[dowlingm]

Air Canada replacing its short-haul YOW-YUL flights through a codeshare agreement with a railroad does not necessitate necessitate Air Canada to assume any commercial control over the rail operator. In fact, such an arrangement will likely hurt competition, as AC has every incentive to deny other airlines to replicate such codeshare agreements.

Either Air Canada has commercial control (the ability to forbid the rail operator to make codeshares other than with AC/Star Alliance) or it doesn’t. Transport Canada could presumably regulate the rail operator to require them to make any reservation system interface open to all operators that can use that interface without favouritism, subject to a defined financial arrangement.

That would not necessarily prevent AC / Star from taking other steps to assert their branding such as station naming/advertising etc., but the likes of KLM might still prefer that than running buses to and from Ottawa.

 

[lenaitch]

You’re assuming a common standard for “safety compliance” which doesn’t seem possible if railway companies are allowed to decide their own standards for crossing equipment.

If Ventures don’t conform to industry norms, why wasn’t it picked up at TTCI, or when Brightline put them in service, or before revenue service began in Canada. At some point the customer, not the manufacturer, must take responsibility for the usage of a product. There seems to have been ample historical warning for VIA, CN and TC to between them have anticipated this situation, and the time for someone to have shouted stop was before passengers went onboard. That this did not happen seems to me proof of how desperate at least two of those parties must have been to retire Renaissance and LRC.

Perhaps.

I suspect, and some on here are saying, that the problem is either a potential deficiency and/or an intermittent one so it might not have shown up during testing.

Not knowing the industry, a reasonable person might think that one of the industry regulators might have a view. I realize it is not a direct parallel but the US-DOT and TC issue safety-related directives on motor vehicles all the time as well as aircraft. 'Design it how you like, but a product should never not do 'x' (or something like that).

 

[micheal_can]

If we look at Durham region and where the built up areas are, they are along the old Highway 2, the 401 and the LSE GO route. It is reasonable to assume that when Via is routed on the Havelock Sub, developers along that route will push the province to put in a GO train if they build subdivisions there. Chances are, it will take at least 10 years after Via opens that route before that happens.

 

[ARG1]

You got lucky. One anecdotal trip evidence does not make.

I mean as someone who used to take VIA every month or so between Ottawa and Toronto, I can support what @Bojaxs is saying. When a delay happens, 75% of the time its past Pickering where the train has to wait for a GO train, and the other 15% or so of the time is there's some train from Montreal that's somehow an hour late blocking Brockville Junction.

 

[ARG1]

How practical would it be for regional/commuter rail to also operate on potential HxR tracks? VIA HFR execs have been playing up the potential of cities like Peterborough and Trois-Rivieres to be part of the commuter shed of Toronto and Montreal respectively. However the likely cost of HxR tickets won't make it a viable option for most commuters.

Realistically if there is some sort of GO service built, I don't see it going any further than Locust Hill.

 

[reaperexpress]

You got lucky. One anecdotal trip evidence does not make.

That's true, so I'm working on assembling actual data using the GPS traces fo Via trains that are publicly online.

In the meantime I'll also share my anecdotal experience from frequent travel between Toronto and Ottawa that Metrolinx generally causes far more minutes of delay per kilometre than CN.

 

[Bordercollie]

Even if they could use Stouffville (which Smallspy is doubting), the Lakeshore East corridor is now constrained to four tracks between the Don and Pape, because of the Ontario Line. When it had a 6-track capacity before the Ontario Line was planned, one or two tracks for VIA was possible.

You can still take the Bala sub to the don branch to the Belleville Sub to Agincourt yard. You would need to build a bypass through the yard to use the Havelock sub Row.

The other way is to go to UXBRIDGE and use that rail corridor east. But it doesn't go to Peterborough.

 

[micheal_can]

You can still take the Bala sub to the don branch to the Belleville Sub to Agincourt yard. You would need to build a bypass through the yard to use the Havelock sub Row.

The other way is to go to UXBRIDGE and use that rail corridor east. But it doesn't go to Peterborough.

Actually.....
...but seriously, reactivate the straighter line to Kawartha Lakes(Lindsey), then down to Peterborough. Thereby avoiding the CP yard and adding one more potential stop. This also means that no issues with freight operations.

OpenRailwayMap

OpenRailwayMap - An OpenStreetMap-based project for creating a map of the world's railway infrastructure.

www.openrailwaymap.org

 

[Bordercollie]

Actually.....
...but seriously, reactivate the straighter line to Kawartha Lakes(Lindsey), then down to Peterborough. Thereby avoiding the CP yard and adding one more potential stop. This also means that no issues with freight operations.

OpenRailwayMap

OpenRailwayMap - An OpenStreetMap-based project for creating a map of the world's railway infrastructure.

www.openrailwaymap.org

That would get you to Perth where the Belleville Sub meets Highway 7. But it's probably an extra 100km. Which is nothing if you are travelling at 250kmph.

 

[asher__jo]

No political reasons. Pure conmercial and economic logic: Bypassing Ottawa escalates construction costs and reduces revenues. Only politicians could fund such a nonsense…

Yup, I mentioned that.

 

[MisterF]

Actually.....
...but seriously, reactivate the straighter line to Kawartha Lakes(Lindsey), then down to Peterborough. Thereby avoiding the CP yard and adding one more potential stop. This also means that no issues with freight operations.

OpenRailwayMap

OpenRailwayMap - An OpenStreetMap-based project for creating a map of the world's railway infrastructure.

www.openrailwaymap.org

This potential route has a couple problems. It's roughly 25 km longer to get to Peterborough than the CP line. We just got through pages of talk of bypassing Ottawa to save that much distance yet again. Imagine bypassing one of the biggest destinations on the line and then adding it back to serve a town of 20,000. The mind boggles.

The other problem is that the right of way is long gone in both Lindsay and Peterborough. It ran down a city street in Peterborough so obviously those links aren't going to be rebuilt. The CP line, by contrast, is intact and operational through Havelock.

 

[micheal_can]

This potential route has a couple problems. It's roughly 25 km longer to get to Peterborough than the CP line. We just got through pages of talk of bypassing Ottawa to save that much distance yet again. Imagine bypassing one of the biggest destinations on the line and then adding it back to serve a town of 20,000. The mind boggles.

The other problem is that the right of way is long gone in both Lindsay and Peterborough. It ran down a city street in Peterborough so obviously those links aren't going to be rebuilt. The CP line, by contrast, is intact and operational through Havelock.

There was talk of finding a way to not be held up at the waterway. This could help with that option. TBH, there is no perfect option out there, but, this one could be a good option.

 

[MisterF]

There was talk of finding a way to not be held up at the waterway. This could help with that option. TBH, there is no perfect option out there, but, this one could be a good option.

Do you mean the canal in Peterborough? I may have missed some messages.

 

[micheal_can]

Do you mean the canal in Peterborough? Taking a route through Lindsay doesn't solve that problem, the canal still has to be crossed. Plus it adds new problems of being a longer route that has significant gaps in it.

Yes, the canal.
Since they would not be relying on the existing route, they could build a raised bridge over it.

 

[lenaitch]

The other problem is that the right of way is long gone in both Lindsay and Peterborough. It ran down a city street in Peterborough so obviously those links aren't going to be rebuilt. The CP line, by contrast, is intact and operational through Havelock.

And through the middle of Lindsay (as well as Uxbridge).

Drawing lines on a fantasy map is easy.