VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Maybe. It depends what they have to do. If you have to build a trench/viaduct through Peterborough or a greenfield bypass of the city then designing the track for a slightly faster speed probably wouldn’t cost that much more.

What if they have no plans to do more than new base and tracks through Peterborough?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What if they have no plans to do more than new base and tracks through Peterborough?

Whatever the plans through Peterborough, arguing that it would be a complete write off for HSR is bizarre.

Let's say we build HFR and it involves some trench or viaduct through Peterborough. We later find out, we can save 5 mins on a future HSR proposal by going around Peterborough with a $1B bypass. I fail to see why this is a question for today. It doesn't invalidate HFR. It just creates a future decision point on whether Peterborough should be bypassed and whether such an investment is justified.

This would be like somebody arguing in the 80s that Ottawa shouldn't build the Transitway because at some point 30-40 years in the future, some portion of they investment will be written off by a future light rail system. It makes no sense. Surely the lesson learned should be that building the Transitway acquired and preserved valuable corridors for relatively low investment.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

Where would CP run it’s freight? If CP ran on the hfr route then they would expect at a minimum that the government would rebuild the original mainline, give them access to freight customers or compensation for not having access to them. CN would not agree to share the lakeshore route and neither would Via.

CP made some serious mistakes when is sold it’s QC and NB lines to 3rd parties. CP lost a bit of its mojo when CP Limited sold off its other subsidiaries. It only recently repurchased it’s route through the eastern townships, Maine and obtaining access from NB Southern (aka the Irvings) to the port of Saint John

I agree that the opportunity to strike while the iron was hot is worse than it was several years ago before CP reacquired the lines in the Eastern townships and Maine. Still, CP’s presence east of Toronto is still fairly minor, and I wonder if their long term strategy now that they acquired KCS is to be the continent’s first true north-south spine from the industrial heart of Mexico up town Canada. Besides they have access to eastern ports through the Gulf, which is much more important than Atlantic Canada in the grand scheme of things.

So I think that CP wouldn’t dismiss the purchase of the Belleville sub out of hand. The question is how much would it cost. Given that the pricetag of HFR is $12B and growing, I don’t think CP would turn it down for, say, $4B, especially if they just bought all of KCS for US$27B. The purchase agreement wouldn’t prohibit CP from using the Belleville sub, it would just change the terms so VIA (or whoever) would have priority over scheduling and CP would be the railroad leasing track time.

Beyond that the Belleville sub is significantly less risky than HFR. The line is already built and has the track geometry for a decent speed, and it’s a much more direct route. It also parallels the existing Via route on the Kingston sub for a significant portion, so you could probably move all VIA service there, relieving CN at least as far east as Trenton.

It misses out on Peterborough but, frankly, Peterborough really only needs a commuter service to Toronto. As acottawa correctly identifies, getting through Peterborough without significant investment in a new line will basically add 20+ minutes and a forced stop for every service because there are too many expensive obstacles in the way.

[Truenorth00]

It doesn't just miss out on Peterborough. It misses out on Ottawa. There aren't too many systems that would skip a metro of 1.4M and the national capital, while connecting the first and second largest metros.

A particularly nonsensical notion when any basic modeling would show that Ottawa-Montreal is bound to be the highest ridership and value segment. And VIA's own services today show Ottawa to be as valuable as Montreal, for VIA from Toronto. This myopic focus on Toronto-Montreal to the exclusion of all other consideration needs to stop.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Whatever the plans through Peterborough, arguing that it would be a complete write off for HSR is bizarre.

Let's say we build HFR and it involves some trench or viaduct through Peterborough. We later find out, we can save 5 mins on a future HSR proposal by going around Peterborough with a $1B bypass. I fail to see why this is a question for today. It doesn't invalidate HFR. It just creates a future decision point on whether Peterborough should be bypassed and whether such an investment is justified.

This would be like somebody arguing in the 80s that Ottawa shouldn't build the Transitway because at some point 30-40 years in the future, some portion of they investment will be written off by a future light rail system. It makes no sense. Surely the lesson learned should be that building the Transitway acquired and preserved valuable corridors for relatively low investment.

Had they bit the bullet back then, the transit system in Ottawa would be much better today. However, the case between doing nothing or doing something, doing something usually is a better thing.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It doesn't just miss out on Peterborough. It misses out on Ottawa. There aren't too many systems that would skip a metro of 1.4M and the national capital, while connecting the first and second largest metros.

A particularly nonsensical notion when any basic modeling would show that Ottawa-Montreal is bound to be the highest ridership and value segment. And VIA's own services today show Ottawa to be as valuable as Montreal, for VIA from Toronto. This myopic focus on Toronto-Montreal to the exclusion of all other consideration needs to stop.

