VIA Rail Service - or any Rail service

[mr.x]

a little off-topic and this isn't about Via Rail but CP Rail. they recently announced that they are unveiling new locomotives branded with 2010 colours and the logo on them. anybody got pics or info?

[cornholio]

Building a rail connection from Vancouver to Calgary is pretty stupid. Fist of all Calgary is too far which means rail, even if you used a 500kmp/hr maglev would never be able to compete against the airplane, rail transit is useful for medium length trips of 500km or less. Even within the EU which is smaller then western Canada with a population about 40 times or so larger taking a train from say Paris to Berlin or Rome to Madrid etc. is not done because it doesn't compete price wise or speed wise against the airplane. On top of all this there is almost nothing between the medium sized Vancouver and the small city of Calgary so a rail connection would be completely worthless. Hell our population density hasn't even justified us building a proper 4 lane highway connecting the two. Now talking about highways I gota say with our density, low population and the small amount of tiny town spread out all over the car is the only economical means of transport between the cities and towns because even a airplane cant compete price wise and time wise with a car unless you are willing to shell out more money to wait and take that rare flight to say Prince George for more money than it would cost to fly to London and then if you have to get to say Williams lake you need to catch that once a day greyhound bus for more money then it would cost you to fly form London to Rome.

As far as the lower mainland goes a rail line would be good up until possibly Chilliwack via Abbotsford and Mission and another one heading from White rock/South Surrey to say Scott Road station.

A railway is not always cheaper because you need a way to get to the station, a once an hour bus to a once an hour train from some far flung suburb just doesn't cut it for the regular joe. Increasing the frequencies to run almost empty trains would then make the railway more expensive then the highway.

[jlousa]

^^^^ very well said^^^^
There is nothing else to add to that.

[ikerrin]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Building a rail connection from Vancouver to Calgary is pretty stupid. Fist of all Calgary is too far which means rail, even if you used a 500kmp/hr maglev would never be able to compete against the airplane, rail transit is useful for medium length trips of 500km or less. Even within the EU which is smaller then western Canada with a population about 40 times or so larger taking a train from say Paris to Berlin or Rome to Madrid etc. is not done because it doesn't compete price wise or speed wise against the airplane. On top of all this there is almost nothing between the medium sized Vancouver and the small city of Calgary so a rail connection would be completely worthless.

That's just crazy talk

First off, a train from Calagary to Banf is a no-brainer. Secondly, Vancouver to Kamloops would make good sense and encourage Kamloops to grow as a city and also displace air travel. Finally, Kamloops and Banf are only 450km apart and in between is some of th best skiing on the planet. I say that an overnight train between Calgary and Vancouver would easily compete against the plane. You could arrive refreshed after sleeping on the train and getting in early to do a day of business. Plus, the train would be popular with tourists, students and people going for skiing holidays. Families would use it for vacations, and I bet a lot of people would prefer the train to driving on treacherous winter roads.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Building a rail connection from Vancouver to Calgary is pretty stupid. Fist of all Calgary is too far which means rail, even if you used a 500kmp/hr maglev would never be able to compete against the airplane, rail transit is useful for medium length trips of 500km or less. Even within the EU which is smaller then western Canada with a population about 40 times or so larger taking a train from say Paris to Berlin or Rome to Madrid etc. is not done because it doesn't compete price wise or speed wise against the airplane. On top of all this there is almost nothing between the medium sized Vancouver and the small city of Calgary so a rail connection would be completely worthless. Hell our population density hasn't even justified us building a proper 4 lane highway connecting the two. Now talking about highways I gota say with our density, low population and the small amount of tiny town spread out all over the car is the only economical means of transport between the cities and towns because even a airplane cant compete price wise and time wise with a car unless you are willing to shell out more money to wait and take that rare flight to say Prince George for more money than it would cost to fly to London and then if you have to get to say Williams lake you need to catch that once a day greyhound bus for more money then it would cost you to fly form London to Rome.

Still more justified than a train to Churchill or Flin Flon, no?

