[mdrejhon]

I agree its a bit surprising, but the GO service will require passengers to switch trains in Hamilton to get to Toronto, and will be much slower than VIA. I bet VIA is banking on being a faster and a more "express" service, and will also enjoy upgraded infrastructure on the corridor from GO becoming more active there.

By 2021-ish there should be a third track all the way to St. Catharines. The kilometers of trackage planned by the incremental West Harbour / Confederation / St. Catharines funding stages, appears to match the kilometers needed for a new track in the corridor alongside the CN. This adds a lot of flexibility for greatly increased train service along the CN Grimsby corridor, on top of the Hamilton Rail Junction expansion that completes by end of 2016.

The third-tracking project, a multi-years-long project, has finally just begun with the Hamiton Rail Junction expansion. I'd expect it should reach West Harbour by end of 2016-early 2017, Confederation by end of 2019 (multiple mentions of third track), and St. Catharines by end of 2021 (assumed -- but quoted kilometers matches the distance between Confederation and St. Catharines).

Given there are only two CN freight trains day on this to-be-triple-tracked corridor, there appears to be plenty of upcoming capacity for both GO and VIA.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Via Rail seeks private sector partnership for Toronto-Montreal upgrade
International Railway Journal - http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...partnership-for-toronto-montreal-upgrade.html

Really good overview of the HFR project.

Highlights:

• “The key reason this project can be done so quickly is that it is based on abandoned or little-used rights-of-way,” he says “We save ourselves environmental studies and a lot of time building crossings and the rest of it. What we have to do is upgrade the track for greater speeds and introduce better signalling. Some of those are dark territories or have signals too far apart for passenger speeds. We will add double-track where necessary, and long passing tracks where that makes more sense. The other beauty for the government is that this is a shovel-ready, quick-deployment project.”
• Desjardins-Siciliano calculates that as little as one-quarter of the total cost would come from the government’s infrastructure budget, with the balance from the pension funds. In any event, the government would have to spend $C 1bn on rolling stock, just to keep its current service running.

 

[reaperexpress]

I agree its a bit surprising, but the GO service will require passengers to switch trains in Hamilton to get to Toronto, and will be much slower than VIA. I bet VIA is banking on being a faster and a more "express" service, and will also enjoy upgraded infrastructure on the corridor from GO becoming more active there.

Yes, a direct VIA train would be much more attractive than two-stage trip with GO, but so would a direct GO train. There is after all a reason GO is proposing separate Toronto-Hamilton and Hamilton-Niagara services even though they will inevitably bring less ridership than a single Toronto-Niagara service. GO wants to prevent the likely delays in Niagara from affecting service between Hamilton and Toronto. Such delays would occur regardless of whether the train is run by VIA or GO.

As a result, while I could see VIA being interested in expanding direct service to Niagara, I don't see Metrolinx granting them new time slots on the Oakville Subdivison for use by such trains. If Metrolinx were okay with the possible delays created by a direct Toronto-Niagara service, they would run that service themselves.

As a side note, the Toronto-St. Catharines-Niagara route is interesting because while most intercity routes have monopolies or duopolies, the Toronto-Niagara route is served by all four of Ontario's major intercity carriers: VIA/Amtrak, GO Transit, Greyhound and Coach Canada/Megabus. It's definitely a busy corridor, but I wonder if expanding both VIA and GO train service would make the market oversaturated, resulting in lacklustre ridership for both. Personally, I'd prefer if VIA kept out of the corridor, remaining only as needed by Amtrak for service to New York. After all, the entire corridor is only 130km long, so VIA's intercity style of operation (reserved seats, advanced purchase, demand pricing) is less appropriate than GO's show-up-and-go operation. Most people don't plan way in advance for such short trips.

 

[Northern Light]

Yes, a direct VIA train would be much more attractive than two-stage trip with GO, but so would a direct GO train. There is after all a reason GO is proposing separate Toronto-Hamilton and Hamilton-Niagara services even though they will inevitably bring less ridership than a single Toronto-Niagara service. GO wants to prevent the likely delays in Niagara from affecting service between Hamilton and Toronto. Such delays would occur regardless of whether the train is run by VIA or GO.

