VIA Rail

[ShonTron]

The restoration of Michigan Central is underway, with Ford moving in. After MCS officially closed and before the Amtrak station opened in New Center, there was a temporary building next to MCS. A new station building is probably required - I could see Ford okay with a train platform for the oft-discussed regional rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor (with stops in Dearborn and near the airport), but not a secure building with Canadian and US customs and immigration staff. A new building could serve as an intercity bus terminal (perhaps with immigration for bus passengers also done at the terminal to reduce delays at the border) as well as a rail station for Amtrak, VIA, and the Ann Arbor service, with a proper, frequent transit connection to downtown Detroit and up to Wayne State/New Center.

 

[dowlingm]

If we want to improve connectivity between Windsor on one hand, and Detroit Amtrak on the other, then extend the Woodward Streetcar under the river to a preclearance CBP/arrival CBSA facility which would not only connect Windsorites with Michigan Amtrak services but also reduce the need for bus services to Detroit generally. Having an Amtrak or two a day trundle through the tunnel into a relocated VIA station may satisfy some rail fans but I would argue doesn't materially improve transportation between Ontario and Michigan.

 

[crs1026]

If we want to improve connectivity between Windsor on one hand, and Detroit Amtrak on the other, then extend the Woodward Streetcar under the river to a preclearance CBP/arrival CBSA facility which would not only connect Windsorites with Michigan Amtrak services but also reduce the need for bus services to Detroit generally. Having an Amtrak or two a day trundle through the tunnel into a relocated VIA station may satisfy some rail fans but I would argue doesn't materially improve transportation between Ontario and Michigan.

Any idea how many people currently make the trip, by taxi or bus, between the VIA station in Windsor and the Amtrak station in Detroit? I would guess not many. Adding even twenty passengers a day to existing VIA and Amtrak trains would be a real good boost to both services.

I do wonder though if we really need a through service. Right now, the route is unmarketable because it's left to the traveller to find their way across the border. I wonder if a dedicated, assured, reserved seat, direct station-to-station shuttle bus with better schedule coordination would suffice. My impression is that the existing border processes can clear a busload or two of travellers much faster than they can clear a trainload of people even with the same passenger count. There may be a lot of passenger reluctance to travel on their own across Detroit (that's old stereotyping to be sure, but something is needed to change the perception). Hype up the shuttle bus, give people assurance that it will take them train to train.

I am loathe to see VIA abandon its newly built station in Windsor when the paint has only just dried. That's money wasted. A through train is optimal but it may be a bridge too far in our environment (yes, it doesn't stand in the way other places, but reality is what it is).

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

Having an Amtrak or two a day trundle through the tunnel into a relocated VIA station may satisfy some rail fans but I would argue doesn't materially improve transportation between Ontario and Michigan.

That's an excellent point. Bad enough with what Niagara Falls has now for GO train service. The real problem isn't even the border crossing, albeit that is very unpredictable, but the funding to run that streetcar often enough to make it viable. QP won't be contributing, that's a given.

Hype up the shuttle bus, give people assurance that it will take them train to train

Quick to implement, flexible for routing (for a number of eventual reasons) affordable and of a very low security risk beyond what's now the norm. Everything points to this. And much more affordable to subsidize! The frequency to make this work means running close to empty at times.

 

[rbt]

I am loathe to see VIA abandon its newly built station in Windsor when the paint has only just dried. That's money wasted. A through train is optimal but it may be a bridge too far in our environment (yes, it doesn't stand in the way other places, but reality is what it is).

A TBD for current project cost means it's still a very early proposal and most Amtrak stuff takes quite a while to go from concept to implementation. I expect Windsor will get a couple decades out of that station.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Not so sure about that.

To access Detroit via the tunnel they would have to permission to use CNs and then CPs trackage and the tunnel.

The current Detroit Amtrak station is not on that piece of track. (either requiring a new station/rehabbing M-Central) or a very circuitous route to the current Amtrak Station.

VIA will not cease to have a station in Windsor (imagine telling Windsorites they need a passport to access a domestic train) ...........and the current VIA station is not on the track that accesses Detroit, and is past the last turnoff to link to said track.

That's not to say I wouldn't support Amtrak/VIA running such a service, but it will involve overcoming a few challenges.

Wait, CN owns trackage in that tunnel? I thought only CP did.

