VIA Rail

[kEiThZ]

The last time I took the plane to Montreal from Pearson, from Union to downtown Montreal took me 4.5 hours.

30ish minutes on the UPX
2 hours in Pearson, until take off (including taxing on the runway etc)
1.3h in the air.
45 minutes Trudeau airport, taxing, deplaning etc.
45 minutes, bus from airport to downtown.

Now do the math with the Island.

1) 1.3 hrs air time for a flight from Pearson to Dorval is a bit irregular. Not close to the norm at all.

2) 2 hrs at Pearson pre-takeoff is also unnecessary.

3) None of the Pearson timings apply to the relevant discussion: Billy Bishop. If you're flying from YTZ, you can get from the front door of Union Station to the front door of Gare Centrale in under 4 hrs with generous allowances for pre-boarding and post-arrival in Montreal.

4) The regular travelers going by air usually don't even bother checking in 1.5 hrs before departure. They have a boarding pass on their phone and they are pulling into the airport 30-45 mins before their flight and heading straight to security with their boarding pass on their phone.

 

[Urban Sky]

I never marveled about anything. You said you couldn't name any intercity doubledeckers other than those in Switzerland, France and the U.S., so I helped you name some more.

If you had actually read the post, you would have seen that I agree with your position regarding doubledeckers on VIA's network. Portraying me as some kind of bilevel fanboy is doing little other than undermining your credibility.

You are right, I should really have written "mentioned" instead of "marveled about", but I actually do think that the Intercity trains of the Netherlands have many things we could marvel about together, such as their high frequency and strict adherence to a single "Taktfahrplan" (clock-face scheduling) and stopping pattern which make their use almost as simple as taking a subway (and much easier than taking a city bus here in Montreal!), and (believe it or not!) I even think that their rolling stock is highly appropriate for the kind of service they provide, as they maximize the number of seats they provide for passengers who might travel up to 3.5 hours on them or for their daily commutes.

I took these trains myself between Maastricht and Utrecht, but I just didn't recall them when I asked for help with naming bilevel intercity trains because for a German train nerd like myself, they rather resemble "Regional Express" trains (limited-stop regional trains) than actual "InterCity" trains due to their low revenue speed of only 140 km/h and high frequency of stops (in the case of Amsterdam-Maastricht: 7 intermediary stops over a distance of 218 km, thus one stop every 27 km) than actual "InterCity" trains of the sort which reaches up to 200 km/h and is more likely to stop every 50-100 km...

Absolutely correct. I suspect that the Amsterdam-Maastricht corridor is the busiest in the country, given the huge commuter flows between nearby cities (Amsterdam - Utrecht, Amsterdam - Den Bosch, Utrecht - Eindhoven, etc). Hence the use of 12-car bilevel trains during peak periods.

Thank you for proving me wrong on my suspicion that GO Transit is the only rail company (at least in the western world) to operate 12-car bilevel trains!

Is there any math or analysis on service cars like the snack car? I'd love to know why some operators can operate one and some can't. Why the difference between Amtrak and VIA on this?

I unfortunately can only answer this very briefly (and very generally), as I really need to go to bed, but the main problems with any kind of snack/bar car are:

• Labour costs: by requiring at the very least one employee (whereas normally two cars can have the same employee assigned)
• Maintenance and capital costs: by incurring (at the very least) the same maintenance and capital costs as a regular revenue car
• Opportunity costs: by taking up expensive "real estate" in the train, which could otherwise be used for additional seats (which may be occupied with additional passengers)

Don't get me wrong: I love restaurant/bar/lounge cars for the same reasons @crs1026 does, but you just can't sell enough sandwiches or hot dogs to break-even compared to converting the service car to a regular revenue seating car - especially today where customers demand higher frequencies, which has significantly reduced train lengths in many intercity networks...

