High Speed Rail in Canada

[Nouvellecosse]

I think the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal is the only one that would be really successful. I see no reason for HSR to go to QC and Windsor. Electrified increased speed maybe, but not full HSR.

[caltrane74]

Alberta is deadly rich, I say go for it.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Alberta is deadly rich, I say go for it.

Definitely, who knows how long this will last for. Gotta seize the moment while you can

[ue]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I think the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal is the only one that would be really successful. I see no reason for HSR to go to QC and Windsor. Electrified increased speed maybe, but not full HSR.

Not the Edmonton-Red Deer-Calgary Corridor? Less population, sure, but a smaller area with lots of migration between these cities on a daily basis. Plus the population will be less of an issue as Alberta continues to surge for the foreseeable future.

[SignalHillHiker]

It makes perfect sense to build it. Calgary and Edmonton are your two cities, they do a lot of business together (one of the employees at my company's Calgary office actually commutes there from Edmonton)... anything that ties you together will be good in the long run.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I think the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal is the only one that would be really successful. I see no reason for HSR to go to QC and Windsor. Electrified increased speed maybe, but not full HSR.

I used to be quite gung-ho about HSR, but after living in Europe for a while, I've come to realise that, though it's really nice, riding HSR can be prohibitively expensive.

Before we compete with airlines for speed, I think we need to compete with the automobile in terms of visible costs, speed and reliability:

- We need train tickets to be subsidised, especially for groups (in Germany, a one-day "intra-provincial" ticket costs the same for 5 people as it does for 1 - €35 - in the same way that a car costs the same if there's one person in it as it does for 5 or 7 passengers). Taking the train should be the inexpensive option for intercity travel.

- We need to give VIA its own tracks for speed and reliability between large cities: With its own tracks, VIA would avoid the lengthy waits for freight to pass (often 30+ minutes) and it would be able to attain operating speeds closer to 200km/h (TO-OTT in 2h, OTT-MTL in 1h).

- We need to give more options for train travel: There should be trains leaving in the corridor at least once in the early morning, morning, noon, afternoon, evening and night to give travelers the flexibility to leave after 6 or 7pm (usually the last train). There should also be different types of service: there could be milk-runs and express service which would give better access to small communities, faster service between big cities and more options for pricing and clientele.


If we can be willing to spend $3B on one highway interchange in Montreal, surely we could spend a similar amount on transforming the way we get around to reduce lost productivity, stress on automobile infrastructure, accidents and medium- and long-term costs.

[north 42]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I think the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal is the only one that would be really successful. I see no reason for HSR to go to QC and Windsor. Electrified increased speed maybe, but not full HSR.

Quebec City, no, Windsor, absolutely. Detroit and Chicago are huge markets that should be connected to the Toronto and Montreal markets, same with a link from Toronto to Buffalo and on to the New York City region. Plus the Windsor-Detroit border crossing is the busiest in North America, and is extremely important to both countries economies.

[Nouvellecosse]

Busiest in terms of rail passengers? Or in terms of cargo traffic? Unless you're suggesting we build a HSR cargo service...

[Innsertnamehere]

busiest in terms of vehicle traffic.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by north 42

Quebec City, no, Windsor, absolutely. Detroit and Chicago are huge markets that should be connected to the Toronto and Montreal markets, same with a link from Toronto to Buffalo and on to the New York City region. Plus the Windsor-Detroit border crossing is the busiest in North America, and is extremely important to both countries economies.

Toronto - Chicago was killed in 2004, largely due to 9/11. I think if it came back again now, it would be quite successful again.

Michigan is getting some 110 mph segments, if Via rail could do some upgrades in Southern Ontario. Toronto - Chicago could be a 4-5 hour trip by rail..

[Innsertnamehere]

They would have to fix the border crossing problem, the maple leaf amtrack service stops over at the border for 2 hours right now.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

They would have to fix the border crossing problem, the maple leaf amtrack service stops over at the border for 2 hours right now.

Vancouver has preclearance in Vancouver for US bound passengers, no wait at the border for Amtrak Cascades.

If the government is willing to pay for it, and support US customs on Canadian soil (like in airports), this wouldn't be a problem.

It does work in this case that Vancouver is the only Canadian stop. Does the Maple Leaf stop anywhere in Canada other than Toronto?

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

Vancouver has preclearance in Vancouver for US bound passengers, no wait at the border for Amtrak Cascades.

If the government is willing to pay for it, and support US customs on Canadian soil (like in airports), this wouldn't be a problem.

It does work in this case that Vancouver is the only Canadian stop. Does the Maple Leaf stop anywhere in Canada other than Toronto?

It makes at least 3 or 4 stops between Toronto and the border, the last being in Niagara Falls.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Alberta is deadly rich, I say go for it.

Our financial outlook is improving, but I'd hardly say we are 'rich'... And we have many other priorities.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Alberta is deadly rich, I say go for it.

Alberta's consecutive deficits may suggest otherwise.

But aside from that, I think it would be great if Alberta would commit to some form of HSR. They'd be the first in the country.

[Coldrsx]

Set the ROW, secure land even... But ^^no HSR for another couple of decades.

[MalcolmTucker]

Depends, some rail companies keep telling the province (Alberta) through the media that if the province were to provide the corridor, the rail companies would take care of the rest of the cost.

[Blader]

Here is my comparison of density per km2 between Alberta and Metropolitan France (mainland and Corsica). Alberta has close to no passenger rail and France has extensive passenger rail. I've reduced Alberta geographical size in half to roughly account for wilderness.
2013 numbers:
Population
Alberta 4,025,000
France 63,460,000

Area
Alberta 330,848 km2 (1/2 of actual area)
France 551,695 km2

Population Density
Alberta 12.16 per km2
France 115.03 per km2

Roughly, this makes Metropolitan France 9.46 times denser than Alberta. I've rounded this number to 10 times so that I can continue off the top of my head.

Calgary 13,350,000
Edmonton 12,250,000
Red Deer 1,000,000
Lethbridge 1,000,000

Yes, HSR would be viable with 10 times numbers.

Feed is important.
France today, has an extensive regional rail network providing feed to HSR. Alberta has almost nothing. Even inter-town bus service struggles.

As much as I love HSR, I'm not prepared to throw money down the drain. I suppose if we had the money of the Emirates where dreams often trump viability we could do it by providing ROW, perhaps rolling stock annd subsidies per passenger.

[Chadillaccc]

France also has 10x (or more) the amount of rail corridors we are talking about building. There only needs to be one here, not ten or twenty.

[itom 987]

HSR won't happen until we are all senior citizens.