 

[Urban Sky]

Ideally I'd want to see a funding package that extends Via to Detroit and GO to Niagara Falls with Canadian preclearance on the American side (this has yet to be done anywhere, but the preclearance treaty does provide for Canadian customs in the States, it's a funding issue not really a negotiation one) as a single project.

The thing is that it's an extension of only a few hundred metres. There's really no impact on go ops, but the service fills a pretty big gap in service terms. The distance is very short, but it's simply not practical to make the cross road transfer on foot.

AFAIK, GO Transit is provincially regulated, which prevents it from crossing inter-provincial (let alone: international) borders, which means your proposal is a non-starter.

Wait, CN owns trackage in that tunnel? I thought only CP did.

According to this map, CN owns the final miles of the Chatham Subdivision, CP owns the tunnel and ETR owns the only suitable connection between the two, which means you have to deal with three different railroads plus whoever owns the other side:

 

[Northern Light]

AFAIK, GO Transit is provincially regulated, which prevents it from crossing inter-provincial (let alone: international) borders, which means your proposal is a non-starter.


According to this map, CN owns the final miles of the Chatham Subdivision, CP owns the tunnel and ETR owns the only suitable connection between the two, which means you have to deal with three different railroads plus whoever owns the other side:
View attachment 178792

Random questions, only tangentially related to this subthread, which perhaps you might be able to answer, or @crs1026 or @smallspy might know.

1) Why did VIA's aquisition of Chatham stop where it does? On cursory examination, CN would want the spur to the Ford plant which connects to the US via CP. But if it it ran goods further east, it would be on VIA's track anyway.........seems like VIA should have acquired the balance of Chatham?

2)Likewise wouldn't it make sense for VIA to aquire what it doesn't own from Chatham to London? (I realize the last bit is on the CN mainline though there appears room for a dedicated third track in that ROW).

3) When VIA operates the Maple Leaf w/Amtrak, its my understanding there are crewing switch overs. Is my understanding correct? If so why? We don't make foreign air plane switch pilots in Gander, LOL. It would just seem more efficient to agree to let Amtrak (or VIA) run an entire route by mutual agreement.

 

[Urban Sky]

Random questions, only tangentially related to this subthread, which perhaps you might be able to answer, or @crs1026 or @smallspy might know.

1) Why did VIA's aquisition of Chatham stop where it does? On cursory examination, CN would want the spur to the Ford plant which connects to the US via CP. But if it it ran goods further east, it would be on VIA's track anyway.........seems like VIA should have acquired the balance of Chatham?

2)Likewise wouldn't it make sense for VIA to aquire what it doesn't own from Chatham to London? (I realize the last bit is on the CN mainline though there appears room for a dedicated third track in that ROW).

3) When VIA operates the Maple Leaf w/Amtrak, its my understanding there are crewing switch overs. Is my understanding correct? If so why? We don't make foreign air plane switch pilots in Gander, LOL. It would just seem more efficient to agree to let Amtrak (or VIA) run an entire route by mutual agreement.

[1+2] You can only buy what the current owner perceives as disposable.
[3] The Maple Leaf is a joint VIA-Amtrak service, where Amtrak provides the equipment and both railroads provide crews on their respective side of the border. Since having employees working across the border requires explocit bilateral agreements, it’s probably more practical for Amtrak staff to enter Canada, since they already have to do that on the other cross-border Amtrak trains (Adirondack, Cascades). The crew change allows VIA to standardise the customer experience on its own trains, while the whole travel time NYP-TRTO might exceed maximum work hours for Amtrak’s on-train staff...

 

[smallspy]

Random questions, only tangentially related to this subthread, which perhaps you might be able to answer, or @crs1026 or @smallspy might know.

1) Why did VIA's aquisition of Chatham stop where it does? On cursory examination, CN would want the spur to the Ford plant which connects to the US via CP. But if it it ran goods further east, it would be on VIA's track anyway.........seems like VIA should have acquired the balance of Chatham?

Because that's what CN decided they were ready to abandon.

Unlike GO, VIA does not have a vast budget which allows them to purchase active sections of track from the freight railways. They are only able to purchase sections of track when the railroads are trying to abandon them.

2)Likewise wouldn't it make sense for VIA to aquire what it doesn't own from Chatham to London? (I realize the last bit is on the CN mainline though there appears room for a dedicated third track in that ROW).

It might, but what would the cost be? It goes back to the previous point.

