[nfitz]

[/QUOTE]

Obviously from context I was referring to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/angels_dancing_on_the_head_of_a_pin - not calling names.

 

[Urban Sky]

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.

View attachment 592155

As I’ve pointed out some three years ago in the GO Transit thread, a small but not insignificant number of people in Europe do commute over distances comparable to Toronto-London, but they don’t chose the kind of slow regional trains which GO Transit offers:

The problem is not that Toronto-London isn't a commutable distance: Thousands of Germans commute daily or multiple days per week to Frankfurt from similar distances as London-Toronto; however, they of course chose intercity trains and definitely not regional trains:

City	Distance (Euclidean distance) from Frankfurt	Typical travel time: intercity train	Typical travel time: regional trains
Kassel	145 km	1:23h (e.g. dep. 07:37, arr. 09:00)	2:26h (e.g. dep. 06:13, arr. 08:39)
Köln (Cologne)	152 km	1:08h (e.g. dep. 08:23, arr. 09:31)	3:40h (e.g. dep. 04:55, arr. 08:36, with change in Koblenz [06:34/52])
Stuttgart	152 km	1:18h (e.g. dep. 06:50, arr. 08:08)	3:16h (e.g. dep. 05:29, arr. 08:45, with changes in Karlsruhe-Durlach [06:20/28] and Mannheim Hbf [07:29/35])
Saarbrücken	154 km	2:28h (e.g. dep. 06:28, arr. 08:56)	3:04h (e.g. dep. 05:45, arr. 08:49)
London, ON	168 km from Toronto	2:10h (dep. 06:30, arr. 08:40)	3:53h (dep. 05:20, arr. 09:13)
Nürnberg (Nuremberg)	189 km	2:02h (e.g. dep. 07:02, arr. 09:04)	3:59h (e.g. dep. 04:28, arr. 08:27, with change in Würzburg [05:48/06:37])

Yep, commuting with regional trains from Cologne is even slower than from London to Toronto (41.5 km/h vs. 43.3 km/h, when using Euclidean distance)...

 

[micheal_can]

As I’ve pointed out some three years ago in the GO Transit thread, a small but not insignificant number of people in Europe do commute over distances comparable to Toronto-London, but they don’t chose the kind of slow regional trains which GO Transit offers:

If true HSR is built on the Corridor, anything within an hour train ride becomes a commuter town.

 

[Urban Sky]

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.

Even at the risk of crossing the border to pedantry, I was talking about the Amtrak trains, which are currently three daily train pairs operating from Chicago via Dearborn, the current Amtrak station (at Woodward Avenue) to Pontiac. The summary @Northern Light posted seems to suggest that only one of the three train pairs is to be diverted, to serve Michigan Central instead of the current Amtrak station before crossing the border, whereas the remaining two trainsets continue to Pontiac while continung to serve the old and not the new station. This would lead to the strange situation that two trains per day serve the old station and one the new station, but apparently Amtrak prefers that over forcing its trains to change direction en-route.

This is why I said that crossing the border only makes sense if Amtrak can be motivated to divert at least one of their trainsets to Michigan Central, as the current Amtrak station lacks the required space for border facilities and having passengers transfer between two trains…

 

[rbt]

As I’ve pointed out some three years ago in the GO Transit thread, a small but not insignificant number of people in Europe do commute over distances comparable to Toronto-London, but they don’t chose the kind of slow regional trains which GO Transit offers:

Indeed. Commutes globally are constrained by time or cost, not distance. Faster&cheaper transportation enables a comfortable commute over a longer distance, with the benefit typically being nicer housing than they could otherwise afford. Some will invest more time than others, but 1 hour seems to be the comfort limit and isn't tied to any particular culture.

In British Hong Kong before the metro for most this meant about 3 to 4km (1 hour walk on congested sidewalks). In modern Japan many travel 200km on Shinkansen (roughly 1 hour including time to get to the station/office).

Apparently the Starbucks CEO currently commutes 1600km 3x weekly (2 hours). Starbucks covers the bill.

If we somehow built an 800km/h train from Toronto to Montreal with $20 tickets, there would be hundreds or even thousands working in Toronto and living in Montreal within a short walk of the stations.

