[roger1818]

I doubt you’ll ever be able to offer any frequent rail service, decent travel time and a remotely acceptable OTP over the Seaway bridge at Saint-Catherines. That’s why I assume that such service would take the CP route through the Welland Tunnel and over the bridge at Fort Erie, which has the triple advantage of allowing to move all border procedures from Niagara Falls (which is irrelevant for cross-border travel) to Buffalo (which is the city with the highest ridership potential between Toronto and NYC), avoiding any interference from the Welland Canal and offering a downtown station in Hamilton…

While that might be optimal, I see two obstacles to this.

1. I don't know if VIA has the incentive or budget to run one or more trains to Buffalo, regardless of what connections can be made.
2. In Canada, the airports and local governments fund preclearance facilities to encourage more flights to the US. I am not sure who would fund the construction and operation of a customs facility in Buffalo, especially if a majority of passengers are transferring to another train.

While not very useful for The Maple Leaf, I could see Niagara Falls (Ontario) paying for a pre-clearance facility to allow all Empire Service trains to easily cross the boarder, increasing tourism to the region (not for connections to other trains). It could also be used by The Maple Leaf, to give the same local tourism advantage to those originating in Niagara Falls, but it wouldn't be significantly different for anyone else.

 

[Northern Light]

While that might be optimal, I see two obstacles to this.

1. I don't know if VIA has the incentive or budget to run one or more trains to Buffalo, regardless of what connections can be made.
2. In Canada, the airports and local governments fund preclearance facilities to encourage more flights to the US. I am not sure who would fund the construction and operation of a customs facility in Buffalo, especially if a majority of passengers are transferring to another train.

While not very useful for The Maple Leaf, I could see Niagara Falls (Ontario) paying for a pre-clearance facility to allow all Empire Service trains to easily cross the boarder, increasing tourism to the region (not for connections to other trains). It could also be used by The Maple Leaf, to give the same local tourism advantage to those originating in Niagara Falls, but it wouldn't be significantly different for anyone else.

I'm a bit confused as what pre-clearance facility we are discussing here.

NF, ON would be a beneficiary of pre-clearance if it were on the U.S. side of the border.

NF, NY already has that facility in place, it simply isn't operated, but there isn't much material benefit there for someone coming from Buffalo or NYC, unless those passengers have been pre-cleared from their point of origination.

That is to say a passenger originating in BF, NY is cleared by Canadian customs at the border, regardless, which side of the border they are cleared on doesn't really matter much in that context; the impact of the delay at the border is really one of delaying Toronto-bound passengers from those destinations.

Pre-Clearance in NF, ON doesn't really expedite anyone whose boarding there, it would only expidite through traffic.

*****

Of course, pre-clearance facilities as we envision them here are really needlessly cumbersome.

I so loved Europe for on-train customs, done while moving, with customs boarding the train one stop before the border and having everyone, cleared or not, by the time you hit the border. Vastly more efficient.

Never once have I left a train in Europe to have my passport checked; and that goes back to pre Schengen days.

 

[roger1818]

I'm a bit confused as what pre-clearance facility we are discussing here.

I said Niagara Falls Ontario (the former VIA Rail station).

NF, ON would be a beneficiary of pre-clearance if it were on the U.S. side of the border.

How would Amtrak Empire Service trains benefit from pre-clearance facility on the U.S. side of the boarder for trains to NYC? The station is already in the USA. Preclearance on the Canadian side of the boarder would allow trains originating in NF ON to travel from Canada into the USA without any schedule impact. The Ontario side of Niagara Falls is a significantly more important tourist destination than the American side

NF, NY already has that facility in place, it simply isn't operated, but there isn't much material benefit there for someone coming from Buffalo or NYC, unless those passengers have been pre-cleared from their point of origination.

I don't see how that facility would be of much use for anyone traveling domestically within the USA. It would only be useful for those traveling to/from Canada from/to Niagara Falls NY. Given that Niagara Falls, NY is shrinking rapidly, I don't see this as being all that valuable.

