[roger1818]

I have also heard that there are 3 weekly trains (each direction) along this line, but I cannot remember where I heard that and cannot find a source.

In Metrolinx's Peterborough Rail Study, it says that at the time (2010) CP "operates a single train three times a week." I would assume that this hasn't changed.

I should add, things have changed significantly since this study was performed. At the time the CP Toronto (Agincourt) Freight Yard was significantly busier, and Metrolinx needed to find a way around it. In 2012, Hunter Harrison mandated the hump and classification yard be closed. As a result, there is now plenty of room for VIA to build their own track through the yard without having to detour around it.

 

[ManyQuestions]

I was talking about the list of routes suggested by @ManyQuestions. If you re-read my post, I refer to its inclusion in the above table.

I do agree that the Vancouver-Seattle would benefit greatly from from increased frequency, the only reason I didn't include it is that it, like all other transborder routes, is currently operated by Amtrak. These routes could certainly still benefit from service improvements, one of the easiest of which would be extending the New York-St. Albans Amtrak route up to Montreal.

Of course, these potential improvements are at most secondary to VIA HFR. Any expansions from the central corridor would benefit significantly from effective interchanges with the HFR core.

 

[roger1818]

These routes could certainly still benefit from service improvements, one of the easiest of which would be extending the New York-St. Albans Amtrak route up to Montreal.

Getting off topic, but Amtrak's Vermonter was previously named the Montrealer when it traveled to Montreal, but Amtrak cut the route short (and changed names) in 1995. The Montrealer operated as an overnight train, but from day 1, the Vermonter operated as a daytime train. Initially there was connecting bus service to Montreal, but it was later discontinued. From what I have heard, the preclearance facilities in Central Station won't open until there is a second train to the USA (most likely the Montrealer).

 

[ManyQuestions]

From what I have heard, the preclearance facilities in Central Station won't open until there is a second train to the USA (most likely the Montrealer).

I haven't noticed or heard of any work going on to construct new preclearance facilities, but I suppose that it could go in the space that has recently been vacated by Staples closing their store in the station. Could be an interesting development if station renovations are incorporated into the HFR project.

 

[roger1818]

I haven't noticed or heard of any work going on to construct new preclearance facilities, but I suppose that it could go in the space that has recently been vacated by Staples closing their store in the station. Could be an interesting development if station renovations are incorporated into the HFR project.

No, the plan is to have it at the other end of the station, on track 23. Here is the plan for the facility:

 

[lenaitch]

CP took over quite a bit of CN’s track in Peterborough in 1990 when CN abandoned Uxbridge to Peterborough (the last major customer, in Lindsay, was closing around that time) but since then, most customers closed or switched to trucks.

All the ex-CN spurs in Peterborough were eventually removed by CP (many of which are now trails), with only Quaker Oats left as a customer of any significance. I’m not even sure if they still get rail deliveries anymore.

This article from June of this year discusses the rebuilding of the train shed and mentions that it is still used to unload rail cars (although the photo shows a truck). I have been told that the amount of grain they receive by rail seasonally fluctuates to accommodate local farmers.

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news/peterborough-region/2021/06/03/train-shed-at-quaker-oats-plant-in-peterborough-could-be-demolished-rebuilt.html

 

[smallspy]

All the ex-CN spurs in Peterborough were eventually removed by CP (many of which are now trails), with only Quaker Oats left as a customer of any significance. I’m not even sure if they still get rail deliveries anymore.

I had been told by a local railfan up there that Quaker stopped receiving rail cars early last year. I don't know if that was due to a change in their operations or related to the issues at the unloading facility at the plant, however.

The only industries that actually receive cars at this point are the mines. There may be a team track or two along the line that is still active, but they likely haven't seen service in 20 years.

