most of the route.
• Reliability - Obvious, CP don't care about VIA trains, it's their line and they will prioritise their own
• Frequency - Trains are much bigger, more expensive to buy and run and there will be limited slots, so they can't be run as often
• Price - Given all that we know, it's obvious a same capacity rail line will have higher operating costs than a bus. So either ticket price must be higher, or massive subsidy must be given

Freight trains on the Kingston Sub are restricted to 65mph. Via trains run 95mph and even 100mph between Brockville and Coteau. Passenger train speed is almost always higher than freight speed. If train stations are located in a cities downtown it should always quicker by train than bus. There are of course cases where it is not but it takes a bus a lot longer to get in and out of stations and for people to get off and on than it does a train. A Via train going 95mph can stop in a mile and a half, detrain and entrain passengers in 3 minutes and be back up to 95 and on its way in another 3 minutes. A bus is still trying to get off the highway in that time.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J81

Freight trains on the Kingston Sub are restricted to 65mph. Via trains run 95mph and even 100mph between Brockville and Coteau. Passenger train speed is almost always higher than freight speed. If train stations are located in a cities downtown it should always quicker by train than bus. There are of course cases where it is not but it takes a bus a lot longer to get in and out of stations and for people to get off and on than it does a train. A Via train going 95mph can stop in a mile and a half, detrain and entrain passengers in 3 minutes and be back up to 95 and on its way in another 3 minutes. A bus is still trying to get off the highway in that time.

That is only true when operating on class 5 (or higher) track. AFAIK, CN’s Kingston sub is the only Class 5 track in Canada (I believe even VIA’s own track near Ottawa is most class 4). I believe (and please prove me wrong if you can) most of Canada’s main lines are Class 4 or 3. Branch lines are typically Class 3 and below. Consequently, to operate this way, VIA, would have to pay to have the track upgraded, which would only be worth while if they are running multiple trains a day.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by J81

Freight trains on the Kingston Sub are restricted to 65mph. Via trains run 95mph and even 100mph between Brockville and Coteau. Passenger train speed is almost always higher than freight speed. If train stations are located in a cities downtown it should always quicker by train than bus. There are of course cases where it is not but it takes a bus a lot longer to get in and out of stations and for people to get off and on than it does a train. A Via train going 95mph can stop in a mile and a half, detrain and entrain passengers in 3 minutes and be back up to 95 and on its way in another 3 minutes. A bus is still trying to get off the highway in that time.

Along with what roger said (if we could find out the actual line speed, that would be great), even if a VIA train could go 95mph on a clear track, that doesn't matter if there is a CP train either going slow or just sat on the track waiting for something.

The station in Edmonton is not downtown, the closest you would get is probably in Strathcona, so add the cost and time of a cab. The station in Calgary isn't great either, without good connection to public transit.

I'm not actually a big fan of buses, but is the question you have to ask. If a proposed rail line does not perform better on objective metrics than a bus, then it can have no business case. And since we are talking about Calgary - Edmonton, this is the line which has by far the greatest chance of being successful. If running trains on unupgraded lines doesn't work on Calgary - Edmonton, it cannot work on any other line in the prairies.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is only true when operating on class 5 (or higher) track. AFAIK, CN’s Kingston sub is the only Class 5 track in Canada (I believe even VIA’s own track near Ottawa is most class 4). I believe (and please prove me wrong if you can) most of Canada’s main lines are Class 4 or 3. Branch lines are typically Class 3 and below. Consequently, to operate this way, VIA, would have to pay to have the track upgraded, which would only be worth while if they are running multiple trains a day.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Along with what roger said (if we could find out the actual line speed, that would be great), even if a VIA train could go 95mph on a clear track, that doesn't matter if there is a CP train either going slow or just sat on the track waiting for something.

The station in Edmonton is not downtown, the closest you would get is probably in Strathcona, so add the cost and time of a cab. The station in Calgary isn't great either, without good connection to public transit.

