Renewed passenger rail service between Banff and Calgary?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Sliver

If it will attract more visitors then we probably shouldn't do it. There seems to be no appetite for expanding the mountain towns or adding new ones in Canada. Covid aside, they're bursting at the seams during the busy season already.

Also, shout out Salzburg. I haven't been to too many places compared to some of the world travellers here, but I have been there and it's fataing beautiful.

Agreed. And as an international traveler, I drove.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Sliver

If it will attract more visitors then we probably shouldn't do it. There seems to be no appetite for expanding the mountain towns or adding new ones in Canada. Covid aside, they're bursting at the seams during the busy season already.

Also, shout out Salzburg. I haven't been to too many places compared to some of the world travellers here, but I have been there and it's fataing beautiful.

I think that would be the point of this train, though. Have visitors stay in Calgary, board the train in the morning, head out to the mountains, walk around, ski, hike, drink, whatever, in Banff, then head back to your hotel in the evening.

And yes Salzburg is awesome.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I think that would be the point of this train, though. Have visitors stay in Calgary, board the train in the morning, head out to the mountains, walk around, ski, hike, drink, whatever, in Banff, then head back to your hotel in the evening.

And yes Salzburg is awesome.

Oh I see, you're thinking they would stay in Calgary. Yeah, maybe some would. I think "staying over" somewhere is potentially part of the experience, but I understand what you're saying better now.

[BlackArcher101]

Seems like a weird concept to me. If I travel and my end destination is some distance from the airport and there is still time left in the day, then I'm getting the hell to my destination. I'm not wasting my vacation time in a city that is there just to arrive and depart from.

If people are here specifically for Banff, I don't know if a train ticket with a cheap hotel is going to sway them unless they had already planned to stay the night here.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Seems like a weird concept to me. If I travel and my end destination is some distance from the airport and there is still time left in the day, then I'm getting the hell to my destination. I'm not wasting my vacation time in a city that is there just to arrive and depart from.

If people are here specifically for Banff, I don't know if a train ticket with a cheap hotel is going to sway them unless they had already planned to stay the night here.

Yeah, I'm the same. I like getting the travel over with all at once and not splitting it between two days. Doesn't feel like my fun has started until I'm settled at my destination. Also, training to and from Banff would just feel like I was commuting to and from my holiday instead of relaxing and enjoying it.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Seems like a weird concept to me. If I travel and my end destination is some distance from the airport and there is still time left in the day, then I'm getting the hell to my destination. I'm not wasting my vacation time in a city that is there just to arrive and depart from.

If people are here specifically for Banff, I don't know if a train ticket with a cheap hotel is going to sway them unless they had already planned to stay the night here.

A crappy hotel room in Banff will cost you about $400 a night. A very nice room in Calgary is about $150. Calgary also has much better options for dining, nightlife and shopping than Banff. If you're a casual visitor that wants to just check out Banff for a day or two, staying in Calgary is a very attractive option.

If you're into serious hiking or skiing at the crack of dawn every morning, then no, this service isn't going to change your mind. However, I don't think Banff is the best place out there if that's what you're after.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by _Q_

A crappy hotel room in Banff will cost you about $400 a night. A very nice room in Calgary is about $150. Calgary also has much better options for dining, nightlife and shopping than Banff. If you're a casual visitor that wants to just check out Banff for a day or two, staying in Calgary is a very attractive option.

If you're into serious hiking or skiing at the crack of dawn every morning, then no, this service isn't going to change your mind. However, I don't think Banff is the best place out there if that's what you're after.

I really don't think it is. When I travel, I want to stay in the town I'm at. I want to walk the streets, and find a coffee place, a dinner place, see it in the evening. I don't want to get up in the morning and have an hour transit before getting back to where I was the night before. Add a family, and you are just forking out more money for train tickets to go back and forth than a hotel room. This might appeal to the Griswold's, but most sane travelers are absolutely not going to do this.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by _Q_

A crappy hotel room in Banff will cost you about $400 a night. A very nice room in Calgary is about $150. Calgary also has much better options for dining, nightlife and shopping than Banff. If you're a casual visitor that wants to just check out Banff for a day or two, staying in Calgary is a very attractive option.

If you're into serious hiking or skiing at the crack of dawn every morning, then no, this service isn't going to change your mind. However, I don't think Banff is the best place out there if that's what you're after.

