[crs1026]

That shot from the sixties shows a train that wasn't very long and probably didn't earn its keep.

Perhaps ski trains are a viable market - there were traditionally more in the Montreal area, thanks to the lines running north - but the threshold of viability and the customer expectations may have changed since the 1960's. It would be useful to have a realistic business case on the subject.

I do agree, however - an apres ski bar car might do good business on the way back to Toronto. And a Kelso stop couldn't hurt the business case for GO to Cambridge.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

Unfortunately its just a terrible scan. Theres things that can be done, but nothings better than scanning the photo properly in the first place. Sad that a lot of these sorts of museums are run with people who are good intentioned and often working volunteer, but havent the slightest clue of how to use technology properly.

Or it was an underexposed shot in the first place.

That shot from the sixties shows a train that wasn't very long and probably didn't earn its keep.

Perhaps ski trains are a viable market - there were traditionally more in the Montreal area, thanks to the lines running north - but the threshold of viability and the customer expectations may have changed since the 1960's. It would be useful to have a realistic business case on the subject.

I do agree, however - an apres ski bar car might do good business on the way back to Toronto. And a Kelso stop couldn't hurt the business case for GO to Cambridge.

- Paul

Even the operators of La Massif stopped running their Charlevoix train in the winter.

 

[crs1026]

Or it was an underexposed shot in the first place.

Exactly. Looks like Kodachrome, given the magenta tint. Kodachrome was never great with shadows.

I tried my best, but I really couldn't improve on it.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

That shot from the sixties shows a train that wasn't very long and probably didn't earn its keep.

Perhaps ski trains are a viable market - there were traditionally more in the Montreal area, thanks to the lines running north - but the threshold of viability and the customer expectations may have changed since the 1960's. It would be useful to have a realistic business case on the subject.

I do agree, however - an apres ski bar car might do good business on the way back to Toronto. And a Kelso stop couldn't hurt the business case for GO to Cambridge.

- Paul

It would be nice if it was even studied to show whether a reverse commute from Union would be viable.Something that arrived when the hills open and left after the hills closed. There would also need to be some sort of bus service for the "last mile" to the various resorts.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

It would be nice if it was even studied to show whether a reverse commute from Union would be viable.Something that arrived when the hills open and left after the hills closed. There would also need to be some sort of bus service for the "last mile" to the various resorts.

I'll say that since I was involved in that Ryerson look at Collingwood passenger rail the emergence of ride sharing, especially if linked to the Innisfil model has done a lot to make the last mile seem less of a hurdle on the tourist side of things.

 

[lenaitch]

Arguing for a rail commuter service to Collingwood is one thing but, given that public money is finite, is spending tax dollars to accommodate one class or recreational tourist money well spent (the same argument could be made for Niagara)? How many trains per day would be needed to satisfy the market? Day skiers? Night skiers? Storage space for all the gear skiers need?

 

[crs1026]

Arguing for a rail commuter service to Collingwood is one thing but, given that public money is finite, is spending tax dollars to accommodate one class or recreational tourist money well spent (the same argument could be made for Niagara)? How many trains per day would be needed to satisfy the market? Day skiers? Night skiers? Storage space for all the gear skiers need?

Being able to fill a trainload on weekend mornings may seem like a business case, but it isn't, considering the amount of capital needed to extend the tracks from Allandale and maintain them to passenger train standards.
Niagara benefits from not needing that much new or upgraded track to run the current service.
I wonder also about first/last mile - Not many people will drag their ski equipment down to Union, and once I haul my ski's by car to Rutherford or Downsview Park to park and catch the GO, maybe it's more convenient to just keep driving.
Put a bus on from Allandale and see if the demand is there.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

Arguing for a rail commuter service to Collingwood is one thing but, given that public money is finite, is spending tax dollars to accommodate one class or recreational tourist money well spent (the same argument could be made for Niagara)? How many trains per day would be needed to satisfy the market? Day skiers? Night skiers? Storage space for all the gear skiers need?

I think the market probably is there in the long term, though certainly one would want a substantive analysis to back that up.

But the fact that that there was a market for it in the past; and that the GTA's population has since nearly tripled, and Blue Mountain has become a much larger resort, with more 4-season programming, meanwhile highway capacity to Blue Mountain and Wasaga has not been substantially improved, certainly seems like a solid foundation.