[cornholio]

A train from Vancouver to Kamloops would not make sense for the reasons I said. Anyways our geography will mean that car and plane will always be king in BC for at least the remainder of this century. Even with tilting train technology and assuming that no 30-50kmph 200 car freight trains aren't congesting the railway you would be hard pressed to average much over 100kmph on the less direct route. The population density would also never justify more than a train or two a day not to mention that you would have to have a way for people to get to their actual destination once they get to say Kamloops. Also trains like many other things profit the most on turnover, obviously there would be almost none between the two destinations meaning that the ticket prices would be insanely high, you know even in Europe traveling by train only saves you money and time for short to medium distances. A train from say Prague to Amsterdam costs you about 4 times more than a flight and that is if you find a good deal while it takes a extra 12 hours of your time and plenty of transfers, in fact only tourists actually travel long distance in Europe by train as most people travel between two destinations somewhere along the route creating high turnover and a actual profits and lowering the ticket prices for trains. On another note many routes in Europe are cheaper and faster by bus which is what many people also use, in fact I would wager that bus use is almost as high if not higher then train use. Though I agree that in Alberta given the geography and the perfect distance between Edmonton and Calgary you could justify hsr between the two since if done properly it would definitely be faster then plane or car(has to be at least over 200kmphr, the higher the better).

[twoNeurons]

Interestingly, trains in Japan, where all highways are heavily tolled are subsidized. Of course, they are VERY expensive to maintain hyper-fast trains with a perfect safety record, but still. Remember, even though Japan is super dense in cities and bullet trains run every 7-10 minutes from Osaka to Tokyo, it's still cheaper for many to take the overnight bus... and it's cheaper many times, to just fly... and people do both.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE trains, and Japan has a great system, but if people fly and takes busses domestically in Japan... how feasible is a train from Vancouver - Kamloops, for anything other than a tourism train.

a real line would have to push through mountains on maglev tracks... and how many are willing to fork out the bucks to do that? Japan's bullet trains have a minimum 3000m-4000m radius on all corners... that's the SHARPEST corner. If you think about that, it means that to make a 90 degreee turn would take 4.7km - 6.3km.

* Constraint No. 1: Numerous curves
One of the biggest obstacles hampering speedup and shortening of travel
time was the existence of many curves on the line. About two-fifths of
the approximately 500km Tokaido Shinkansen Line between Tokyo and Osaka
consists of curves, and the sharpest curves with a curvature radius of
2,500m (R2,500) include about one-eighth of the total line length.
These curves would hardly be problematical in conventional lines with
lower speed trains, but when the running speed exceeds 200 km/hr, they
stand out as a formidable matter. Therefore, on the newer Shinkansen
lines (Sanyo Shinkansen [from Osaka to Hakata] as well as Tohoku/Joetsu
Shinkansen lines) the sharpest curves are suppressed to a radius of
4,000m.

A maximum speed of 270 km/hr had already been attained in 1985 by a
rolling stock truck in a running test on the Tohoku Shinkansen Line, in
which case no serious problem was encountered, but attaining a speed of
250 km/hr at curved sections is a different matter. With the "Nozomi,"
the main objective was to attain a travel time of 2 hrs 30 minutes,
which was regarded necessary to make the Shinkansen line service
competitive with airlines.

Lot of other interesting information on the challenges Japan faced

[ikerrin]

Originally Posted by cornholio

A train from Vancouver to Kamloops would not make sense for the reasons I said. Anyways our geography will mean that car and plane will always be king in BC for at least the remainder of this century. Even with tilting train technology and assuming that no 30-50kmph 200 car freight trains aren't congesting the railway you would be hard pressed to average much over 100kmph on the less direct route. The population density would also never justify more than a train or two a day not to mention that you would have to have a way for people to get to their actual destination once they get to say Kamloops. Also trains like many other things profit the most on turnover, obviously there would be almost none between the two destinations meaning that the ticket prices would be insanely high, you know even in Europe traveling by train only saves you money and time for short to medium distances. A train from say Prague to Amsterdam costs you about 4 times more than a flight and that is if you find a good deal while it takes a extra 12 hours of your time and plenty of transfers, in fact only tourists actually travel long distance in Europe by train as most people travel between two destinations somewhere along the route creating high turnover and a actual profits and lowering the ticket prices for trains. On another note many routes in Europe are cheaper and faster by bus which is what many people also use, in fact I would wager that bus use is almost as high if not higher then train use. Though I agree that in Alberta given the geography and the perfect distance between Edmonton and Calgary you could justify hsr between the two since if done properly it would definitely be faster then plane or car(has to be at least over 200kmphr, the higher the better).