 

[roger1818]

Even at the risk of crossing the border to pedantry, I was talking about the Amtrak trains, which are currently three daily train pairs operating from Chicago via Dearborn, the current Amtrak station (at Woodward Avenue) to Pontiac. The summary @Northern Light posted seems to suggest that only one of the three train pairs is to be diverted, to serve Michigan Central instead of the current Amtrak station before crossing the border, whereas the remaining two trainsets continue to Pontiac while continung to serve the old and not the new station, which would lead to the strange situation that two trains per day serve the old station and one the new station, but apparently Amtrak prefers that over forcing its trains to change direction en-route.

That was my understanding as well, though I agree that some did seem confused.

This is why I said that crossing the border only makes sense if Amtrak can be motivated to divert at least one of their trainsets to Michigan Central, as the current Amtrak station lacks the required space for border facilities and having passengers transfer between two trains…

That is why I suggested that the best option would be to have all Wolverine (and VIA Western corridor) trains terminate at Michigan Central, and a new train run from Michigan Central to Pontiac (and beyond?). I agree that this would be more challenging though.

 

[micheal_can]

Indeed. Commutes globally are constrained by time or cost, not distance. Faster&cheaper transportation enables a comfortable commute over a longer distance, with the benefit typically being nicer housing than they could otherwise afford. Some will invest more time than others, but 1 hour seems to be the comfort limit and isn't tied to any particular culture.

In British Hong Kong before the metro for most this meant about 3 to 4km (1 hour walk on congested sidewalks). In modern Japan many travel 200km on Shinkansen (roughly 1 hour including time to get to the station/office).

Apparently the Starbucks CEO currently commutes 1600km 3x weekly (2 hours). Starbucks covers the bill.

If we somehow built an 800km/h train from Toronto to Montreal with $20 tickets, there would be hundreds or even thousands working in Toronto and living in Montreal within a short walk of the stations.

The fact that 30 people would commute on GO for 4hours from London to Toronto shows that time is almost irrelevant. Makes me wonder if we had all the rail lines we used to have in the province just how far would someone regularly commute if the trains ran on a schedule that worked for commuters. For instance, if HFR comes in, would someone commute from Windsor on a regular basis. Maybe not due to it being over 6 hours, but who knows. At this point the push for commuting further may have more to do with housing costs than time.

 

[Urban Sky]

That is why I suggested that the best option would be to have all Wolverine (and VIA Western corridor) trains terminate at Michigan Central, and a new train run from Michigan Central to Pontiac (and beyond?). I agree that this would be more challenging though.

I would argue that all Amtrak and VIA trains (except early-morning #70 and late-evening #79) should serve Michigan Central, but all Amtrak trains should continue to Pontiac, also serving the existing Amtrak station. 10 minute dwell should be aufficient to change directions and Amtrak trains are so few and scheduled in a way that they don’t meet anywhere near Detroit.

 

[roger1818]

I would argue that all Amtrak and VIA trains (except early-morning #70 and late-evening #79) should serve Michigan Central, but all Amtrak trains should continue to Pontiac, also serving the existing Amtrak station. 10 minute dwell should be aufficient to change directions and Amtrak trains are so few and scheduled in a way that they don’t meet anywhere near Detroit.

That certainly is another option. I was thinking that the Pontiac extension (along with other routes) would be better served by more of a Regional or Commuter rail type service so that the schedule could be decoupled from the Wolverine. Not a surprise though that Motor City doesn't have good rail service. This topic is out of scope for this thread though.

 

[dowlingm]

As far as VIA expanding into Detroit, I don't think that makes much sense. It makes sense to do customs / immigration and trainset transfer in one go, not transfer in Michigan and immigration in Windsor. Now, they could do preclearance but consider this- there is not a single preclearance site operated by Canada in the entire United States, including airports that would be routing large amounts of traffic here like O'Hare, La Guardia etc. Why would Canada break that streak for a few hundred a day coming through Detroit?

 

[roger1818]

As far as VIA expanding into Detroit, I don't think that makes much sense. It makes sense to do customs / immigration and trainset transfer in one go, not transfer in Michigan and immigration in Windsor.

The point would be to do customs and immigration in Detroit, not to have people get off the train in Windsor.

Now, they could do preclearance but consider this- there is not a single preclearance site operated by Canada in the entire United States, including airports that would be routing large amounts of traffic here like O'Hare, La Guardia etc. Why would Canada break that streak for a few hundred a day coming through Detroit?

