VIA Rail Canadian and the Canadians

[zephyr17]

Now I realize the CN is a very busy railroad, and they have limited sidings and lots of single track in an area where it would be difficult to double track. But to me, there is no comparison. You have to have lots more patience when riding VIA then on Amtrak.

I do not cut CN that much slack. It is CN's choice under the PSR philosophy to run trains that don't clear their sidings. With that said, as an early adopter of PSR they also ran into problems earlier and realized they were jamming up their own trains. CN has embarked on various projects to lengthen sidings and second main tracks in several places.

While you still may sit in sidings for long periods on VIA, you are now likely to reach Vancouver or Toronto on time or close to it. The routinely 24 hour or more late trains of the 2016-2018 period appear to be a thing of the past. Although that was solved by CN and VIA agreeing to add an enormous amount of pad, 13 hours eastbound, IIRC, in 2019. CN has largely kept up its end of the bargain, at least in delivering the train to its terminals. The train is now seldom severely at its endpoints. The middle, not so much. It can be as much as 9 hours late at Winnipeg and still be on time at Vancouver or Toronto.

 

[Urban Sky]

I do not cut CN that much slack. It is CN's choice under the PSR philosophy to run trains that don't clear their sidings. With that said, as an early adopter of PSR they also ran into problems earlier and realized they were jamming up their own trains. CN has embarked on various projects to lengthen sidings and second main tracks in several places.

While you still may sit in sidings for long periods on VIA, you are now likely to reach Vancouver or Toronto on time or close to it. The routinely 24 hour or more late trains of the 2016-2018 period appear to be a thing of the past. Although that was solved by CN and VIA agreeing to add an enormous amount of pad, 13 hours eastbound, IIRC, in 2019. CN has largely kept up its end of the bargain, at least in delivering the train to its terminals. The train is now seldom severely at its endpoints. The middle, not so much. It can be as much as 9 hours late at Winnipeg and still be on time at Vancouver or Toronto.

To underline your point: this is the extent to which the timetable changes in July 2018 and April 2019 have all but eliminated the issue of excessive arrival delays making national news:


All data is pre-Covid, but I have no reason to believe that things have slipped back significantly compared to the May 2019 to March 2020 period…

 

[zephyr17]

To underline your point: this is the extent to which the timetable changes in July 2018 and April 2019 have all but eliminated the issue of excessive arrival delays making national news:
View attachment 33096View attachment 33097

All data is pre-Covid, but I have no reason to believe that things have slipped back significantly compared to the May 2019 to March 2020 period…

Well, its just anecdotal evidence, but my round trip in March 2022 had us into Toronto before noon, and Vancouver around 4:30 am (the switching and back up moves arriving at Vancouver woke me up). We were about 6 hours late in Winnipeg, btw. On my November trip to Toronto, we arrived about 1 pm.

 

[user 14106]

Maybe American folk need to have longer holiday entitlement, so they can enjoy the Canadian at their leisure, but that's another subject, of course! "Laissez les bons temps rouler"

No argument from me there! And who knows with WFH more of an option and the ability to work en route for many these days accessibility to a trip like this may be getting a bit more feasible for some in my position.

Don’t take my commentary as a condemnation of the route or an argument against its existence nor a criticism of those who consider it their favorite route for some of the reasons I mentioned. I'm sure its a fabulous service and as I stated I hope to take it one day myself when its feasible. But I would stand by my comments - the train does have some usability drawbacks when compared to Amtrak - and I think demonstrates that daily service shouldn't be taken for granted. I'm sure there are political and operational realities that have led to the twice a week running and long schedule and certainly aren't VIA's decision. But nevertheless they do impact the usability of it as a serious option for some like myself compared to other modes, including Amtrak's daily routes. I do support any passenger rail though and would gladly support an effort to preserve this train if it was under threat - I certainly am not advocating for its elimination - just pointing out some of its limitations compared to other options.

