VIA Rail

[crs1026]

^The only way I could see doing this at a price VIA and Exo could afford would be to build off the throat at the north end of Central station…. Or perhaps share with rem as far as the new rem station at McGill and branch off there. A short shared operation might be more doable than sharing for the full length of the existing tunnel. But even that is very fanciful as there is likely lots of stuff in the way, and construction at McGill is well along.
I do think you have picked a good location for the tunnel to join the Quebec/Ste Therese line. It’s that first 750 metres from Central that’s the killer.
One senses that Montreal may consider some Exo lines as expendable once Rem and maybe the pink line are built.

- Paul

 

[andrewmaps]

^The only way I could see doing this at a price VIA and Exo could afford would be to build off the throat at the north end of Central station…. Or perhaps share with rem as far as the new rem station at McGill and branch off there. A short shared operation might be more doable than sharing for the full length of the existing tunnel. But even that is very fanciful as there is likely lots of stuff in the way, and construction at McGill is well along.
I do think you have picked a good location for the tunnel to join the Quebec/Ste Therese line. It’s that first 750 metres from Central that’s the killer.
One senses that Montreal may consider some Exo lines as expendable once Rem and maybe the pink line are built.

- Paul

Would like to know how much research went into the Pink Line route... As the Southern part of my route would essentially mimick that alignment. (including the portal) The Pink Line was expected to surface around the area of my portal and travel at grade in the corridor until Montreal Ouest ...and there would be space for a station under everything else. Pink lines route is not too close to the Ville-Marie, and it passes under the REM.

 

[Urban Sky]

Would like to know how much research went into the Pink Line route... As the Southern part of my route would essentially mimick that alignment. (including the portal) The Pink Line was expected to surface around the area of my portal and travel at grade in the corridor until Montreal Ouest ...and there would be space for a station under everything else. Pink lines route is not too close to the Ville-Marie, and it passes under the REM.

There is neither the space, nor the money nor the stomach in Montreal to digest the construction of two underground rail corridors across the city. And I couldn't blame my fellow Montrealers if they chose a Metro line over an intercity tunnel which would only benefit passengers travelling between Montreal and Quebec...

 

[nfitz]

Would like to know how much research went into the Pink Line route...

Probably about as much as went into Ford's Front Street monorail.

 

[reaperexpress]

There is neither the space, nor the money nor the stomach in Montreal to digest the construction of two underground rail corridors across the city. And I couldn't blame my fellow Montrealers if they chose a Metro line over an intercity tunnel which would only benefit passengers travelling between Montreal and Quebec...

Yes I agree that there wouldn't be the stomach for two new rail tunnels. But to be fair, the intercity tunnel wouldn't just be for the benefit of people travelling from Québec. It would also serve all of the northern and eastern suburbs via the St Jérôme line, and Mascouche Line, respectively, as well as the VIA long-distance services from Jonquière and Senneterre (and more importantly, Shawinigan and Joliette). And as drawn, it would also serve the western lines (Vaudreuil-Dorion and Candiac), providing them with a new connection to the various services using Gare Centrale (REM, VIA, Amtrak and other Exo Lines).

If the tunnel were to be funded by the City of Montréal, then certainly they would choose a metro over an intercity line. But large infrastructure projects like either of those are typically funded mostly by the province and feds, so the fact that the benefits are spread across the province is actually a point in favour of a mainline rail tunnel.

I'm afraid you will need to show at least some inclination to consider all three dimensions, if you want me to take your lines on a map serious...

Well I don't think this dotted line on a map was intended to be a design submitted for construction. It's clearly just a theoretical concept.

Which is how planning works. First you start with a concept, then you dig deeper to see if it is feasible, and if so, how it compares to other alternatives (including Do Nothing). The more interesting reponse would be to provide examples of obstacles which would make the new tunnel infeasible.

 

[Urban Sky]

Yes I agree that there wouldn't be the stomach for two new rail tunnels. But to be fair, the intercity tunnel wouldn't just be for the benefit of people travelling from Québec. It would also serve all of the northern and eastern suburbs via the St Jérôme line, and Mascouche Line, respectively, as well as the VIA long-distance services from Jonquière and Senneterre (and more importantly, Shawinigan and Joliette). And as drawn, it would also serve the western lines (Vaudreuil-Dorion and Candiac), providing them with a new connection to the various services using Gare Centrale (REM, VIA, Amtrak and other Exo Lines).

If the tunnel were to be funded by the City of Montréal, then certainly they would choose a metro over an intercity line. But large infrastructure projects like either of those are typically funded mostly by the province and feds, so the fact that the benefits are spread across the province is actually a point in favour of a mainline rail tunnel.

My point was that only a much smaller proportion of Montrealers (i.e. those people who would have to suffer most of the disruption caused by the construction) would benefit from the operation of a heavy rail tunnel than of an additional subway line...

Well I don't think this dotted line on a map was intended to be a design submitted for construction. It's clearly just a theoretical concept.

Which is how planning works. First you start with a concept, then you dig deeper to see if it is feasible, and if so, how it compares to other alternatives (including Do Nothing). The more interesting reponse would be to provide examples of obstacles which would make the new tunnel infeasible.

