[dowlingm]

Proposal for Via Rail all economy (or limited Business class) GTAH regional commuter service.

Is the bigger priority a couple of hundred people from Kingston, Brockville, Cobourg, or the 1000 or more extra people which could be carried on a GO train from Oshawa in the same schedule and Union platform slot? The fact that VIA has left the Kingston commuter fallow until now shows that they do not see an economic interest in doing this, especially when such riders won’t pay “rack rate” but will instead want multi trip discounts

 

[crs1026]

Is the bigger priority a couple of hundred people from Kingston, Brockville, Cobourg, or the 1000 or more extra people which could be carried on a GO train from Oshawa in the same schedule and Union platform slot? The fact that VIA has left the Kingston commuter fallow until now shows that they do not see an economic interest in doing this, especially when such riders won’t pay “rack rate” but will instead want multi trip discounts

The answer of course is "we need both" -

That is not as greedy as it sounds. VIA's historical commitment to this service has been constrained by equipment availability and freight railway restrictions. VIA has downplayed that market not because it's uneconomic, but because their limited pool of equipment has more revenue potential when deployed to T-O-M-Q service, and using their allocated slots to that service. They have the luxury of using demand management tools to restrict ridership to the number of seats they can offer.

Even a pair of GO regional style trains in commuter slots, with a greater number of seats sold at lower fares, might draw much greater ridership with acceptable cost recovery. Assuming, of course, that Ontario is less inclined to ration equipment purchases to the degree that Ottawa has done.

If it were as simple as taking 500 cars off the 401 at rush hour from Oshawa to downtown, as opposed to 100 cars travelling five times the distance from Kingston, I would agree that the Go train is the higher priority notwithstanding similar carbon and other impacts. But we should be building the capacity for both.

I have been making noise at nauseum about how we need to be concerned about VIA's access to the Lakeshore line even if a parallel HFR route is built. This is why.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

Proposal for Via Rail all economy (or limited Business class) GTAH regional commuter service.

With the Venture train sets giving VIA some flexibility I was thinking if VIA could introduce some peak period commuter style service to the GTAH. For example VIA currently shows the travel time from Port Hope to Union at about 1 Hr 15 mins with provisional stops at Oshawa (Via currently does not sell Guildwood-Union tickets), about the same time it takes to ride Lakeshore E from Oshawa to Union. A couple of morning trains would allow people in Port Hope to be downtown in the morning and return home in the evening. For example three trains departing Port Hope around 6, 7, and 8. would arrive at Union around 7, 8, and 9. In the West Kitchener to Union is a similar distance and so would be similar travel times, Hamilton Union is a bit shorter. And in the North Barrie has a similar distance/travel time.

The obvious issue is that the last few routes are already served by GO and so VIA would be cannibalizing some of GO's ridership, however I think an arrangement could be made where VIA takes over some of GO's super express and/or provides an elevated more comfortable method of travel for those who want it. This would allow GO to deploy more trainsets on it's core service area, namely the central GTA.

With hybrid work from home models I can see people paying a bit higher fare for a more comfortable ride when they go into the office 2 or 3 times per week.

Some back of envelope calculations, a thee car train (one cab car + two coach cars + locomotive) seats about 200 passengers, or staying with the typical corridor configuration of 5 cars (one cab car + 3 coach cars + 1 business class + locomotive) seats 322 passengers. So six daily trains (three in am peak, 3 out pm peak) would be 600 to 900 passengers per day, about 250,000 riders per year. Giving riders on the outer edges of the GTAH a more comfortable and faster trip to Union.

Just a thought

I wonder if it would be better for Metrolinx themselves to run their own intercity service, within Ontario.

Purchase some Siemens Chargers and run commuter, express trains from London, Kingston, Peterborough, Brantford etc. to Union station. It can have it's own division/ brand similar to how the UP Express is setup.

But that would probably eat into VIA's ridership too much.

 

[Urban Sky]

I wonder if it would be better for Metrolinx themselves to run their own intercity service, within Ontario.

Purchase some Siemens Chargers and run commuter, express trains from London, Kingston, Peterborough, Brantford etc. to Union station. It can have it's own division/ brand similar to how the UP Express it setup.

But that would probably eat into VIA's ridership too much.

If the province of Ontario doesn’t want to foot the bill of extending HxR West of Toronto alone, it might think twice before undermining the economic viability of the federal intercity railroad…

 

[crs1026]

I wonder if it would be better for Metrolinx themselves to run their own intercity service, within Ontario.

Purchase some Siemens Chargers and run commuter, express trains from London, Kingston, Peterborough, Brantford etc. to Union station. It can have it's own division/ brand similar to how the UP Express is setup.

But that would probably eat into VIA's ridership too much.

My response as a taxpayer is, I expect my provincial and federal governments to work together seamlessly and collaboratively without partisan bias, so that they do not duplicate or inefficiently service matters where both may have a role and there is risk of overlap or "turf" controversies.

I don't have a firm position on who should run the service or with what equipment, but it should work as win-win for a common goal. Reasonable people can work together constructively.

It never turns out that way between Ottawa and QP, but I think it's important to hold a high expectation and not give in to a lower standard.