 

[kEiThZ]

Don't get me wrong: I love restaurant/bar/lounge cars for the same reasons @crs1026 does, but you just can't sell enough sandwiches or hot dogs to break-even compared to converting the service car to a regular revenue seating car - especially today where customers demand higher frequencies, which has significantly reduced train lengths in many intercity networks...

I get the idea. But I wonder if the promotional and aspirational value is lost in the analysis. I mean Amtrak manages a cafe car on a 304 seat/5 pax coach Acela. And they must see value in it, if they included it in the Avelia Liberty refresh.

 

[jamincan]

Thank you for proving me wrong on my suspicion that GO Transit is the only rail company (at least in the western world) to operate 12-car bilevel trains!

Never mind a 12-car bilevel train, I was once on a 24-car bilevel train into Barrie!

(from Aurora, when we needed a push from the following train due to some tech issues)

 

[crs1026]

Don't get me wrong: I love restaurant/bar/lounge cars for the same reasons @crs1026 does, but you just can't sell enough sandwiches or hot dogs to break-even compared to converting the service car to a regular revenue seating car - especially today where customers demand higher frequencies, which has significantly reduced train lengths in many intercity networks...

This is interesting insight, thank you. For North America, anyways, the cafe car dates from an era where trains didn’t sell out all the time, and maximising seats per car operated really wasn’t an issue. The cafe car was just a sunk cost towards running the train. I suppose that’s an outdated paradigm - the more things that are scalable, and the more consistent the fleet can be, the better the economics will be. One certainly can’t advocate for DMU and snack bar car in the same breath!

Still, having a kitchen in every car must have its costs. There will be a more distributed handling and accounting for cash (although touchless is likely here to stay), liquor must be inventoried in every car, there must be more food wastage (as every coach must be stocked, and one would expect more unsold items returned), handling costs and logistics would be more complex. Many more refrigerators and microwaves and coffee makers to maintain.

Still, given the choice between a made-to-order Norwegian Rail panini-style toasted cheese sandwich, and the traditional stone cold cellophane wrapped Canadian equivalent, I know which I’d pick.

- Paul

 

[roger1818]

Regarding Snack cars, does it have to be a dedicated snack car or could it be a hybrid with snack counter but some/all of the seating is for "paying customers." In this model, you get the food/beverages you want, when you want and bring it back to your seat. You still have the issue of a dedicated employee, but on a longer train, the space needed for the counter likely wouldn't be much more than the space needed for kitchens in every coach. As for profitability, while sandwiches don't make much money, beverages do (especially booze).

The other question is, will having a snack car make taking the train a more attractive option, and thus result in more ticket sales (I'm not sure about this one)?

 

[lenaitch]

Regarding Snack cars, does it have to be a dedicated snack car or could it be a hybrid with snack counter but some/all of the seating is for "paying customers." In this model, you get the food/beverages you want, when you want and bring it back to your seat. You still have the issue of a dedicated employee, but on a longer train, the space needed for the counter likely wouldn't be much more than the space needed for kitchens in every coach. As for profitability, while sandwiches don't make much money, beverages do (especially booze).

The other question is, will having a snack car make taking the train a more attractive option, and thus result in more ticket sales (I'm not sure about this one)?

I suppose many configurations are possible. I can't say that the coach seats in a partial snack car would be particularly attractive with increased noise and traffic. As far as eating at your seat, I imagine that goes on now with either a pre-packaged onboard purchase or passenger provided. Commuters do it, inter-city bus travellers do it. How well it works I suppose depends on sensibilities, eating habits and diet. I imagine I'd be thrilled sharing a coach seat with somebody noshing on an onion sandwich.

 

[cplchanb]

Regarding Snack cars, does it have to be a dedicated snack car or could it be a hybrid with snack counter but some/all of the seating is for "paying customers." In this model, you get the food/beverages you want, when you want and bring it back to your seat. You still have the issue of a dedicated employee, but on a longer train, the space needed for the counter likely wouldn't be much more than the space needed for kitchens in every coach. As for profitability, while sandwiches don't make much money, beverages do (especially booze).