There is a first time for everything. There is significant cost to operating a pre-clearance facility, especially if the location is far enough from the boarder that the agents need to live in a foreign country. While the American Government sees benefits for operating these facilities, Canada, so far, hasn't been so concerned. A facility close to a boarder crossing, where CBSA agents are already employed, would be a lot cheaper to operate than one in an airport hundreds of kilometers from the boarder.

 

[crs1026]

As far as VIA expanding into Detroit, I don't think that makes much sense. It makes sense to do customs / immigration and trainset transfer in one go, not transfer in Michigan and immigration in Windsor. Now, they could do preclearance but consider this- there is not a single preclearance site operated by Canada in the entire United States, including airports that would be routing large amounts of traffic here like O'Hare, La Guardia etc. Why would Canada break that streak for a few hundred a day coming through Detroit?

While people can point to rail lines on a map, things like modern customs infrastructure and where it can be located carry the most weight. The days of a couple customs agents walking down the aisle in an insecure facility are over, and designing border crossings that only meet that historic standard is a pointless exercise.

I'm not sure there is a good reason -other than nostalgia - for Amtrak to re-enter the Michigan Central terminal. The current station, while modest, may actually be better situated overall. Detroit is probably a little way from undertaking a project to reimagine its downtown transportation infrastructure (although it would be a good thing if they did so). If VIA is committed to double ended trainsets, it makes more operational sense for VIA to cross the border and make their station stop at the current Amtrak station, rather than duplicate station facilities. Deadhead equipment moves back to Windsor may be easier to operate than layovers. But - that may just be too much risk and headache for Border agencies.

With Gordie Howe coming on line, a well advertised and guaranteed dedicated bus transfer may actually be the best solution. Not elegant, but urban change may have to be what it is.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

Apparently the Starbucks CEO currently commutes 1600km 3x weekly (2 hours). Starbucks covers the bill.

If we somehow built an 800km/h train from Toronto to Montreal with $20 tickets, there would be hundreds or even thousands working in Toronto and living in Montreal within a short walk of the stations.

No doubt a condition of employment. Not many have that kind of leverage. If you can't work from home at least some of the time, I agree that an hour (ish) at each end is probably the limit for many, regardless of mode.

Temporary tasks aside. I spent a lovely winter 'commuting' to Ottawa from Simcoe County. Out on Monday or Tuesday, back on Friday, and in my line of work, many went to where the work was, which kept changing.

 

[reaperexpress]

That certainly is another option. I was thinking that the Pontiac extension (along with other routes) would be better served by more of a Regional or Commuter rail type service so that the schedule could be decoupled from the Wolverine. Not a surprise though that Motor City doesn't have good rail service. This topic is out of scope for this thread though.

I agree that Detroit makes more sense as a customs location since there are more Canadians heading to Detroit than Americans heading to Windsor.

Michigan Central Station has a better location on the railway network than the current Baltimore Street Amtrak station since it's on the way to the international tunnel.

I describe this theoretical concept in detail in this post, which is based around a regional rail service from Ann Arbor to Pontiac, changing direction at Michigan Central. There would be timed transfers every 3 hours between all the services.

If we have any intention of connecting the Canadian and American passenger networks across the Ontario/Michigan border, then a customs station at Michigan Central is (from what I can tell) the only reasonable path forward. Of course it would be more ideal for Chicago-Toronto passengers to have a customs facility in Toronto, with a single-seat ride seamlessly crossing the border, but doing so would also require customs facilities at any Canadian station at which the train stops. That is a good longer term goal, but even then the first step would still be to build a customs facility in Detroit to serve all of the communities between Toronto and Detroit skipped by Amtrak's through service. If we only build a customs facility in Toronto, then everyone in southwestern Ontario would need to backtrack to Toronto to cross the border, which of course hardly anyone would do. The number of passengers lost west of Toronto could easily exceed the number of passengers to/from Toronto who are dissuaded by the travel times at the border.

The key factor which makes the Detroit hub concept more palatable than some other en-route transfers is that most passengers would want to disembark in Detroit regardless, either to go to/from Detroit, or to transfer to another service such as the existing train service to Pontiac, the planned commuter service to Ann Arbor, and the proposed Amtrak service to Cleveland via Toledo.

