[micheal_can]

https://www.sudbury.com/local-news/northern-ontario-highways-dangerously-unsafe-say-ndp-mpps-11152517

Considering that the tracks are there. How hard would it be to run trains between Sudbury and North Bay?

Don't threaten me with a good time...

The line is still active, but there are speed restrictions due to track conditions. If it were rolled into Ontario Northland, it may be palatable.

Ridership is an interesting thing. There are 2 buses a day that use the section, of which one continues to Ottawa. If the train were to continue south to Toronto, or were to meet the future Northlander both ways, it could pull from the ~4 buses a day between Sudbury and Toronto.

The bigger issue is that the sections of highways that are the worst are north of SSM. If you want to solve that, a line that continues on the HCR and ACR and then on to Thunder Bay would help. However, that ridership is quite low. One bus every few days and some of the lowest AADT on the highways is the ridership to draw from.

So, yes, in my dream world, anything is possible with enough money and political will.Realistically? Not going to happen However,if the choice is a divided highway or a train, the train would be cheaper.

 

[NorthernTracks]

https://www.sudbury.com/local-news/northern-ontario-highways-dangerously-unsafe-say-ndp-mpps-11152517

Considering that the tracks are there. How hard would it be to run trains between Sudbury and North Bay?

My two cents: The Northlander needs to be in service before entertaining any other provincial passenger rail proposals. It's far too easy for governments and politicians to get distracted by this, that and the other.

An initial business case (similar to the one completed for the Northlander) would be needed.

Extending the Sudbury-White River train east to North Bay might be the way to do it, but can you get political buy-in from the federal government and VIA Rail? They both like passing the buck to each other in order to avoid actually doing anything constructive.

If there are slow orders on the OVR, then that's another hurdle that needs to be overcome.

 

[ShonTron]

The OVR between North Bay and Sudbury sees little use and is low speed bolted track. It’d be a lot of work to resignal and rebuild for very little benefit.

 

[micheal_can]

The OVR between North Bay and Sudbury sees little use and is low speed bolted track. It’d be a lot of work to resignal and rebuild for very little benefit.

Why would bolted track be a problem? Trains don't need to be high speed here. If they could maintain ~60mph, in the straighter stretches that would likely be fast enough for most people. Isn't the Newmarket Sub and all of ONR's lines bolted track?

My two cents: The Northlander needs to be in service before entertaining any other provincial passenger rail proposals. It's far too easy for governments and politicians to get distracted by this, that and the other.

That would be a given.

An initial business case (similar to the one completed for the Northlander) would be needed.

Extending the Sudbury-White River train east to North Bay might be the way to do it, but can you get political buy-in from the federal government and VIA Rail? They both like passing the buck to each other in order to avoid actually doing anything constructive.

That would be Via, which may be a harder sell.

 

[reaperexpress]

With the mess going on with Via and the new trains, what about the ones for the Northlander? I thought they would only have about 3-4 cars. There isn't a demand for much more. And, they will use CN's Bala and Newmarket subdivisions, so that makes me wonder how they will be able to ensure the crossings work with that much shorter train on those subdivisions and cannot ensure the same thing for Corridor trains. Or will the Northlander be going so slow it won't matter?

CN's crossing-related speed restrictions on the mainlines were 45 mph (72 km/h) until a couple weeks ago. With the new operational changes described in the recent @Trackside_Treasure blog post here, the new PSO speeds for short Venture consists seem to be in the range of 60-75 mph (96-121 km/h).

According to OpenRailwayMap, the only segments with speed limits greater than 45 mph are south of Washago. North of there, the speed limit is only 40 mph (64 km/h) to begin with.

Between the CN York sub and Gormley it doesn't look like there would be much impact, if any, since there are relatively few level crossings and those that do exist are often near stations or other speed restrictions anyway.

The main issue seems to be the segment from Gormley to Washago, which apparently has a continuous 70 mph (112 km/h) speed limit. It has level crossings every kilometre or so, so the question is how many of these crossings are using the type of equipment that CN claims is unable to pinpoint the location of small trains. Many crossings on the Via network were never subject to speed restrictions because they used level crossing equipment that had no issues detecting small trains.