The other question is, will having a snack car make taking the train a more attractive option, and thus result in more ticket sales (I'm not sure about this one)?

no because people already assume they will be charged an arm and a leg for snacks and drinks, just like airlines do. They would rather have convenience of time and speed with individual seat comfort over a snack car. This is especially true for
short intercities where people would rather watch a movie on their laptop than wander around to a snack car.

 

[micheal_can]

Regarding Snack cars, does it have to be a dedicated snack car or could it be a hybrid with snack counter but some/all of the seating is for "paying customers." In this model, you get the food/beverages you want, when you want and bring it back to your seat. You still have the issue of a dedicated employee, but on a longer train, the space needed for the counter likely wouldn't be much more than the space needed for kitchens in every coach. As for profitability, while sandwiches don't make much money, beverages do (especially booze).

The other question is, will having a snack car make taking the train a more attractive option, and thus result in more ticket sales (I'm not sure about this one)?

I doubt someone will switch to the train just because of having a snack car. Having said that, maybe a reservable dinning car with a premium meal, of course at a premium cost might do well. A 3-5 hour train ride with an amazing meal would attract some people.

 

[crs1026]

I doubt someone will switch to the train just because of having a snack car. Having said that, maybe a reservable dinning car with a premium meal, of course at a premium cost might do well. A 3-5 hour train ride with an amazing meal would attract some people.

Well, Business Class is an attempt at that, and VIA does that pleasantly enough. I can't imagine how much a premium meal with table cloth would cost given the square feet involved. And frankly, if I'm going to have that experience, I may not want to share a table of four with strangers.

Virgin in Britain was a cut above in food service in first class when I last was over there, but they did work out of a kitchen sized space rather than an LRC sized galley.

I'm probably not a typical air passenger (if there is such a thing) but more and more I do buy food on board, for a couple of reasons. First, I have enough in my hands while boarding and stowing, and it's a pain to bring food along, stow it, then go looking for it. Second, the fare in airports is just as expensive (or more) and not very appealing. Ordering on the tablet was interesting but didn't seem to help the crew much. I wonder if the same dynamics even apply on VIA - there's less problem with stowage, and unless the trip is a long one I suspect most people just buy Pringles or Hummus rather than a bigger meal. When I fly, it's mostly for vacations, and the cost of food on the plane is a pretty small component of total trip cost. That might not be true for, say, a student coming home for the weekend.

When I add up the linear feet of space consumed by the galley in an LRC coach, however, I wonder if a discrete cafe counter really consumes more space.... especially on longer consists. There must be a break-even point. However, having to marshall consists so there is always one snack car will be less flexible so that alone might tilt the equation.

What I do suspect, given the LRC's inside dimensions, is that VIA and/or Transport Canada also had a keep-em-seated agenda when the LRC came out. If so, that has to go. The ability to move around is important, and it's a way that VIA can differentiate from other modes. Even if there's no snack car to walk to, stretching likely sells.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

I doubt someone will switch to the train just because of having a snack car. Having said that, maybe a reservable dinning car with a premium meal, of course at a premium cost might do well. A 3-5 hour train ride with an amazing meal would attract some people.

The last time a railroad tried to attract a premium customer segment with superior catering ("superlative cuisine in the Deluxe Dining Room Car") was in October 1965:

Source: official CP timetable (effective 1965-10-31)

The experiment lasted less than 3 months before CP completely abandoned its Toronto-Montreal and Toronto-Ottawa routes, as explained by R.L.Kennedy on Trainweb:

At this time the CPR introduced new trains between Montreal-Toronto and Ottawa-Toronto, using the old train numbers. The latter trains were RDC equipped day runs via Havelock leaving each terminal at 9.00 a.m. The Lake Shore service via Trenton featured equipment once used on The Canadian, including Skyline dome cars and Park observation dome cars. Departing 5.00 p.m. from each terminal, they were deluxe name trains; Royal York to Toronto and Le Chateau Champlain to Montreal, where CP had hotels by the same name. Their reign was short, embarrassingly so. The high-priced deluxe service didn't catch on fast enough and the trains were gone in a matter of months! Sunday, January 23,1966 saw the end of Montreal-Toronto trains 21 & 22 and Ottawa-Toronto trains 33 & 34.