Well, I disagree. I am not arguing that we should have hourly service on bullet trains. I am just saying that there should be a couple of runs a day. Perhaps an overnight train and a day train between Calgary and Vancouver with stops in between at the ski slopes. I think you could run more frequent service Calgary to Banf, and also several kamloops trains with stops in betwee as well.

You would get tourists riding the trains. You would get students. You would get retirees and people heading out to the mountains for skiing. Are two trains a day too much to ask to start out. Then monitor them and expand as demand evolves.

There are trains to Northern Sweden and Northern Finland and Northern Norway and their populations in the North are far less dense than West Coast Canada. For goodness sake, you have two of the most desirable cities in the world anchoring either side of the train and one of the most beautiful National parks on the way. Plus there are loads of other developing ski hills along the route and Kamloops.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by ikerrin

Well, I disagree. I am not arguing that we should have hourly service on bullet trains. I am just saying that there should be a couple of runs a day. Perhaps an overnight train and a day train between Calgary and Vancouver with stops in between at the ski slopes. I think you could run more frequent service Calgary to Banf, and also several kamloops trains with stops in betwee as well.

You would get tourists riding the trains. You would get students. You would get retirees and people heading out to the mountains for skiing. Are two trains a day too much to ask to start out. Then monitor them and expand as demand evolves.

There are trains to Northern Sweden and Northern Finland and Northern Norway and their populations in the North are far less dense than West Coast Canada. For goodness sake, you have two of the most desirable cities in the world anchoring either side of the train and one of the most beautiful National parks on the way. Plus there are loads of other developing ski hills along the route and Kamloops.

I agree that such service would be enticing, but only if it's cheaper than a flight, and not much more than a greyhound. Right now, long distance rail is usually the most expensive and least flexible mode of transport in Canada.

[cornholio]

Scandinavian countries are much denser then BC or Alberta. BC is 4.7p/sqk Norway is 12p/sqkm Finland is 16p/sqkm Sweden is 20p/sqkm. These countries also have the poorest rail infrastructure in Europe. A country like Norway which is the most similar to BC has only 65km's of high speed rail and 250km's of double tracked rail. The only places you can really get by train there is between Oslo, Bergen, Lillehamer and the other southern cities.

Also there is rail service between Vancouver and Edmonton. Its for tourists and its very expensive. In fact for much cheaper I could hop on a plane and be in London hours before the train would actually arrive in Edmonton.

Now rail service for tourists is great but lets be realistic about any possibility of rail service for actual intercity commuters. BC's population would have to at least quadruple before you can even begin to consider rail as a viable option.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by cornholio

A train from Vancouver to Kamloops would not make sense for the reasons I said. Anyways our geography will mean that car and plane will always be king in BC for at least the remainder of this century. Even with tilting train technology and assuming that no 30-50kmph 200 car freight trains aren't congesting the railway you would be hard pressed to average much over 100kmph on the less direct route. The population density would also never justify more than a train or two a day not to mention that you would have to have a way for people to get to their actual destination once they get to say Kamloops.

The Okanagan Valley, with a population of 250,000+, would make a more viable endpoint, wouldn't you say?

[twoNeurons]

i was thinking the same thing... Kamloops would be an extension but Kelowna is where the people and growth are at.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by tintinium

i was thinking the same thing... Kamloops would be an extension but Kelowna is where the people and growth are at.

Nobody's going to ride a roundabout train to Kamloops though the Okanagan, are they?

I think a train to Vernon from Vancouver would serve the Okanagan and the Fraser Valley well. Not sure if the economics of it will make it feasible though.

[cornholio]

The only rail connection from Vancouver to the Okanagan is via Kamloops and the Fraser Canyon. Following the route of the Coquihala(sp?) is impossible due to grades. The Fraser canyon is also very congested and it is extremely difficult to expand. In fact in the not to distant future you will probably be hearing allot about a needed expansion of rail capacity through the Fraser canyon, there will also be allot of controversy because the cost is going to be huge (billions and billions) and their going to want to offload it on to the taxpayers, plus there are going to be big environmental concerns in the Fraser canyon because of the scope of any project to substantially increase capacity.
By the way a very conservative estimate for passenger rail from Vancouver to the Okanagan or Kamloops would be no less then a 100mill per km, personally for the price I would much rather have a fixed link between Vancouver and Vancouver island and maybe some cash to spare. Not to mention the millions to maintain any such railway for a what max maybe 2-4thousand passengers a day, and im being very generous with that number.

