[SFO-YYZ]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1377251391593398272

Thanks for this. Captured a few screenshots below. Looks like they've made some updates to the originally published designs. It feels more "streamlined" than the prior version released in 2018. Good job to VIA Rail team for not ruining the Siemens charger unlike Amtrak or other U.S. operators determined to make every new rolling stock look like they are out of the 50s.

 

[robmausser]

Thanks for this. Captured a few screenshots below. Looks like they've made some updates to the originally published designs. It feels more "streamlined" than the prior version released in 2018. Good job to VIA Rail team for not ruining the Siemens charger unlike Amtrak or other U.S. operators determined to make every new rolling stock look like they are out of the 50s.

View attachment 309331
View attachment 309333

There are some minor differences but that swooped nose cone has always been part of the design, even in 2018

 

[robmausser]

Btw I can't wait to ride these 200kmh speed daemons.... at 60kmh stuck behind a CN freight train.

HFR or bust!

 

[crs1026]

Paul and you are forgetting about the Kingston hub. We'll still be running the equivalent of a half to full dozen trains the length of the Lakeshore corridor. Only now they start in Kingston.

I hadn't forgotten, and in fact if you read up you will note that I observed that there might be tradeoffs, that made me queasy about the idea.

But I think you have formed a vision of the "Hub" that is beyond proven intentions. The "Hub" was something only vaguely spelled out in a single interaction with some local politicians who may not remember and who may not still be in office when HFR arrives. I wouldn't run with this thought just yet. Maybe after HFR is brought forward officially, VIA will say more.

I'm admittedly jaundiced about the term. In the GTA, transit "Hubs" are regularly announced only to amount to adding a second newspaper box at a minor bus loop. We don't know if VIA has a business case for the model, or if it's a napkin based thing that some hack floated.

I am not debating the value of a hub model, I just don't have confidence it will emerge as what you claim. I do anticipate Kingston will see a "layover facility", meaning enough platform or siding addition to permit nightly layover of 3-4 trainsets. I'm not so confident that VIA will move to turnbacks, partly for operational reasons and partly because there is valid through business (Cobourg-Ottawa, or Cornwall-Toronto, for instance). A "hub" might simply be a trainset arriving in Kingston as eastbound Train A, dwelling for some time (10-15 minutes) to asure schedule compliance, then departing for Montreal as Train B with through passengers remaining on board. Perhaps with a different crew, so that crews turn back and avoid overnight layover costs as is incurred today. In my view, that's just a padded schedule - as a "hub", it's just lipstick on a pig, although it might be a good plan.

For purely optical reasons I doubt VIA would offer a competing (and potentially superior) service on the very line that it just spent billions to avoid, so the express train suggestion may be a fantasy. But short-duration curfews for freight for 2 or three through trains a day may actually be easier to operate than continued frequent all-day passenger service competing with freight. The local service that has been floated is just more of what everyone recognizes is not sustainable.

- Paul

 

[reaperexpress]

Thanks for this. Captured a few screenshots below. Looks like they've made some updates to the originally published designs. It feels more "streamlined" than the prior version released in 2018. Good job to VIA Rail team for not ruining the Siemens charger unlike Amtrak or other U.S. operators determined to make every new rolling stock look like they are out of the 50s.

Here's the 2018 livery for reference:

I think both versions look great, unlike some of the American designs which don't seem to complement the shape of the locomotive:

Also thank heavens we're not getting a version which looks like its nose was chopped off, like the Amtrak Corridor and MARC versions.

 

[robmausser]

Here's the 2018 livery for reference:

I think both versions look great, unlike some of the American designs which don't seem to complement the shape of the locomotive:

Also thank heavens we're not getting a version which looks like its nose was chopped off, like the Amtrak Corridor and MARC versions.

I call them Micheal Jackson trains.

 

[kEiThZ]

I think you have formed a vision of the "Hub" that is beyond proven intentions. The "Hub" was something only vaguely spelled out in a single interaction with some local politicians who may not remember and who may not still be in office when HFR arrives. I wouldn't run with this thought just yet. Maybe after HFR is brought forward officially, VIA will say more.

Fair enough.

I am actually optimistic that something close to what VIA promised the Mayor of Kingston (and probably Belleville, Coburg, etc. too) is achievable. A schedule that originates in Kingston timed for them, should boost ridership. And shorter trains should be filled more easily.