Around Brockville, the Via owned track goes to Ottawa. What if Via build their own track along CN's track between Toronto and Brockville and set it up where CN does not run on it? Then they could run as much as they wanted.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It doesn't just miss out on Peterborough. It misses out on Ottawa

How would it miss Ottawa? You can connect directly to Via-owned track at Smiths Falls and then again near Coteau.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

How it would miss Ottawa? You can connect direct to Via-owned track at Smiths Falls and then again near Coteau.

It's not a continuous direct connection. The services would have to split at Brockville, as they do today. Think of what this means. In effect, Kingston would get twice the service of Ottawa. How does that make any sense? The split also means fewer frequencies to both Ottawa and Montreal, than a single service would have.

The value of going via Peterborough, is that the route is short enough that the diversion through Ottawa isn't extremely burdensome. Meanwhile, Ottawa and Peterborough combined add more riders than the Lakeshore gives up, for fewer stops. Also, there's the potential for a Kingston hub, making services for those Lakeshore communities actually suitable to their needs than a byproduct of serving the large metros.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What if they have no plans to do more than new base and tracks through Peterborough?

Then there would probably be quite low speeds going through Peterborough. Again, I would look at the West side of Guelph as an example.

• Video Link

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Again. This is not something novel that no other country has dealt with. The majority of HSR in Europe today is upgraded rail corridors.

Yes, there may be segments that may not be upgradeable later. And when that time comes decisions will have to be made whether to run slower through that segment or build a new alternative. They should not in general invalidate an entire corridor though.

There seems to be this strange idea that if we build HFR, we can never build HSR. Looking at that route, it's pretty clear that a lot of it could be upgraded to 200+ kph at least simply with grade separation later. I would think just a few percent of straightening and they can probably achieve something like 70-80% of the whole TOM HFR routing to 250+ kph. The vast, vast majority of what is spent on HFR would be useable on an HSR corridor. The worst case scenario may be writing off something like 20%, in which case, we still got 15-20 years of service before HSR, for those dollars.

The difference between high speed and conventional speed is not just grade separation, it is curves, track, railbed signalling, incline, tunnel size, etc. A lot of these things can’t be readily refitted later on. It is a huge sunk cost. If it is just a few percent of straightening would get the line up to 70-80% HSR then the line should be build as HSR from the start, they can always leave some of the more expensive parts for a future phase.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Then there would probably be quite low speeds going through Peterborough. Again, I would look at the West side of Guelph as an example.

• Video Link

It is a HFR not HSR

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It is a HFR not HSR

Yes, but they are promising really high average speeds.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, but they are promising really high average speeds.

Which they can do outside of the cities.

[thebasketballgeek]

Isn’t it great that we’re discussing whether to build HSR or HFR meanwhile China has built 40,000 km of HSR infrastructure in the 21st century…

We’re the ONLY G7 country without High Speed Rail it’s pathetic. If Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal costs $20 billion for HSR so what? The economic activity it will generate definitely will exceed whatever costs are associated with it. Not to mention it’ll finally give airlines legitimate competition therefore making intercity travel more accessible and affordable for Canadians. We already know the climate benefits of an electric HSR as well. It is solely responsible for a 1.3% reduction in emissions for China and most of it is powered by Coal so it could lead to a much more impactful number once they transition to electric.

The more important thing is that we need to consider high speed rail as a public utility rather then solely looking at if the line itself will be profitable. Thats how the CCP views High Speed Rail and that way Canada can grow some balls and start the discussion of a Transcanada Maglev System.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Which they can do outside of the cities.

Yes, but if you’re promising a 3:15 travel time to Ottawa, if you’re taking 30 minutes to cross Peterborough you have to get really high average speeds on the rest of the line.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, but if you’re promising a 3:15 travel time to Ottawa, if you’re taking 30 minutes to cross Peterborough you have to get really high average speeds on the rest of the line.

It is roughly 15 km. The train would need to be going less than 20mph to take that time. I would assume it would be built to around 40mph through the city.

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Isn’t it great that we’re discussing whether to build HSR or HFR meanwhile China has built 40,000 km of HSR infrastructure in the 21st century…

We’re the ONLY G7 country without High Speed Rail it’s pathetic. If Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal costs $20 billion for HSR so what? The economic activity it will generate definitely will exceed whatever costs are associated with it. Not to mention it’ll finally give airlines legitimate competition therefore making intercity travel more accessible and affordable for Canadians. We already know the climate benefits of an electric HSR as well. It is solely responsible for a 1.3% reduction in emissions for China and most of it is powered by Coal so it could lead to a much more impactful number once they transition to electric.

The more important thing is that we need to consider high speed rail as a public utility rather then solely looking at if the line itself will be profitable. Thats how the CCP views High Speed Rail and that way Canada can grow some balls and start the discussion of a Transcanada Maglev System.

When a budget and human rights are irrelevant, it is amazing what can be done.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

When a budget and human rights are irrelevant, it is amazing what can be done.

Imo high speed rail is so crucial to the success of a future Canada that budget should take a back burner and get the required funding by any means necessary.

Good point on human rights as land acquisition costs in China are generally only 8% of a projects total cost while in a G7 country it’s closer to 20%.

Although if Czechia out of all countries is able to spend nearly $20 billion Euros on expanding their high speed rail when their largest city Prague is equivalent to the size of Ottawa I don’t see what the hold up is here. I mean they only have 10 million people total which is less then Ottawa-Toronto-Montreal combined. If you expand the rail corridor from Quebec City-Windsor that’s nearly 20 million people who could be utilizing the service. Not to mention that high speed rail always increases tourism in an area as well making it easier to see all that region has to offer.

It’s simply a lack of political will and an acceptance of mediocrity. If Canada wants to truly be a great country high speed rail is a necessity.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Imo high speed rail is so crucial to the success of a future Canada that budget should take a back burner and get the required funding by any means necessary.

Good point on human rights as land acquisition costs in China are generally only 8% of a projects total cost while in a G7 country it’s closer to 20%.

Although if Czechia out of all countries is able to spend nearly $20 billion Euros on expanding their high speed rail when their largest city Prague is equivalent to the size of Ottawa I don’t see what the hold up is here. I mean they only have 10 million people total which is less then Ottawa-Toronto-Montreal combined. If you expand the rail corridor from Quebec City-Windsor that’s nearly 20 million people who could be utilizing the service. Not to mention that high speed rail always increases tourism in an area as well making it easier to see all that region has to offer.

It’s simply a lack of political will and an acceptance of mediocrity. If Canada wants to truly be a great country high speed rail is a necessity.

Show me another country that has a distance of Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal that has done well at building HSR in the last 20 years.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Show me another country that has a distance of Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal that has done well at building HSR in the last 20 years.

Uhmm Madrid-Barcelona is a 620 km line that was constructed in 2008 with a stop at Zaragoza. It operates at 300km which means it only takes about 2 and a half hours for Spaniards to traverse their two most important cities and another mid sized city. Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal distance would be approximately 600-650km long for comparison. I don’t think anyone in Spain would say the Madrid-Barcelona High speed rail was a mistake.

One more similar comparison is Madrid’s metro population is 6.7 million and Barcelona is 4.8 million so the populations of these two metros are very similar to Toronto and Montreal with the caveat of adding another 1.4 million residents within Ottawa for this service.

Slightly off topic but it’s weird that Canada always preaches it’s diversity and progressiveness towards globalization, yet we never implement other countries ideas regarding infrastructure or housing. Imagine How much better would our rail would be if we emulated Spain or our bike lanes if we emulated the Netherlands for example.

[casper]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Uhmm Madrid-Barcelona is a 620 km line that was constructed in 2008 with a stop at Zaragoza. It operates at 300km which means it only takes about 2 and a half hours for Spaniards to traverse their two most important cities and another mid sized city. Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal distance would be approximately 600-650km long for comparison. I don’t think anyone in Spain would say the Madrid-Barcelona High speed rail was a mistake.

One more similar comparison is Madrid’s metro population is 6.7 million and Barcelona is 4.8 million so the populations of these two metros are very similar to Toronto and Montreal with the caveat of adding another 1.4 million residents within Ottawa for this service.

Slightly off topic but it’s weird that Canada always preaches it’s diversity and progressiveness towards globalization, yet we never implement other countries ideas regarding infrastructure or housing. Imagine How much better would our rail would be if we emulated Spain or our bike lanes if we emulated the Netherlands for example.

No shortage of bike lanes in Vancouver or Victoria.

As for high speed rail there are only two logical areas. Vancouver to Seattle and the corridor in Ontario/Quebec. I would support building it so it can go as fast as possible without breaking the bank. I would suggest electrification should be the priority over speed at this point. In that regard with both Via and Go upgrades there is a significant network being built as we speek.

[ssiguy]

You realize how absolutely pathetic passenger rail is in Canada when VIA is doing cartwheels about it's new multi-billion dollar HFR service that won't be ready {if ever} for a decade and all that it will do is bring back journey times that we had in the late 70s.