[crs1026]

Until such a time that on-time performance metrics get tied into the remuneration for allowing those trains to operate on the track, there is zero incentive to fix it.

Further, it is unclear whether VIA and/or Ottawa is actually paying its way for any capacity it is presuming to use in the GTA.

Ottawa promised Ontario $1.8B for GO expansion back in 2017..... I have no information on whether Ottawa ever cut that cheque or if amounts will be paid over time. That's not that big a contribution in the context of the entire GO expansion..... certainly not the 30% or more that has been announced for other transit projects around the country. Did ML make any assurances to VIA in return?

It's also unclear how much capacity has been roughed in for VIA as GO has planned its infrastructure expansion. That's critical for HFR especially. We don't know what assumptions ML has made about VIA trains, and on what specific routings. Has VIA been "at the table" when capital investment for expansion to Kitchener, Niagara, and beyond Oshawa been finalised?

I do think VIA needs to have priority over GO.... but someone needs to pay the bill for that. I'm actually surprised that someone like Doug Ford (who has no hesitation to butt heads with Ottawa from time to time) hasn't made a bigger issue out of this. If Ottawa has dragged its feet while ML figured out how much capacity to build, well, they may have missed the train.

- Paul

 

[reaperexpress]

There is a problem with this line of thinking, from a railroading standpoint.

The dispatching organization also runs their own trains, and so has a vested interest in the timeliness of those trains.

They have no so interest in the timeliness of the trains that they allow from other organizations.

Until such a time that on-time performance metrics get tied into the remuneration for allowing those trains to operate on the track, there is zero incentive to fix it.

Your description of "railroading standpoint" is simply a description of a for-profit company, which the Province of Ontario is not.

I know that they have no interest in the timelinesss of trains from other organizations. That's exactly what I'm saying. We, as the citizens of Ontario, should be demanding that Metrolinx act as an impartial rail infrastructure operator to benefit all passenger operations in Ontario, not just GO Transit, and as such their performance metrics should be changed to include evaluation for performance of Via Rail trains as well as GO Trains. In many states, it's actually the state-owned segments of railway where Amtrak has the most reliable service. It's absurd that in Ontario the provincially-owned railways are among the most unreliable segments for Via Rail on a per-kilometre basis.

The current situation where Metrolinx Rail Traffic Control is only evaluated on the performance of GO trains and not at all on other trains creates a horrendously suboptimal situation where dispatch regularly adds 15+ minutes of delay to Via trains just on the off chance that doing so could save 30 seconds for an on-time GO Train that already has several minutes of schedule padding. There is no possible evaluation of railroading in which that decision is in the best interest of the public.

It's interesting to note that the Province also owns most of the highways in Ontario, and yet the provincially-owned GO Transit and Ontario Northland buses don't get any significant level of priority over privately-owned vehicles. It's almost as if the decisions of the MTO are made with more than just the bottom line of GO Transit in mind.

I'd argue that the MTO should in fact prioritize provincial buses on highways (e.g. bus lanes) but just as Via Rail should receive a similar level of service to GO on publicly-owned railways, private intercity buses (Flixbus, Megabus, etc) should have access to priority features like bus lanes just as GO buses do.

 

[smallspy]

Your description of "railroading standpoint" is simply a description of a for-profit company, which the Province of Ontario is not.

I know that they have no interest in the timelinesss of trains from other organizations. That's exactly what I'm saying. We, as the citizens of Ontario, should be demanding that Metrolinx act as an impartial rail infrastructure operator to benefit all passenger operations in Ontario, not just GO Transit, and as such their performance metrics should be changed to include evaluation for performance of Via Rail trains as well as GO Trains. In many states, it's actually the state-owned segments of railway where Amtrak has the most reliable service. It's absurd that in Ontario the provincially-owned railways are among the most unreliable segments for Via Rail on a per-kilometre basis.

The current situation where Metrolinx Rail Traffic Control is only evaluated on the performance of GO trains and not at all on other trains creates a horrendously suboptimal situation where dispatch regularly adds 15+ minutes of delay to Via trains just on the off chance that doing so could save 30 seconds for an on-time GO Train that already has several minutes of schedule padding. There is no possible evaluation of railroading in which that decision is in the best interest of the public.

It's not just for a for-profit company though, is it?

For better or for worse, Metrolinx tracks it's delay/on-time figures. And it attributes any delays to the appropriate division that it feel should. And remember that 15 minute service guarantee? Those delays get attributed in part to figure out whether Metrolinx is at fault, and thus has to pay out for the delays. https://www.gotransit.com/en/service-guarantee

And it's more than just that - in quite a few cases people's jobs are on the line. Morale is not terrific in many parts of the organization, and anything that anyone can do to keep out of the proverbial firing line they will. And if that means that the dispatchers following the grid to a "T", to the detriment of VIA, that's exactly what they will do.

