[micheal_can]

This whole discussion about the O-Train VIA Rail Station name could also apply to Montreal's Metro. For someone trying to get to Gare Central using STM's official PDF Metro Map. The only indication that you need to use Boneventure Station is a tiny icon, similar to OC Transpo's map, though OC Transpo's map uses the VIA logo instead of a generic train logo, since VIA is the only railway that serves Ottawa Station.

Then there is the whole thing about wayfinding. In Ottawa it is pretty obvoius how to get between the train station and the O-Train staiton. In Montreal, it is a very poorly signed maze between the two stations.

This makes me wonder if the local transit operators want to ignore the existence of Via. Maybe Via is not just irrelevant outside of the Corridor.

I agree that the immigrations checks should be at Michigan Central, but the customs facility in Windsor should work as a stop-gap which might cut a full decade from the timeline to restore cross-border rail service.

As for 2.), this is not a constraint, as VIA can always operate the cross-border segment on behalf of Amtrak, just like Amtrak operates the Maple Leaf west if Niagara Falls/ON on behalf of VIA. Amtrak would still hold the contract with the tunnel owners and then ask VIA to operate the trains jn the negotiated slots. Happens all the time across the entire transportation industry…

So, why not have 2 trains. One that is Amtrak that brings people to Windsor Station from Chicago and goes back over the border empty, and one that is Via going to Detroit with passengers but comes back to Canada empty?

 

[roger1818]

I agree that the wayfinding leaves much to be desired, but naming “Bonaventure” after Gare Centrale reminds me of the Lonely Planet guide describing Frankfurt-Hahn Airport with the following kind words:

Only cynics like Ryanair would argue that there is a second airport in Frankfurt.

The problem with Bonaventure station is that it ignores Gare Centrale in its location (making McGill station for many passengers - myself included - the more convenient access point as it is on the green line and barely further than Bonaventure), whereas the problem with Ottawa’s “Tremblay” station is that it ignores Ottawa (VIA) Station in its name. Only one of these two issues can be changed in the short- or medium-run…

I would argue that the name Bonaventure also ignores Gare Central in it's name. Of course the history is when Bonaventure station was built, it served two train stations (Gare Central and Windsor Station), but it would be easy enough to add a suffix to the name today (for example "Bonaventure - Gare Central"). Not doing so is "a sign of neglect and ignorance you will struggle to find in any other major or capital city on this planet…"

 

[roger1818]

So, why not have 2 trains. One that is Amtrak that brings people to Windsor Station from Chicago and goes back over the border empty, and one that is Via going to Detroit with passengers but comes back to Canada empty?

Huh? No one is suggesting having 2 separate trains with a deadhead. Amtrak is suggesting they transport everyone to and from Windsor. I am suggesting that having VIA transport everyone to and from Detroit would make more sense.

 

[Urban Sky]

I would argue that the name Bonaventure also ignores Gare Central in it's name. Of course the history is when Bonaventure station was built, it served two train stations (Gare Central and Windsor Station), but it would be easy enough to add a suffix to the name today (for example "Bonaventure - Gare Central"). Not doing so is "a sign of neglect and ignorance you will struggle to find in any other major or capital city on this planet…"

Spot the difference:
“Tremblay” station is located in a suburban wasteland and has been built right next to Ottawa Rail station and serves few more purposes than serving as an intermodal station for intercity rail passengers.
“Bonaventure” station is located right in the CBD and has been built underneath a busy hotel (and conference/convention site) and adjacent to a bus terminal of the same name. Renaming it to include a reference to Gare Centrale would be false advertising, as it provides by no means a direct and convenient connection to Gare Centrale. Before changing the name, its location and/or the access to Gare Centrale would need to be fixed.
As I said in my previous post: in Ottawa, the issue is the O-Train station’s name, whereas in Montréal, it’s the Metro station’s location.