Do people really travel 3 hours a day to stay in a slightly better place on vacation? I mean thats ignoring the out to lunch hotel costs you are quoting.

You can find $200-$300 rooms in Banff that are nice. $150 in calgary is going to be a crappy room downtown, or nice that isn't downtown.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Do people really travel 3 hours a day to stay in a slightly better place on vacation? I mean thats ignoring the out to lunch hotel costs you are quoting.

You can find $200-$300 rooms in Banff that are nice. $150 in calgary is going to be a crappy room downtown, or nice that isn't downtown.

What if Banff isn't your final destination? Isn't it plausible that someone would want to come to Calgary and want to make Banff also part of their trip? That the train service between the two locations makes a trip to the area more attractive?

Like arrive Thursday night in Calgary, check in to hotel, have dinner, check out a pub then head back to the hotel. Get up at 8 am on Friday, get ready and take the train to Banff at 9:30 am. Arrive in Banff at 10:30. Do some dining site seeing, casual hiking, etc. For the entire day. Board a train at 9:00 pm and be back at your hotel by 10:30. Take it easy to the day on Saturday, get out of hotel at 11 am, have brunch, catch a flames game or go shopping later. Maybe go to kensington or Inglewood. Go out at night, head back to hotel and leave on Sunday afternoon.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by _Q_

What if Banff isn't your final destination? Isn't it plausible that someone would want to come to Calgary and want to make Banff also part of their trip? That the train service between the two locations makes a trip to the area more attractive?

Like arrive Thursday night in Calgary, check in to hotel, have dinner, check out a pub then head back to the hotel. Get up at 8 am on Friday, get ready and take the train to Banff at 9:30 am. Arrive in Banff at 10:30. Do some dining site seeing, casual hiking, etc. For the entire day. Board a train at 9:00 pm and be back at your hotel by 10:30. Take it easy to the day on Saturday, get out of hotel at 11 am, have brunch, catch a flames game or go shopping later. Maybe go to kensington or Inglewood. Go out at night, head back to hotel and leave on Sunday afternoon.

For the number of people that would do that it'd be a million times cheaper to just fly them to and fro on a helicopter.

[Wormius]

When we travelled abroad we stayed where it was cheaper but close to rail station. When we were in The Netherlands we stayed in Den Hague and took the train out on day trips to Amsterdam, Delft, etc. Sure there are things to do in Den Hague, but it was a lot cheaper than Amsterdam was in the summer for a nice place.

Now, I wouldn’t stay in some crappy podunkville just because it had rail service, but Calgary is nice enough to stay if Banff is too pricy.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by _Q_

What if Banff isn't your final destination? Isn't it plausible that someone would want to come to Calgary and want to make Banff also part of their trip? That the train service between the two locations makes a trip to the area more attractive?

Like arrive Thursday night in Calgary, check in to hotel, have dinner, check out a pub then head back to the hotel. Get up at 8 am on Friday, get ready and take the train to Banff at 9:30 am. Arrive in Banff at 10:30. Do some dining site seeing, casual hiking, etc. For the entire day. Board a train at 9:00 pm and be back at your hotel by 10:30. Take it easy to the day on Saturday, get out of hotel at 11 am, have brunch, catch a flames game or go shopping later. Maybe go to kensington or Inglewood. Go out at night, head back to hotel and leave on Sunday afternoon.

As Sliver said the amount of people who are going to travel to Calgary to do that is very small. Banff and Lake Louise and the Mountains is the draw.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by _Q_

What if Banff isn't your final destination? Isn't it plausible that someone would want to come to Calgary and want to make Banff also part of their trip? That the train service between the two locations makes a trip to the area more attractive?

Like arrive Thursday night in Calgary, check in to hotel, have dinner, check out a pub then head back to the hotel. Get up at 8 am on Friday, get ready and take the train to Banff at 9:30 am. Arrive in Banff at 10:30. Do some dining site seeing, casual hiking, etc. For the entire day. Board a train at 9:00 pm and be back at your hotel by 10:30. Take it easy to the day on Saturday, get out of hotel at 11 am, have brunch, catch a flames game or go shopping later. Maybe go to kensington or Inglewood. Go out at night, head back to hotel and leave on Sunday afternoon.

