Thr Atlantic was indeed slated for the chopping block in January 1990, but survived thanks to intense lobbying along the route, with 3 frequencies per week each on the Ocean, Atlantic and Chaleur (overlapping to 6 frequencies Montreal-Matapedia and for [Montreal-]Moncton-Halifax). In the end, the Atlantic survived only another 5 years before it was abandoned over grave uncertainties over the future of the ROW it was using, but its frequencies were transferred over to the Ocean, which is the reason why the Ocean operated with 6 frequencies between December 1994 and the 2012 cuts.
Interesting stats there…somewhat surprised to see the Windsor/Toronto route highest percentage-wise amongst corridors…
Thanks for posting those interesting statistics. It would also be interesting to see similar statistics regarding the Trudeau-Pepin cuts in 1981 if anyone can locate them.
This repeats the common misconception that fare box recovery means anything at all. First of all, highways and civil aviation infrastructure have zero fare box recovery, so it’s an idiotic measure of the value of a service. Second, it’s been proven again and again by economic models that the trains create more economic activity and thus more tax revenue than and operating support they receive. Third, for rural communities, access to this service providing transportation to medical appointments, education, and mobility for people who don’t drive is priceless. Governments exist to provide these kinds of services, regardless of fare box recovery.
I never saw them laid out as well back then. Also, VIA Rail had not been operating as a combined CN-CP network for very long, so the data available for the former bus executive hired to prepare the cutback plan wouldn't have been very solid.
Thanks @Urban Sky for posting this article. A very interesting history that I was not aware of. My wife and I rode the Atlantic both ways in Aug/Sept 1981 so got this trip in before the first cancellation of the service. We actually intended to return on the Ocean but it was sold out whereas the Atlantic still had sleeper space.
I didn’t comment on how financial viability should be measured, but on how politicians and fiscally conservative parts of the public often measure it.
Road users pay fuel taxes and aviation passengers pay airport fees, therefore it is possible to calculate cost-recovery rates also for these modes. However, roads are commonly seen as a utility, such as the infrastructure providing water and electricity, whereas rail services can be seen as a duplication of the road infrastructure and the bus services it could accommodate (see my last point in this comment).
This is, though true in certain contexts, complete nonsense as a blanket statement for every single route in the Canadian context. The rationale for providing rail services into remote areas is not rooted in any economic considerations, but the history of Canada and the fact that the most marginalized groups of population (the indigenous inhabitants, which are also called “First Nations”) depend disproportionately on these services.
Exactly, but it doesn’t have to be a train, especially if the per-mile operating costs of intercity rail is more than 10 times that of an intercity bus…
Even the data for 1988 is of very poor quality, just compare the 1988 ridership-data-by-route provided on page 17 with those on pages 65-70. Similarly, page 17 provides no breakdown of Quebec-Montreal (i.e., into Quebec-Drummondville-Montreal and Trois-Rivières - Montreal), whereas pages 65-70 omit Halifax - Saint-John and Toronto-London).
Are you ignoring that a train with a capacity load of 400+ is better than 10 buses??
Congratulations, you’ve successfully identified the inherent strength of trains, which is its scalability, where you can add cars to transport hundreds of people! This is called “Economies of Scales” and works in favor of the train in busy corridors (like the Quebec-Windsor Corridor), where large cities are within a reasonable distance and linked by rail infrastructure which allows travel times which are competitive against driving or the bus.
Looking forward to your report. This trip is on my bucket list, along with Churchill.Our Via Rail trip Prince Rupert Jasper Vancouver is just a month away! As a lifelong rail fan, I’m already excited! As one who’d rather be beamed up than ride, she’s stoic!
We will lay over in PR two days since we arrive from Victoria by BC Ferry and its schedule doesn’t line up exactly with Via Rail from PR to Jasper. I’d like to know if there might be some places in PR from which I could maybe see freight handling ops, on and off trains, ships, etc.
Very sorry to hear that your trip has been disrupted. I hope that you will be able to reschedule it at some point.July 26 now. Needless to say, our rail trip to Jasper is no longer an option. So tragic that the monster wildfires have destroyed so much of Canada with no end in sight. So, no trip report forthcoming from me.
Road users pay fuel taxes and aviation passengers pay airport fees, therefore it is possible to calculate cost-recovery rates also for these modes. However, roads are commonly seen as a utility, such as the infrastructure providing water and electricity, whereas rail services can be seen as a duplication of the road infrastructure and the bus services it could accommodate (see my last point in this comment).