Huh? No one is suggesting having 2 separate trains with a deadhead. Amtrak is suggesting they transport everyone to and from Windsor. I am suggesting that having VIA transport everyone to and from Detroit would make more sense.

This is actually how cross-border rail services operated on the French-Spanish border pre-Schengen:
SNCF would terminate at Port-Bou or Irùn and return back into France empty, whereas RENFE would terminate in Cerbère or Hendaye and return back into Spain empty, which is why the border station on the French side would have one broad gauge track right in front the station and customs building and that on the Spanish side a standard gauge track at a similar location:


The advantage was that border processing could be done within the country of arrival, but it of course led to a lot of avoidable deadhead moves and is therefore unsuitable for the Windsor-Detroit border crossing.

 

[micheal_can]

On the TTC, the streetcar station is called Union. The Subway is called Union. The heavy rail is called ... Union. Maybe all major stations which also have some sort of RT connected to it should be all named the same on all systems that touch it.

 

[urbancog]

Giving the station a name that includes the city name and a supplementary name helps:
Toronto Union Station - In the Via app, search for Toronto and select Toronto Union, on local services get off at Union
Paris Gare Du Nord - In the SNCF app, search for Paris and select Gare Du Nord, on the RER get off at Gare Du Nord
Newcastle Central Station - In the LNER or LUMO apps, search for Newcastle and select Central, on the Tyne-Wear Metro get off at Central.

 

[Urban Sky]

Giving the station a name that includes the city name and a supplementary name helps:
Toronto Union Station - In the Via app, search for Toronto and select Toronto Union, on local services get off at Union

GO calls the station “Union Station GO”, without any reference to Toronto:


VIA is the only one who calls any train station “Toronto” and only adds the “Union Station” in certain contexts, such as when booking trains, as you correctly state:

Paris Gare Du Nord - In the SNCF app, search for Paris and select Gare Du Nord, on the RER get off at Gare Du Nord

There are at least half a dozen train stations which have the city name “Paris” in their station title*, which is why they need to have a supplementary name to distinguish stations. Ottawa has only one single train station which features its name, so there is no need to add a supplementary name to differentiate train stations.

*out of my head, these are: “Paris Gare du Nord”, “Paris Gare de l’Est”, “Paris Gare du Lyon”, “Paris Gare d’Austerlitz”, “Paris Gare Montparnasse” and “Paris Saint-Lazaire”, but there might be many more…

Newcastle Central Station - In the LNER or LUMO apps, search for Newcastle and select Central, on the Tyne-Wear Metro get off at Central.

Neither LNER nor LUMO show any supplementary name for “Newcastle”, as the official station name consists only of the city name:

 

[nfitz]

To be fair, the "silly" part is having the transfer in Windsor. Detroit is a far more significant destination, so having to transfer just to travel 1 stop on the Wolverine doesn't make sense. Michigan Central needs to be upgraded anyway, so why not add the customs facilities there. One of the Wolverine trains would still need to be detoured to Michigan Central (though it would make sense to detour them all and create a new regional train to Pontiac, possibly extending it to either Flint or Grand Rapids), but all of the VIA trains to Windsor could be extended to Detroit.

Why would Amtrak have any interest in servicing passengers that don't want to travel any further into the USA than downtown Detroit? It would be silly of them to do so!

Nothing precludes VIA extending Windsor trains to downtown Detroit, and establishing their own facilities there.

 

[Urban Sky]

Why would Amtrak have any interest in servicing passengers that don't want to travel any further into the USA than downtown Detroit? It would be silly of them to do so!

Nothing precludes VIA extending Windsor trains to downtown Detroit, and establishing their own facilities there.

The only place in Detroit where American and Canadian trains could meet and passengers from/to Canada could clear customs is Michigan Central, so as long as Amtrak does not relocate its Wolverine trains to Michigan Central, there is nothing really VIa can do on their side…

 

[nfitz]

There are at least half a dozen train stations which have the city name “Paris” in their station title*, which is why they need to have a supplementary name to distinguish stations. Ottawa has only one single train station which features its name, so there is no need to add a supplementary name to differentiate train stations.