This segment would almost certainly be affected by CN's crossing rules. Based on the experience on the Via network, my guess is that CN will reduce the track speed in this segment to something around 50-60 mph in the vicinity of crossings with the problematic equipment types.

On the ONR network (north of North Bay) track speeds are being increased as part of a the Northlander program but I've not seen any indication what the new speed will be. The alignment doesn't look like it would support more than 60 mph, but that would be a substantial improvement over the current 40 mph.

 

[dowlingm]

(referring to earlier posts re Sudbury-North Bay)
I'd disagree that it would have to be VIA - if ONR, CP and OVR would agree to ONR operating an extended White River service in lieu of VIA from a North Bay operating base, VIA retires the RDCs, and the feds redirect White River subsidy to VIA while Ontario subsidises the North Bay-Sudbury part.

The thing is - there isn't a direct connection between an infrequent (even daily) North Bay-Sudbury shuttle and a material difference in the safety of northern Ontario roads as posited earlier.

 

[jordanmkasla2009]

Why would bolted track be a problem? Trains don't need to be high speed here. If they could maintain ~60mph, in the straighter stretches that would likely be fast enough for most people. Isn't the Newmarket Sub and all of ONR's lines bolted track?


That would be a given.


That would be Via, which may be a harder sell.

ONR is currently in the process of welding their rails between North Bay and Timmins-Porcupine in preparation for the Northlander returning.

 

[micheal_can]

CN's crossing-related speed restrictions on the mainlines were 45 mph (72 km/h) until a couple weeks ago. With the new operational changes described in the recent @Trackside_Treasure blog post here, the new PSO speeds for short Venture consists seem to be in the range of 60-75 mph (96-121 km/h).

According to OpenRailwayMap, the only segments with speed limits greater than 45 mph are south of Washago. North of there, the speed limit is only 40 mph (64 km/h) to begin with.

Between the CN York sub and Gormley it doesn't look like there would be much impact, if any, since there are relatively few level crossings and those that do exist are often near stations or other speed restrictions anyway.

The main issue seems to be the segment from Gormley to Washago, which apparently has a continuous 70 mph (112 km/h) speed limit. It has level crossings every kilometre or so, so the question is how many of these crossings are using the type of equipment that CN claims is unable to pinpoint the location of small trains. Many crossings on the Via network were never subject to speed restrictions because they used level crossing equipment that had no issues detecting small trains.
View attachment 678917

This segment would almost certainly be affected by CN's crossing rules. Based on the experience on the Via network, my guess is that CN will reduce the track speed in this segment to something around 50-60 mph in the vicinity of crossings with the problematic equipment types.

On the ONR network (north of North Bay) track speeds are being increased as part of a the Northlander program but I've not seen any indication what the new speed will be. The alignment doesn't look like it would support more than 60 mph, but that would be a substantial improvement over the current 40 mph.

So, it sounds like the real issue is south Washago. I do wonder if the government will feel it is worth the cost of the shunts, or just accept that slow order.TBH, the fact that it is 60 mph likely would not be such an important thing, outside of slowing down the line for CN's freight.

 

[micheal_can]

(referring to earlier posts re Sudbury-North Bay)
I'd disagree that it would have to be VIA - if ONR, CP and OVR would agree to ONR operating an extended White River service in lieu of VIA from a North Bay operating base, VIA retires the RDCs, and the feds redirect White River subsidy to VIA while Ontario subsidises the North Bay-Sudbury part.

The thing is - there isn't a direct connection between an infrequent (even daily) North Bay-Sudbury shuttle and a material difference in the safety of northern Ontario roads as posited earlier.

Leaving the S-WR route as is would be fine. The reality is, if we expected to resolve the issues of crashes and closures of the major highways (1,17,69,144) then having a route using the OVR, HCR,ACR, and CP between Winnipeg and Toronto is what would be needed, along with the Northlander. Having said that, I doubt anything will even be discussed until the Northlander is running and is seen to be a success. TBH the future of any passenger rail in Northern ON rests solely on the success of the Northlander. If it flops, nofurther discussions will happen at the government level about adding more.