That is to say a passenger originating in BF, NY is cleared by Canadian customs at the border, regardless, which side of the border they are cleared on doesn't really matter much in that context; the impact of the delay at the border is really one of delaying Toronto-bound passengers from those destinations.

Pre-Clearance in NF, ON doesn't really expedite anyone whose boarding there, it would only expidite through traffic.

Pre-Clearing US customs means that people traveling from Niagara Falls, ON to the USA don't have to get off the train after crossing the bridge and the train doesn't need to wait for everyone to get back onboard. Without preclearance, the Empire Service Trains to NYC will always terminate south of the boarder. Getting them across the boarder easily would be good for local tourism.

Granted the idea of a climate controlled, pedestrian walkway between the two stations (with appropriate customs and immigration on either side) would provide similar benefits.

Of course, pre-clearance facilities as we envision them here are really needlessly cumbersome.

I so loved Europe for on-train customs, done while moving, with customs boarding the train one stop before the border and having everyone, cleared or not, by the time you hit the border. Vastly more efficient.

Never once have I left a train in Europe to have my passport checked; and that goes back to pre Schengen days.

Then again, even before the EU, you could drive across many European boarders without stopping at the boarder. It always surprised me that they would check the passport of train passengers but not motorists.

 

[Allandale25]

You can find some more details in the discussion here:

Canadian-Passenger-Rail@groups.io | Train 79 6/9

groups.io

Apparently, CN also had issues with their own dispatching system, which prevented that one of their freight units pushed the disabled train to the next station…

@TerryJohnson was apparently on the train.

 

[crs1026]

Of course, pre-clearance facilities as we envision them here are really needlessly cumbersome.

I so loved Europe for on-train customs, done while moving, with customs boarding the train one stop before the border and having everyone, cleared or not, by the time you hit the border. Vastly more efficient.

Never once have I left a train in Europe to have my passport checked; and that goes back to pre Schengen days.

Well, customs checks at the US-Canada border are all about the computer. The questions asked are mostly to support/verify the computer driven processes.

I don’t see any easy way to streamline the processes such that there can be a less painful on train process at the Niagara border..I have little confidence that revitalising train travel is a priority for either country’s border service…. it will remain the tail, not the dog.

My solution? An FRA waiver to allow the Canadian trains to cross the border as far as that improved US NF facility…. dead end tracks with bumper posts, if necessary. High level platforms and a walk-through-the-clearance process, onto a different train on the other side of the platform. More frequent Canadian side GO trains to mesh with Empire service but also provide non-connecting service.. A “dogcatcher” bus connection running late in the day, such that anyone held for secondary inspection, paperwork, etc has some ability to proceed once cleared. A Buffalo-Niagara shuttle bus allowing GO service at times when there is no Empire service connection.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

@TerryJohnson was apparently on the train.

That is a serious faliure on multiple levels. So the next morning the crew would have not had their minimum rest so did they have to send another crew to Windsor by taxi?

Also did they tow the disabled train the next day back to Toronto? They had an extra trainset?

 

[Urban Sky]

While that might be optimal, I see two obstacles to this.

1. I don't know if VIA has the incentive or budget to run one or more trains to Buffalo, regardless of what connections can be made.
2. In Canada, the airports and local governments fund preclearance facilities to encourage more flights to the US. I am not sure who would fund the construction and operation of a customs facility in Buffalo, especially if a majority of passengers are transferring to another train.

While not very useful for The Maple Leaf, I could see Niagara Falls (Ontario) paying for a pre-clearance facility to allow all Empire Service trains to easily cross the boarder, increasing tourism to the region (not for connections to other trains). It could also be used by The Maple Leaf, to give the same local tourism advantage to those originating in Niagara Falls, but it wouldn't be significantly different for anyone else.

I was talking about a project like HFR, i.e. a project for which investing in terminal facilities is worthwhile. As long as passenger trains pass over - and not under - the Welland Canal, you won't have the service quality and reliability you need to attract any significant amount of passengers.