This may be a difference in outlook. But I don't get why it should be discounted just because of a label that has a poor connotation in the GTA.

For purely optical reasons I doubt VIA would offer a competing (and potentially superior) service on the very line that it just spent billions to avoid, so the express train suggestion may be a fantasy.

Not just optical reasons. Post HFR, I would imagine that CN and VIA will basically keep Lakeshore service to whatever level is required for the Lakeshore. Neither party is going to be interested in more traffic than necessary. Especially not a run that is faster every other operation on the corridor.

 

[kEiThZ]

I think both versions look great, unlike some of the American designs which don't seem to complement the shape of the locomotive

The Amtrak version is nauseating.

 

[reaperexpress]

Paul and you are forgetting about the Kingston hub. We'll still be running the equivalent of a half to full dozen trains the length of the Lakeshore corridor. Only now they start in Kingston.

I don't think the 'hub' concept necessarily means that the number of trains will be maintained or increase. It may simply be a redesign of schedules to optimise for the local segments (e.g. Toronto-Kingston, Kingston-Ottawa) rather than the end-to-end routes (e.g. Toronto-Ottawa).

I think @crs1026 's suggestion of a layover yard in Kingston is spot-on, since it would enable some early morning commuter services to depart from Kingston towards Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. In the January 2018 schedule below (the most recent schedule I happen to have a spreadsheet of) the first train from Kingston to Ottawa didn't arrive there until 11:29, which is rather late.

With so many of the current trains running skip-stop patterns, there are a lot of missed connections along the line. For example, there's only one train per day which you can use to travel from Brockville to Cornwall (#64), despite there being 6 trains along that segment.

I colour-coded the services by approximate service type:
red = superexpress
yellow = intercity/regional
green = commuter

Here's an idea of how a more locally-oriented schedule could look:
In this concept, the number of trains is significantly reduced, but the utility of the service for local communities is still comparable. There may be fewer trains, but the trains that remain are at more useful times.

I removed most of the express services, but I kept two express runs per day between Toronto and Montreal, which would supplement the hourly service via Ottawa during the busier times of day.

I also added a couple shuttle trips between Ottawa and Kingston rather than continuing them the whole way to Toronto, since I figure that the HFR route will capture the entire demand between Toronto and Ottawa themselves. Most of these shuttle trips have a timed connection in Kingston to a train running between Toronto and Montreal.

 

[Bordercollie]

Within 10 years of HFR's possible opening (let's say 2025)

Airport security screening will be as simple as walking through a millimetre wave scanner.

Evolv Express® - Security Screening for the New World

Revolutionary touchless security screening. 10x faster than metal detectors. Evolv Express offers a welcoming, line-free visitor experience.

evolvtechnology.com

There will be large zero-emissions aircraft in the skies to carry people between cities costing a fraction of the amount in fuel a similar flight does today.

Airbus reveals new zero-emission concept aircraft

Airbus has revealed three concepts for the world’s first zero-emission commercial aircraft which could enter service by 2035. These concepts each represent a different approach to achieving zero-emission flight, exploring various technology pathways and aerodynamic configurations in order to...

www.airbus.com

There will be zero-emissions air taxies shutting passengers from city centers to major airports.

United says it will buy up to 200 small electric aircraft to zip people to airports, avoid traffic

United could use the air taxi-type craft to carry passengers on short routes, such as from downtown Chicago to O’Hare International Airport.

www.chicagotribune.com

All of which will chip away at the value of HFR. Every day this project gets delayed makes this project less likely to succeed.

Why are you assuming that everyone is going from Toronto to Ottawa or Montreal?
What about from Kingston to Ottawa? Or Belleville to Montreal? What if you live in Oshawa and you want to travel to Kingston? Can you still fly to all of those places?

Likely not.

So even though air travel is great for distances over 100kms, train travel makes more sense for shorter distances.

So stop assuming that zero emissions air travel will solve the world's problems.

Before covid, what was the scheduled journey time for the express train from Ottawa to Toronto?

 

[kEiThZ]

Here's an idea of how a more locally-oriented schedule could look:
In this concept, the number of trains is significantly reduced, but the utility of the service for local communities is still comparable. There may be fewer trains, but the trains that remain are at more useful times.

