VIA rail seemed weird when I used it

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Even in Paris which is close to a nirvana in terms of transit and walkability in the western world, about 40% of households have a car and the percentage of households with kids who have a car is in the range of 70% I would estimate. And we are talking Paris city proper here, not Paris + suburbs.

Ideally everyone would have access to many different modes of transportation to choose from. They all have trade-offs. It isn't true that once you have a car you will always want to take it everywhere. What if you want to go out drinking? What if you're going to a downtown setting with limited parking, or where driving is annoying? What if you're changing modes of transport (getting on a plane or boat) and you don't want to leave your car there? What if you don't have a license because you're too young, old/disabled, etc. and there is nobody to drive you?

Or maybe it goes the other way and you are going downtown but you are travelling with 5 people so you'd rather just deal with parking then coordinate taking a group on transit. Or you need to haul something around so transit is impractical.

The way to look at this is to ask whether or not a 5-20% market share is enough for something like rail service to operate.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

Ideally everyone would have access to many different modes of transportation to choose from. They all have trade-offs. It isn't true that once you have a car you will always want to take it everywhere. What if you want to go out drinking? What if you're going to a downtown setting with limited parking, or where driving is annoying? What if you're changing modes of transport (getting on a plane or boat) and you don't want to leave your car there? What if you don't have a license because you're too young, old/disabled, etc. and there is nobody to drive you?

Or maybe it goes the other way and you are going downtown but you are travelling with 5 people so you'd rather just deal with parking then coordinate taking a group on transit. Or you need to haul something around so transit is impractical.

The way to look at this is to ask whether or not a 5-20% market share is enough for something like rail service to operate.

Yes, my family is multi-modal (bus, bike, transit and car) even though we have access to a vehicle. One of my kids just walked in the door from the bus stop after spending the afternoon in Ottawa with friends. The car was sitting in the driveway and my wife and I were sitting on the deck having a drink.

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

It's also possible to have multiple stations within a metropolitan area (one in Toronto, plus one in Mississauga and one in Oshawa, for example).

Not to mention Guildwood, Oakville and Brampton. The biggest cities in the corridor all have Via stations in the suburbs.

Originally Posted by acottawa

The more stations you add the slower it becomes.

Nope. Not every train stops at every station.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Mister F

Nope. Not every train stops at every station.

Then you're reducing convenience. Train timing is a zero sum game.

[hipster duck]

Oh VIA rail. One of my good friends works for the crown corporation, and we often joke about it over beers. As many of you may have guessed, the people who work inside VIA are aware of its flaws but many feel that they are helpless to change at least 60% of what makes it suck so badly.

Beyond the obvious fact that VIA has to accommodate the schedules of a private freight railway company, VIA is also treated like the stapler guy in Office Space who cannot be fired, but who is treated miserably by management in the hopes that he'll quit. No government wants to be the one that killed VIA rail; when people think back to Mulroney's legacy, cutting VIA to the bone is one of the things people remember the most, along with the GST and NAFTA. At the same time, no government wants to support a money-losing crown corporation that really only benefits niche customers in Central Canada. As a result, each government since Mulroney has supported VIA to the absolute bare minimum for service to limp along. The Chretien/Martin government under Collenette bought abandoned British sleeping coaches at fire sale prices (these turned out to be lemons); the Harper government probably invested the most, by building additional tracks here and there (these invariably helped CN too), and Trudeau has promised to replace the aging LRC cars that are the backbone of the fleet (my friend tells me that if these aren't replaced, VIA will essentially have to fold). VIA just doesn't have the surplus rolling stock to expand service, even if it wanted to (which it does).

That said, I still think that 40% of VIA's failures are of its own making. It wouldn't kill them to contract out more connecting bus services to their railway stations; in some cases, I think that milk run services should be replaced with coach buses that travel on a parallel road, meeting up with the train at relatively busy stations. There's really no reason for one train a day to stop at Ganonoque. It would make much more sense for 4 buses a day to take connecting passengers from Ganonoque to Kingston. VIA rail is slower than a plane, so they should make the on-board experience less plane like. This starts with that idiotic lineup at the major stations, and carries over to things like having a bar car and the ability to roam freely around the train, rather than waiting for the [horrible] snack cart to wind its way through. Getting rid of the snack cart, means they can yank out the galley and put in at least 4 more seats per car. At least on the Corridor, they could probably cut their onboard labour force in half, since they seemingly have a conductor for every other car. They really should negotiate with CN to come up with a schedule that allows VIA to run at predictable intervals. Not having clockface service, and having trains that stop at different stations makes VIA rail very uncompetitive.

