[kEiThZ]

I keep saying that if/when HFR happens, they should spend a bit more on the Ottawa-Montreal portion to make it HSR. There's money to be made there when HSR makes those cities commutable.

 

[muller877]

The Corridor breakdown is interesting. It looks like QUE-MTL-OTT added more passengers than MTL-OTT-TOR.

Passengers/week (2016 -> 2017):

Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto +7.6% (42,336 ->45,566)
Quebec-Montreal-Ottawa +31.7% (11,102 -> 14,617)
Corridor East Total +12.6% (53,438 -> 60,183)

Toronto-London-Sarnia-Windsor +5.9% (17,753 -> 18,804)
Toronto-Niagara +35.2% (580 -> 784)
Southwesten Ontario Total +6.8% ( 18333 -> 19588)​

To be clear Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto added more passengers. Quebec-Mtl-Ott increased its % from a smaller base.

I also wonder why they have duplicated the Montreal-Ottawa section. Of the 14,000 riders on the Quebec-Ottawa route how many were only on the train from Mtl-Ott? Or does this paint a picture where the Mtl-Que section is highly unprofitable and HSR should not be considered? (likewise the breakdown before and after London)

 

[Allandale25]

^ I'm actually surprised the Toronto to Niagara numbers increased given how limited the service is.

 

[Mariner35]

To be clear Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto added more passengers. Quebec-Mtl-Ott increased its % from a smaller base.

I also wonder why they have duplicated the Montreal-Ottawa section. Of the 14,000 riders on the Quebec-Ottawa route how many were only on the train from Mtl-Ott? Or does this paint a picture where the Mtl-Que section is highly unprofitable and HSR should not be considered? (likewise the breakdown before and after London)

Quebec Montreal Ottawa added 3515 Passengers
Montreal- Ottawa- Toronto added 3230 Passengers

 

[SamStar]

^ I'm actually surprised the Toronto to Niagara numbers increased given how limited the service is.

Must have been the unlimited rail pass.

 

[innsertnamehere]

When the numbers are that small, a large increase of ridership isn't necessarily statistically significant.

I don't believe the unlimited rail pass would have permitted travel across the border, and my understanding is the vast majority of niagara via riders continue on to the US. It is operated with an Amtrak train after all.

 

[rbt]

^ I'm actually surprised the Toronto to Niagara numbers increased given how limited the service is.

I use it occasionally to go to Grimsby to access the Bruce Trail (typically hike back to Hamilton). I've wondered if my ticket price even covers the cost of the train stopping then accelerating again.

 

[ShonTron]

I use it occasionally to go to Grimsby to access the Bruce Trail (typically hike back to Hamilton). I've wondered if my ticket price even covers the cost of the train stopping then accelerating again.

I've done that once! It's one of a few full day hikes on the Bruce Trail fully doable with public transport at both ends. (I'd like to try Grimsby to St. Catharines one of these days). It's better to start at Grimsby and head west - because you have several points once you get towards Hamilton to say "that's it, I'm done" and find a HSR bus to get you downtown, and the train going towards Toronto's arrival in Grimsby can be very variable.

 

[Northern Light]

I've done that once! It's one of a few full day hikes on the Bruce Trail fully doable with public transport at both ends. (I'd like to try Grimsby to St. Catharines one of these days). It's better to start at Grimsby and head west - because you have several points once you get towards Hamilton to say "that's it, I'm done" and find a HSR bus to get you downtown, and the train going towards Toronto's arrival in Grimsby can be very variable.

This is why I'm personally most enthused about 2WAD GO service to Hamilton (and points beyond) .

I love hiking the Bruce, but as I get older its ever harder to grab someone to go with, all the time, harder still to find a friend who also drives.

That means if I go by myself I not only have to endure the nauseatingly boring drive out there and back, but I also have to do a loop hike to get back the car.

The idea of being able to conveniently grab a GO train going against the flow in morning rush or early on a weekend and heading out to Hamilton, Stoney Creek Or Grimsby, doing a hike of 10km-25km, and then being able to grab a pint on a patio before heading home on the train just sounds so lovely.

The problem doing it w/VIA is the infrequent service.

Hourly would be just fine though.

 

[Urban Sky]

I also wonder why they have duplicated the Montreal-Ottawa section. Of the 14,000 riders on the Quebec-Ottawa route how many were only on the train from Mtl-Ott? Or does this paint a picture where the Mtl-Que section is highly unprofitable and HSR should not be considered? (likewise the breakdown before and after London)

If you want to break down train stats (revenues, cost, passengers, etc.) at anything lower than train number level (e.g. per segment), you arrive at awkward allocation decisions, which are best avoided.