As a result, while I could see VIA being interested in expanding direct service to Niagara, I don't see Metrolinx granting them new time slots on the Oakville Subdivison for use by such trains. If Metrolinx were okay with the possible delays created by a direct Toronto-Niagara service, they would run that service themselves.

As a side note, the Toronto-St. Catharines-Niagara route is interesting because while most intercity routes have monopolies or duopolies, the Toronto-Niagara route is served by all four of Ontario's major intercity carriers: VIA/Amtrak, GO Transit, Greyhound and Coach Canada/Megabus. It's definitely a busy corridor, but I wonder if expanding both VIA and GO train service would make the market oversaturated, resulting in lacklustre ridership for both. Personally, I'd prefer if VIA kept out of the corridor, remaining only as needed by Amtrak for service to New York. After all, the entire corridor is only 130km long, so VIA's intercity style of operation (reserved seats, advanced purchase, demand pricing) is less appropriate than GO's show-up-and-go operation. Most people don't plan way in advance for such short trips.

I see the VIA-Amtrak opportunity here as one of a Toronto-Buffalo rail shuttle.

Right now the combined train for the above 'The Maple Leaf' is Toronto-NYC which is an absurdly long trip, never mind the corridor issues.

The traffic volumes Toronto-Buffalo are there to support more service (as opposed to Toronto-NYC where I think that is highly dubious without drastic speed improvements).

However, they would have to address pre-clearance customs issues. A 2 hour hold up at the border is a non-starter, and they need a frequent-traveler program that almost completely bypasses customs.

That, along with some modest corridor improvements could get you Toronto-Buffalo in 2.5 hours or less with a great deal less hassle than driving.

I think 4x per day, per direction would be feasible.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

From MERX:

VIA Rail Canada Inc. is looking to pre-qualify three (3) firms to execute signal work on existing CTC, Automatic Warning Devices, Hot Box Detectors as modifying circuits, upgrades or installation of new equipment (mast, gates, cantilevers, etc) for all subdivisions: Alexandria, Beachburg, Smiths Falls, Brockville, and Chatham.

https://www.merx4.merx.com/public/solicitations/199189927/abstract

 

[DSC]

A 2 hour hold up at the border is a non-starter, and they need a frequent-traveler program that almost completely bypasses customs..

The problem with cross-border train (or bus) travel is that - unless the inspection actually occurs on a moving train/bus - the train/bus waits for the last passenger to clear customs/immigration before departing. (Unless they are actually being 'held' for investigation.) Of course, if many passengers have pre-clearance such as Nexus this will allow the inspectors to concentrate on those who do not and it might be a bit faster but .....

 

[nfitz]

The problem with cross-border train (or bus) travel is that - unless the inspection actually occurs on a moving train/bus - ...

Or you pre-clear people at the terminal, like you do at airports. Which is the plan in Montreal, I believe.

 

[Northern Light]

Or you pre-clear people at the terminal, like you do at airports. Which is the plan in Montreal, I believe.

Yes it is; in conjunction with re-extension of The Vermonter to Montreal.

Vancouver is also being looked at.

Toronto, currently, is not, as there is only 1 international train per day, that of course, could change w/my suggestion of the Buffalo shuttle service. The only other likely International Train here
is one to Chicago again, but I don't see that until track speeds go up a fair bit.

 

[DSC]

Or you pre-clear people at the terminal, like you do at airports. Which is the plan in Montreal, I believe.

Wiki says this is still being planned and until it is the train will not go to Montreal - it ends in St Albans (Vermont).:

Planned extension of the Vermonter to Montreal[edit]
Efforts have been underway for many years to extend the Vermonter to Montreal. In 2012 the Federal Railroad Administration awarded $7.9 million to allow for the upgrade of the existing freight rail line between St. Albans and the Canada–US border.[16] Work on this project was completed in late 2014.