[rant]Which is exactly what I did (even with a link to an older post of mine in this very thread, where I already discussed most of these concerns in great detail), but this commenter chose to hand-wave away all the concerns I mentioned (e.g. Avenue Atwater and the Rue du Fort tunnel are too close to each other and too steep to dive underground inbetween, an underground station underneath the existing tracks would be inaccessible from the existing station concourse and in the way of the various arms of the Autoroute Ville-Marie tunnel and the underground city prevents you from being anywhere close to the street surface), rather than considering the possibility that someone who has actually lived in this city for 9 years, worked for VIA for 6 years, lived within walking distance of Avenue Atwater and the Rue du Fort tunnel for 2 years, been involved in the negotiations with the CDPQi and read more HSR/Higher-Speed Rail studies than most of you have heard of might have a more profound understanding of the engineering challenges of ploughing a railway tunnel through this city than a Crayonista who arbitrarily draws lines over a map...[/rant]

 

[lenaitch]

Crayonista

My new word!

 

[robmausser]

Honestly I dont expect anything but the current routing the Mascouche Line takes out of Gare Central becoming permanent and HFR simply following the same route.

From the EXO website:

 

[reaperexpress]

Honestly I dont expect anything but the current routing the Mascouche Line takes out of Gare Central becoming permanent and HFR simply following the same route.

The entire purpose of the Côte-de-Liesse REM station is to provide a transfer to the Mascouche line. The station is located on a spur relative to the CN line, so in practice trains serving it will need to terminate there. I don't think we know yet whether VIA will terminate its Jonquière and Senneterre services at Côte-de-Liesse or bypass it using the current huge detour route to Gare Centrale.

 

[kEiThZ]

Honestly I dont expect anything but the current routing the Mascouche Line takes out of Gare Central becoming permanent and HFR simply following the same route.

From the EXO website:

View attachment 329659

I don't think it's an either/or situation. They could launch with this. And then build a tunnel if the business case for one somehow arises. This only adds 15-20 mins to the Mtl-QC trip. They can make up some of it outside the city.

 

[robmausser]

I don't think it's an either/or situation. They could launch with this. And then build a tunnel if the business case for one somehow arises. This only adds 15-20 mins to the Mtl-QC trip. They can make up some of it outside the city.

Of course anything is possible but I dont think a tunnel is within the original RER budget, or even EXO. Maybe someday.

The entire purpose of the Côte-de-Liesse REM station is to provide a transfer to the Mascouche line. The station is located on a spur relative to the CN line, so in practice trains serving it will need to terminate there. I don't think we know yet whether VIA will terminate its Jonquière and Senneterre services at Côte-de-Liesse or bypass it using the current huge detour route to Gare Centrale.

That was also the plan with Parc and the St.Jerome line (which on weekends and non-peak does terminate at Parc) but people complained and the route to Lucien Station was retained.

And I think will happen the same with Mascouche. People don't like transfers and the majority of Mascouchians want to go downtown.

 

[andrewmaps]

Of course anything is possible but I dont think a tunnel is within the original RER budget, or even EXO. Maybe someday.

That was also the plan with Parc and the St.Jerome line (which on weekends and non-peak does terminate at Parc) but people complained and the route to Lucien Station was retained.

And I think will happen the same with Mascouche. People don't like transfers and the majority of Mascouchians want to go downtown.

Yes, and also the Large (6 car double decker?) Mascouche trains will disgorge many passengers at Côte-de-Liesse mostlikely overwhelming the tiny 4-car REM trains... Taking them directly downtown makes most sense.

 

[crs1026]

^I sure hope that VIA/Exo work with CN/CP to upgrade the route from CdeL to Ballantyne so that trains don’t plod along as they do now. The through trip around the mountain , while not optimal, could be a lot faster. Not a big expense - likely only a few millions for better signalling and maybe some track improvement.

- Paul

 

[reaperexpress]

That was also the plan with Parc and the St.Jerome line (which on weekends and non-peak does terminate at Parc) but people complained and the route to Lucien Station was retained.

And I think will happen the same with Mascouche. People don't like transfers and the majority of Mascouchians want to go downtown.

The difference between this situation and the St-Jérôme line is that Parc is actually a through station, which allows trains to continue to downtown without much hassle. Côte-de-Liesse is a terminal station, so to continue to Gare Centrale, trains would first need to back up to Ahuntsic to switch tracks there. There is absolutely no way the RTM would choose to do that.

Prior to the tunnel's closure, peak-period trains took 16 minutes to get from Ahuntsic to Gare Centrale, with one intermediate stop. Now with the big detour they take 54 minutes, non-stop. In comparison, the future route via Côte-de-Liesse and the REM will take about 16 to 18 minutes:
- 5 minutes in the train between Ahuntsic and Côte-de-Liesse,
- 0.5 minutes to change platforms (only applies southbound, given that northbound is cross-platform from REM to Exo),
- 0 to 2.5 minutes waiting for the REM train
- 10 minutes in the train to Gare Centrale

Currently with the big detour, the end-to-end travel time is 1h45. If there are 4 trains on the line, that translates to service every 60 minutes in both directions* (assuming a 15-minute turnaround time).
With trains turning back at Côte-de-Liesse, the end-to-end travel time would be 55 minutes, which translates to service every 35 minutes in both directions with those same 4 trainsets.

*Yes, I realize that in practice the peak-period service is often uni-directional, but this comparison is just an illustration of the relative productivities of the trainsets in the two scenarios.

Do you honestly believe that people are so put-off by a transfer (which is cross-platform in one direction) that they would prefer a trip which takes 36 minutes longer, and is barely half the frequency?


References:

Extract of Exo5 schedule, 21 May 2019:

Extract of Exo5 schedule, 22 June 2020:

Service summary for Côte-de-Liesse station, from REM website:

 

[roger1818]

^^^The question is (as @andrewmaps said), how many REM trains will it to take to absorb all the people on a Mascouche Line train? I could see it easily taking 5 or more REM trains. Don't forget the REM trains won't be empty when they arrive at Côte-de-Liesse.