VIA Rail

[crs1026]

Im really miffed that VIA didnt buy the line when GEXR put it up for sale a couple years ago.

GEXR didn't own the London-Stratford-Kitchener line. CN did. GEXR just leased it. The lease was terminated.

GEXR only owns the branches west of Stratford, which they still operate.

Was the portion west of Kitchener ever on the market? I don't know. ML only bought east of Kitchener.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

^I'm informed that VIA's 2016, 2017, and 2018 Corporate Plans all contained a statement to the effect that VIA was looking at the purchase of the London-Kitchener section. The 2019 and 2020 versions did not make that statement.
Whether VIA decided otherwise, or there was no money to be had.... or whether CN was ever interested, we don't know.

- Paul

 

[TFC]

GO is working on improving the signalling and adding sidings on their section - Kitchener to Georgetown.

CN is not interested in doing any improvements to their section of the line - it's more than adequate for their current and future needs. Any improvements would have to be paid for by VIA or the Province.

The ideal/plan for an additional roundtrip to and from Stratford is likely dead, as is the plan for the use of additional RDCs.

Dan

I recall when CN assumed operations on the north mainline, GEXR was responsible for bringing the line back up to the condition that it was in when they assumed operation. I think there was also discussion on this forum a while ago around GEXR providing CN with monetary compensation for CN to carry out upgrades. I wasn't sure whether these upgrades (assuming they've already taken place), have resulted in a tangible improvement to VIA's operations, particularly west of Kitchener.

 

[roger1818]

^I'm informed that VIA's 2016, 2017, and 2018 Corporate Plans all contained a statement to the effect that VIA was looking at the purchase of the London-Kitchener section. The 2019 and 2020 versions did not make that statement.

Interesting. I hadn't noticed that, but sure enough:

2016 Corporate Plan pg. 23:

2017 Corporate Plan pg. 13:

2018 Corporate Plan pg. 23:

Whether VIA decided otherwise, or there was no money to be had.... or whether CN was ever interested, we don't know.

If I had to guess, the government didn't approve the funding. The fact that VIA only ran 2 trains a day each way along that corridor (giving preference to the more direct, southern route) made it harder to justify.

 

[crs1026]

If I had to guess, the government didn't approve the funding. The fact that VIA only ran 2 trains a day each way along that corridor (giving preference to the more direct, southern route) made it harder to justify.

It would have been a considerable amount to ask for, considering that VIA would both have to buy the line and then fix it up. And recognizing that CN had good business on the line, so it wouldn't be a fire-sale purchase of something that would otherwise attract scrap value.

And, it would have been directionally and politically odd to simply go ahead and buy that line, and fix it up, while having such huge angst over doing exactly that with the larger HFR package. (Although, IMHO, fixing up this short segment and growing the business would likely offer a simple and constructive proof that the larger HFR investment was sound).

Maybe it will happen eventually.

- Paul

 

[ManyQuestions]

Has anybody heard anything about when the engineering studies for the HFR project are supposed to be presented? I recall hearing that the original plan was to have them completed in time to full funding to be considered in the 2021 federal budget. I also remember talking to both Arup and AECOM about the studies a year ago at my university job fair and being told that they were not hiring summer students for the project because it was already progressing well. This was before the coronavirus started to really spread around Canada.

Sorry if this was asked several times already, I haven't been following this forum very closely over the past month.

 

[Allandale25]

Has anybody heard anything about when the engineering studies for the HFR project are supposed to be presented? I recall hearing that the original plan was to have them completed in time to full funding to be considered in the 2021 federal budget. I also remember talking to both Arup and AECOM about the studies a year ago at my university job fair and being told that they were not hiring summer students for the project because it was already progressing well. This was before the coronavirus started to really spread around Canada.

Sorry if this was asked several times already, I haven't been following this forum very closely over the past month.

This is the latest public update I heard and posted. I haven't seen anything else including in the media.

Post in thread 'VIA Rail' https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/via-rail.21060/post-1621928

 

[smallspy]

I wish I could be any more specific, but the plans to improve service in Southwestern Ontario are far from dead and I am confident that most (if not: all) stations will see improved service (whether through GO or VIA) within the next decade.

I'm not saying that the larger plans for improvements in SW Ontario are dead - we both know that there are plans afoot - just that the specific ones for Stratford and the RDC fleet are.

We also both know that it's unlikely that we're going to see much in terms of excitement from the higher-ups for another couple of years, too.

Thanks, that's what I was curious about. So what that means is if there is track that has deteriorated to the point where it's difficult for VIA to run economical service, it in effectively becomes a political decision (i.e. Ottawa as to express a willingness to approach the line owner about a sale / provide capital for to purchase the line). Presumably a key passenger rail link like the one through St. Marys would generate enough political pressure for VIA or Metrolinx to buy it, if it actually came to that. Nice to hear that you think it's likely it will see improved service in the future.

In fairness, it's a bit more complex than that.