Also, I don't agree that more people would travel from Toronto to New York City than Buffalo (or to Chicago than Detroit), simply because even a decently fast train would struggle to be competitive. First, the gravity model suggests that Toronto-NYC and Toronto-Buffalo should be similarly large markets (and larger than Toronto-Montreal!):

Note: for Toronto-Detroit, I added 10 km and 20 minutes to Toronto-Detroit and another hour of customs/transfer time for Toronto-Chicago.

Second, international experience shows that you can expect a modal share of rail (when looking at rail and air only) of 70% for a travel time of 2:30 (which is basically the current travel time for Toronto-Buffalo, once you exclude the dwell time at the border), whereas even a travel time of 6 hours (i.e. less than half of the current travel time) would only give you something like 10%:

Source: ALG

Therefore, I really wouldn't bother about Toronto-NYC (or: Toronto-Chicago) at this moment, but the pre-requisite for any somewhat attractive cross-border service by rail are shared border facilities in Buffalo (and Detroit), which allow to process passengers in varying priority: Check-in cutoff when departing from Buffalo (or Detroit) could maybe be 20 minutes before scheduled departure time for NEXUS card holders, 40 minutes for Canadian & American citizens or permanent residents, 60 minutes for everyone having a valid ESTA or eTA and 90 minutes for everyone else. Similarly, when arriving at Buffalo (or Detroit), there could be separate queues for these four passenger types, to minimize travel time for most passengers...

 

[Urban Sky]

That is a serious faliure on multiple levels. So the next morning the crew would have not had their minimum rest so did they have to send another crew to Windsor by taxi?

Also did they tow the disabled train the next day back to Toronto? They had an extra trainset?

As reported on Groups.io, train #79 arrived Windsor at 8:18 and departed as #72 exactly 1:40 hours later (i.e. 75 minutes late), which of course means you needed to bring in a fresh crew - especially after what turned into a 12-hour shift...

 

[crs1026]

Therefore, I really wouldn't bother about Toronto-NYC (or: Toronto-Chicago) at this moment, but the pre-requisite for any somewhat attractive cross-border service by rail are shared border facilities in Buffalo (and Detroit), which allow to process passengers in varying priority: Check-in cutoff when departing from Buffalo (or Detroit) could maybe be 20 minutes before scheduled departure time for NEXUS card holders, 40 minutes for Canadian & American citizens or permanent residents, 60 minutes for everyone having a valid ESTA or eTA and 90 minutes for everyone else. Similarly, when arriving at Buffalo (or Detroit), there could be separate queues for these four passenger types, to minimize travel time for most passengers...

This is something that is often overlooked . My recollection is that the gate closure at Vancouver for Seattle-bound travellers was well in advance of the advertised departure time, by roughly 90 minutes. In other words, even with an off-train pre-inspection, pre-trip delay at Vancouver (and likely at Montreal) will be similar to that encountered at a major airport and total trip time will be penalised accordingly.

In that respect, the delay encountered on-train in Niagara Falls - and eventually at Windsor, I hope - is not that much worse and might actually be better than international routes where border formalities happen in a terminal. The logistical issue is doing electronic document verification on train instead of at a counter. In my experience, a walk-through counter top arrangement works faster, even with disembarking and reboarding required.

I like the idea of a virtual pre-clearance via Nexus or similar (Nexus, by the way, is the best investment a cross-border traveller will ever make, and even offers benefits for domestic air travel) however I doubt the authorities will ever commit to a program that precludes holding people back if there is a red flag raised at the gate. So unless there are multiple departures that offer a fallback for any traveller whose passage is not immediately approved, the border dwell has to be timed around the most problemmatic transactions.

While I envy the European border crossing process, the reality is, this is North America and the security and immigration context - both for Canada and for our neighbour, to whom we are marrieds in this process - is never going to converge on that context. I would like to see us improve, but we need to be realistic here.

- Paul

 

[TerryJohnson]

As reported on Groups.io, train #79 arrived Windsor at 8:18 and departed as #72 exactly 1:40 hours later (i.e. 75 minutes late), which of course means you needed to bring in a fresh crew - especially after what turned into a 12-hour shift...