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

The new fleet is an exact 1:1 replacement of seats within the old fleet. There may be opportunity for growth in the short term thanks to new trains needing less maintenance, hence higher utilisation. For a while anyways. Presumably the HxR, when funded, would add some new trainsets. In the short term, the opportunity is mostly in squeezing every last seat mile out of the HEP II fleet - the LRc's are pretty much done.

- Paul

I wonder what the costs are to add seats to each train. Does VIA end up in a net subsidy situation if they add 1-2 cars to each train?

 

[Urban Sky]

I wonder what the costs are to add seats to each train. Does VIA end up in a net subsidy situation if they add 1-2 cars to each train?

I’m not sure I understand: adding seats or adding cars?
And do you want to discuss the increment in costs or profits/subsidy?

 

[kEiThZ]

I’m not sure I understand: adding seats or adding cars?
And do you want to discuss the increment in costs or profits/subsidy?

Well adding seats by adding cars. For example, if they move from 5 car trains to say 7 car trains and add one economy and one business car to each train, how does that impact the net finances of their Corridor services? Does the added revenue from more seats offered exceed added costs of more seats offered or do we end up in a situation where VIA now needs higher federal subsidies?

I'm curious because the 1:1 seat count replacement does (prima facie) seem to have been superceded by population growth along the Corridor.

 

[crs1026]

Well adding seats by adding cars. For example, if they move from 5 car trains to say 7 car trains and add one economy and one business car to each train, how does that impact the net finances of their Corridor services? Does the added revenue from more seats offered exceed added costs of more seats offered or do we end up in a situation where VIA now needs higher federal subsidies?

I'm curious because the 1:1 seat count replacement does (prima facie) seem to have been superceded by population growth along the Corridor.

Welcome to the dark art of railway accounting.

First level, add one car to the fleet. Immediately you have new overheads for that car, even if it doesn't turn a wheel. Capital cost, depreciation, plus the cost of routine regulatory inspections that are time based. Additional cost for a siding to park it on (not material for a single car, perhaps, but material if you add many cars and your yard needs increase - see for example additions to GO Willowbrook). Time based long term maintenance eg repainting.

Now add that car to a train. Immediate overheads for wear and tear on the car, plus added costs to the track. At various times over the years, the freight railways have charged by the axle... I'm not sure how that works these days. Labour to staff the car. Cleaning, watering and waste removal.

I'm sure the business case for the Venture cars looked at a lot of this. I'm jaded enough to believe that it was a bit like the big sisters analysing Cinderella's clothing budget - Transport Canada not wanting to acknowledge upside in the market potential. Seat to seat seems like middle ground, as I'm sure they would have argued for a smaller but more reliable fleet and VIA argued for more revenue potential. But I don't have access to the data, so that's just me being grumpy.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

Well adding seats by adding cars. For example, if they move from 5 car trains to say 7 car trains and add one economy and one business car to each train, how does that impact the net finances of their Corridor services? Does the added revenue from more seats offered exceed added costs of more seats offered or do we end up in a situation where VIA now needs higher federal subsidies?

I'm curious because the 1:1 seat count replacement does (prima facie) seem to have been superceded by population growth along the Corridor.

From the configurations I recalled from one of the public presentations, the cars removed for a 3-car trainset are not the sames which get added onto a 7-car trainset. Therefore, I don’t see any scope for extending trainsets unless VIA orders and receives extra units for the 2 car types they need to extend the 5-car-trainsets…

 

[kEiThZ]

From the configurations I recalled from one of the public presentations, the cars removed for a 3-car trainset are not the sames which get added onto a 7-car trainset. Therefore, I don’t see any scope for extending trainsets unless VIA orders and receives extra units for the 2 car types they need to extend the 5-car-trainsets…

This is what I mean though. Is there a business case to ordering more cars? It just seems strange to me that the population of the Corridor has grown several million since this order was made. Yet, the government insisted on a 1:1 seat replacement. Surely, the population growth should drive incremental ridership growth.

 

[crs1026]

This is what I mean though. Is there a business case to ordering more cars? It just seems strange to me that the population of the Corridor has grown several million since this order was made. Yet, the government insisted on a 1:1 seat replacement. Surely, the population growth should drive incremental ridership growth.

Considering there are six-car LRC trainsets running at the moment, one would think yes.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

This is what I mean though. Is there a business case to ordering more cars? It just seems strange to me that the population of the Corridor has grown several million since this order was made. Yet, the government insisted on a 1:1 seat replacement. Surely, the population growth should drive incremental ridership growth.

IIRC, VIA has an option for an additional 16 trainsets. I don’t see a reason why VIA couldn’t just order individual extra cars rather than entire trainsets (which would of course be even more useful)…

 

[kEiThZ]

IIRC, VIA has an option for an additional 16 trainsets. I don’t see a reason why VIA couldn’t just order individual extra cars rather than entire trainsets (which would of course be even more useful)…

I don't doubt that VIA has the optionality to order more. I am wondering if adding more riders actually nets them more or less. I assume that's what Transport Canada looks at before deciding whether to let VIA buy more cars.

 

[Urban Sky]

I don't doubt that VIA has the optionality to order more. I am wondering if adding more riders actually nets them more or less. I assume that's what Transport Canada looks at before deciding whether to let VIA buy more cars.

As long as there is no decision on HxR, there certainly won’t be any additional order. Should HxR go ahead in the HSR variant and require an entirely new fleet, there will be more than enough fleet for any foreseeable Corridor application…