3) When VIA operates the Maple Leaf w/Amtrak, its my understanding there are crewing switch overs. Is my understanding correct? If so why? We don't make foreign air plane switch pilots in Gander, LOL. It would just seem more efficient to agree to let Amtrak (or VIA) run an entire route by mutual agreement.

The Maple Leaf is, much as the International was, a Canadian train on this side of the border, and an American one on the other side. And yes, it uses VIA crews in Canada. This is in contrast to the Vermonter and the Cascades trains, which are Amtrak trains all the way to their Canadian destinations.

While I'm sure that there are all sorts of regulatory reasons why the American crews don't operate all the way to Toronto on the Maple Leaf, there may be a much more practical one, too - doing so may put them over federal hours-of-service rules.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

[1+2] You can only buy what the current owner perceives as disposable.
[3] The Maple Leaf is a joint VIA-Amtrak service, where Amtrak provides the equipment and both railroads provide crews on their respective side of the border. Since having employees working across the border requires explocit bilateral agreements, it’s probably more practical for Amtrak staff to enter Canada, since they already have to do that on the other cross-border Amtrak trains (Adirondack, Cascades). The crew change allows VIA to standardise the customer experience on its own trains, while the whole travel time NYP-TRTO might exceed maximum work hours for Amtrak’s on-train staff...

TY

On Chatham, it just looks (perhaps wrongly to my under-informed eye) as though it wouldn't be CN priority trackage, and would be more useful to VIA.

On the border, I hadn't thought of the long hours; but I have long thought a dedicated Buffalo-Toronto service would make sense, subject to dealing w/crew and customs issues; that crew-change anomoly just struck me as odd, but your explanation makes sense.

 

[ShonTron]

TY

On Chatham, it just looks (perhaps wrongly to my under-informed eye) as though it wouldn't be CN priority trackage, and would be more useful to VIA.

On the border, I hadn't thought of the long hours; but I have long thought a dedicated Buffalo-Toronto service would make sense, subject to dealing w/crew and customs issues; that crew-change anomoly just struck me as odd, but your explanation makes sense.

The combination of the few industrial customers and the track payments VIA pays is probably enough for CN to continue to maintain the balance of the Chatham Sub between Chatham and Komoka. There are large grain terminals in Blenheim (on a remnant of the Caso) and Thamesville, and two or three customers left in Chatham (though not what it was like before the region deindustrialized in the 1990s). But that's not the type of high priority freight that ties up VIA trains elsewhere on CN's mainlines.

 

[crs1026]

The combination of the few industrial customers and the track payments VIA pays is probably enough for CN to continue to maintain the balance of the Chatham Sub between Chatham and Komoka. There are large grain terminals in Blenheim (on a remnant of the Caso) and Thamesville, and two or three customers left in Chatham (though not what it was like before the region deindustrialized in the 1990s). But that's not the type of high priority freight that ties up VIA trains elsewhere on CN's mainlines.

What CN has chosen to retain active interest in around southwestern Ontario puzzles the heck out of some of us folks in the bleachers.... they spend money on odd pieces of track here and there, and they hold onto bits that don't have any obvious value at the moment. I'm sure there is a strategy behind it all.

In the case of the Chatham Sub, as noted, their business is not an impediment to VIA. Perhaps they may even pass costs to VIA that makes it good to have VIA on the line.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

it would be interesting to see a version of that track figure showing which line VIA is currently using, and the location of the existing station, and the old one that they'd need to rebuild for this through-service.

(I'd try myself, but I'm not very familiar with how Windsor is/was served)

 

[crs1026]

it would be interesting to see a version of that track figure showing which line VIA is currently using, and the location of the existing station, and the old one that they'd need to rebuild for this through-service.

(I'd try myself, but I'm not very familiar with how Windsor is/was served)

The map a few posts back tells the story pretty well. VIA has its station on a stub end of the old CN line, a bit to the east of downtown. A little east of the stub, there is a short line connection (ETR) which jogs from the VIA line over to the CP line in exactly the right place to enter the tunnel. Perhaps some trackage might have to be signalled, realigned, etc, but the basic path is there. The issue is, either VIA moves its station off the stub or there will be a backup move needed to access the VIA station (think Hamilton West Harbour, only worse).

The issue may be moot, however, because the CP and VIA lines run almost within sight of each other all the way east. Somewhere out there, one could build a new connecting track from the VIA line to the CP line east of Windsor. It would be new trackage, with all the issues that entails, but it might be a lot simpler and cheaper than realigning and signalling the ETR line.

- Paul