Do we want to start posting road closures of the major highways to show just how often it happens?

 

[lenaitch]

Extending the Sudbury-White River train east to North Bay might be the way to do it, but can you get political buy-in from the federal government and VIA Rail? They both like passing the buck to each other in order to avoid actually doing anything constructive.

The Sudbury-White River service is part of VIA's regional/remote service mandate. I'm curious why the federal government would extend that service to include a stretch that literally parallels a highway between two large cities.

Leaving the S-WR route as is would be fine. The reality is, if we expected to resolve the issues of crashes and closures of the major highways (1,17,69,144) then having a route using the OVR, HCR,ACR, and CP between Winnipeg and Toronto is what would be needed, along with the Northlander. Having said that, I doubt anything will even be discussed until the Northlander is running and is seen to be a success. TBH the future of any passenger rail in Northern ON rests solely on the success of the Northlander. If it flops, nofurther discussions will happen at the government level about adding more.

Do we want to start posting road closures of the major highways to show just how often it happens?

I'm not sure I've ever understood the attempted connection between highway closures and rail alternatives. Except as an initial preference for mode of travel, travellers aren't going to suddenly abandon their cars, or, more particularly, their vacation home or trailer at a train station and hop on a train that will leave them without them at the other end and would, at best, be along once a day (that they might have already missed). Most of the weather-related closures are in the winter and I suggest that most of the non-commercial traffic that is impacted is local, not private travel between say Thunder Bay and SSM. For commercial traffic, passenger rail does nothing for them. If the closure is along Hwy 11 ('the northern route') there is simply no land alternative. Cancelling activities and appointments is a way of life in the north and you should know that.

 

[micheal_can]

I'm not sure I've ever understood the attempted connection between highway closures and rail alternatives. Except as an initial preference for mode of travel, travellers aren't going to suddenly abandon their cars, or, more particularly, their vacation home or trailer at a train station and hop on a train that will leave them without them at the other end and would, at best, be along once a day (that they might have already missed). Most of the weather-related closures are in the winter and I suggest that most of the non-commercial traffic that is impacted is local, not private travel between say Thunder Bay and SSM. For commercial traffic, passenger rail does nothing for them. If the closure is along Hwy 11 ('the northern route') there is simply no land alternative. Cancelling activities and appointments is a way of life in the north and you should know that.

Picture what would happen if a section of the 401 was closed both ways for 12+ hours. A lot of people would just sit back and wait. However, some may try to make alternative arraignments.What would you do if you wanted to travel somewhere by car and found the highway was closed? Another thing is, rail is more attractive than bus. Buses are seen as something poor people take. So, if a train existed, especially in winter, a lot of people may leave the car at the station.. I know I would.

 

[Bordercollie]

The Sudbury-White River service is part of VIA's regional/remote service mandate. I'm curious why the federal government would extend that service to include a stretch that literally parallels a highway between two large cities.


I'm not sure I've ever understood the attempted connection between highway closures and rail alternatives. Except as an initial preference for mode of travel, travellers aren't going to suddenly abandon their cars, or, more particularly, their vacation home or trailer at a train station and hop on a train that will leave them without them at the other end and would, at best, be along once a day (that they might have already missed). Most of the weather-related closures are in the winter and I suggest that most of the non-commercial traffic that is impacted is local, not private travel between say Thunder Bay and SSM. For commercial traffic, passenger rail does nothing for them. If the closure is along Hwy 11 ('the northern route') there is simply no land alternative. Cancelling activities and appointments is a way of life in the north and you should know that.

You know it's actually really hard to get from North Bay to Sudbury and then to the 400 corridor unless you have a car.
Also to areas west is also difficult unless you take a bus or fly.
A ticket from Toronto to Sudbury can cost $500 each way.
As the population grows there will be a need for alternative basic transportation. Unless we have drones that can carry people safely for hundreds of KMs. I just don't see that happening.