It's also striking that such a suggestion comes from the one poster who usually doesn't miss any opportunity to demand the destruction of the one public train service in this country which actually attracts high-paying passengers with superior dining and amenities by the thousands, just to replace it with ordinary overnight trains which have absolutely zero competitive advantages over all already existing transportation options...^^

 

[kEiThZ]

One certainly can’t advocate for DMU and snack bar car in the same breath!

Different applications though. You don't need a snack car for a 2 hr ride. A 5 hr ride is different.

Still, having a kitchen in every car must have its costs. There will be a more distributed handling and accounting for cash (although touchless is likely here to stay), liquor must be inventoried in every car, there must be more food wastage (as every coach must be stocked, and one would expect more unsold items returned), handling costs and logistics would be more complex. Many more refrigerators and microwaves and coffee makers to maintain.

This is what I'm wondering too. Which is why I'm wondering if this has been studied at all.

I take from @Urban Sky post that they don't see value in a coach that doesn't generate revenue. But I wonder how that compares to say one that saves cost, by combining kitchens and freeing up floor space in other coaches for more seating. That said, it may be less pressing as travel times drop with HFR. I'm just wondering how Acela makes it work.

Still, given the choice between a made-to-order Norwegian Rail panini-style toasted cheese sandwich, and the traditional stone cold cellophane wrapped Canadian equivalent, I know which I’d pick.

They don't need a dining/snack car to deliver better food. Just better catering.

 

[roger1818]

I take from @Urban Sky post that they don't see value in a coach that doesn't generate revenue. But I wonder how that compares to say one that saves cost, by combining kitchens and freeing up floor space in other coaches for more seating. That said, it may be less pressing as travel times drop with HFR. I'm just wondering how Acela makes it work.

I wonder if it has something to do with the sale of Alcohol. According to Branchline. Vol.25 No.2, February 1986: pg.16:

MOTHBALLED: All five Tempo Cafe-Bar-Lounge cars (nos. 340-344) are stored at VIA's Mimico Maintenance Base in Toronto. Now that alcoholic beverages can be served in coaches, these cars are no longer required for the service for which they were built. (David Stremes)

Just a guess, but maybe Amtrak isn't allowed to sell alcohol in coaches, so they need to have a "bar car" to provide that service.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

The last time a railroad tried to attract a premium customer segment with superior catering ("superlative cuisine in the Deluxe Dining Room Car") was in October 1965:

View attachment 287343
Source: official CP timetable (effective 1965-10-31)

The experiment lasted less than 3 months before CP completely abandoned its Toronto-Montreal and Toronto-Ottawa routes, as explained by R.L.Kennedy on Trainweb:

It's also striking that such a suggestion comes from the one poster who usually doesn't miss any opportunity to demand the destruction of the one public train service in this country which actually attracts high-paying passengers with superior dining and amenities by the thousands, just to replace it with ordinary overnight trains which have absolutely zero competitive advantages over all already existing transportation options...^^

"2 Lounge cars... Deluxe Dining Room Car... Individual Chairs in first class... private room accommodations... 7 days a week" Oh man what I would give to get service like this between Montreal and Toronto. Comparing this to Porter/AC today, where you get a fine selection of potato chips, KitKat bars, and a cheap mini wine. Speaking as a frequent business traveler between the 2 cities, I'd happily pay the equivalent of AC's business class tickets for this and I'm sure most would as well if VIA were to offer this level of service, albeit a very small segment of the overall corridor market.

 

[kEiThZ]

Just a guess, but maybe Amtrak isn't allowed to sell alcohol in coaches, so they need to have a "bar car" to provide that service.

Makes sense. And looking at Amtrak pages, it seems that's the only places they sell booze.