Don't get me wrong, I am not in any way excusing or condoning the practice. As you stated in your earlier post it's pretty abhorrent to be on a VIA train that has sailed past a GO train, only to have to wait for it to service a stop or two and then come past. I've experienced it several times. But unfortunately it's not likely to change in the near term, not without a hell of a lot more noise than is happening now.

Dan

 

[Urban Sky]

Independently of whether one believes this is desirable or not, I sense that the point which some people are trying to make here is that whereas there is a consensus across Europe and apparently even the United States that train dispatching over publicly controlled infrastructure should priviledge intercity passenger trains (as their delays create much more knock-on effects than those of local trains, which can recover at their next terminus), GO seems to be an outlier…

 

[crs1026]

Independently of whether one believes this is desirable or not, I sense that the point which some people are trying to make here is that whereas there is a consensus across Europe and apparently even the United States that train dispatching over publicly controlled infrastructure should priviledge intercity passenger trains (as their delays create much more knock-on effects than those of local trains, which can recover at their next terminus), GO seems to be an outlier…

I would say it differently, but get to the same place. Amtrak has just as many scuffles (maybe more) with freight railroads over dispatching priority, but where they do have control they exert their seniority.
Metrolinx, given their relationship as a tenant to CP and CN, ought to know better and understand the issue - but since their metrics for On-time Performance (which is a very important measure in their individual performance contracts and bonus metrics) look better if they give VIA lower priority, the self interest of their own personnel governs.
Having said that, It’s an interesting case study on how one behaves when the shoe is on the other foot.

- Paul

 

[reaperexpress]

It's not just for a for-profit company though, is it?

For better or for worse, Metrolinx tracks it's delay/on-time figures. And it attributes any delays to the appropriate division that it feel should. And remember that 15 minute service guarantee? Those delays get attributed in part to figure out whether Metrolinx is at fault, and thus has to pay out for the delays. https://www.gotransit.com/en/service-guarantee

And it's more than just that - in quite a few cases people's jobs are on the line. Morale is not terrific in many parts of the organization, and anything that anyone can do to keep out of the proverbial firing line they will. And if that means that the dispatchers following the grid to a "T", to the detriment of VIA, that's exactly what they will do.

I doubt that using the operating model common in other countries - where the public rail owner gives equal access to all passenger rail operators - would decimate morale, cost people their jobs and end the ability to run reliable service. Somehow every EU country managed to implement impartial rail dispatching without causing the sky to fall.

In the European Union, it is in fact legally required that public rail owners give equitable access to passenger rail operators. In the Netherlands, for example, the national government owns both ProRail (rail infra owner) and NS (train operating company) but they are not allowed to give NS trains absolute priority over passenger trains from other companies such as Arriva or Eurostar. ProRail must act as an impartial dispatcher and there is an EU standard methodology for evaluating dispatching.

NS can't get absolute priority over every other train, but they still have on-time performance just as good as GO Transit and they have a 30-minute service guarantee for delays not caused by a different company (so it covers mecanical issues, passenger incidents, etc).

In Germany, the rail infrastructure owner is even part of the same company as two of the passenger TOCs (DB Regio and DB Fernverkehr), but they too are supposed to provide a similar level of priority to all passenger rail operators.

What I am proposing is to introduce the same expectations in Ontario:

Don't get me wrong, I am not in any way excusing or condoning the practice. As you stated in your earlier post it's pretty abhorrent to be on a VIA train that has sailed past a GO train, only to have to wait for it to service a stop or two and then come past. I've experienced it several times. But unfortunately it's not likely to change in the near term, not without a hell of a lot more noise than is happening now.

Currently little to no noise is being made about this, so I am trying to change that. The general public is currently blisfully unaware of how much Metrolinx undermines Via Rail's operations, so we need to bring this issue to the public's attention. Like you said, change will only happen if there is a lot of public pressure to do so. The public is well aware of the way that CN impacts Via operations, so it should be possible to get a similar level of awareness about how Metrolinx's incentives are currently set up. This series of posts is merely my first step to make noise. I figure I want to share my thoughts with knowledgeable people such as yourself to get a second opinion before I start making noise targeted at the general public.

 

[dowlingm]

Your description of "railroading standpoint" is simply a description of a for-profit company, which the Province of Ontario is not.

I know that they have no interest in the timelinesss of trains from other organizations. That's exactly what I'm saying. We, as the citizens of Ontario, should be demanding that Metrolinx act as an impartial rail infrastructure operator to benefit all passenger operations in Ontario, not just GO Transit, and as such their performance metrics should be changed to include evaluation for performance of Via Rail trains as well as GO Trains. In many states, it's actually the state-owned segments of railway where Amtrak has the most reliable service. It's absurd that in Ontario the provincially-owned railways are among the most unreliable segments for Via Rail on a per-kilometre basis.

Are we comparing like with like here?