I still take VIA rail, but I feel I do it more out of charity as a train enthusiast than on its own merits.

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Then you're reducing convenience. Train timing is a zero sum game.

How does building stations that not all trains stop at reduce convenience? Some trains run express, some don't. A variety of stopping patterns is a staple of train schedules all over the world, including with Via Rail.

[J81]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Oh VIA rail. One of my good friends works for the crown corporation, and we often joke about it over beers. As many of you may have guessed, the people who work inside VIA are aware of its flaws but many feel that they are helpless to change at least 60% of what makes it suck so badly.

Beyond the obvious fact that VIA has to accommodate the schedules of a private freight railway company, VIA is also treated like the stapler guy in Office Space who cannot be fired, but who is treated miserably by management in the hopes that he'll quit. No government wants to be the one that killed VIA rail; when people think back to Mulroney's legacy, cutting VIA to the bone is one of the things people remember the most, along with the GST and NAFTA. At the same time, no government wants to support a money-losing crown corporation that really only benefits niche customers in Central Canada. As a result, each government since Mulroney has supported VIA to the absolute bare minimum for service to limp along. The Chretien/Martin government under Collenette bought abandoned British sleeping coaches at fire sale prices (these turned out to be lemons); the Harper government probably invested the most, by building additional tracks here and there (these invariably helped CN too), and Trudeau has promised to replace the aging LRC cars that are the backbone of the fleet (my friend tells me that if these aren't replaced, VIA will essentially have to fold). VIA just doesn't have the surplus rolling stock to expand service, even if it wanted to (which it does).

That said, I still think that 40% of VIA's failures are of its own making. It wouldn't kill them to contract out more connecting bus services to their railway stations; in some cases, I think that milk run services should be replaced with coach buses that travel on a parallel road, meeting up with the train at relatively busy stations. There's really no reason for one train a day to stop at Ganonoque. It would make much more sense for 4 buses a day to take connecting passengers from Ganonoque to Kingston. VIA rail is slower than a plane, so they should make the on-board experience less plane like. This starts with that idiotic lineup at the major stations, and carries over to things like having a bar car and the ability to roam freely around the train, rather than waiting for the [horrible] snack cart to wind its way through. Getting rid of the snack cart, means they can yank out the galley and put in at least 4 more seats per car. At least on the Corridor, they could probably cut their onboard labour force in half, since they seemingly have a conductor for every other car. They really should negotiate with CN to come up with a schedule that allows VIA to run at predictable intervals. Not having clockface service, and having trains that stop at different stations makes VIA rail very uncompetitive.

I still take VIA rail, but I feel I do it more out of charity as a train enthusiast than on its own merits.

I guess you have it all figured out! You should be prez! 🤦🏻♂️

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Oh VIA rail. One of my good friends works for the crown corporation, and we often joke about it over beers. As many of you may have guessed, the people who work inside VIA are aware of its flaws but many feel that they are helpless to change at least 60% of what makes it suck so badly.

Beyond the obvious fact that VIA has to accommodate the schedules of a private freight railway company, VIA is also treated like the stapler guy in Office Space who cannot be fired, but who is treated miserably by management in the hopes that he'll quit. No government wants to be the one that killed VIA rail; when people think back to Mulroney's legacy, cutting VIA to the bone is one of the things people remember the most, along with the GST and NAFTA. At the same time, no government wants to support a money-losing crown corporation that really only benefits niche customers in Central Canada. As a result, each government since Mulroney has supported VIA to the absolute bare minimum for service to limp along. The Chretien/Martin government under Collenette bought abandoned British sleeping coaches at fire sale prices (these turned out to be lemons); the Harper government probably invested the most, by building additional tracks here and there (these invariably helped CN too), and Trudeau has promised to replace the aging LRC cars that are the backbone of the fleet (my friend tells me that if these aren't replaced, VIA will essentially have to fold). VIA just doesn't have the surplus rolling stock to expand service, even if it wanted to (which it does).