Dan

 

[Allandale25]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1430993016735637510

 

[Urban Sky]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1430993052362067985

München S-Bahn operates at headways of 2 minutes with LZB (i.e. the legacy moving-block* train control system also used by all HSR trains in Germany) and a train which doesn't stop can be fitted into a smaller gap than one which stops (because it doesn't require any dwell time). But even if we assume that the absence of dwell time is offset by longer train length and lower acceleration capabilities, you could fit an intercity train into any 3 minute gap by simply delaying the following train by no more than 60 seconds. Given the OTP challenges under which the S-Bahnen in Munich operate (many corridors are actually shared with other traffic), this is hardly problematic.

If REM and VIA won't share tracks, it will not be a consequence of operational issues, but of design choices which not only make such track sharing all but inpossible, but also impede it from unlocking even remotely the capacity which the Stammstrecken in Frankfurt or Munich have. Just look up the capacity of a DB BR 423, triple it (because they operate in triples during rush hour) and compare it with the pathetic capacity of the REM's matchboxes. Using light metros (i.e. a high-cost-low-capacity transportation mode optimized for people movers at airports) for rapid transit (i.e. an application where capacity is much more important than the ultra-high frequencies enabled by autonomous operation) is like trying to make a pig fly...

*it actually uses fixed blocks, but with a block length of only 100 meters and the use of virtual signals, it acts like a moving-block system.

One more thing: Frankfurt S-Bahn operates at 24 tph (i.e. more frequent than 180 second headways) with PZB, i.e. Germany's regular fixed-block train control system which is also used on Ottawa's Trillium line. The comparison of Frankfurt and Munich suggests that switching from a train control system first deployed in the 1930s to one from the 1960s is already sufficient to shrink headways from 150 to 120 seconds...

 

[Tristen]

Make it less like an airport experience, I should be able to arrive at the station just 5 mins before departure and have step-free-boarding. Preferably like those in Japan.

 

[kEiThZ]

Found this interesting take on passenger rail in Canada including HFR:

Wondering what everyone thinks about it.

Somebody hasn't looked at how much ridership there is between Toronto and Ottawa and is simply going off conventional wisdom about most people going between Toronto and Montreal.

Also, the routing through Ottawa, adds about 10% more distance give or take. A better designed system should be competitive.

 

[Urban Sky]

Somebody hasn't looked at how much ridership there is between Toronto and Ottawa and is simply going off conventional wisdom about most people going between Toronto and Montreal.

I just stumbled over this table while skimming through Deliverable 7 (Demand Forecasting) of the Ecotrain Study today:

 

[Mind_the_gap]

Some recent drone footage of the Siemens Sacramento factory by The Four Foot. Clearly visible is a beautiful brand new VIA locomotive.

Exploring Rail Manufacturing in the Western US!

 

[Urban Sky]

One of the other parts of the video that interested me was the take on the Senneterre train. It does have a high subsidy and low ridership, but I find it interesting that it survived the 1990s cuts.

"Remote Services" were the only one of VIA's historically five service categories which survived the 1990 cuts untouched:

Because whether a service crosses an interprovincial border or not is thankfully irrelevant to VIA’s mandate, which historically comprised five different categories:

1. Corridor services
2. Transcontinental services
3. Regional services
4. Remote services
5. Tourism services

Refer to this categorization of VIA’s services in 1988:

Source: Canadian Railroad Historical Association (1989, p.206)

It also puzzles me how you can create a map like this without realizing that allowing Montrealers to travel to Senneterre might not be the reason why taxpayers fund that service:

 

[Urban Sky]

A new expanded Corridor schedule is taking effect today and is discussed extensively by Transport Action Canada and on groups.io:

VIA Rail increases corridor services August 30

A new schedule takes effect August 30, 2021 that reinstates many train services that has been suspended due to the pandemic, but key connections still are missing in the Quebec-Windsor corridor, so Transport Action has raised these concerns with VIA Rail. There are also no increases planned in...

www.transportaction.ca

Corridor frequency increase August 30

groups.io