GO Transit

[KevinT]

I've often wondered what it would take to re-lay the tracks of the Branchton sub, which splits off the CN double track mainline southeast of Cambridge near Lynden and Governors roads* and heads all the way in to the Ainslie street terminal. Very little of it seems to have been developed on, it's still mostly greenfield. It would effectively make Cambridge a new destination on the Lakeshore West line, splitting off from the Hamilton/Niagara service at Burlington bay. Google Maps / back of the napkin research shows Grand River Brewing and a few small residences on Ainslie to be about the only things affected...

* Technically it's the old Brantford bypass that splits off here, with the Branchton sub splitting off that in Harriston

[Bureaucromancer]

If re-building lines is in the picture my hope is that we can reuse the Cambridge to Paris Rail Trail and on to Brantford. Create a DMU service running Guelph - Cambridge - Paris - Brantford - Hamilton with the obvious connections to Kitchener and Lakeshore trains.

[jwilliamson]

If re-building lines is in the picture my hope is that we can reuse the Cambridge to Paris Rail Trail and on to Brantford. Create a DMU service running Guelph - Cambridge - Paris - Brantford - Hamilton with the obvious connections to Kitchener and Lakeshore trains.

If it's a newly built line and not being shared with a freight company, wouldn't it make more sense to build an electrified line and run EMUs?

[Bureaucromancer]

If re-building lines is in the picture my hope is that we can reuse the Cambridge to Paris Rail Trail and on to Brantford. Create a DMU service running Guelph - Cambridge - Paris - Brantford - Hamilton with the obvious connections to Kitchener and Lakeshore trains.

If it's a newly built line and not being shared with a freight company, wouldn't it make more sense to build an electrified line and run EMUs?

It would be nice, yes, but on the one hand I suspect ridership will be on the low end, and on the other I would prefer not to have to build new from Brantford into Hamilton. I like the concept of the corridor, but realistically if such a project is to have any chance of actually being built reducing the initial captial expenditure is going to have to be a very high priority,

Even ignroing that, this doesn't seem like a place that fighting CN over electrification of a shared line is worthwhile to me given the demand and frequency that would seem reasonable, which also suggests to me that experimenting with battery electric or Hydrogen could be appropriate.

[jamincan]

I know this is something that only lives in your head, but I would fight tooth and nail a line on the rail trail.

[Bureaucromancer]

You understand the PURPOSE of rail-trails is to preserve the corridors?!

Where do you suggest we do OTHER than the trail?

[ijmorlan]

You understand the PURPOSE of rail-trails is to preserve the corridors?!

Where do you suggest we do OTHER than the trail?

The purpose of rail trails is to be long distance recreational trails. Using rights-of-way that already exist is often an easy way of doing it, easier than trying to establish new routes. Also, railway routes are low slope and usually fairly direct. And the fact that it preserves the existing route is good, but not the actual purpose of building the rail trail.

Having said that, the presence of a trail shouldn’t be an absolute bar to re-installing rails. On the other hand, it should be possible to keep the trail and install rails in most cases — how many railway rights-of-way are so narrow that there is no extra space for a trail? But this will involve more expense, depending on the terrain and other considerations.

[danbrotherston]

You understand the PURPOSE of rail-trails is to preserve the corridors?!

Where do you suggest we do OTHER than the trail?

The purpose of rail trails is to be long distance recreational trails. Using rights-of-way that already exist is often an easy way of doing it, easier than trying to establish new routes. Also, railway routes are low slope and usually fairly direct. And the fact that it preserves the existing route is good, but not the actual purpose of building the rail trail.

Having said that, the presence of a trail shouldn’t be an absolute bar to re-installing rails. On the other hand, it should be possible to keep the trail and install rails in most cases — how many railway rights-of-way are so narrow that there is no extra space for a trail? But this will involve more expense, depending on the terrain and other considerations.

You should tell this to CN...their response is pretty funny.

Really though, rail is not magic, there are reasons to use it, but there are also reasons to use a bus.  Having frequent bussing along the route discussed is probably a far stronger business case than building a train.

[KevinT]

I know this is something that only lives in your head, but I would fight tooth and nail a line on the rail trail.

That's the beauty of the Branchton sub*, unlike the Lake Erie & Northern from Cambridge to Paris it's not yet a recreational trail.

*Correction/edit: It was part of the CN Fergus sub, although originally it was the Galt Branch of the Great Western Railway.

[ijmorlan]

You should tell this to CN...their response is pretty funny.

It’s about what the LRT authority in question thinks, not CN.

I agree CN would probably want the trail about 100m from the tracks. LRT people would probably be more reasonable.

[KevinL]

Apparently due to some huge conference in Toronto on the weekend, GO has such demand that trains will operate from Kitchener this Saturday and Sunday (albeit very early in the morning). The capability is there, it turns out!

[jwilliamson]

Apparently due to some huge conference in Toronto on the weekend, GO has such demand that trains will operate from Kitchener this Saturday and Sunday (albeit very early in the morning). The capability is there, it turns out!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener...-1.5214829

It's a Jehovah's Witnesses conference. 45000 attendees.

[MidTowner]

45,000 delegates will be traveling to the Jehovah's Witness international convention, apparently.

This is terribly exciting. I'd be really curious about how this came about. The Go site says that the trips are to "accommodate a significant number of advanced GO train ticket bookings that have been made." But you can't just book a train ticket on a service that doesn't exist- do the organizers contact Go in cases like this?

You're right: the capability exists. It can be done. We could get it on more Saturdays in the summer, potentially.

[ijmorlan]

This is terribly exciting. I'd be really curious about how this came about. The Go site says that the trips are to "accommodate a significant number of advanced GO train ticket bookings that have been made." But you can't just book a train ticket on a service that doesn't exist- do the organizers contact Go in cases like this?

I wonder if they mean bus bookings? I can imagine that if they suddenly had a thousand or so bookings on a bus they might move them all to a train rather than trying to dig up 25 buses to move everybody.

[SammyOES]

This is awesome. I don't understand why stuff like this doesn't happen more often.

Like partner for a Jays game. Or pick a day in the summer when you can take the train and spend an afternoon downtown. And so on. Just like any effort at all to grow the base of people using GO.