There was a fresh head end crew, but I'm not so sure about OTS. Maybe they got time for a coffee and a shower? The crew were amazingly professional and patient throughout the night.

 

[roger1818]

I was talking about a project like HFR, i.e. a project for which investing in terminal facilities is worthwhile. As long as passenger trains pass over - and not under - the Welland Canal, you won't have the service quality and reliability you need to attract any significant amount of passengers.

Given how quickly the proposed TOMQ HFR plan is progressing, an HFR line to Buffalo seems to be quite well entrenched in the realm fantasy.

Also, I don't agree that more people would travel from Toronto to New York City than Buffalo (or to Chicago than Detroit), simply because even a decently fast train would struggle to be competitive. First, the gravity model suggests that Toronto-NYC and Toronto-Buffalo should be similarly large markets (and larger than Toronto-Montreal!):
View attachment 425798
Note: for Toronto-Detroit, I added 10 km and 20 minutes to Toronto-Detroit and another hour of customs/transfer time for Toronto-Chicago.

I agree with you regarding Toronto-Detroit, but I was talking about Toronto-Buffalo. It is true that Toronto-NYC does struggle to be competitive with flying because Lake Ontario is in the way. As we have said before, the gravity model is interesting, but it hides synergies between cities. That is why despite Toronto-Montreal having double the "Ridership Units" of Toronto-Ottawa, actual ridership is higher on Toronto-Ottawa (Toronto and Ottawa are in the same province, they have the same primary language, Toronto is Ottawa's provincial capital and Ottawa is Toronto's National capital). Both NYC and and Buffalo loose a lot of "points" in synergy for being in different countries. Having said that, NYC is at least the USA's economic centre and a major entertainment centre. Buffalo doesn't really; have any significance. There might be some travel for sporting events, but the train would struggle to compete with the car for that (people tend not to go to games alone, so the cost of train fair is proportional to the number of people traveling, and unless there is a late train that aligns with the end of the game, you have to delay the return to the next day). Then there is the whole issue of needing a passport (or enhanced driver's license), which not everyone has (especially south of the boarder). Am I missing something about why Buffalo would be such a great business or vacation destination for Torontonians?

Second, international experience shows that you can expect a modal share of rail (when looking at rail and air only) of 70% for a travel time of 2:30 (which is basically the current travel time for Toronto-Buffalo, once you exclude the dwell time at the border), whereas even a travel time of 6 hours (i.e. less than half of the current travel time) would only give you something like 10%:
View attachment 425794
Source: ALG

Correct me if I am wrong, but I did a quick check and couldn't find any direct flights between any of Toronto's airports and Buffalo, so I don't know how that helps your argument.
https://algnewsletter.com/land-transportation/air-vs-rail-can-rivals-become-partners/

Therefore, I really wouldn't bother about Toronto-NYC (or: Toronto-Chicago) at this moment, but the pre-requisite for any somewhat attractive cross-border service by rail are shared border facilities in Buffalo (and Detroit), which allow to process passengers in varying priority: Check-in cutoff when departing from Buffalo (or Detroit) could maybe be 20 minutes before scheduled departure time for NEXUS card holders, 40 minutes for Canadian & American citizens or permanent residents, 60 minutes for everyone having a valid ESTA or eTA and 90 minutes for everyone else. Similarly, when arriving at Buffalo (or Detroit), there could be separate queues for these four passenger types, to minimize travel time for most passengers...

While I do tend to agree with you regarding Detroit vs. Chicago, I don't see why investing HFR to Buffalo (bypassing Niagara Falls) should be a priority for the Canadian government.

 

[Sunnyside]

Ilium

Given how quickly the proposed TOMQ HFR plan is progressing, an HFR line to Buffalo seems to be quite well entrenched in the realm fantasy.