Sorry for sounding like a pessimist but I just think its much better for everyone to focus on viable projects.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by cornholio

The only rail connection from Vancouver to the Okanagan is via Kamloops and the Fraser Canyon. Following the route of the Coquihala(sp?) is impossible due to grades. The Fraser canyon is also very congested and it is extremely difficult to expand. In fact in the not to distant future you will probably be hearing allot about a needed expansion of rail capacity through the Fraser canyon, there will also be allot of controversy because the cost is going to be huge (billions and billions) and their going to want to offload it on to the taxpayers, plus there are going to be big environmental concerns in the Fraser canyon because of the scope of any project to substantially increase capacity.

I wonder why they don't have a rail line going along the Highway 3 corridor and up the Okanagan Valley from Penticton. And not just for passenger rail but for freight as well.

Originally Posted by cornholio

By the way a very conservative estimate for passenger rail from Vancouver to the Okanagan or Kamloops would be no less then a 100mill per km, personally for the price I would much rather have a fixed link between Vancouver and Vancouver island and maybe some cash to spare. Not to mention the millions to maintain any such railway for a what max maybe 2-4thousand passengers a day, and im being very generous with that number.

You've got to be off by a digit or two on that $100 mill/km figure. That's a cost comparable to building a Skytrain over the same stretch. If it were that expensive to build rail, they couldn't have afforded to build it anywhere.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Nobody's going to ride a roundabout train to Kamloops though the Okanagan, are they?

I think a train to Vernon from Vancouver would serve the Okanagan and the Fraser Valley well. Not sure if the economics of it will make it feasible though.

I wonder if you have a personal stake in Kamloops. Anyway... as Kelowna and Kamloops grow, more and more traffic will go between these two cities. Sure it would be roundabout to get to Vancouver, but Rail is all about providing places along the way, because few actually travel its length.

That's interesting about the Fraser Canyon Rail. If expansion WERE to go forward there, then that's the only way I could see them justifying a faster more direct link.

In general though I'm with cornoholio on this one. Let's focus on more feasible projects.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by tintinium

I wonder if you have a personal stake in Kamloops.

WTF? I've actually been suggesting that the train go to the Okanagan instead of Kamloops. What ever gives you that idea?

[twoNeurons]

^^^ OOOPS Replied to the wrong person.

[ikerrin]

No. H 187/07
For release October 11, 2007

CANADA'S NEW GOVERNMENT REVITALIZES INTER-CITY PASSENGER RAIL SERVICES IN CANADA

OTTAWA — The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, along with the Honourable Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance, today announced a new funding package for VIA Rail Canada Inc., a Crown corporation, to revitalize inter-city passenger rail services in Canada. The funding totals $691.9 million over the next five years.

"Today, Canada's New Government is acting to provide faster, cleaner, more frequent and reliable passenger rail service across Canada," said Minister Cannon. "The corridor between Quebec City and Windsor has the largest passenger volumes and will benefit from infrastructure improvements that will make the entire passenger rail system more efficient and accessible."

"VIA Rail has a proud legacy of serving Canadians, and our government is taking steps to make this wonderful service even better," added Minister Flaherty. "We are launching the largest capital program in VIA Rail's history. It will allow for the renewal of VIA Rail's fleet, the upgrading of the existing network and it will support a stronger economy, a cleaner environment and a safer Canada."

"I would like to thank the Government of Canada for this welcome and timely investment in VIA Rail Canada," said Donald A. Wright, VIA's chairman. "It is an important recognition of the entire team at VIA, whose hard work over the past decade has earned VIA solid marks for its excellent customer service and sound management. This investment is also recognition of the potential of the current passenger rail service to meet the growing transportation needs of Canadians in an environmentally responsible, efficient and cost-effective manner."

This new investment addresses VIA Rail's capital needs, ensuring that its current network and service levels are sustainable into the future.

Of the total funding package, $516 million in capital funds will be allocated over five years for infrastructure improvements and equipment refurbishments, beginning in 2007. This investment will be targeted towards:

fleet renewal, through refurbishment of the F40 locomotives and Light, Rapid and Comfortable (LRC) passenger cars;
strategic infrastructure improvements to eliminate bottlenecks in the Quebec City —Windsor corridor; and
station refurbishments.
The equipment refurbishment will also help improve the company's environmental performance through increased fuel efficiency and reduced greenhouse gas emissions per passenger.

