News   Jan 15, 2025
News Roundup for January 15, 2025
 210     0 
News   Jan 15, 2025
Winter Delivery
 420     1 
News   Jan 14, 2025
Kazmir and Curio Condos Top Off Along The Queensway
 620     0 

VIA Rail

Trains aren't expensive. It's the rails they run on that are expensive...at least in the case of VIA...
 
Trains, and planes are both expensive in Canada. However, VIA rail prices are ridiculously high given the level of service they provide. For the slow service, their price is very expensive. While I love the convenience of downtown to downtown travel, the infrequent and slow service can't justify the price. I often flight with Porter or AC from YTZ to get to Montreal than to take VIA for often the same price. For a long weekend trip, it saves 10hrs in flying.

This summer I've looked at doing a trip to the east coast for a vacation and though maybe it'd be fun to take the Ocean train from Montreal to Halifax. I looked at prices and for a sleeper cabin, the price for 2 adults and 1 child is $1600 one way. Comparatively, the economy class is about $600, but I can't sit on a train for 24 hours in an economy seat, even one that reclines. The price difference is insane though. Yes I would get fed and have a bed for the night, but honestly, the flight is the same price for 3 people round trip! The sleeper train cost should about a $100-$200 more hundred dollars more, about the cost of a hotel room, not $1000.
 
lead82 said:
Trains, and planes are both expensive in Canada. However, VIA rail prices are ridiculously high given the level of service they provide. For the slow service, their price is very expensive. While I love the convenience of downtown to downtown travel, the infrequent and slow service can't justify the price. I often flight with Porter or AC from YTZ to get to Montreal than to take VIA for often the same price. For a long weekend trip, it saves 10hrs in flying.

This summer I've looked at doing a trip to the east coast for a vacation and though maybe it'd be fun to take the Ocean train from Montreal to Halifax. I looked at prices and for a sleeper cabin, the price for 2 adults and 1 child is $1600 one way. Comparatively, the economy class is about $600, but I can't sit on a train for 24 hours in an economy seat, even one that reclines. The price difference is insane though. Yes I would get fed and have a bed for the night, but honestly, the flight is the same price for 3 people round trip! The sleeper train cost should about a $100-$200 more hundred dollars more, about the cost of a hotel room, not $1000.
Click to expand...
I imagine there are people here who feel the fix to that issue is to somehow drive up the price of airfare through taxes or fees in some sort of "level the playing field" idea, to make train travel more attractive.

I wonder if those distant routes are even profitable. Is VIA mandated to provide them?
 
Having just got back from Rome, Florence, and Venice {you can send the sympathy cards later} I had first hand experience of what an excellent rail service looks like.

The trains from the 3 ran every 30 minutes all day, had no level crossings, and cruised at 250km/hr with some trains on other routes cruising at 340. They were comfortable, convenient, and right on schedule. All the trains I took came in within 3 minutes of their scheduled time, stopped for about 6 or 7 minutes and then carried on. One of the routes had over 40 km of tunnel. They were of course all electrified. The trains were express and though travelling thru several decent size cities they flew by and left those routes to the more regional service. Italy, and all of Europe, realized long ago what VIA has yet to figure out...........the reason and demographics of train travel has done a 180 from when the trains were introduced.

Trains were originally built to bring locals to their nearest major centres when the roads were terrible and most in the country had no alternative by bus or didn't own a car. Yes there were some longer journeys but they were more limited as people a hundred years ago didn't travel near as much as they do today. Europe has accepted the fact that the vast majority of people in less populated centres own more cars and drive them further than their urban counterparts so they have reconfigured their routes.......less service for small places which won't use it and more service to urbanites who will. Europe has accepted that serving little places where everyone drives is a lost cause and the revenue and ridership comes almost exclusively from major centre to major centre except for more commuter-type service.

VIA knows this. On the Prairies there are hundreds of little towns and yet near non-existent ridership whereas in the Corridor, ridership goes thru major urban centres and the ridership is 100X higher. Europe knows that to have an effective rail system you cannot try to be everything to everybody. By trying to offer passable service to everyone, the result is that no one gets served well.