I agree with you regarding Toronto-Detroit, but I was talking about Toronto-Buffalo. It is true that Toronto-NYC does struggle to be competitive with flying because Lake Ontario is in the way. As we have said before, the gravity model is interesting, but it hides synergies between cities. That is why despite Toronto-Montreal having double the "Ridership Units" of Toronto-Ottawa, actual ridership is higher on Toronto-Ottawa (Toronto and Ottawa are in the same province, they have the same primary language, Toronto is Ottawa's provincial capital and Ottawa is Toronto's National capital). Both NYC and and Buffalo loose a lot of "points" in synergy for being in different countries. Having said that, NYC is at least the USA's economic centre and a major entertainment centre. Buffalo doesn't really; have any significance. There might be some travel for sporting events, but the train would struggle to compete with the car for that (people tend not to go to games alone, so the cost of train fair is proportional to the number of people traveling, and unless there is a late train that aligns with the end of the game, you have to delay the return to the next day). Then there is the whole issue of needing a passport (or enhanced driver's license), which not everyone has (especially south of the boarder). Am I missing something about why Buffalo would be such a great business or vacation destination for Torontonians?



Correct me if I am wrong, but I did a quick check and couldn't find any direct flights between any of Toronto's airports and Buffalo, so I don't know how that helps your argument.
https://algnewsletter.com/land-transportation/air-vs-rail-can-rivals-become-partners/


While I do tend to agree with you regarding Detroit vs. Chicago, I don't see why investing HFR to Buffalo (bypassing Niagara Falls) should be a priority for the Canadian government.

My takeaway from this is that proper HFR to Buffalo is probably overkill unless we go all the way to NYC. That might not be completely off the table, but I agree that it’s pretty far off. I don’t think we should dismiss a proper Buffalo rail connection however, as it’s proximity and size are still considerable; HFR/HSR is just not the tech for it.

We should seriously consider a connection as part of a complete Niagara GO/VIA overhaul instead, perhaps starting from Bayview Junction in Hamilton all the way to downtown Buffalo via CN and/or CP’s tracks . AD2W hourly service to Niagara Falls via new dedicated tracks, a new canal bridge, service to Welland, and an extension to Buffalo would really integrate the very populous Niagara region with the existing networks. Whether it should be VIA/GO or something else is up for debate, but the main point is to have Buffalo be seen as a regional connection building upon other regional improvements on the Canadian side moreso than a direct link to Toronto. In my experience those in Buffalo are more interested in the destinations within an hour anyway, namely Niagara Falls, St. Catherine’s, and Hamilton. These places have (most of) the same barriers to new service that going to Buffalo would have anyways, so it would probably work better for everyone to make it one big scheme that uses Buffalo as the final ridership Node.

 

[lenaitch]

Deleted

 

[Bordercollie]

Ilium

My takeaway from this is that proper HFR to Buffalo is probably overkill unless we go all the way to NYC. That might not be completely off the table, but I agree that it’s pretty far off. I don’t think we should dismiss a proper Buffalo rail connection however, as it’s proximity and size are still considerable; HFR/HSR is just not the tech for it.

We should seriously consider a connection as part of a complete Niagara GO/VIA overhaul instead, perhaps starting from Bayview Junction in Hamilton all the way to downtown Buffalo via CN and/or CP’s tracks . AD2W hourly service to Niagara Falls via new dedicated tracks, a new canal bridge, service to Welland, and an extension to Buffalo would really integrate the very populous Niagara region with the existing networks. Whether it should be VIA/GO or something else is up for debate, but the main point is to have Buffalo be seen as a regional connection building upon other regional improvements on the Canadian side moreso than a direct link to Toronto. In my experience those in Buffalo are more interested in the destinations within an hour anyway, namely Niagara Falls, St. Catherine’s, and Hamilton. These places have (most of) the same barriers to new service that going to Buffalo would have anyways, so it would probably work better for everyone to make it one big scheme that uses Buffalo as the final ridership Node.

There is nothing in Buffalo that Torontonians would need to travel to except for the airport.

All of the other cities surrounding it are too small to be a destination, including Albany, Rochester and Cleveland.

 

[smallspy]

There is nothing in Buffalo that Torontonians would need to travel to except for the airport.

All of the other cities surrounding it are too small to be a destination, including Albany, Rochester and Cleveland.

That's quite the Toronto-centric view.

How about those city's view of Toronto?

Dan