On March 16, 2015, the United States and Canada signed the "Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine, and Air Transport Preclearance Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada". The agreement would allow for the establishment of a preclearance customs and immigration facility within Central Station in Montreal that could be used by the Vermonter and Amtrak's Adirondack train.[17]

Before the Vermonter can be extended to Montreal the Congress must pass enabling legislation for the preclearance agreement and the Parliament of Canada must ratify the agreement. Construction of a preclearance facility in Central Station is expected to take about three years; one year for planning and permitting and two years for construction. Construction of the preclearance facility is not expected to start until after the preclearance agreement has been approved by both governments.[18][19]

 

[mdrejhon]

Yes, a direct VIA train would be much more attractive than two-stage trip with GO, but so would a direct GO train. There is after all a reason GO is proposing separate Toronto-Hamilton and Hamilton-Niagara services even though they will inevitably bring less ridership than a single Toronto-Niagara service. GO wants to prevent the likely delays in Niagara from affecting service between Hamilton and Toronto. Such delays would occur regardless of whether the train is run by VIA or GO.

Ontario seems to have also left enough ambiguity in the earlier announcement for a direct Toronto-StCatharines/Niagara train rather than connecting service. It could go either connecting or direct.

I mathed up all the planned kilometers of trackage planned as part of the West Harbour GO funding, Confederation GO funding, and the StCat/Niagara funding -- it coincidentally(?) matches the kilometers of track needed to have at least a third track all the way from Hamilton Bayview junction through St. Catharines.

With crossing gate upgrades and a better trackbed, that's quite some potential time savings there right off the bat -- to really speed up the Hamilton-StCat leg. Long term, the straight arrow Grimsby corridor is in theory 300kph capable when/if that day of bullet trains ever comes to this corridor.

Regardless, even just a 3rd track, this would benefit both GO and VIA, for any nonstop.

 

[dowlingm]

Or you pre-clear people at the terminal, like you do at airports. Which is the plan in Montreal, I believe.

Preclearance is only possible when no intermediate stops are made before US soil - so Adirondack will lose Saint-Lambert as a stop once border clearance is done at Gare Centrale. Similarly, no stops are made between Vancouver BC and the border on Cascades. Discontinuing all stops in between Niagara Falls NY and Toronto Union has far larger implications for Amtrak Maple Leaf.

As far as service to Niagara goes, while presumably VIA could make a similar deal to that made by GO with the Welland Canal folks, there is surely a point at which the logistics of the waterway will mean further expansion will require either non-guaranteed slots or a billion dollar tunnel.

 

[nfitz]

Wiki says this is still being planned and until it is the train will not go to Montreal - it ends in St Albans (Vermont).:

I was referring to the current Amtrak service (Adirondack) to Montreal, that doesn't run through Vermont, but stays in New York state, staying on the west side of Lake Champlain. Not the former service (Vermonter) through Vermont, New Hampshire, Mass., and Connecticut (onto Washington DC).

I hadn't realised they were thinking about restoring the Vermont service!

 

[Northern Light]

Preclearance is only possible when no intermediate stops are made before US soil - so Adirondack will lose Saint-Lambert as a stop once border clearance is done at Gare Centrale. Similarly, no stops are made between Vancouver BC and the border on Cascades. Discontinuing all stops in between Niagara Falls NY and Toronto Union has far larger implications for Amtrak Maple Leaf.

Well, you can 'isolate' certain cars in the consist. I've experienced this in Europe, where cars bound for 'x' are isolated from cars bound for 'y'.

This would allow customs to clear one or two 'open cars' ; or to perform that function on the train from its last stop (say Hamilton).

There are a range of choices for expedient customs service.

Also, I was discussing it specfically in regards to a Toronto-Buffalo rail shuttle as opposed to 'The Maple Leaf'; the latter is only one train per day, it could remain as is; or benefit from an alternate customs arrangement.

In the absence of true high speed, I don't really see Toronto-NYC getting beyond twice daily service, but I could be wrong.

 

[smallspy]

Well, you can 'isolate' certain cars in the consist. I've experienced this in Europe, where cars bound for 'x' are isolated from cars bound for 'y'.