The remainder of the funding, a total of $175.9 million over five years, will be directed towards VIA Rail's operating costs. This additional funding is needed to sustain VIA's national network until the capital program is completed. VIA expects to reduce its maintenance costs after the equipment is rebuilt and to attract more passengers as it moves to provide faster, more frequent service on its trains in the Quebec City — Windsor Corridor.

"Once the F40 locomotive rebuilding program is complete, VIA will have one of the most fuel efficient fleets of diesel locomotives of any passenger rail operator in North America. The locomotives will also meet the new emissions standards set by the recent Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Canada and the Railway Association of Canada – which includes VIA Rail," concluded Minister Cannon.

Funding improvements to the national transportation system is one of Canada's New Government's priorities for investments in infrastructure. Through its unprecedented $33-billion Building Canada infrastructure plan, the Government of Canada is making partnership investments to support a stronger economy, a cleaner environment, and a more secure Canada.

VIA Rail Canada Inc., a Crown corporation, was created in 1977 to operate Canada's national passenger rail service.

A backgrounder on the new funding is attached.

-30-

Contacts:

Karine White
Press Secretary
Office of the Minister of Transport,
Infrastructure and Communities, Ottawa
613-991-0700
Media Relations
Transport Canada, Ottawa
613-993-0055

Chisholm Pothier
Press Secretary
Office of the Minister of Finance, Ottawa
613-996-9611
Malcolm Andrews
Senior Manager
Corporate Communications
VIA Rail Canada
514-871-6658
Transport Canada is online at www.tc.gc.ca. Subscribe to news releases and speeches at www.tc.gc.ca/listserv/ and keep up-to-date on the latest from Transport Canada.

This news release may be made available in alternative formats for persons with visual disabilities.

BACKGROUNDER

NEW FUNDING FOR VIA Rail CANADA

Canada's New Government recognizes that investments are required to ensure the long-term viability of passenger rail services and to improve VIA Rail's financial performance.

This new funding, totalling $691.9 million, will improve the sustainability and reliability of passenger rail services in Canada and provide more frequent, faster, cleaner and safer services along the Quebec City — Windsor Corridor. The proposed equipment and facilities investments, combined with strategic infrastructure improvements, will address VIA Rail's capital needs and improve its operational performance. The funding will allow VIA Rail to rebuild its aging fleet of locomotives and cars, upgrade stations, and improve strategic infrastructure to eliminate bottlenecks and enhance capacity for faster, more frequent and reliable service.

These investments will benefit Canadians across the country. For example:

The F40 locomotive rebuilding program will improve the reliability of VIA services, lower maintenance costs and help to improve the company's environmental performance through increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions. The rebuilt locomotives will ensure another 15 to 20 years of service on the eastern and western transcontinental trains, on the regional service to Gaspé (Quebec) and on remote services to such points as Parent (Quebec), Churchill (Manitoba) and Prince Rupert (British Columbia). They will meet the new emission standards for railway locomotives set by the recent Memorandum of Understanding between the Railway Association of Canada, Environment Canada and Transport Canada.
Light, Rapid and Comfortable (LRC) cars will have their operating systems and interiors rebuilt. Travellers will enjoy new seats, better lighting, computer outlets and washrooms, while VIA will lower its maintenance costs and energy requirements, thereby saving fuel and reducing emissions.
Several stations across the country will be refurbished.
Strategic infrastructure improvements, which will be spread throughout the Quebec City — Windsor corridor, will:
increase track capacity and alleviate bottlenecks;
improve on-time performance;
reduce trip times through increased speed;
allow for more trips; and
improve safety and reliability of service.
With a total investment of $516 million in capital planned over the next five years, VIA Rail's passenger services will continue to bring modern, affordable, safe and efficient travel options to Canadians.

The government will also provide VIA with $175.9 million in additional operating funding over the next five years. While VIA Rail's annual funding level was frozen in 1998, the effects of inflation over the past decade have had an impact on the purchasing power of this Crown corporation and its ability to maintain its aging fleet of locomotives and cars. Once the capital investment program is completed, VIA will be able to operate without this additional funding.

October 2007