amnesiajune
Senior Member
Buses aren't heated?
|
|
|
Ontario Northland/Northern Ontario Transportation
- Thread starter CDL.TO
- Start date
Buses aren't heated?
White Pine
Active Member
Yes, but the poor guy shovelling the coal has to deal with a lot of issues.
Just kidding, I was more referring to adverse weather conditions, although I suppose it's possible for a train to be affected as well.
Just kidding, I was more referring to adverse weather conditions, although I suppose it's possible for a train to be affected as well.
jys
Active Member
micheal_can
Senior Member
The attitude about what the fascination is with train over bus is about the same as asking what is the fascination of having GO train service?
Weather can close highways, or make them unsafe to travel, or make them slow to travel. Trans do track speed, regardless of weather conditions. So, if the track speed is normally 60 mph, and there is a blizzard, the train travels at - 60 mph.
A friend of mine has an elderly mother with MS. She does not visit him unless it is by train. He lives in Sudbury, so it is reasonable. A train is stable. It does not rock as much as a bus. That is due to the usually good quality of rails.
Food service is common on long distance trains. They have hot meals. The bus stops once between North Bay and Toronto for a pit stop for you to run to get some food.
Using a washroom on a bus is a challenge for most people. The washroom rocks with the road conditions. On a train, there is not much rocking.
In short, rail is the better way to move people.
If you do not agree with that, then GO trains should be, and must be shut down.
Weather can close highways, or make them unsafe to travel, or make them slow to travel. Trans do track speed, regardless of weather conditions. So, if the track speed is normally 60 mph, and there is a blizzard, the train travels at - 60 mph.
A friend of mine has an elderly mother with MS. She does not visit him unless it is by train. He lives in Sudbury, so it is reasonable. A train is stable. It does not rock as much as a bus. That is due to the usually good quality of rails.
Food service is common on long distance trains. They have hot meals. The bus stops once between North Bay and Toronto for a pit stop for you to run to get some food.
Using a washroom on a bus is a challenge for most people. The washroom rocks with the road conditions. On a train, there is not much rocking.
In short, rail is the better way to move people.
If you do not agree with that, then GO trains should be, and must be shut down.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
Go Train service actually needs the extremely high capacity of a train - the typical rush hour Go Train has more than 2,000 passengers. Ontario Northland does not. The trains were never carrying more than one or two buses worth of people when they operated.
Weather has the exact same effect on train service.
Yes it does.
For the extra cost of subsidizing a train, you could feed every bus passenger a great meal for free and still have tons of money left over.
The food on the Northlander was pure garbage, by the way. Their "hot meals" were a few sandwiches and a frozen pizza that they would put in the microwave.
I get it... everyone in this thread (including me) is a train nerd. But there's absolutely no justification for spending $400 per passenger to subsidize a train.
This is incredibly stupid for reasons I've already explained.
Fritter
Active Member
1 GO Train, approx 2000 passengers
1 Bus approx 55 passengers
1 GO Train=approx 36-37 buses.
1 Bus approx 55 passengers
1 GO Train=approx 36-37 buses.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
My understanding was that a GO train was closer to 1500 people? Regardless, still a lot of buses.
Also, Northlander isn't exactly going to be carrying 1,500 people.
Also, Northlander isn't exactly going to be carrying 1,500 people.
micheal_can
Senior Member
So, my friend who is an engineer with CN is lying to me? They do not reduce speed due to inclement weather. They do not reduce speed due to visibility.
So, the Northlander would be faster than the bus in bad weather.
smallspy
Senior Member
Weather affects trains differently than road traffic.
In hot weather, there are frequently speed restrictions due to heating of the rails. These restrictions can be as little as a reduction of 10mph, or as severe as an almost halving of speed.
In snow, switches can jam up with ice and snow, and thus need to be cleaned. Signals can get covered, and thus trains will need to slow down or stop and inspect.