 

[micheal_can]

You know it's actually really hard to get from North Bay to Sudbury and then to the 400 corridor unless you have a car.
Also to areas west is also difficult unless you take a bus or fly.
A ticket from Toronto to Sudbury can cost $500 each way.
As the population grows there will be a need for alternative basic transportation. Unless we have drones that can carry people safely for hundreds of KMs. I just don't see that happening.

Northern ON is very much a car is king place. Even in the urban areas, bus service is horrible. And then getting out of the city. Sudbury does not even have regular bus service to it. Recently,they did get a shuttle run by a local taxi company. So, with the car being king, adding more buses to the highway won't change that.And if they highway is closed, what then?

I once tried flying out of North Bay to Toronto near New Years. I had a flight to catch to get me back to Victoria.The one from North Bay was supposed to take off in the morning. Yeah, that didn't happen. At the time, I think there were 3 or 4 flights Air Canada offered. I was on an evening flight to Toronto and the last flight out to Victoria. I was nearly AWOL. This was just after the Northlander was shut down. The airport was fogged in.

So,when it comes to transportation in Northern ON, the solutions are the same as Southern ON, but the ridership will never be there. It doesn't need to compete with air travel. It almost does not need to compete with driving. It just needs to not be a bus.

 

[Bordercollie]

Northern ON is very much a car is king place. Even in the urban areas, bus service is horrible. And then getting out of the city. Sudbury does not even have regular bus service to it. Recently,they did get a shuttle run by a local taxi company. So, with the car being king, adding more buses to the highway won't change that.And if they highway is closed, what then?

I once tried flying out of North Bay to Toronto near New Years. I had a flight to catch to get me back to Victoria.The one from North Bay was supposed to take off in the morning. Yeah, that didn't happen. At the time, I think there were 3 or 4 flights Air Canada offered. I was on an evening flight to Toronto and the last flight out to Victoria. I was nearly AWOL. This was just after the Northlander was shut down. The airport was fogged in.

So,when it comes to transportation in Northern ON, the solutions are the same as Southern ON, but the ridership will never be there. It doesn't need to compete with air travel. It almost does not need to compete with driving. It just needs to not be a bus.

And hopefully there will be a code share agreement like VIA has with the airlines to be able to get a train ticket instead of being stranded. If all flights are booked and the next seat out is in three days a 5 hour train ride is not that bad.

 

[lenaitch]

Picture what would happen if a section of the 401 was closed both ways for 12+ hours. A lot of people would just sit back and wait. However, some may try to make alternative arraignments.What would you do if you wanted to travel somewhere by car and found the highway was closed? Another thing is, rail is more attractive than bus. Buses are seen as something poor people take. So, if a train existed, especially in winter, a lot of people may leave the car at the station.. I know I would.

Alternatives are a lot easier along the 401, particularly east of Toronto, with alternate routes (although weather can have broad impact) and multiple VIA trains. The reality is northern Ontario is not the 401. You may wish that services were evenly distributed across the province but they're not; they're reflective of population density and distribution. A few million people get more services than a few thousand. No one wakes up in Marathon intending to drive to the Soo only to find the highway closed then expects a train to be waiting for them. You want Toronto-level service? Live in Toronto. You paid roughly 1/4 to 1/5 for a house there than in the Toronto.

The real impact of major highway closures is their impact on the movement of goods, and passenger rail isn't going to solve that. For giggles, compare the traffic volumes of the 401 vs 11 or 17, particularly in the winter. Dig deeper and compare the volumes by vehicle type.

You know it's actually really hard to get from North Bay to Sudbury and then to the 400 corridor unless you have a car.
Also to areas west is also difficult unless you take a bus or fly.
A ticket from Toronto to Sudbury can cost $500 each way.
As the population grows there will be a need for alternative basic transportation. Unless we have drones that can carry people safely for hundreds of KMs. I just don't see that happening.

Rural Canada is auto-centric, no question, and the vast majority of people who live there accept that, Given our population densities and distribution, there is no economical, non-roadway-based alternative unless you are willing to pay taxes you can't imagine.