It's the 21st century but VIA still uses a 18th century business model.
 
ssiguy2 said:
VIA knows this. On the Prairies there are hundreds of little towns and yet near non-existent ridership whereas in the Corridor, ridership goes thru major urban centres and the ridership is 100X higher. Europe knows that to have an effective rail system you cannot try to be everything to everybody. By trying to offer passable service to everyone, the result is that no one gets served well.
Click to expand...
Sounds like we should have basically three destinations in Ontario: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal (and maybe Quebec City); plus similar urban to urban routes in BC and Alerta, electrify the system, and scrap everything else.
 
Admiral Beez said:
Sounds like we should have basically three destinations in Ontario: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal (and maybe Quebec City); plus similar urban to urban routes in BC and Alerta, electrify the system, and scrap everything else.
Click to expand...
Or two divisions in VIA. One that will survive due to paying its own way (The Windsor-Quebec Corridor, perhaps reduced to Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal) and everywhere else that will only survive by operating subsidy. Comparing to planes in a nation our size, as the excellent vid Beez posted illustrates very clearly, is an extremely unfair comparison. Compare to road travel....and *include the costs of providing that road with the cost of bus fare*!

The argument some are making unintentionally is *exactly* what Desjardins-Siciliano has addressed exquisitely with his HFR 'manifesto'.
 
ssiguy2 said:
VIA knows this. On the Prairies there are hundreds of little towns and yet near non-existent ridership whereas in the Corridor, ridership goes thru major urban centres and the ridership is 100X higher. Europe knows that to have an effective rail system you cannot try to be everything to everybody. By trying to offer passable service to everyone, the result is that no one gets served well.

It's the 21st century but VIA still uses a 18th century business model.
Click to expand...

Well, pre-1950s model. Carrying passengers never paid its way, but the head-end traffic (mail and package freight) sure helped. The drive to eliminate passenger trains gained momentum once the Post Office shifted to trucks. Sleeping and dining car service was a separate business unit hung on the rear end of a coach and mail train that had its own balance sheet. Sleeping + Dining got a cost break because the train was running anyways. There were some pretty arcane arguments (still going on to this day, especially in Congress in the US) about what part of the business has to cover what cost.

Outside the Corridor, what is killing VIA is that the model since the 1960's has been an assumption that the major freight lines (Toronto-Vancouver especially) had extra capacity and the passenger train was basically using that for nominal cost. With growth in traffic, and a very different technology for operating freight trains, that just isn't true any more.

The only way to operate a passenger train is to sink enough capital into the long distance lines to clear all the freights out of the way. Everyone I know who has ridden the Canadian in the last few years has commented on just how busy, how crazy busy, the CN line is especially west of Winnipeg. CN is upgrading to meet its freight requirements but it is not going to add more sidings at its expense to let VIA run effectively. Apparently Rocky Mountain Rail Tours does pay CP some higher amount that makes CP happy to have their business..... just look at their fares. But they limit their business to where the most passengers are, and they don't take local customers.

I'm the most passionate guy I know about long distance passenger train travel - but even I can't rationalise the economics.

- Paul
 
ssiguy2 said:
VIA knows this. On the Prairies there are hundreds of little towns and yet near non-existent ridership whereas in the Corridor, ridership goes thru major urban centres and the ridership is 100X higher. Europe knows that to have an effective rail system you cannot try to be everything to everybody. By trying to offer passable service to everyone, the result is that no one gets served well.

It's the 21st century but VIA still uses a 18th century business model.
Click to expand...
VIA uses the model Parliament tells it to.
 
Ideally Via Rail will have two divisions: an "intercity" for fast and frequent journeys between cities, which could be complete in a few hours. Even routes like Toronto-Sudbury or Halifax-Quebec would deserve three trains a day. The other would be "long-distance" with a mandate to serve remote northern communities without affordable means of transportation, like Winnipeg-Churchill, Toronto-CN line-Winnipeg, etc, where one train per day will be more than sufficient. And with the growth of e-commerce, Via could partner with Amazon or other platforms to provide last-mile solutions. In China, high speed trains are already being used for fulfillment.

Are you in Cochrane and ordered from Amazon's Mississauga warehouse? Get it on tomorrow's Via Rail/resuscitated Ontario Northland train from Toronto for only $5 extra.
 
A lot of these discussions ignores a basic problem. VIA doesn't own the tracks. Paying to rent them worsens the business case. And they get no priority compared to the the freight traffic.

Comparisons to Europe are pointless. They dont have these problems.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top