Notwithstanding that, I stand by my position, that for now, the compelling argument is extending the GO Barrie service by a single station ~2km further along, that could serve, in the future, as the basis for a Blue/Mountain Wasaga Service, and/or a return to Orillia on a new alignment is the best way to go.

Such an extension can better serve the commuter market in Barrie itself for the existing service, while also reducing modestly the scale/cost of future expansion.

That done, running a bus from the new terminus is a decent idea as per @crs1026 suggestion.

Though, the transfer penalty will skew results a bit.

The other thing I would look at, for now, is the actual run-time of the Barrie Corridor, some of the alignment through northern York region is needlessly curvy, and has lower track speeds as a result. For this service to be competitive w/the car, as a starting point, the Toronto-Barrie portion of the route must be time competitive w/the car.

A travel time of 1hr 43 for that segment today is just too long. I think some investment in the more rural sections of ROW with any eye to driving that down to 90M or less would also be a wise precursor here.

 

[lenaitch]

The other thing I would look at, for now, is the actual run-time of the Barrie Corridor, some of the alignment through northern York region is needlessly curvy, and has lower track speeds as a result. For this service to be competitive w/the car, as a starting point, the Toronto-Barrie portion of the route must be time competitive w/the car.

Given that investors are loathe to waste money, and the fact that it was virgin territory, I doubt it was needlessly curvy when it was built in the 1850s. They could no doubt build it arrow-straight today but, in light of all the competing needs and wants, t that would likely run up against the 'finite public money problem.

 

[Natika33]

I think the market probably is there in the long term, though certainly one would want a substantive analysis to back that up.

But the fact that that there was a market for it in the past; and that the GTA's population has since nearly tripled, and Blue Mountain has become a much larger resort, with more 4-season programming, meanwhile highway capacity to Blue Mountain and Wasaga has not been substantially improved, certainly seems like a solid foundation.

Notwithstanding that, I stand by my position, that for now, the compelling argument is extending the GO Barrie service by a single station ~2km further along, that could serve, in the future, as the basis for a Blue/Mountain Wasaga Service, and/or a return to Orillia on a new alignment is the best way to go.

Such an extension can better serve the commuter market in Barrie itself for the existing service, while also reducing modestly the scale/cost of future expansion.

That done, running a bus from the new terminus is a decent idea as per @crs1026 suggestion.

Though, the transfer penalty will skew results a bit.

The other thing I would look at, for now, is the actual run-time of the Barrie Corridor, some of the alignment through northern York region is needlessly curvy, and has lower track speeds as a result. For this service to be competitive w/the car, as a starting point, the Toronto-Barrie portion of the route must be time competitive w/the car.

A travel time of 1hr 43 for that segment today is just too long. I think some investment in the more rural sections of ROW with any eye to driving that down to 90M or less would also be a wise precursor here.

I have no idea what others would do, but I'd go skiing by train. I'd also sometimes go up to Collingwood for the ski town & spas without actually skiing (ass several of my coworkers & inlaws do). Heck, by the time anything like this comes to fruition, I'd be too old to ski anyway.

 

[lenaitch]

Being able to fill a trainload on weekend mornings may seem like a business case, but it isn't, considering the amount of capital needed to extend the tracks from Allandale and maintain them to passenger train standards.
Niagara benefits from not needing that much new or upgraded track to run the current service.
I wonder also about first/last mile - Not many people will drag their ski equipment down to Union, and once I haul my ski's by car to Rutherford or Downsview Park to park and catch the GO, maybe it's more convenient to just keep driving.
Put a bus on from Allandale and see if the demand is there.

- Paul

That sounds like a fine thing for the private resort owners to pilot. Keep in mind that 'Blue' is only one venue, albeit probably the largest. Ski facilities stretch from Oastler Bluff to almost Thornbury, as well as Snow Valley, Horseshoe Valley and Mount St. Louis Moonstone north of Barrie.

 

[HuskyJet]

Arguing for a rail commuter service to Collingwood is one thing but, given that public money is finite, is spending tax dollars to accommodate one class or recreational tourist money well spent (the same argument could be made for Niagara)? How many trains per day would be needed to satisfy the market? Day skiers? Night skiers? Storage space for all the gear skiers need?