That said, I still think that 40% of VIA's failures are of its own making. It wouldn't kill them to contract out more connecting bus services to their railway stations; in some cases, I think that milk run services should be replaced with coach buses that travel on a parallel road, meeting up with the train at relatively busy stations. There's really no reason for one train a day to stop at Ganonoque. It would make much more sense for 4 buses a day to take connecting passengers from Ganonoque to Kingston. VIA rail is slower than a plane, so they should make the on-board experience less plane like. This starts with that idiotic lineup at the major stations, and carries over to things like having a bar car and the ability to roam freely around the train, rather than waiting for the [horrible] snack cart to wind its way through. Getting rid of the snack cart, means they can yank out the galley and put in at least 4 more seats per car. At least on the Corridor, they could probably cut their onboard labour force in half, since they seemingly have a conductor for every other car. They really should negotiate with CN to come up with a schedule that allows VIA to run at predictable intervals. Not having clockface service, and having trains that stop at different stations makes VIA rail very uncompetitive.

I still take VIA rail, but I feel I do it more out of charity as a train enthusiast than on its own merits.

I expect that running buses multiple times a day for a handful of passengers will cost more than having a train that is passing the station anyways to stop there.


Operating a bar car will also likely be more expensive than having a snack cart.


Nevertheless, we need our transport networks to be more multi-modal. Intercity buses connecting to rail and planes. The history has been that they all operate independently. I think our public transport plans are inching forward to provide better intermodal connections. Despite its rough start, the UPX train will grow in usefulness over time. Ottawa will soon open an LRT connection between the VIA station and downtown and Montreal will have an airport rail line in the next few years. Unfortunately, Ottawa's airport rail plan is trash.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Nevertheless, we need our transport networks to be more multi-modal. Intercity buses connecting to rail and planes. The history has been that they all operate independently. I think our public transport plans are inching forward to provide better intermodal connections.

Here in the east, our regional bus service Maritime Bus uses Moncton as it's regional hub. They have developed a relationship with VIA Rail and use the VIA terminal in the city as their main bus terminal. At least some of their busses are coordinated to connect with the VIA rail service.

In addition, Maritime Bus routes operating from Moncton to northern NB, PEI and into NS will make a pit stop at the Romeo LeBlanc International Airport terminal on the way out of (or into) town (it's on the way). I'm pretty sure Maritime Bus also makes stops at the airports in Fredericton and Halifax as well.

EDIT - I just checked their route map, they do stop at the Freddy airport and YHZ in addition to YQM (I thought so)

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Not most of Kanata, stittsville or Gatineau by car, and not most of Orleans or Nepean by transit.

Not true. I live in the western most edge of Stittsville and often take the train to Montreal. Most times of day I can usually drive (or take a cab) to either train station in less than 30 minutes. AM rush hour can slow things down but I could still get to Fallowfield in about 30 minutes (if the train I’m taking departs from there), though Tremblay is usually the better option for trains to Montreal (the opposite is true for trains to Toronto).

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Mister F

Canadians love to say this kind of thing but it's not really relevant to the Windsor-Quebec corridor, which has roughly the same population as Scandinavia in a much smaller area.

While true, governments know that investing in rail along the Quebec-Windsor corridor would be resented by the rest of the country (especially out west).

I do see a couple other corridors as having potential for HFR. One is Edmonton-Calgary and the other is Vancouver-Seattle. The former is difficult to get any traction as there isn’t any existing service to build off of and gage demand with. As for the latter, the service is operated by Amtrak and while there has been a desire coming from south of the boarder to increase service above the current 1 round trip a day (plans from 20 years ago had it up to 4 or 5 a day by now), it is conditional on track improvements being made north of the boarder. Since the track is owned by BNSF, the Canadian government doesn’t want to be seen investing in an American company.

[1ajs]

canadas massive and makes it hard but i could see a partial reason for the old school carbon copy machines being they go in lots of regions where theres no cell service at all... so rather then a hodge podge of systems its all standardized