*out of my head, these are: “Paris Gare du Nord”, “Paris Gare de l’Est”, “Paris Gare du Lyon”, “Paris Gare d’Austerlitz”, “Paris Gare Montparnasse” and “Paris Saint-Lazaire”, but there might be many more…

The stations may say Paris on the sign in front, but navigating Paris, you don't see the word Paris everywhere in wayfinding - or on the map.

 

[nfitz]

The only place in Detroit where American and Canadian trains could meet and passengers from/to Canada could clear customs is Michigan Central, so as long as Amtrak does not relocate its Wolverine trains to Michigan Central, there is nothing really VIA can do on their side…

I thought that it was a given, that if Amtrak was going to serve Windsor that it would use (or at least run through) Michigan Central.

 

[Urban Sky]

The stations may say Paris on the sign in front, but navigating Paris, you don't see the word Paris everywhere in wayfinding - or on the map.

View attachment 592137View attachment 592140

It’s normal that local transit maps and signs will omit the city name, see the transit map for Berlin:

However, any platform signs and timetable references for train passengers will include the city name:

Someone walking around Paris or Berlin will be well aware in which city he is, someone looking out of their train window not necessarily…

I thought that it was a given, that if Amtrak was going to serve Windsor that it would use (or at least run through) Michigan Central.

As much as Michigan Central would deserve to become Detroit’s main transportation hub again, the wording “would serve as a second Amtrak station in Detroit, specifically serving trains to/from Windsor” does not sound as if they plan to also reroute their trains which continue to Pontiac:

For UT"ers not up to date on the plan:

View attachment 592067 [<= click on this attachment]

View attachment 592068
Source:

Chicago-Toronto train service to return by 2027

The business case for a cross-border passenger rail connection was submitted by Amtrak and VIA Rail late October, and the mayors of Detroit and Windsor have both sent letters of support to Transport Canada.

www.transportaction.ca

Current to Nov' 23

 

[nfitz]

However, any platform signs and timetable references for train passengers will include the city name:

Without exception?

Though probably can't find an exception at Bridge station in London.

“would serve as a second Amtrak station in Detroit, specifically serving trains to/from Windsor” does not sound as if they plan to also reroute their trains which continue to Pontiac:

I think we are into dancing on a head of a pin territory. Nothing precludes VIA running on into Detroit, with custom facilities in Detroit. I never mentioned running to Pontiac.

 

[roger1818]

Niagara Falls, London, Barrie, Peterborough, Port Hope/Coburg could all be GO Regional Rail destinations.

It really depends on your definition of Regional Rail. In North America it tends to be synonymous with Commuter Rail, but in Europe, it has longer distances between stops than commuter rail. Those destinations would only make sense with the latter definition.

I made a map showing approximate distances from Union using concentric circles in 25 km increments (I modified it to adjust for traveling around the lake to get to Niagara Falls, since a tunnel under lake Ontario is not viable) and marked the above "destinations." Here are my thoughts abut them with GO, based on this map.

Niagara Falls: GO already provides limited service with express trains.
London: This is by far the furthest of the "destinations." and would be pushing the limit for usability of a stopping train. Probably best served by Inter-City Rail.
Barrie: GO already provides service to Allendale Waterfront. Doubtful if it will ever be extended into central Barrie.
Peterborough: As discussed before, it is largely greenspace between Peterborough and Agincourt. It would make sense as an HFR stop, not as a GO extension.
Port Hope/Coburg: There are plans to extend to GO Bowmanville. HxR would reroute the passengers from Ottawa/Montreal allowing VIA to have more trains stops at Port Hope and Coburg and would provide faster service than any GO train.

 

[generalcanada]

I think we are into dancing on pinhead territory.