Thinking in terms of funding a commuter or 2WAD service to Collingwood, I wonder if there exists a mechanism for the county to partially fund operations? Line 2 of the LINX bus service already hits the major town centers between Allendale and Collingwood (minus Cwood itself, of course). Notwithstanding the increased O&M of trains versus buses, it would be a useful backbone with value to the county by itself, let alone the value to the GO network (further range, increased catchment area, etc).

Am I crazy for remembering reading in one of the other UT threads there are (or will be) provincial incentives for building rapid transit stations among population centers? (or intensifying neighbourhoods in proximity to stations)?

I don't know, just seems to me if there was the political will and in the context of our housing crisis, incentives for building housing and connecting said housing to transit paired with current county and provincial transit budgets could be a crafty way to press the business case scales in favour of building out this service.
If the business case was sound, seems like it could be a win for GO and Simcoe County regional needs in one fell swoop.

 

[ShonTron]

Given that investors are loathe to waste money, and the fact that it was virgin territory, I doubt it was needlessly curvy when it was built in the 1850s. They could no doubt build it arrow-straight today but, in light of all the competing needs and wants, t that would likely run up against the 'finite public money problem.

Yeah, early railways - especially resource or farm-to-market routes - were laid out efficiently and cost-effectively. This meant chasing bonuses from townships and towns eager for rail access, picking routes that avoided hills, lakes, and expensive bridges, minimizing cuts and embankments, and connecting existing markets.

The OS&H (later the Northern Railway, then Grand Trunk) did pretty much all that, serving Newmarket (already an important market town), Barrie and Collingwood on an easy route out of Toronto, while capturing shipping traffic with the Collingwood port. Compare it to the much more winding Canadian Northern, built 50 years later and forced to go up the Don Valley and around the less populated side of Lake Simcoe.

 

[crs1026]

In fairness…. The Barrie line was Upper Canada’s first railway, and the speed of its first runs was considered by many to be the devil’s work. Much was learned later about how to route railways. I doubt that later builders would have built a line through the Holland Marsh on any routing.
As.discussed in other threads, there may be potential for sections of third track that will allow faster overtaking trains, but turning this line into a higher speed route is probably not in the cards.
Nor should it be…. Any more than turning Yonge Street into a 400 series highway… the purpose that it serves as a commuter oriented line is still its best use.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

Arguing for a rail commuter service to Collingwood is one thing but, given that public money is finite, is spending tax dollars to accommodate one class or recreational tourist money well spent (the same argument could be made for Niagara)? How many trains per day would be needed to satisfy the market? Day skiers? Night skiers? Storage space for all the gear skiers need?

Niagara should be a Via route. The only reason GO is doing it is because they have the money to do it. This really speaks to why the Northlander is coming back. It is coming back because the province sees the political gains of doing it. The argument could be made that a train to Collingwood would have the same political gains as Niagara or the Northlander.

I'd assume 1rrain each way on Saturday and Sunday would be all that would be needed beyond Allendale. Maybe one as part of the Friday commute.Also one each way a day during March Break/Reading Week/Christmas break. Storage of gear would be important. Currently there is a problem with bikes So, it would not be surprising if there'd be a problem with skis.

Being able to fill a trainload on weekend mornings may seem like a business case, but it isn't, considering the amount of capital needed to extend the tracks from Allandale and maintain them to passenger train standards.
Niagara benefits from not needing that much new or upgraded track to run the current service.
I wonder also about first/last mile - Not many people will drag their ski equipment down to Union, and once I haul my ski's by car to Rutherford or Downsview Park to park and catch the GO, maybe it's more convenient to just keep driving.
Put a bus on from Allandale and see if the demand is there.

- Paul

That capital is the biggest hurdle that a study hopefully would lay out.
I'd agree, a dedicated bus from Allendale would be a prudent first step.The good thing, if I am reading the schedule correctly, there is a train early enough from Union to make it work. What would be needed is 1 more earlier time so that others from the other lines could take it.

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1703079607/Documents/GO/full-schedules/FS06012024/TABLE65.pdf

That sounds like a fine thing for the private resort owners to pilot. Keep in mind that 'Blue' is only one venue, albeit probably the largest. Ski facilities stretch from Oastler Bluff to almost Thornbury, as well as Snow Valley, Horseshoe Valley and Mount St. Louis Moonstone north of Barrie.

This goes to the last mile problem in transit. This is also where the province could work with each resort to have a bus for each at the nearest station.. An interesting thing to see is what happens with the Parkbus for Algonquin once the Northlander is running.