VIA has purchased lines where it was prudent to do so, and when they became available, and when it aligned with their short- and medium-term future to do so. This is why they own the Alexandria Sub, the Smiths Falls Sub, and a section of the Chatham Sub.

In a situation where the quality of the line has deteriorated, VIA does have the option to request (and hopefully receive) funding to pay for improvements to the line. Again, this has happened in the past with the Guelph Sub.

But also to be considered is whether the costs vs. benefits will make sense. It's obvious that spending millions (or hundreds of millions) of dollars on the rails on Vancouver Island and the Gaspé Penninsula didn't meet that criteria - it can be deduced that the current (and future) ridership simply wasn't high enough to warrant the outlay.

Dan

 

[robmausser]

If I had to guess, the government didn't approve the funding. The fact that VIA only ran 2 trains a day each way along that corridor (giving preference to the more direct, southern route) made it harder to justify.

God I hate this line of thinking.

1. Service sucks, so there is no ridership demand. Only 2 trains a day.
2. Ask government for more funding on the line, to increase travel times, reliability, more trains per day, more ridership.
3. Funding denied, there isn't enough ridership to justify an expansion. Only 2 trains a day! And they are slow and unreliable

Circular logic.

 

[roger1818]

God I hate this line of thinking.

1. Service sucks, so there is no ridership demand. Only 2 trains a day.
2. Ask government for more funding on the line, to increase travel times, reliability, more trains per day, more ridership.
3. Funding denied, there isn't enough ridership to justify an expansion. Only 2 trains a day! And they are slow and unreliable

Circular logic.

LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.

 

[crs1026]

LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.

That southern route is better in its current state, perhaps...but as with HFR to the east, the question is how much use CN will allow. The Stratford route has much more upside potential for adding more trains without conflicting with freight. As to travel time, the line west of Kitchener is largely straight with only a couple of places where it would have to remain slow. It could easily be upgraded to 100 mph. Some bridge work might be needed. At that quality, the time difference would be eliminated. Right now, speed west of Stratford is in the 60-65 km/h range, which is downright pathetic. One has to think that a single-seat ride between Guelph/Kitchener and Chatham/Windsor would have appeal.

Which reminds me - I haven't heard that CN and VIA/GO have a final agreement to increase service between Halwest and Silver - if that segment isn't available, the entire discussion is moot.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

That southern route is better in its current state, perhaps...but as with HFR to the east, the question is how much use CN will allow. The Stratford route has much more upside potential for adding more trains without conflicting with freight. As to travel time, the line west of Kitchener is largely straight with only a couple of places where it would have to remain slow. It could easily be upgraded to 100 mph. Some bridge work might be needed. At that quality, the time difference would be eliminated. Right now, speed west of Stratford is in the 60-65 km/h range, which is downright pathetic. One has to think that a single-seat ride between Guelph/Kitchener and Chatham/Windsor would have appeal.

Which reminds me - I haven't heard that CN and VIA/GO have a final agreement to increase service between Halwest and Silver - if that segment isn't available, the entire discussion is moot.

- Paul

What can be done to increase track speeds west of Stratford? Installing welded rail instead of jointed rail? Refurbishment of the track bed?

 

[crs1026]

What can be done to increase track speeds west of Stratford? Installing welded rail instead of jointed rail? Refurbishment of the track bed?

All of the above. The problem is simply decades of lack of maintenance. I haven't looked at the track too closely, but it's old jointed rail. Install new CWR for sure, probably replace a goodly number of ties, undercut the whole thing, reballast and resurface.. Likely rebuild the level crossings. Much brush grubbing to improve sightlines for level crossings. Renew culverts and drainage. I wonder what the bridge at St Mary's might need, I believe it's under a PSO.
To handle more frequent passenger service, one might add a siding or two, also.
Not much different, really, than what VIA had to do to the Smiths Falls and Brockville Subs.

- Paul

 

[robmausser]

All of the above. The problem is simply decades of lack of maintenance. I haven't looked at the track too closely, but it's old jointed rail. Install new CWR for sure, probably replace a goodly number of ties, undercut the whole thing, reballast and resurface.. Likely rebuild the level crossings. Much brush grubbing to improve sightlines for level crossings. Renew culverts and drainage. I wonder what the bridge at St Mary's might need, I believe it's under a PSO.
To handle more frequent passenger service, one might add a siding or two, also.
Not much different, really, than what VIA had to do to the Smiths Falls and Brockville Subs.

- Paul

That being said, I dont think CN will go to this length when refurbing the line. Its just not needed for their freight usage.

 

[robmausser]

LOL. It isn't quite so simple as that. With Metrolinx extending GO service to Kitchener, ridership on the northern route has taken a serious hit. Also, the southern route is 10 km (about 5%) shorter (185 km vs 195 km), which gives it a competitive advantage for through travel.

Interesting that there was a business case for High Speed Rail, but slightly improving the line is off the table......

Hmm...