 

[Northwestern]

Via Rail, like Amtrak, is dependent on, in their case, CN for their long-distance trains. It is a shame the "Canadian" was shifted off its original routing on CP which, at least in the U.S., is much more supportive and cooperative with passenger rail. The CP route is more scenic. Also, in 1955, the "Canadian" took 66 hours and 40 minutes from Vancouver to Toronto. I took the train in 1967 at age seventeen and still fondly remember it. The dining car was superb and the spiral tunnels from the dome were incredible. How far we have fallen.
[/QU

I agree that CP would most likely be more supportive of the "Canadian". Also probably less delays in the CP route. I took the Canadian back in the late 70's and it was a lot of fun. Great service and great food.

I will somewhat disagree on whether the CP route to Banff is more scenic, compared to the CN route to Jasper. Mount Robson and Pyramid Falls are a great sight and photo opportunity.

Pyramid Falls:

https://is.gd/9PJRUT
I've heard rumors, over the years, that the VIA might discontinue the Canadian, altogether. I don't believe it will happen but if it does, I have to think something will take its place ( a less expensive, overnight Rocky Mountaineer?) The scenery along the Canadian route (on either the old CP route or the present CN route) is unsurpassed.

 

[Urban Sky]

I don’t think anyone disputes that Amtrak‘s LD routes are easier to use than VIA‘s Canadian, but when you compare the Canadian with Australia‘s Indian Pacific, which operates with very similar equipment over virtually the same distance (2,698 vs. 2775 miles), we should agree that the difference in usability compared to a pure tourist train (operating without anything cheaper than private cabins amd with only one single intermediary stop to join/leave the train) is still orders of magnitudes bigger than that compared to Amtrak:

Source: seat61.com
Note: the Canadian and Australian Dollar usually trade almost at par.

 

[Urban Sky]

I agree that CN would most likely be more supportive of the "Canadian". Also probably less delays in the CN route. I took the Canadian back in the late 70's and it was a lot of fun. Great service and great food.

I will somewhat disagree on whether the CP route to Banff is more scenic, compared to the CN route to Jasper. Mount Robson and Pyramid Falls are a great sight and photo opportunity.

Pyramid Falls:

https://is.gd/9PJRUT
I've heard rumors, over the years, that the VIA might discontinue the Canadian, altogether. I don't believe it will happen but if it does, I have to think something will take its place ( a less expensive, overnight Rocky Mountaineer?) The scenery along the Canadian route (on either the old CP route or the present CN route) is unsurpassed.

I agree that the CN line has also very spectacular sceneries and allows an even more remote and isolated experience East of Winnipeg than the CP route.

As for these rumours, as long as VIA is mandated to operate rail services out of Sudbury, Winnipeg and Jasper, there will be a need for a regularly recurring rail service which can be used to swap equipment between the Corridor and these locations, as none of these locations hosts nearly enough operations to justify a full-service maintenance center…

 

[zephyr17]

I will somewhat disagree on whether the CP route to Banff is more scenic, compared to the CN route to Jasper. Mount Robson and Pyramid Falls are a great sight and photo opportunity.

I've actually ridden both iterations of the Canadian and the CP route is more scenic. Eastbound Kicking Horse Canyon as well as Kicking Horse Pass which not only include the Spiral Tunnels, but Cathedral Mountain up close and personal. Westbound, Kicking Horse Pass, Kicking Horse Canyon, plus Rogers Pass and the Stoney Creek Bridge. The views on CN are good, but there are much more sustained "good parts" on the CP.

Further east, the Canadian Shield on the CN is no match for the spectacular north shore of Lake Superior in the CP.

 

[JRR]

I enjoyed my trip on the Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver in a single berth cabin. Food and service personnel were both very good.
Difficult to know how to respond to the the quoted post above, would we enjoy the Canadian if it travelled at French TGV speeds of 180+ MPH?
I think the Canadian does a difficult job well, attracting "land cruise" rail fans to offset some of the cost of providing normal train services over a sparsely populated route.
Maybe American folk need to have longer holiday entitlement, so they can enjoy the Canadian at their leisure, but that's another subject, of course! "Laissez les bons temps rouler"

The Canadian is the best train ride We’ve ever been on. I’ll grant you that iit’s a “land cruise” and that we sat on sidings watching freights go by but in their defense, there are long stretches of single track which are a vital link of Canadian commerce and logistics. If you can find the time and money, it’s a trip all rail fans should take.