Conceptual services from Michigan Central station.
- I transfered the existing Pontiac Amtrak service to the future Michigan commuter rail agency, to allow through-running from Ann Arbor to Pontiac serving both of Detroit's central stations.
View attachment 376487

The primary goal stated in the above article is not to create a Chicago-Toronto rail connection, it is to create a Detroit-Toronto rail connection, with the through-traffic from other American cities being a modest bonus. The US is already planning to increase service between Chicago and Detroit, and putting Detroit on the VIA map would allow them to increase Detroit/Windsor - Toronto service too, regardless of any through passengers from Chicago.



A service with connections in Detroit will certainly not be very fast, but neither are the alternatives. Wait times at the roadway bridges are often long and unpredictable, and plane passengers also need line up to clear customs. Both of those delays would tend to be well under the 90 minutes likely to be scheduled for a transfer in Detroit, but much of that time could be spent wandering around the new amenities at Michigan Central, which will include shopping and parks.


Indeed Canada needs to be fully on board to make this happen, primarily to upgrade the Essex Terminal trackage for passenger use. However, the US could fund most or even all of the capital work to reactivate Michigan Central Station and build a customs facility.


If we do decide to go through with upgrading the Essex Terminal trackage, we should indeed aim for a lot more than just a single connection per day. Perhaps one train per day could run non-stop from Detroit to London to avoid the reverse move, but other trains should also be extended across the border.

Here's a vision of how a relatively modest service level on both sides of the border could massively increase cross-border connectivity. The idea is that every 3 hours there would be a timed meet, where all or most of the lines would arrive and dwell, facilitating transfers. To allow time to clear customs, the VIA train would be first to arrive, and last to leave.

I assumed 4 platforms in service, because Ford has stated that they are protecting the 4 southern platforms for passenger rail operations. This is rather underwhelming - I would have wanted at least 5 platforms to enable growth for the 5 services serving the station.

View attachment 376511


The below timetables are purely to illustrate the concept for timed meets, and the times of day at which they might occur. Any of these time slots may actually be occupied by other train movements and/or not be approved by the host railway. Travel times between Detroit and Windsor are also significantly reduced compared to current trackage.
I made these fantasy timetables a while ago and am not entirely satisfied with them, the dwell time for VIA should be much higher to provide a larger margin of error for passengers transferring through customs.

View attachment 376503
View attachment 376506
View attachment 376505

The station access in Detroit is certainly an important consideration. In addition to looking into options such as extending the streetcar along Michigan Ave to the station, it's worth noting that people also have the option of taking a taxi/ridershare to the station. The cost of those services makes them impractical for access to regional stations (*cough* London at 05:20 *cough*) but even Americans are accustomed to travelling to a car-centric wasteland (a.k.a. airport) without using their own personal vehicles, as part of a long-distance trip.


Given that so many passengers will be embarking/disembarking at Detroit regardless of how the customs is set up, I would argue that Detroit is actually is a more promising place to demonstrate an international rail terminal than Niagara Falls. Niagara could then use Detroit as a model.

 

[reaperexpress]

While people can point to rail lines on a map, things like modern customs infrastructure and where it can be located carry the most weight. The days of a couple customs agents walking down the aisle in an insecure facility are over, and designing border crossings that only meet that historic standard is a pointless exercise.

I'm not sure there is a good reason -other than nostalgia - for Amtrak to re-enter the Michigan Central terminal. The current station, while modest, may actually be better situated overall. Detroit is probably a little way from undertaking a project to reimagine its downtown transportation infrastructure (although it would be a good thing if they did so). If VIA is committed to double ended trainsets, it makes more operational sense for VIA to cross the border and make their station stop at the current Amtrak station, rather than duplicate station facilities. Deadhead equipment moves back to Windsor may be easier to operate than layovers. But - that may just be too much risk and headache for Border agencies.

With Gordie Howe coming on line, a well advertised and guaranteed dedicated bus transfer may actually be the best solution. Not elegant, but urban change may have to be what it is.

- Paul

The present Amshack is unsuitable for expansion, it just has a single track. Keep in mind that in addition to connecting the Wolverine and Corridor services, there are also plans to run a new Amtrak service from Detroit to Cleveland via Toledo, and on-and-off proposals to run a commuter rail service from Ann Arbor. Michigan Central has space reserved for up to 4 tracks, and is a more plausible place to build a customs facility due to available space, which makes it a more suitable site to invest in for station infrastructure.