VIA Rail

[smallspy]

@smallspy

Question, Dan, would a regulation tying freight train length to siding length be likely to produce a useful outcome?

ie. If CN/CP were told, you can run a train only as long as the length that sidings along its route can fully accommodate, thus allowing either the freight or a passenger train the ability to pass/be passed.

It has happened in the past on a number of occasions - CN has had Transport Canada issue orders limiting their train lengths on a number of subdivisions over the years for various operational reasons, but they are generally for a short term and as a punishment for deeds done (or not done, as it were).

But to enact a piece of regulation to do so on a permanent basis? I really can't see that happening. Transport Canada is basically a lobby group for the freight railways, and any move to limit train lengths on an ongoing basis would only serve as a detriment to the freight railways' operations.

To continue with your hypothetical situation, however.....I'm not sure that it would be particularly useful, to be honest. It would require more crews to move the same amount of traffic across the railroad. It wouldn't necessarily make those trains travel any faster either, as the freight railroads run their calculations and therefore operations based on a trailing tonnes-per-horsepower rating for each train, and therefore each train would have fewer locomotives. While the trains would then be able to fit into more sidings across the railroad, without other plant improvements those trains are still entering and exiting the sidings at low speed.

No, I think what is far more beneficial for everyone involved is more track and switches, along with localized improvements in alignment where possible and desired, and improvements in the signalling system to allow for both higher speeds (especially into the sidings that can handle just about all of the trains as they are) and shorter headways between trains. But unfortunately, those things cost money - something that the freight railroads are adverse to until it's almost too late.

I can answer that... yes. The main reason VIA goes into the siding is the trains they meet do not fit.

That's extremely simplistic, and not necessary true. When meeting trains, it is generally preferred to put the first train arriving at the meeting point into the siding to allow the second train a more preferential signal indication - and thus allowing it move out of way more quickly.

In that case, it's irrelevant whether the train is a passenger train or not. It just matters to keep the railway fluid.

Dan

 

[micheal_can]

There is a solution, one that is legal and would force CN/CP to play nice... Mail. What you do is have a mail bag that is picked up in one main terminal, such as Toronto, to be dropped off somewhere like Vancouver. Now, any train that meets this train has to yield.. It is the law.....

 

[lenaitch]

There is a solution, one that is legal and would force CN/CP to play nice... Mail. What you do is have a mail bag that is picked up in one main terminal, such as Toronto, to be dropped off somewhere like Vancouver. Now, any train that meets this train has to yield.. It is the law.....

Are you suggesting that mail is carried by rail or should be returned to rail. I would be interested to see the law that still exists.

 

[micheal_can]

Are you suggesting that mail is carried by rail or should be returned to rail. I would be interested to see the law that still exists.

I cannot find it right now, but there is a regulation that all trains must yield to mail trains. So, returning, even a small portion back to trains could help.

 

[smallspy]

Except that some mail is already carried by train today.

Canada Post contracts out some of the long-haul trips (Toronto to Winnipeg is carried by a Winnipeg-based company, for instance), and some of those carriers do use trains where convenient/economical/practical.

Dan

 

[lenaitch]

I cannot find it right now, but there is a regulation that all trains must yield to mail trains. So, returning, even a small portion back to trains could help.

Sounds like a throwback to the days of 'post office cars' when mail was actually picked up, delivered and sorted enroute.
I would be surprised there remains any valid law that attempts to dictate the business priority of a common carrier. Do planes with a Canada Post container in their hold get priority clearance and routing?
It reminds of the days of the Lords' Day Act (Sunday prohibition of most commerce, entertainment, etc.) when truckers would try to circumvent the law by tossing a case or two of tomatoes in with their load of lumber or steel thus making their cargo perishable.

 

[kEiThZ]

Okay, you asked for it, even though your point is obviously well-reasoned: According to this CNBC report, only half of the passengers who travel First Class on Delta have paid for their tickets (rather than received upgrades as loyal customers) and this is supposedly already a industry-leading proportion. As the primary motivation to offer First Class seems to be keeping your best customers loyal rather than actually making money, such accommodation types are much easier to justify for a publicly listed carrier than a government-subsidized railroad (note that you can only redeem Preference points for travel on Prestige Class outside the peak season, i.e. when there is no opportunity cost in offering the upgrade). Therefore, it doesn't seem as a coincidence that Italo is among the only railroads I'm aware of which offer premium (i.e. above Business) accommodations (even though Amtrak does the trick of simply branding the Economy Class on its Acela Express as "Business Class", so that they can offer a "First Class" with only two accommodation classes). Other than Italo, I only know of Railjet and JR East with their superb Gran Class...