 

[fdaley]

I'm not totally blaming CN for this, but I've been on lots of Amtrak trains in the last year (Coast Starlight, Surfliner, San Joaquin, Silver Meteor, Pennsylvanian...) and none of them had the long delays like the Canadian where you sit on a siding waiting for 3 freights to pass.

Now I realize the CN is a very busy railroad, and they have limited sidings and lots of single track in an area where it would be difficult to double track. But to me, there is no comparison. You have to have lots more patience when riding VIA then on Amtrak.

I find it much easier to be patient when you have dome cars, better beds and vastly better food. Our last trip west on the Canadian, which was before the latest round of schedule padding, we arrived into Vancouver 23 hours late and had been as much as 30 hours late in Alberta. We reached the Rockies in darkness but had a great daylight run through the Fraser canyon. The extra meals required by our extreme tardiness were still very good (i.e., not Dinty Moore stew). We detrained feeling we had had a marvelous ride, and most of our fellow travelers seemed to feel the same. Next time we go across country by train, it'll certainly be an option.

By comparison, on my last overnight trip on the Lake Shore, the train ran on time eastbound. The only hot breakfast offering at that point was the Jimmy Dean sandwich. I spent the last four hours of the ride counting down how soon I'd be able to get off the darned train and find a real meal. The time before that, the shower flooded our bedroom and the sofa head rest kept falling off the wall and into our bed at night. The fact that the Lake Shore still runs daily has not made me want to ride it again beyond local travel in New York and Mass.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I find it much easier to be patient when you have dome cars, better beds and vastly better food.

Well on my last trip on the Canadian I was in Coach so while I did have access to the dome car (yay) I didn't have any bed or better food. Amtrak Cafe food is definitely better than VIA Rail cafe food in my opinion.

I do agree that Flex dining is bad... and fortunately, that is an error that is slowly being corrected.

The Canadian is the best train ride We’ve ever been on.

It's great. I'd put the Coast Starlight and Zephyr in the category as well. For me personally, the Zephyr can't be beat. There is suach an incredible variety of scenery on that line plus the amazing Big 10 curves and Moffatt Tunnel.

The Coast Starlight in the good days with the Parlour Car was equal to or even a notch above the Canadian service wise in my opinion.

But..... the historic Budd cars provide a true time machine that is not matched anywhere in the world.

 

[fdaley]

Amtrak Cafe food is definitely better than VIA Rail cafe food in my opinion.

Yes, the VIA cafe food has really deteriorated over the past 20 years. And like Amtrak, VIA has regrettably moved away from the dining car being a service open to all. I used to meet coach passengers in the Canadian diner, and bought meals there myself as a coach passenger in years past. Also, on routes without a full diner, such as the Prince Rupert train, the food offerings are so limited that you really need to carry your own food aboard if you don't want to go hungry.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

And like Amtrak, VIA has regrettably moved away from the dining car being a service open to all. I used to meet coach passengers in the Canadian diner, and bought meals there myself as a coach passenger in years past

Yes, a few years ago when I rode in the sleeper I remember being seated with coach passengers - I would have LOVED to eat several meals in the diner on my trip. I also asked about the ability to upgrade and was told "we have space but it's the same prices as online" - those prices were crazy high. I know amtrak used to sell available space on board for a discount, I don't know why the railroads don't do that anymore.

 

[AFriendly]

I love the Canadian but it simply isn't fulfilling the same mission as Amtrak's services. Not even the long-distance ones. Its not the 1950s and it won't ever be again. I am not saying that Amtrak's services can't or shouldn't be improved, but nostalgia for this kind of operation isn't going to further the cause of passenger trains as a viable public transportation option, so in my opinion comparisons to Amtrak need to be drawn with care. Also, we need to keep in mind that the current level of service on VIA 1 and 2 was achieved at the cost of the destruction of Canada's rail passenger network in 1990.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I love the Canadian but it simply isn't fulfilling the same mission as Amtrak's services. Not even the long-distance ones.

I may or may not agree with you. What is the mission that amtrak's long-distance service is fulfilling?

To me, the Canadian checks off a few boxes at the same time. It does provide a transit option for those wishing to travel across Canada. While it's slow, and the schedule is limited, if you can't fly it surely beats a long bus ride. When I have traveled on the Canadian I've met many people in both coach and sleeper class that were Canadians traveling for various reasons and of course I also met international tourists in both classes as well.

Many Canadian, and international visitors use the Canadian as transportation to and from Jasper National Park - in this way it operates a bit like the Grand Canyon Railway - it provides a fun and scenic transportation service to and from a major vacation destination.

The Canadian is also a destination for railfans around the world, it's a living time machine that takes you back to the streamlined era of travel as it existed specifically in North America.

Another comparison to the Canadian is the Alaska Railroad's Denali Star. In both coach and gold star I've met Alaskan's who were traveling to visit friends and family who live elsewhere in the state. A good majority of passengers are riding as transportation while on vacation to get to Denali National Park, while still others are there because the Alaska Railroad itself is a destination for railfans.

Since Prestige Class on VIA and Gold Star on Alaska RR must be profitable... I'm not sure why it should be suggested that offerings these are a negative... and in fact I think Amtrak should consider this type of service on routes like the Zephyr, Empire Builder, and Starlight. We used to get close to this level of service on the Builder and the Starlight.

 

[zephyr17]

Also, we need to keep in mind that the current level of service on VIA 1 and 2 was achieved at the cost of the destruction of Canada's rail passenger network in 1990.

As one who has ridden VIA since the 1980s I would classify the Canadian as a diminished survivor of the drastic 1990 cutbacks rather than something "achieved" through the destruction of the larger network. VIA's service quality and standards were about the same in the 1980s as they are now (the fairly recent Prestige class notwithstanding), just on more trains. The Canadian wasn't elevated after 1990, it stayed the same, although suffering a different route and a reduced schedule. Many of the others just died.

Today's Canadian is the result of doing the best you can with what little you've got. Politics is what gutted VIA, not the desire to run a cruise train instead of a functional network. It ended up evolving into a cruise train as a result of that gutting, and later ones, not vice versa.

I don't consider VIA to be a model for train frequency, network or other purely operational aspects. I have said a few times that since being reduced to twice weekly (yet another politically induced cutback) the Canadian has lost most of its basic transportation function. Amtrak LD trains do still serve a basic transportation function in a skeletal network that seems to perpetually hang by a thread.

However, in onboard service VIA does serve as a useful model. The onboard supervision in the former of the Service Manager position, which is on all VIA trains, not just the Canadian, is probably the single most important difference. It helps explain the much greater consistency and quality of service encountered on VIA as opposed Amtrak's wild inconsistencies. The trains are also staffed at an appropriate level for the services provided on them. Note here that I am speaking of VIA as whole, not only the Canadian.

Unfortunately, some here seem to conflate VIA's operational inadequacies with their onboard service quality, as if you had to have one to get the other. They are separate and independent variables. Amtrak needs to chose the level of onboard service they respectively intend to supply on their various services and classes, then institute a program designed to actually deliver them. I doubt anyone here argues Amtrak actually delivers consistent quality onboard service today.

 

[AFriendly]

I may or may not agree with you. What is the mission that amtrak's long-distance service is fulfilling?

To me, the Canadian checks off a few boxes at the same time. It does provide a transit option for those wishing to travel across Canada. While it's slow, and the schedule is limited, if you can't fly it surely beats a long bus ride. When I have traveled on the Canadian I've met many people in both coach and sleeper class that were Canadians traveling for various reasons and of course I also met international tourists in both classes as well.

Many Canadian, and international visitors use the Canadian as transportation to and from Jasper National Park - in this way it operates a bit like the Grand Canyon Railway - it provides a fun and scenic transportation service to and from a major vacation destination.

The Canadian is also a destination for railfans around the world, it's a living time machine that takes you back to the streamlined era of travel as it existed specifically in North America.

Another comparison to the Canadian is the Alaska Railroad's Denali Star. In both coach and gold star I've met Alaskan's who were traveling to visit friends and family who live elsewhere in the state. A good majority of passengers are riding as transportation while on vacation to get to Denali National Park, while still others are there because the Alaska Railroad itself is a destination for railfans.

Since Prestige Class on VIA and Gold Star on Alaska RR must be profitable... I'm not sure why it should be suggested that offerings these are a negative... and in fact I think Amtrak should consider this type of service on routes like the Zephyr, Empire Builder, and Starlight. We used to get close to this level of service on the Builder and the Starlight.

"What is the mission that amtrak's long-distance service is fulfilling?" - to put it bluntly, acting as placeholders for future short- and medium-distance passenger rail corridors so that right-of-way, stations, and other infrastructure needed to develop those services isn't lost forever. I personally want Amtrak's long-distance network to be preserved and grow even as new corridors spring up along those routes, but when it comes to what's vital for the future, the right of way is what is key.

Being an attraction for railfans and a fun and scenic mode of transportation are all wonderful things, but the future of passenger rail doesn't lie with streamliner nostalgia. I am a railfan, but I'm also a public transit advocate and I want to have my cake and eat it too.

For all of the above reasons, if the choice presented to me was to have the current Amtrak network operated in the state that it is- frequencies, service levels, menus, accommodations, etc., or 2-3 long-distance trains in the entire United States operated to the standard of the Canadian, I'd take the former choice any day.

"Since Prestige Class on VIA and Gold Star on Alaska RR must be profitable..." a lofty assumption. They are profitable as long as the train to which they are coupled exists.

 

[mcropod]

I don’t think anyone disputes that Amtrak‘s LD routes are easier to use than VIA‘s Canadian, but when you compare the Canadian with Australia‘s Indian Pacific, which operates with very similar equipment over virtually the same distance (2,698 vs. 2775 miles), we should agree that the difference in usability compared to a pure tourist train (operating without anything cheaper than private cabins amd with only one single intermediary stop to join/leave the train) is still orders of magnitudes bigger than that compared to Amtrak:
View attachment 33099
Source: seat61.com
Note: the Canadian and Australian Dollar usually trade almost at par.

I agree with your comparisons about distance and time, and you correctly identify that the fares for the I/P and Ghan in Oz is inclusive of meals and all drinks at an open bar. Both trains are much more than a transport option - in fact, I reckon they fail as transport options, in the same way that a Mediterranean or Carribean cruise fails as a transport option. Neither train promotes themselves as that, and they'd be laughed at in Oz were they to do so.

For a certain type of Aussie, the trains are a once-in-a-lifetime, high-end, escorted domestic holiday. Something to skite about with your mates at the Bowling Club.

Both trains are built around off-train experiences - in the case of The Ghan, I think there was as much time spent off the train as on, with hardly any daytime running on the journey south I took in May (Top End's Dry Season) a couple of years ago. The Ghan used to run a couple of seat coaches called Red Class without including meals and drinks to try for the traveller market (backpackers, and NT citizens needing transport north or south), but ditched the concept after a short while.

Comparing The Canadian with either of these two Oz trains on distance, onboard accommodation, meals catering, and cost, needs to take account of the excursion or cruise component of the Oz service absent from The Canadian. I had fun on all three, and I would happily have another go on all of them were I to have a chance, but The Canadian is more comparable overall with the Amtrak LD trains than the Oz ones, IMHO.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

"What is the mission that amtrak's long-distance service is fulfilling?" - to put it bluntly, acting as placeholders for future short- and medium-distance passenger rail corridors so that right-of-way, stations, and other infrastructure needed to develop those services isn't lost forever. I personally want Amtrak's long-distance network to be preserved and grow even as new corridors spring up along those routes, but when it comes to what's vital for the future, the right of way is what is key.

I see. I pretty much agree but for different reasons. Amtrak's LD trains still provide a transportation option that obviously people are using. I do want to see more frequency both in LD trains AND in corridors operating in the LD networks (Chicago to Memphis and DC to Atlanta are 2 excellent examples).

Being an attraction for railfans and a fun and scenic mode of transportation are all wonderful things, but the future of passenger rail doesn't lie with streamliner nostalgia. I am a railfan, but I'm also a public transit advocate and I want to have my cake and eat it too.

But the streamliner nostalgia doesn't take away from the transportation aspects. If anything, it attracts more riders because of the novelty.

For all of the above reasons, if the choice presented to me was to have the current Amtrak network operated in the state that it is- frequencies, service levels, menus, accommodations, etc., or 2-3 long-distance trains in the entire United States operated to the standard of the Canadian, I'd take the former choice any day.

I totally agree with this. Especially with the fact that Amtrak is slowly bringing back the dining cars to normal operations.

"Since Prestige Class on VIA and Gold Star on Alaska RR must be profitable..." a lofty assumption. They are profitable as long as the train to which they are coupled exists.

Well yeah... but those trains do exist. Is there any negative to operating such a service if they make money for the company?

 

[west point]

It will never happen in Canada. 1st a law giving VIA some priority. Then enough equipment to enable VIA to purchase 6 replacement Canadian trainsets including hopefully some domes. Then schedule 3 starts a week on CN route and 3 on CP route alternating days with one day off probably a Monday or Tuesday. After each 4 months the CN and CP days would swap. That way each route gets the same days, weeks, months in a 2 year period. ,

 

[Urban Sky]

"Since Prestige Class on VIA and Gold Star on Alaska RR must be profitable..." a lofty assumption. They are profitable as long as the train to which they are coupled exists.

I'm not familiar with Alaska RR, but in the case of the Canadian, the question is not whether Prestige Class would turn a profit if it was running as a separate train independently from VIA's other services, but whether it attracts more incremental revenues than it causes incremental costs. Now have a look at the Canadian's financial performance in the 10 last pre-Covid years and guess in which year Prestige Class was introduced (bonus question: in which year was the frequency cut outside the peak summer months from 3 to 2 departures per week?):


Note: values in bold are obtained directly from the reports, whereas the other values were derived from the values provided in the reports (e.g. Passenger-miles * Funding per p-mi = Operating Subsidy)

Comparing The Canadian with either of these two Oz trains on distance, onboard accommodation, meals catering, and cost, needs to take account of the excursion or cruise component of the Oz service absent from The Canadian. I had fun on all three, and I would happily have another go on all of them were I to have a chance, but The Canadian is more comparable overall with the Amtrak LD trains than the Oz ones, IMHO.

My sole intention when comparing the Canadian to the Indian Pacific was to show those railfans who seem to dismiss the "Canadian" as a pure tourist train with minimal transportation utility what an actual tourist train with minimal transportation utility looks like...

 

[jiml]

...including hopefully some domes.

From where?

 

[west point]

From where?

Maybe some builder can adapt old Budd dome designs. Note I said hopefully only.

 

[Fenway]

Finally using a ticket I bought in February 2020 and will leave Vancouver on Friday and arrive in Toronto on Tuesday.

I told my boss that the wifi and cellular service on that train is spotty and he just wants to know the black holes of coverage. I sent him the timetable and said I expect that I can look at memos at stations along the route but I expect limited coverage for the most part.

I am hoping other members can give me an idea of where service is available.

 

[fdaley]

Finally using a ticket I bought in February 2000 and will leave Vancouver on Friday and arrive in Toronto on Tuesday.

I told my boss that the wifi and cellular service on that train is spotty and he just wants to know the black holes of coverage. I sent him the timetable and said I expect that I can look at memos at stations along the route but I expect limited coverage for the most part.

I am hoping other members can give me an idea of where service is available.

Well, perhaps things have changed in the four years since I last rode it, but I think you should be able to count on getting a cell signal at Jasper, Edmonton, Saskatoon and Winnipeg. Possibly at a few other smaller stops, though most of these are of very limited duration, or the places where you are near a major highway, which are few. Nearly everything east of Winnipeg will be a black hole for sure except perhaps around Capreol/Sudbury and the approach to Toronto.

So I'd tell your boss you should be able to check in once or twice on Saturday, on Sunday night, and then again sometime Tuesday. Enjoy the trip.