Amtrak performance over state-owned sections of railway are almost all if not all PRIIA services. Services (other than Canadian which wouldn’t count as PRIIA) into and out of Toronto are not co-funded by Ontario or co-branded. Do I think they should be? Yes I do. But right now they are not.

Again, if there are instances of VIA getting messed around when they hit their slot, that’s one thing. But I don’t think it should be a rule that up to 2,000 commuters on a packed L12 must defer to a Venture 30 minutes down with maybe 100-200 on an alignment they aren’t co-owners or investors in. After all, according to Metrolinx, VIA supposedly exercised station owner prerogatives in respect of stations between Kitchener and London, rather than defer to some sort of greater good.

 

[reaperexpress]

Are we comparing like with like here?

Amtrak performance over state-owned sections of railway are almost all if not all PRIIA services. Services (other than Canadian which wouldn’t count as PRIIA) into and out of Toronto are not co-funded by Ontario or co-branded. Do I think they should be? Yes I do. But right now they are not.

The point is not to compare like for like, the point is to look for examples of better railway management and consider whether we should reform our railway management in a similar way. I'd agree that the U.S. is not a great place to look since they do still have a lot of tribalism like we do here.

In the EU, track fees are the mechanism used to compensate rail owners, though since rail access is considered a public benefit, they don't cover the full cost of construction and maintenance. Via Rail pays track fees to the Province of Ontario and if we feel they are too low, that's a discussion that could be had. Like you said, we could just as easily be talking about Ontario paying Via Rail for providing a large amount of intra-provincial public benefit such as running a fast and relatively frequent Toronto - Ottawa train service.

Again, if there are instances of VIA getting messed around when they hit their slot, that’s one thing. But I don’t think it should be a rule that up to 2,000 commuters on a packed L12 must defer to a Venture 30 minutes down with maybe 100-200 on an alignment they aren’t co-owners or investors in.

Yeah I don't think that should be a rule either and I have never suggested anything of the sort. I suggested that decisions should be made based on the characteristics of the situation rather than the colour of the train. If we want to consider the number of passengers aboard each train that's something we could include in our dispatching procedures.

After all, according to Metrolinx, VIA supposedly exercised station owner prerogatives in respect of stations between Kitchener and London, rather than defer to some sort of greater good.

This "they hit me so I'm going to hit them back" mentality between Metrolinx and Via is clearly not in the best interest of Ontario railway passengers. Just because I'm calling out Metrolinx at this particular moment doesn't mean that I think Via Rail can do no wrong.

 

[Bojaxs]

A little bit of insight from my job at CN. I've spoke to a couple TC's (Transit Controllers) at the Brampton yard and asked them if the GO or VIA trains running between George Town and downtown Brampton ever get in the way of operations. Both said the GO & VIA trains move so fast and run through the line so quickly that they don't ever consider them when moving trains to the yard.

 

[dowlingm]

Has anything further arisen about White River’s equipment?

 

[micheal_can]

Has anything further arisen about White River’s equipment?

AFAIK nothing yet. My thinking is that right now, Via is retiring the worst equipment. So, once they start retiring equipment that is still serviceable, that will be when we might hear more.

 

[turbanplanner]

Has anything further arisen about White River’s equipment?

What equipment?

 

[Bordercollie]

GO trains pride themselves on being on time. It is not a surprise that the Via would need to wait so that a GO train was able to keep its schedule. Thsi does beg the question about what will happen with Via HFR and Go 2WAD when they are operating in the same tracks.

There should be enough capacity for all trains now that the third track is in place at Danforth and should allow the VIA train to overtake the GO train there. Until you get to Guildwood where they need to share a platform and the lack of a third track at Rouge Hill is a problem. Was there not a plan to add a third track between Pickering Junction through Rouge Hill?

 

[dowlingm]

What equipment?

1. The “no more RDCs” change Trains magazine said was supposedly happening
2. No baggage on 184/185 presumably because neither 6250 or 6251 are available

 

[smallspy]

A little bit of insight from my job at CN. I've spoke to a couple TC's (Transit Controllers) at the Brampton yard and asked them if the GO or VIA trains running between George Town and downtown Brampton ever get in the way of operations. Both said the GO & VIA trains move so fast and run through the line so quickly that they don't ever consider them when moving trains to the yard.

The guys in Brampton Yard would have no idea what is going on in the mainline. They are concerned only with their couple of acres, and nothing more.

If you wanted actual opinions, you would be better served by talking to the RTCs in Edmonton. Those guys and gals are the ones who have to run the delicate balance of harmonizing 50 and 60mph freights with 90mph passenger trains.

And they will tell you that there are places on the system where it is very difficult to balance out the different train types. The Kingston Sub is the biggest one.

Has anything further arisen about White River’s equipment?

Nothing was happening in the first place.

I know a bunch of people at Trains Mag, and they're a great bunch - but they are certainly not the foremost experts. Most of the articles - including the one on the White River run - are supplied by foamers doing railfanning trips.

Dan