Trains may have to slow down in poor visibility if they can't see the signals.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Seated capacity of a GO coach is, I believe, 162 people so that would be a seated capacity of 1,620 on a 10 coach and 1,944 on a 12 coach....of course the standees add to that capacity.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
They definitely reduce speed to make sure they can see signals, and they obviously have to slow down if there are problems with the rails or switches because of the weather.
Anyways, even if the Northlander is a bit faster in bad weather that happens a dozen or so days a year, how does that justify service that's less frequent, goes to fewer places and costs a lot more to operate?
White Pine
Active Member
Apparently, the train did have fairly high ridership around major movements of students (labour day, thanksgiving, chistmas, reading week, etc, but that probably covers about 10 days a year. They also *apparently* had a higher ridership pre capita than Via does, problem being low population of course. That's why I was wondering whether it would be more viable with UPX cars if that line were ever electrified. But $400 per pax is pretty steep.
lenaitch
Senior Member
The $400 subsidy keeps getting repeated and the only source I can find for that is the government press release justifying it's shutdown. I'm never one to believe government fiscal gymnastics but, since I can't counter it I'll have to accept it. It was around that same time (you know, when the government 'saved' ONTC by only selling Ontera, for $6million, when it was valued at about $62million) that the government mandated full cost recovery for bus service, forcing the ONTC to cut back rather than 'enhance' bus service to replace the train. So forgive me if I believe two squats what this or any other government says about northern transportation issues.
The point at which an operating subsidy becomes 'too rich' might be a good philosophical exercise. Perhaps then clear boundaries could drawn and shut down all low performing services, perhaps like the Sheppard subway, UPX and maybe some of those evening GO buses I see with about 4 people on them.
The accessible bus posted in #123 looks interesting. I wonder what the pax capacity is, given the need for wider aisle and larger washroom, as well as the luggage capacity. One problem I have with highway coach seating is that you are sardined in and staring at the back of the seat in front of you like a typical modern commercial airliner. I much prefer the larger windows and option of facing seating available on a train.
The point about bus washrooms is valid. Anybody who has ever used one - or even sat in a seat near one - knows what hell must be like. Yes, trains do rock, but they don't bounce and jostle like a bus on Ontario roads, and better rolling stock would probably help that. When you can sleep and take a shower on the Via Canadian, you know things are possible. With better scheduling, services and rolling stock, the Northlander could be a more viable service. Subsidy free? No. Competitive, very likely.
The point at which an operating subsidy becomes 'too rich' might be a good philosophical exercise. Perhaps then clear boundaries could drawn and shut down all low performing services, perhaps like the Sheppard subway, UPX and maybe some of those evening GO buses I see with about 4 people on them.
The accessible bus posted in #123 looks interesting. I wonder what the pax capacity is, given the need for wider aisle and larger washroom, as well as the luggage capacity. One problem I have with highway coach seating is that you are sardined in and staring at the back of the seat in front of you like a typical modern commercial airliner. I much prefer the larger windows and option of facing seating available on a train.
The point about bus washrooms is valid. Anybody who has ever used one - or even sat in a seat near one - knows what hell must be like. Yes, trains do rock, but they don't bounce and jostle like a bus on Ontario roads, and better rolling stock would probably help that. When you can sleep and take a shower on the Via Canadian, you know things are possible. With better scheduling, services and rolling stock, the Northlander could be a more viable service. Subsidy free? No. Competitive, very likely.
jys
Active Member
So in the end, we have to decide between providing a luxurious service to serve a few people or spreading out the money to provide a more basic service that will serve a lot more people.
Just look at the $560 million ice rink fiasco they are making on parliament hill.
Don Martin: Parliament Hill skating rink a teeth-grinding waste of tax dollars
Just look at the $560 million ice rink fiasco they are making on parliament hill.
Don Martin: Parliament Hill skating rink a teeth-grinding waste of tax dollars
Last edited: