Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Rapidbus said:

I was wondering where the old station in Victoria went until I realized that and the bridge is gone. I only walked a couple of block from the bridge into Victoria, and the tracks looks completely unusable. If you were to ask me, to restore service, tracks will have to be torn up and relaid, as well as other infrastructure improvements. Railfans may prefer the rail, but in this case, buses can provide more frequent service as well as better service directly into Victoria

If you were to ask me, I would prefer to subsidize existing intercity bus company, so the entire Western Canada could be served well. 300 million could do a lot to improve mobility options in Western Canada. It would also allow private operators to receive a bridge loans or to start new routes that may operate at a loss for a while.

 

Oh absolutely, I would love a single, centralized bus system, or even a franchised system where individual operators bid on contracts to operate under BC Transit's banner and their centralized scheduling. Right now, our fragmented system is impossible to navigate without extensive local knowledge.

Fun fact RE the downtown station, it actually still exists (well, part of it). The roof was stuck on a truck and put at the cruise ship terminal, which is kind of insult to injury but at least it's still around. Vic West station's platform is also still in place, along with the foundation of that hilariously hideous station.

 

20201212_121026.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

Yes, the E&N follows the entire eastern side of Vancouver Island, the only area of major population that it doesn't serve on the Salish Sea is Saanich. Courtenay/Comox, Qualicum/Parksville, Nanaimo, Duncan, Victoria. It passes through literally every other community.

And yes, absolutely Edmonton-Calgary should be prioritized over Vancouver Island any day, we definitely can find common ground there. I only brought up the island corridor because of Wilson's services being potentially canceled. Before cancellation, the Calgary-Red Deer-Edmonton RDC service was faster than highways will take you on the same journey today. That would definitely be the place to start, especially considering the existing transit infrastructure in both cities to get people to the major stations... but if VIA is this slow to put service through Trois-Rivières and Peterborough, then I am not holding my breath on it.

RE "Sheep skin," you lost me there, if it was supposed to be a witty shot at me I'm sorry but it missed because I don't even understand it. I'll have to assume (dangerous on the internet) that you are claiming I'm a wolf in sheep's clothing. I don't claim to be a sheep. I'm fully aware of the ICF - I check their website for updates about once a week because this issue is one that is close to heart for me. I have no intention of continuing my studies at UVIC, and have no interest in a career in business. My profession is education - don't worry, I don't take that tone into my classroom with me. This is the internet so you are either being very sarcastic or I am missing something, so I won't try to respond to the rest of your comment. I am aware that only government policy can really affect this - that is why I continue to vote for (and write thanks to) Members of Parliament that endorse a VRCA or some equivalent, so that neither VIA nor the government can kick trains around like a financial soccer ball.  

I assume you googled my username and found my transit maps from 2018 on CBC Prince George, hence why you assumed I am a student at UVIC. The articles about my maps (which I recognize are awful now that I have expanded my skills and create maps commercially) were published very close to the end of my studies.

Not at all.  Sheepskin has been used to acknowledge post secondary education accomplishments...

Personally, I'm a lot surprised by how much information can be gleemed about an individual on the internet 😨

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2021 at 3:24 PM, InfiNorth said:

So it's totally justifiable for the province to waste the same number of tax dollars on a single massive, poorly planned highway interchange that has now been determined to have little to no effect on traffic flow but not on public transportation? It's only okay to dump hundreds of millions into a piece of infrastructure only usable by those privileged/environmentally wasteful enough to own a vehicle? God forbid we build infrastructure that lets people along a dense, linear corridor move away from car dependent and environmental abhorrent habits. Sorry, but as a car owner who commutes by car... stop wasting money on road infrastructure. We need rail. You are always super quick to jump in an defend a total lack of actual service from VIA Rail. Sorry, but I'm getting tired of it. I am hugely appreciative of the resources your offer the community but you act like there is literally no case to be made for anything that VIA isn't already doing.

Okay, sure, we only want to "waste" a fraction of the money we'd spend on rail. Then how about a public intercity network like what you find in Western Washington? Regardless, acting like we should all just be happy with the status quo is getting really old. Why is it some crime in need of your genius to ask for rail infrastructure? Guess what, I live here. I know how things work out here, I know the geography. You live so far away that in Europe you would be on another continent. You live in a place with rail service and I doubt you recognize just how absolutely horrid it is to have to rely exclusively on private transport if you don't own a car. You come in assuming that when we ask for rail service, we are literally asking for sixty-year-old RDCs to runover collapsing tracks once a day and therefore no one will use it. You think no one would use it if the tracks were fixed and we had multiple services daily that could compete with highway speeds? No, I guess we should all stop hoping and dreaming and just accept that VIA Rail has never once ever in its entire history made a single decision that didn't serve the public well. 

And regarding your whining about the "federal taxpayer" subsidizing transport on Vancouver Island... why is it that you can't help pay for a single, short VIA Rail line when my tax dollars subsidize a network that is entirely unusable to me? Why do my tax dollars subsidize a network that is primarily located (once again) so far away from me that in Europe it would be on another continent? Because it is social support. It is a public service. It helps lift up Canadians. Same reason it's okay to subsidize flights in the North. Same reason it's okay to have a coast guard even if you live in Saskatchewan. The point of a country is to support one another.

Sorry if that was belligerent but you always bring the same argument and all it is is "well the tracks are bad and the service that used to run sucked so we shouldn't try for something better so be quiet."

I'm tired of your responses. All you do is pop in to tell people they are wrong, and not to share exciting ideas or news. Part of a forum is having ideas and dreams. It isn't to sit on the sidelines and yell at people when they are even remotely optimistic. 

Note: Cut over $100,000,000 off that total figure you posted... no one in their right mind is advocating for the Port Alberni sub to be reactivated. No one. East end track gang may want it but there is literally no business case for Port Alberni to have a rail connection, not even freight. 

The problem is that, even though the benefits of rail corridors, have been proven time, and time again, the high upfront cost for development, are hard to justify to taxpayers. The exception is when the taxpayers themselves are asking for the investment. Redeveloping the E&N corridor would be quite expensive, no matter the numbers you use. Having it run by VIA would be a huge mistake in my book. Properly developed, this corridor, with feeder buses running to and from it, would fundamentally change the way transit works on the Island, especially if all the systems were coordinated, into a regional system. I just don't see it happening.

Calgary to Edmonton, with its nearly flat landscape would be an excellent spot to work on a high speed rail corridor. I know that the population density isn't high between the cities, but that's exactly why I think it could work. Downtown to downtown in about an hour, would be perfect to test the viability of High Speed rail in Canada.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, RZ350 said:

The problem is that, even though the benefits of rail corridors, have been proven time, and time again, the high upfront cost for development, are hard to justify to taxpayers. The exception is when the taxpayers themselves are asking for the investment. Redeveloping the E&N corridor would be quite expensive, no matter the numbers you use. Having it run by VIA would be a huge mistake in my book. Properly developed, this corridor, with feeder buses running to and from it, would fundamentally change the way transit works on the Island, especially if all the systems were coordinated, into a regional system. I just don't see it happening.

Calgary to Edmonton, with its nearly flat landscape would be an excellent spot to work on a high speed rail corridor. I know that the population density isn't high between the cities, but that's exactly why I think it could work. Downtown to downtown in about an hour, would be perfect to test the viability of High Speed rail in Canada.

People only want what directly benefits them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Orion6784 said:

People only want what directly benefits them.

What part of my comment about Edmonton-Calgary being a priority did you miss? Apparently me advocating for restoration of service anywhere in Canada makes me selfish... Apparently me as a car owner saying that we need to reduce the money dumped into highway infrastructure is selfish. This forum baffles me. 

Edit: Since CPTDB isn't showing my reason for the edit, I am acknowledging my error.

Edited by InfiNorth
Clarified by Orion6784
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, InfiNorth said:

What part of my comment about Edmonton-Calgary being a priority did you miss? Apparently me advocating for restoration of service anywhere in Canada makes me selfish... Apparently me as a car owner saying that we need to reduce the money dumped into highway infrastructure is selfish. This forum baffles me. 

I was commenting about a response to your comment. I did not say you were selfish. I was talking about most people in general.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Benton Harper said:

I'm still trying to fathom why one would go on to edit their post with strike thru's...

Shame, shame, shame...

To acknowledge my own error. Because when someone has information that counters mine I don't just stick to my guns, I accept it and consider it.

9 hours ago, Catherine Wilkins said:

 

I'm done with this discussion as of now; however, as a user with roughly the same amount of time on this forum as me, I fail to see why you see yourself as a moderator. This is just as much your forum as it is the user's that triggered my initial reactionary comment in this thread. If a moderator would like to step in, fine, but I'm done here. Posting in giant-sized font isn't helping.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
1 hour ago, Shaun said:

Q2 would be spring. Is that what they mean?

Q2 means anytime from April 1st to June 30th.

Like with the COVID-19 vaccines, "delivery in Q1" means 90% of them come at the end of March.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2021 at 3:16 PM, Articulated said:

Q2 means anytime from April 1st to June 30th.

Like with the COVID-19 vaccines, "delivery in Q1" means 90% of them come at the end of March.

Understand that. But it said "winter" testing which is where I got confused.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shaun said:

Understand that. But it said "winter" testing which is where I got confused.

Yes, the first trainset will arrive on property in Q2. However, it will first undergo acceptance testing and inspection, which can be done without the trainset moving; slow-speed testing can also be done without leaving the yard. VIA's crews will also need to be trained on it before it can begin mainline testing. This is likely what they mean by "winter", as the trainset won't need or be able to leave the yard for 4-6 months after arrival.

If you look at the schedule image in the Twitter link, they have a "Gate 6: Ready to start winter [testing]" placed just to the left of Q4 2021, which indicates they expect to start winter testing sometime end of Q3/early Q4 (so October-November 2021). The NRC in Ottawa is also equipped to perform cold-weather testing, so they will likely do that there if regular outdoor temperatures are not sufficient.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

There's been a few people here discussing the Edmonton-Red Deer-Calgary line, which is nice to see. Has anyone from Via ever commented on it? Is it something that could actually be brought back, or do the freight companies have a veto on it? It sure would be nice to see this line serviced once again, but I am obviously not holding my breath.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MatthewB said:

There's been a few people here discussing the Edmonton-Red Deer-Calgary line, which is nice to see. Has anyone from Via ever commented on it? Is it something that could actually be brought back, or do the freight companies have a veto on it? It sure would be nice to see this line serviced once again, but I am obviously not holding my breath.

The line was closed in 1985 (i.e. at a time where various services cut in 1981 reappeared, such as the Atlantic, the Super-Continental west of Winnipeg and service to  Sherbrooke or Havelock were restored) because it had become too uncompetitive and unattractive for a number of reasons, including:

- a series of deadly collisions at level-crossing

- the inability to achieve travel times and frequencies which would have been competitive against the car or the bus

- the inability to serve Edmonton with a station more central than its “South Edmonton” terminus in Strathcona

 

Are you aware of any plans to fix these issues, which would be prerequisites for restoring VIA service?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Urban Sky said:

The line was closed in 1985 (i.e. at a time where various services cut in 1981 reappeared, such as the Atlantic, the Super-Continental west of Winnipeg and service to  Sherbrooke or Havelock were restored) because it had become too uncompetitive and unattractive for a number of reasons, including:

- a series of deadly collisions at level-crossing

- the inability to achieve travel times and frequencies which would have been competitive against the car or the bus

- the inability to serve Edmonton with a station more central than its “South Edmonton” terminus in Strathcona

 

Are you aware of any plans to fix these issues, which would be prerequisites for restoring VIA service?

Thanks for responding, I hadn't heard of those issues before. I'm not aware of any plans, but I'm just a university student so I'm no expert.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MatthewB said:

Thanks for responding, I hadn't heard of those issues before. I'm not aware of any plans, but I'm just a university student so I'm no expert.

No worries, I just wanted to highlight that (just as with Gaspé or on Vancouver Island), it will take considerable investments into the infrastructure before a return of passenger operations becomes viable - and that is the responsibility of the respective host railroads and of the various levels of government, not VIA...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Urban Sky said:

No worries, I just wanted to highlight that (just as with Gaspé or on Vancouver Island), it will take considerable investments into the infrastructure before a return of passenger operations becomes viable - and that is the responsibility of the respective host railroads and of the various levels of government, not VIA...

To the contrary of Red Deer sub and SVI, Chemin de fer de la Gaspésie (property of the government, operated by the regional municipalities) is undergoing a overhaul of critical infrastructures : 250 M$ were allocated to fully reopen the railroad from Matapédia to Gaspé : over 135 M$ were invested to refurbish the rail up to Port-Daniel―Gascons (2017-2022, with totally new bridges in Caplan and on the Port-Daniel sand bar to be erected this year). The rest is budgeted for Chandler subdivision (2021-2025). The Amiral tourist train is expected to return to Gaspé in 2024 and freight in 2025. Aside from the work on the closed portion (Caplan-Gaspé), Cascapedia sub (Matapédia-Caplan) has seen major work since 2018 to enhance safety and higher operating speeds :

  • Railwork
    • 70,000 new ties and many more anchors and spikes replaced;
    • Installation of 5 km of continuous welded rail;
    • New ballast;
    • New signal lights;
  • Bridges
    • 130'-long bridge replaced over Kempt river in Restigouche-Partie-Sud-Est township;
    • 2 completely new bridges (415' and 580') in Cascapédia―Saint-Jules, paralleling the century-old ones (expected to open in 2021)

The main issue is on VIA side, as whether rolling stock and personnel will be available to provide for the Chaleur reinstatement upon completion of work. Apart from having no VIA train right now, I don't think the situation in the Gaspé is close to being comparable to Edmonton-Calgary or Vancouver Island services.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, webfil said:

Apart from having no VIA train right now, I don't think the situation in the Gaspé is close to being comparable to Edmonton-Calgary or Vancouver Island services.

I'm not familiar (beyond timetabling and basic history) about the demographic that used the Chaleur. Was it primarily tourist as the Canadian has become or was it used by locals a lot as well?

8 hours ago, Urban Sky said:

- the inability to achieve travel times and frequencies which would have been competitive against the car or the bus

The Strathcona terminal would suck big time, especially considering what transit (and traffic) to the rest of Edmonton from that area is like. On that note, the timetables from when it was discontinued show a travel time of less than what current Google driving estimates are for station-station. At the time was driving faster thanks to smaller urban centres and less traffic?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Urban Sky said:

No worries, I just wanted to highlight that (just as with Gaspé or on Vancouver Island), it will take considerable investments into the infrastructure before a return of passenger operations becomes viable - and that is the responsibility of the respective host railroads and of the various levels of government, not VIA...

For sure, I appreciate that insight. I knew that governments would need to make *some* investments, but I honestly didn't realize the scale of how much was needed. Hopefully such an investment can be seen by the province as a worthwhile infrastructure investment (or even green investment, depending on who's in power). I can dream on I guess haha.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/2/2021 at 5:56 PM, InfiNorth said:

I'm not familiar (beyond timetabling and basic history) about the demographic that used the Chaleur. Was it primarily tourist as the Canadian has become or was it used by locals a lot as well?

I'd say locals first, maybe with added tourist influx during peak periods (July-August). To the contrary of the Canadian, the fares and the schedule made the train competitive with the buses on medium- and long-distance, but with added comfort and amenities :

  • Montréal to Gaspé
    • by train, 2011 : ≥125 $
    • by bus, 2021 : 135 $
  • Montréal to Rimouski
    • by train, 2019 : ≥75 $
    • by bus, 2021 : 95 $

As for the schedule, the train would depart Gaspé in the afternoon and arrive in Montréal mid-morning the next day, while three bus would depart Gaspé per day, with one overnight run with departure from Gaspé around 9 PM and arrival in Montréal early in the morning the next day. The bus is thus quicker, but only for the portion east of Mont-Joli.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...