Nobody would do this. Many international travelers associate one thing with Canada, and it's Banff. They aren't wasting their time hanging out in a city an hour from what they want to see. They are getting to Banff, and skiing, or taking tours.

Have you ever traveled? This strikes me as an idea some city dweller who travels to other big cities would think is the way people travel. It is not. You save up, you spend money on one big trip, and you do it in a way that maximizes your time in the place you want to be. That's Banff, not Calgary.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Wormius

When we travelled abroad we stayed where it was cheaper but close to rail station. When we were in The Netherlands we stayed in Den Hague and took the train out on day trips to Amsterdam, Delft, etc. Sure there are things to do in Den Hague, but it was a lot cheaper than Amsterdam was in the summer for a nice place.

Now, I wouldn’t stay in some crappy podunkville just because it had rail service, but Calgary is nice enough to stay if Banff is too pricy.

I don't know that area, but is Den Hague central and there are destinations surrounding it? If so, it makes sense to pit in at one spot and use it as your base of operations from which you travel. For Calgary, though, you're really just going to head in a straight line west to hit up Banff/LL. At that point, it doesn't make as much sense to be commuting between the city and mountains.

[woob]

Are we looking at this too negatively because we are and always have been a car centric region/population? Would tourists who come from places where train use is frequent and heavy see this as a wonderful addition? Could you tack on a trip to Vancouver once you were in Banff and have you entire stay be serviced by rail?

[PepsiFree]

I think it's a neat idea, if it were a nice comfortable uncrowded high speed train that is cheap to use.

But, being that seems to be a fantasy, I don't think it it's all that worth it.

I like driving, for one, and I have taken the bus between cities plenty of times in other countries. We should probably just work on making the buses easier, nicer, and more frequent if we want to throw money at something.

[Nufy]

This city can't get the C-train to the Airport...

But they want to connect DT Calgary to Banff...

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Nobody would do this. Many international travelers associate one thing with Canada, and it's Banff. They aren't wasting their time hanging out in a city an hour from what they want to see. They are getting to Banff, and skiing, or taking tours.

People literally make day trips to Banff from Calgary everyday.

Have you ever traveled? This strikes me as an idea some city dweller who travels to other big cities would think is the way people travel. It is not. You save up, you spend money on one big trip, and you do it in a way that maximizes your time in the place you want to be. That's Banff, not Calgary.

I could see this appealing to a lot more people than you think. Not having to rent a car, buy park passes or spend 10-20% more for basically every necessity would be

I’m not saying the financial numbers work out to make this viable or not as I haven’t looked very closely at any of that, but you seem to be of the opinion that no one would have any reason to use this service. If they could make it where using the same infrastructure we would have a line from the airport to Banff with a stop downtown and extra trains dedicated for more frequent airport to downtown runs it could really help hotels and conference centres downtown attract more business.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Nufy

This city can't get the C-train to the Airport...

But they want to connect DT Calgary to Banff...

The assumption is probably that they can more easily/quickly get Provincial/Federal money for a different type of train. Having already gotten more than $3B for the Green Line Calgary will probably need to wait in line for new funding for LRT. And even then, you're going to have massive battles over whether to go further SE, go North, or go to the airport via the NE LRT.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Nobody would do this. Many international travelers associate one thing with Canada, and it's Banff. They aren't wasting their time hanging out in a city an hour from what they want to see. They are getting to Banff, and skiing, or taking tours.

Have you ever traveled? This strikes me as an idea some city dweller who travels to other big cities would think is the way people travel. It is not. You save up, you spend money on one big trip, and you do it in a way that maximizes your time in the place you want to be. That's Banff, not Calgary.

I have traveled quite extensively. Some people actually just want to get away for a long weekend, rather than blowing 3 years of savings on an elaborate trip. But even for a longer trip, this can sometimes be the best option. Do you think that people make a week long trip out of Niagara Falls, or do you think they make it a day trip out of a longer visit to Toronto? Do you think people spend a week at the Dead Sea or do you think it's usually a day trip out of Amman or Jerusalem?

This is probably my favorite way to vacation. Stay in the big city and make day trips to areas near by that are attractive. If it's close enough and the city has enough going for it, then it's worth it.

The town of Banff can get pretty damn boring after a day or two. There are only so many beavertails one can eat on a trip.