That's my point. This is still a very substantial schedule. Why would CN be interested in accomodating cannon ball runs on top?

 

[kEiThZ]

So stop assuming that zero emissions air travel will solve the world's problems.

Like most such fantasies, he's also ignoring cost. Millimeter Wave scanners, electric air taxis and a whole new mainline fleet for all the airlines. Does this sound like a recipe for cheap mobility?

This is what I detest about a lot of the Musk fanboys. In their world, anybody not wealthy enough to afford the high end of travel should just stay home. And a lot of HSR and air travel fanatics have the same zeal when pushing their fantasies too.

 

[robmausser]

Within 10 years of HFR's possible opening (let's say 2025)

Airport security screening will be as simple as walking through a millimetre wave scanner.

Evolv Express® - Security Screening for the New World

Revolutionary touchless security screening. 10x faster than metal detectors. Evolv Express offers a welcoming, line-free visitor experience.

evolvtechnology.com

There will be large zero-emissions aircraft in the skies to carry people between cities costing a fraction of the amount in fuel a similar flight does today.

Airbus reveals new zero-emission concept aircraft

Airbus has revealed three concepts for the world’s first zero-emission commercial aircraft which could enter service by 2035. These concepts each represent a different approach to achieving zero-emission flight, exploring various technology pathways and aerodynamic configurations in order to...

www.airbus.com

There will be zero-emissions air taxies shutting passengers from city centers to major airports.

United says it will buy up to 200 small electric aircraft to zip people to airports, avoid traffic

United could use the air taxi-type craft to carry passengers on short routes, such as from downtown Chicago to O’Hare International Airport.

www.chicagotribune.com

All of which will chip away at the value of HFR. Every day this project gets delayed makes this project less likely to succeed.

If you honestly think any of this will be available in 10 years except for electric taxis I got some snake oil to sell you.

Its weird too that you think Zero emissions is what is the driving force behind why people would take the train over planes. Its honestly the last thing of importance to most people.

As for airport security, its only gonna get worse bub, new technology or not.

 

[drum118]

Why are you assuming that everyone is going from Toronto to Ottawa or Montreal?
What about from Kingston to Ottawa? Or Belleville to Montreal? What if you live in Oshawa and you want to travel to Kingston? Can you still fly to all of those places?

Likely not.

So even though air travel is great for distances over 100kms, train travel makes more sense for shorter distances.

So stop assuming that zero emissions air travel will solve the world's problems.

Before covid, what was the scheduled journey time for the express train from Ottawa to Toronto?

Like you stated, not everyone doing the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-Windsor trips, but stop in between to get to Z that has no bus service or air.

Air travel cause more emission than any other mode of travel

With good rail service 7/24 you can have rail service in place of air over 300-500 km to the point air service will come a thing of the past or not have good service. This has happen in Europe already and why some airlines have stop service X unless it part of a 1-2 stop over trip.

People want to go to other location and like airlines, one is force by rail that doesn't get them there they must go to Y to get to where they want to go. There is a need to bring some lines back into service as well new lines only for passenger service and high speed trains.

GO Transit was a good example as everything had to go to Toronto Union Station and transfer to X that had a wait time between then to get to where one wanted to go to. Today, rail still goes to Union with 2 lines that doesn't require you to transfer if you need a point on the other side of Union on the same lines. Buses now go all over the place that don't need to go to Union anymore.

Until we start spending big bucks and gain the 40 years we are behind Europe, the car is the mode of travel to get one to where they want to go to.

Anything pertaining to rail travel improvement is 20 years out with some before then.

 

[reaperexpress]

That's my point. This is still a very substantial schedule. Why would CN be interested in accomodating cannon ball runs on top?

From CN's perspective, it's a vast improvement. The VIA service has dropped from roughly every hour along their line, to every two hours. That leaves huge buffers for freight train movement between each departure. Furthermore, the level of impact on CN is a function of speed differentials. The faster the VIA service, the sooner it will catch up to a freight train. If VIA and CN had the same average speed it wouldn't be as much of an issue, since they could simply run one in front of another. In this schedule, nearly all of the fastest VIA trips are eliminated: these are the ones which currently cause the biggest headaches for CN.

As for whether CN would accommodate a couple cannonball runs, I don't know. That's why I asked the question.