I'm not actually a big fan of buses, but is the question you have to ask. If a proposed rail line does not perform better on objective metrics than a bus, then it can have no business case. And since we are talking about Calgary - Edmonton, this is the line which has by far the greatest chance of being successful. If running trains on unupgraded lines doesn't work on Calgary - Edmonton, it cannot work on any other line in the prairies.

I have been told by a future uncle in law that worked for a railway to look for their timetables That can tell you track speed.

Or, use the existing one, possibly move it closer to the future LRT extension.

See problem solved. We don't need to reinvent the wheel here.

[milomilo]

You didn't solve anything, you hand waved away obvious problems and don't answer any questions. The existing VIA station is on the wrong side of the city accessible by a (likely slow) single track branch line, in the middle of nowhere. It's a crap location for a station so not the place to go.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

You didn't solve anything, you hand waved away obvious problems and don't answer any questions. The existing VIA station is on the wrong side of the city accessible by a (likely slow) single track branch line, in the middle of nowhere. It's a crap location for a station so not the place to go.

Getting to downtown with VIA is not necessarily needed if there is a good way to get downtown by using higher order transit. So, lets say, moving the station to be connected to the LRT is only $1 million, where as getting it downtown would be in the order of $5 million, which is better? Both. Do the lower cost option first. Then once demand grows, build more.

Part of the idea is to make sure it connects to the Canadian as well. Having a "union" station is key to making VIA work better for major cities. Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal all have that figured out. So, why not do that in Edmonton? Ottawa's is out of the downtown core, but is connected to the LRT. It seems to do well. Why would we treat Edmonton any different?

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Getting to downtown with VIA is not necessarily needed if there is a good way to get downtown by using higher order transit. So, lets say, moving the station to be connected to the LRT is only $1 million, where as getting it downtown would be in the order of $5 million, which is better? Both. Do the lower cost option first. Then once demand grows, build more.

If you really believe that $1 million is the order of magnitude for the capital cost of making an LRT connect with a rail station (“Edmonton South”, located in Strathcona) which is 2 km away from its current alignment, then this would be the most grotesque indication you’ve provided so far for the shocking degree to which your ability to understand real-word problems has been replaced by an alternative reality in which everyone who doesn’t understand and acknowledge how ingenious your own ideas are is just a stupid moron...

Part of the idea is to make sure it connects to the Canadian as well. Having a "union" station is key to making VIA work better for major cities. Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal all have that figured out. So, why not do that in Edmonton? Ottawa's is out of the downtown core, but is connected to the LRT. It seems to do well. Why would we treat Edmonton any different?

Any suggestions at which existing LRT station in Edmonton such a VIA station serving the Canadian as well as a potential Calgary-Edmonton service could be erected?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

If you believe that $1 million is the order of magnitude for the capital cost of connecting a rail station (Strathcona) with an LRT which is 2 km away from that station, this is just yet another indication for the shocking degree to which your ability to understand real-word problems has been replaced by an alternative reality...

Any suggestions at which existing LRT station in Edmonton such a VIA station serving the Canadian as well as a potential Calgary-Edmonton service could be erected?

The line passes within 500m of Belvedere Station. Maybe a new station there for both the existing Canadian and the future station could be put there. Again, something to look into.

Want to help?

[milomilo]

I understand that he is talking about the existing VIA station on the north side of Edmonton, which would be reasonably close to the future NW LRT line. But would have no benefits whatsoever and be pointless to run a Calgary originating train to. It too would cost more than 1M to modify Edmonton's NW LRT plans, and make that line worse.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I understand that he is talking about the existing VIA station on the north side of Edmonton, which would be reasonably close to the future NW LRT line. But would have no benefits whatsoever and be pointless to run a Calgary originating train to. It too would cost more than 1M to modify Edmonton's NW LRT plans, and make that line worse.

Actually, I was thinking of moving the Via station instead.

[milomilo]

OK. Why bother? The Strathcona station is better located for travel to Calgary. Connection to the Canadian has no value but requires a lengthy runaround the city.