These trains clearly belong to Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal:

Source: Official VIA Rail timetable (effective 2014-07-07)

However, all of these trains clearly belong to Montreal-Quebec:

Source: Source: Official VIA Rail timetable (effective 2017-11-05, revised edition)

Therefore, you have a duplication of Ottawa-Montreal with some services between these two cities counting for one service group and some for the other. Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal (TOM) trains were first introduced in April 2011, while Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec (OMQ) trains were first introduced in December 2012. Whereas there were only 2 OMQ trains initially (#28 and #33), all but one TOM train (#51) were broken up at Ottawa in June 2016 and instead many more OMQ trains created. In June 2017, an additional OMQ train was created by merging trains #32/632 and #24 to #24/624. These shifts of course affect the figures reported on page 9 in the Annual Plan especially when comparing them with the figures of previous years...

 

[reaperexpress]

To get a sense of how VIA's corridor routes are currently doing relative to the past, I made a summary table comparing the current eastbound schedule to the 1979 VIA schedule that @Urban Sky provided (thanks again for that fantastic resource!):

In general, the west seems to have fared a lot worse than the east, with frequency generally dropping west of Toronto, but improving to the east.

The three routes where travel times have improved also happen to be the three routes where VIA owns a portion of the track. Coincidence?

The real standout is Toronto-Ottawa, which has more than tripled in frequency and had an incredible hour-and-a-half reduction in travel time!
The more unfortunate standout is Sarnia-Toronto, which has now dropped to a frankly pathetic state.

Notes:
- 1979 Ottawa-Montreal frequency includes The Canadian which travelled via Vankleek Hill. It does not include the daily RDC trip from Ottawa to Montréal Gare Windsor (CP stn) via Lachute because 3h15 is a stupidly long time to cover that distance and there was another faster departure to Montréal Centrale at about the same time.
- 1979 Montreal-St Foy frequency does not include The Ocean or The Scotian which served Lévis, but not Ste Foy. It also does not include the 3 daily RDC trips to Québec via Trois Rivières which took about 3h30.

 

[timio]

Didn't the Sarnia train at one point go via Woodstock, at least for one of the trips?

The slowest part of that trip is now between Kitchener and London, with the last schedule I looked at suggesting it can take 2 hours to travel the relatively short distance.

 

[reaperexpress]

Didn't the Sarnia train at one point go via Woodstock, at least for one of the trips?

The slowest part of that trip is now between Kitchener and London, with the last schedule I looked at suggesting it can take 2 hours to travel the relatively short distance.

Yes, that is the main reason for the reduction in speed. In 1979, all trips from Windsor or Sarnia went via Woodstock and Brantford, while a separate RDC service operated 4 times per day between London and Toronto via Kitchener, with a 5th round trip between Stratford and Toronto. In my opinion, this configuration makes more sense than the current configuration since it saves people from unnecessarily suffering through the slow London-Kitchener track if they aren't actually heading somewhere on that corridor. VIA Rail seems to agree as well, given that the 2016-2020 corporate plan proposed to revert to the 1979 configuration, as I illustrated here earlier. However there doesn't seem to have been any action on that front given that that was planned to occur in 2017.

You can see the 1979 eastbound schedule under the '1979-06' tab of my Google Doc here. I didn't enter the westbound schedule, so for that you'd need to look for Urban Sky's direct scan.

 

[ShonTron]

Didn't the Sarnia train at one point go via Woodstock, at least for one of the trips?

The slowest part of that trip is now between Kitchener and London, with the last schedule I looked at suggesting it can take 2 hours to travel the relatively short distance.

That's largely due to RailTex/G&W (Goderich-Exeter Railway) taking over the track between Silver (Georgetown) and London on a long-term lease, and providing poor maintenance. It wasn't so bad. There are several PSOs that have been introduced in the last decade that are extremely frustrating, such as at the Highway 7/8 overpass west of New Hamburg.

The introduction of GO Transit service to Kitchener (and Metrolinx's takeover) helped to keep the eastern section in better shape, but the western section is awful. CN won't be renewing GEXR's lease of that section, so there's a chance some improvement will be possible.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

That's largely due to RailTex/G&W (Goderich-Exeter Railway) taking over the track between Silver (Georgetown) and London on a long-term lease, and providing poor maintenance. It wasn't so bad. There are several PSOs that have been introduced in the last decade that are extremely frustrating, such as at the Highway 7/8 overpass west of New Hamburg.

The introduction of GO Transit service to Kitchener (and Metrolinx's takeover) helped to keep the eastern section in better shape, but the western section is awful. CN won't be renewing GEXR's lease of that section, so there's a chance some improvement will be possible.

Yes as of November 15th, 2018 CN will be assuming control of freight operations along the segment from "London East" to Silver. GEXR will continue to service Goderich to Stratford. Also I believe that Metrolinx's purchase of the Kitchener to Silver segment finally goes through this year. I've heard rumours of CN using this line for more through freight service connecting to their yards in the GTA, including double-stack trains. Hopefully this means track improvments.

VIA has also expressed interest in buying the London East to Kitchener segment from CN, however I haven't heard of any progress on this. Something else to watch for is the results of RDC tests in southern Ontario that occurred a few years ago, and if CN will allow for previously "announced" increases in frequency using London as a hub.