To be clear. I'm not suggesting VIA adopt a three class service model with First Class. I'm suggesting that VIA 1 be improved to provide the kind of suites that airlines provide in business class on a 5 hr trip. As Paul said (and I concur), it's hard to justify. VIA 1 when you're paying double in some cases for just a meal and 3 drinks. Providing a more private seat where someone can work can easily attract that premium.

I wouldn't be worried about giving away seats. As the video pointed out, for the airlines, the 5% of premium passengers provide 30% of the revenue. For HFR, the economy passengers may be cross-shopping against a tank of gas, while the VIA One pax are cross-shopping airfare. So even if half the car was paying passengers, the profits would outstrip any other car on the train. And of course, a good revenue management model should get the proportion of tickets given away down.

 

[micheal_can]

Sounds like a throwback to the days of 'post office cars' when mail was actually picked up, delivered and sorted enroute.
I would be surprised there remains any valid law that attempts to dictate the business priority of a common carrier. Do planes with a Canada Post container in their hold get priority clearance and routing?
It reminds of the days of the Lords' Day Act (Sunday prohibition of most commerce, entertainment, etc.) when truckers would try to circumvent the law by tossing a case or two of tomatoes in with their load of lumber or steel thus making their cargo perishable.

It does go back to then. Just because it is outdated doesn't mean it is no longer valid. I am saying that if it has never been struck down, it could be used to get what is needed with Via; a stable schedule.

 

[lenaitch]

It does go back to then. Just because it is outdated doesn't mean it is no longer valid. I am saying that if it has never been struck down, it could be used to get what is needed with Via; a stable schedule.

Many laws dating back to that era were rendered invalid by the Charter. Most legislation is either new or heavily amended since the mid-1980s.

I'm not trying to call you out. Perhaps such a law or regulations is still rattling around the bowels of the Parliamentary Library. But I spent many years hearing urban myths on laws. I had a former neighbour who was adamant that a police officer had no authority if they didn't have their hat on (and, yes, you can drive with bare feet and pass on a solid line).

 

[MisterF]

Using old mail legislation to, in effect, give priority to passenger trains would never work. The freight companies would treat it the same as if the government proposed actual legislation to do the same thing and would use their lobbying power to get the government to back down. Proposing some back door sneaky way to make freight trains give way to passenger trains implies that the government can't do it the more direct way. They can, they just choose not to. If they have no interest in doing it the direct way, they're not going to do it in some sneaky way either.

 

[littlewill1166]

And of course, a good revenue management model should get the proportion of tickets given away down.

I seriously don't get why VIA is dragging their feet on replacing the reservation system. A lot of the station ticket agents are annoyed with how slow and old it is. It's super limited in terms of offering addons (seat selection, meal ordering, etc.), and it definitely isn't as flexible as Amadeus (for example) in revenue management. I think VIA could easily improve its service just by replacing their reservation system (which they have been planning on doing for 4 years now).

 

[micheal_can]

Using old mail legislation to, in effect, give priority to passenger trains would never work. The freight companies would treat it the same as if the government proposed actual legislation to do the same thing and would use their lobbying power to get the government to back down. Proposing some back door sneaky way to make freight trains give way to passenger trains implies that the government can't do it the more direct way. They can, they just choose not to. If they have no interest in doing it the direct way, they're not going to do it in some sneaky way either.

I know they choose not to. I wonder with the minority government status and the desire to do more to lower the carbon footprint whether it will make a difference. I am thinking not.

 

[dowlingm]

I know they choose not to. I wonder with the minority government status and the desire to do more to lower the carbon footprint whether it will make a difference. I am thinking not.

If you come up with unrealistic scenarios, it must be very comforting to be able to predict they won't happen.

 

[micheal_can]

If you come up with unrealistic scenarios, it must be very comforting to be able to predict they won't happen.

When something is being squandered and you want to fix it, you look for options. All Options.

The government needs to enact legislation that can allow Via to keep to a schedule. How they do that in the end, is not something I am concerned with.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I am wondering if VIA could provide some sort of commuter service to Toronto. I think GO is pretty much maxed out in terms of further extensions out into the suburban GTA. Would a couple morning and evening runs from say London/Belleville/Owen Sound to Toronto with only a handful of stops at major stations be feasible? I imagine service would have to be within 60 mins +/- from the outer stations, and would be a scaled back service from typical VIA services (no food/drink, maybe wifi). Could VIA make this profitable?