VIA and Amtrak have both suggested this to the CBSA and the US CBP, and neither seems particularly interested in attempting it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[reaperexpress]

From MERX:

VIA Rail Canada Inc. is looking to pre-qualify three (3) firms to execute signal work on existing CTC, Automatic Warning Devices, Hot Box Detectors as modifying circuits, upgrades or installation of new equipment (mast, gates, cantilevers, etc) for all subdivisions: Alexandria, Beachburg, Smiths Falls, Brockville, and Chatham.

https://www.merx4.merx.com/public/solicitations/199189927/abstract

Wait... the Beachburg Subdivision? Isn't that abandoned?

Preclearance is only possible when no intermediate stops are made before US soil - so Adirondack will lose Saint-Lambert as a stop once border clearance is done at Gare Centrale. Similarly, no stops are made between Vancouver BC and the border on Cascades. Discontinuing all stops in between Niagara Falls NY and Toronto Union has far larger implications for Amtrak Maple Leaf.

Dropping all but one or two of the Canadian stops would obviously be a problem if VIA/Amtrak is the only rail service in the corridor, but once GO is serving the local destinations it wouldn't be such a big deal. In fact, regardless of customs requirements, it's better to have the long-distance trains make as few stops as possible to keep times competitive between major cities, while overlapping regional services provide service to the communities in between.

The only other likely International Train here is one to Chicago again, but I don't see that until track speeds go up a fair bit.

With current tracks, the travel time to Chicago would be about 10 hours. Toronto-Windsor currently takes 4h13 and Detroit-Chicago takes 5h24. A 10-hour trip is pretty long, but that's not necessarily a dealbreaker. The Chicago-Toronto route happens to have Detroit smack in the middle of it, which makes for a lot of ideal intercity rail-distance trips. Chicago-Detroit and Windsor-Toronto services already operate, and are both planned to get upgraded infrastructure and increased service. At least a couple of those trains should run the full route from Chicago to Toronto because they could attract some long-distance travellers who would otherwise be dissuaded by the transfer in Detroit. There doesn't need to be a full trainload of Chicago-Toronto customers to be worthwhile, because each half of the route is justified in its own right and would be operated regardless.

10 hours also happens to be the ideal duration for an overnight train. You can leave one city at around 10PM and arrive in the other at 8AM - with just enough time for a standard 8-hour sleep in between. Such trains could be more profitable than typical long-distance sleeper trains because they avoid the need for expensive dining and recreation facilities - a single café/lounge car would do. I think the prospect of falling asleep in Toronto and waking up in Chicago or New York would be very attractive even if sleeper tickets are several times more expensive than daytime train tickets, because they directly compete with an extra night in a hotel. Economy-class coach cars would also provide a budget overnight option and make the train able to serve short trips within the daytime segments (such as Toronto-Buffalo and Albany-New York).

Here's a graphic I made showing roughly what time an overnight train might arrive in various American cities if it left Toronto at 10pm.

Even with ordinary-speed rail I could see the following daily services operating out of a Toronto pre-clearance facility:
- Toronto-New York daytime (existing)
- Toronto-Buffalo daytime
- Toronto-New York overnight
- Toronto-Chicago daytime
- Toronto-Chicago overnight
That's 5 departures per day, which is more than the current pre-clearance facility in Vancouver and the proposed one in Montréal combined.

I see the VIA-Amtrak opportunity here as one of a Toronto-Buffalo rail shuttle.

Right now the combined train for the above 'The Maple Leaf' is Toronto-NYC which is an absurdly long trip, never mind the corridor issues.

The traffic volumes Toronto-Buffalo are there to support more service (as opposed to Toronto-NYC where I think that is highly dubious without drastic speed improvements).

However, they would have to address pre-clearance customs issues. A 2 hour hold up at the border is a non-starter, and they need a frequent-traveler program that almost completely bypasses customs.

That, along with some modest corridor improvements could get you Toronto-Buffalo in 2.5 hours or less with a great deal less hassle than driving.

I think 4x per day, per direction would be feasible.

A pre-clearance facility would definitely make Amtrak an attractive option for Toronto-Buffalo travel. A single trip leaving Buffalo for Toronto in the morning and returning to Buffalo in the afternoon would nicely fill the gap between daytime and overnight services to New York: