Well, once they announce construction has commenced for the HFR we can start talking about it. Til then, we seem to talk about all sorts of things. If you don't like it, you don't need to participate in it.
I don't participate in your mental masturbation. I'm just calling out the ridiculousness of it all.
The BC gov website seems to have a pretty good overview of the potential options for an island fixed link. In my view it seems like a lost cause at least in terms of the lifespan of anyone currently living and it would be best to focus on things like electric short haul planes (already being explored by Harbour Air) and electric ferries that have been introduced in other parts of the world.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
The electric planes are neat and maybe costs will come down over the long run but switching planes and boats to be electric doesn't immediately improve the transportation options as far as cost, frequency, or travel times.
One of the challenges for planes and fast ferries to Vancouver Island is that it's mostly a low density area with a lot of outdoor attractions and not much transit so people often want cars there. I fly over there when I can and it is great but usually I am relying on somebody with a car on the other side.
LOL. People are dreaming of connections to Vancouver Island when we can't even build proper rail service between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal? Talk about cart before horse.
Once there are shovels in the ground on HFR, we will know how competent this country is at passenger rail development. Before that, these fantasies are beyond pointless.
LOL. People are dreaming of connections to Vancouver Island when we can't even build proper rail service between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal? Talk about cart before horse.
This view makes no sense. There is not a single priority list of infrastructure projects in Canada that the government moves down in order. A link to Vancouver Island would be implemented largely by the province of BC. And realistically if Vancouver Island were to get train service it would probably come through TransLink or BC Transit and not VIA.
It's also worth noting that people in smaller towns and rural areas flip this around and ask why the cities should get fancier and fancier infrastructure when the rural areas don't even have the most basic stuff. No more trains for Toronto until every Canadian has water and sewer service!
The electric planes are neat and maybe costs will come down over the long run but switching planes and boats to be electric doesn't immediately improve the transportation options as far as cost, frequency, or travel times.
One of the challenges for planes and fast ferries to Vancouver Island is that it's mostly a low density area with a lot of outdoor attractions and not much transit so people often want cars there. I fly over there when I can and it is great but usually I am relying on somebody with a car on the other side.
Sounds like one of the few places where on-demand/microtransit would actually make economic sense. Although from what I've heard, Victoria is quite walkable.
The electric planes are neat and maybe costs will come down over the long run but switching planes and boats to be electric doesn't immediately improve the transportation options as far as cost, frequency, or travel times.
One of the challenges for planes and fast ferries to Vancouver Island is that it's mostly a low density area with a lot of outdoor attractions and not much transit so people often want cars there. I fly over there when I can and it is great but usually I am relying on somebody with a car on the other side.
I'm not sure that bolded part is actually true. With planes, they're already extremely fast so travel time doesn't need to be improved, and due to the dramatic drop in maintenance and energy requirements some estimate that electrification of short haul flights would reduce overall costs by as much as 40% which would make the service significantly cheaper to operate. The video below details the business case with the cost breakdown starting around 11:15. While the case study examines a subsidized route which wouldn't have price flexibility, for normal routes this could prompt carriers to offer cheaper fares, causing such services to become more popular and thereby spurring carriers to offer more frequent service. Substantial fuel cost savings could be realized through electrified ferries, particularly given the setting within a hydo rich region. Plus there's no reason the switch couldn't be subsidized to further spur the transition.
There's also no reason why an increase in car-free visitors couldn't prompt an increase in bus tours/shuttles and car rental/sharing services. And the the cost savings from ferry electrification could also benefit people who wish to continue using auto-ferries that operate at conventional speeds.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
This view makes no sense. There is not a single priority list of infrastructure projects in Canada that the government moves down in order. A link to Vancouver Island would be implemented largely by the province of BC. And realistically if Vancouver Island were to get train service it would probably come through TransLink or BC Transit and not VIA.
This is a VIA thread after all. And every time projects are discussed here, provincial responsibility is almost never brought up. Virtually every harebrained idea that comes up is somehow supposed to be done VIA in this thread....
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
It's also worth noting that people in smaller towns and rural areas flip this around and ask why the cities should get fancier and fancier infrastructure when the rural areas don't even have the most basic stuff. No more trains for Toronto until every Canadian has water and sewer service!
I agree with them.
My only caveat? Let cities get equivalent spending to taxes collected by federal and provincial government in their jurisdiction. Or make tax room for the cities to connect. Then Toronto can build their own subways and wouldn't have to rely on any other level of government.
Indeed, I actually think rail service between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal might have actually been better if this setup was around.
Lots of bridges are in typhoon zones. I think the depth is the bigger issue.
The depth is an insurmountable show-stopper, as becomes clear in the link you provided:
Quote:
Fixed Link Challenges
Georgia Strait is located in a zone of high seismic activity.
Potential marine slope instabilities along the eastern side of the strait could result in underwater landslides.
Extreme wave conditions (4-7 m waves, with 6 m tides and 2-knot current)
Wind speeds are up to 115 km with gusts up to 180 km. Closure of the structure to traffic would likely be required several times each year during strong winds.
Crossing could be up to 26 km long, in depths of water up to 365 m. Deep, soft sediments are up to 450 m thick on the ocean bed.
Major ships pass through the area and a floating bridge could not withstand the impact from such vessels.
A bridge across the Georgia Strait would also be subject to snow, ice and fog conditions that would make driving hazardous.
Here are possible fixed-links across Georgia Strait.
Bored Tunnel
Japan’s Seikan Tunnel is 54 km in length and 240 m below sea level at its deepest point. It cost $7 billion U.S (1988 dollars) to construct and took 25 years to complete. The 50-km Chunnel between Great Britain and the European mainland cost $15 billion U.S. (1994 dollars) to construct and took 11 years to complete. The Chunnel is 75 m below sea level at its lowest point.
Construction of a bored tunnel under Georgia Strait would take place below water 365 m deep and in thick, soft sediments, creating extreme pressures during construction. The depth of both the water and the sediment would require a tunnel over 50 km in length. For these reasons, a bored tunnel is not considered a viable option.
[...]
Fixed-Link Comparisons
There are no fixed bridges in existence today that would meet the conditions present in Georgia Strait.
Prince Edward Island’s $1-billion (1997 dollars) Confederation Bridge is only 12.9 km long and is set in water 35 m deep with a rock bottom. In comparison, a fixed bridge across British Columbia’s Georgia Strait would be 26 km in length, in water up to 365 m deep and in a zone with much higher seismic risk.
The Tagus River Bridge in Lisbon has the deepest conventional bridge foundation in existence in water depths of only 79 m. Greece’s Rion Antirion Bridge is in an active seismic zone with an ocean bottom consisting of deep, soft sediments. However, this structure is only 2.8 km long and sits in waters of only 65 m. It cost an estimated $1940 million to complete in 2004, and each of four main pier structures cost $233 million.
Any fixed link across Georgia Strait would pass through or over high use navigation channels. Currently 45,000 vessels pass through these waters each year, including pleasure craft, commercial vessels and military vessels. A fixed link would potentially require two channels, each a minimum of 200 m wide by 65 m high to accommodate current and future vessel needs.
Past swimmer_spe: "I bet I can come up with the most absurd, unrealistic proposals for VIA service"
Future swimmer_spe: "hold my beer"
I don't drink beer. I like mixed drinks. Then I can think I am not drinking alcohol till I try to stand up.
Kinda like the reverse of Via. "Via goes everywhere" Tires to go to all the major cities on the mainland of Canada.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
The Qiongzhou Strait is 120m deep.
About the same as the Salish Sea or the Straight of Georgia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse
The BC gov website seems to have a pretty good overview of the potential options for an island fixed link. In my view it seems like a lost cause at least in terms of the lifespan of anyone currently living and it would be best to focus on things like electric short haul planes (already being explored by Harbour Air) and electric ferries that have been introduced in other parts of the world.
For links to islands planes still make the most sense. Going electric also makes sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floppa
Doesn't hurt to dream
Not on here. It hurts a lot to dream, at least on here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
It's also worth noting that people in smaller towns and rural areas flip this around and ask why the cities should get fancier and fancier infrastructure when the rural areas don't even have the most basic stuff. No more trains for Toronto until every Canadian has water and sewer service!
Shhhh. According to most on here, we must focus on the cities, especially the#1, 2 and 6th cities The rest don't matter. And the 4th is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00
This is a VIA thread after all. And every time projects are discussed here, provincial responsibility is almost never brought up. Virtually every harebrained idea that comes up is somehow supposed to be done VIA in this thread....
I actually agree. The problem is that many of the provinces would try to get out of it, much like they are trying to get out of universal healthcare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00
I agree with them.
My only caveat? Let cities get equivalent spending to taxes collected by federal and provincial government in their jurisdiction. Or make tax room for the cities to connect. Then Toronto can build their own subways and wouldn't have to rely on any other level of government.
Indeed, I actually think rail service between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal might have actually been better if this setup was around.
I would agree so long as there was still some level of control on what it could be spent on.
I quite like the submerged floating tunnel idea, and I had read awhile ago that Norway was seriously considering the idea to replace some of the ferry links along E39, which would have very similar issues to a Vancouver Island fixed link.
I invite you to look up the CMA/CA populations of all the Sault-Ste-Maries, Thunder Bays, Kenoras, Reginas and Salmon Arms and compare them with that of Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver - or just with stations in the Corridor - in the vain hope that you might one day finally realize how immaterial even their combined population is (given the enormous distance over which they are scattered)...
I agree that the cities you listed are smaller that the the largest CMA's in Canada but to ignore them is foolish. You have an urban centric view of the country which much of the country would frown upon. Via trains stop at places in the corridor that are smaller than Sault Ste Marie, Thunder Bay, Regina, Medicine Hat, Moose Jaw and Brandon. You don't want to have regional trains that have major cities as their origin and destination and you don't want to service the above cities but you still want to run the Canadian on its existing route which has towns that are even smaller than the cities that I suggested in both Northern Ontario and the Prairies.
Having intermediate stops is all about increasing the occupancy rate on the train and gaining extra revenue with little extra cost.
Routing the Canadian via Thunder Bay, Dryden, Kenora, Brandon and Regina and on to Saskatoon would increase ridership and revenue at very little added cost.
Adding Sault Ste Marie to the mix would add additional riders, especially American tourists from upper Michigan. Depending on schedules the Agawa Canyon might be travelled in daylight. The trip would definitely take longer but it would be more reliable as there is little freight traffic between Sudbury an Franz via the Soo. Studies would have to be done to determine what the ridership , operational constraints, rolling stock and crew requirements would be but we should not just discount the idea without investigating this option.
The other advantage of the CP route is that it is much more scenic than the CN route as it hugs the shore of Lake Superior for a good portion of the route. This change would also provide better service to Sudbury as the CP station is downtown.
Since the Canadian runs 2- 3 times per week, make one of the trips go via the CN line and and the others via the CP line. Via must feel that it is indebted to CN as it refuses to discuss route changes with CP.
I invite you to look up the CMA/CA populations of all the Sault-Ste-Maries, Thunder Bays, Kenoras, Reginas and Salmon Arms and compare them with that of Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver - or just with stations in the Corridor - in the vain hope that you might one day finally realize how immaterial even their combined population is (given the enormous distance over which they are scattered)...
I agree that the cities you listed are smaller that the the largest CMA's in Canada but to ignore them is foolish. You have an urban centric view of the country which much of the country would frown upon. Via trains stop at places in the corridor that are smaller than Sault Ste Marie, Thunder Bay, Regina, Medicine Hat, Moose Jaw and Brandon. You don't want to have regional trains that have major cities as their origin and destination and you don't want to service the above cities but you still want to run the Canadian on its existing route which has towns that are even smaller than the cities that I suggested in both Northern Ontario and the Prairies.
Having intermediate stops is all about increasing the occupancy rate on the train and gaining extra revenue with little extra cost.
Routing the Canadian via Thunder Bay, Dryden, Kenora, Brandon and Regina and on to Saskatoon would increase ridership and revenue at very little added cost.
Adding Sault Ste Marie to the mix would add additional riders, especially American tourists from upper Michigan. Depending on schedules the Agawa Canyon might be travelled in daylight. The trip would definitely take longer but it would be more reliable as there is little freight traffic between Sudbury an Franz via the Soo. Studies would have to be done to determine what the ridership , operational constraints, rolling stock and crew requirements would be but we should not just discount the idea without investigating this option.
The other advantage of the CP route is that it is much more scenic than the CN route as it hugs the shore of Lake Superior for a good portion of the route. This change would also provide better service to Sudbury as the CP station is downtown.
Since the Canadian runs 2- 3 times per week, make one of the trips go via the CN line and and the others via the CP line. Via must feel that it is indebted to CN as it refuses to discuss route changes with CP.
There are a few challenges with routing to SSM. Track condition is a big one. However, with some funding, it should be able to get upgraded enough to move faster than a snails pace.
Timing is easy. Leave existing (pre 2020) Canadian as is. 3x a week is fine. On the other 4 days, have 3 of them as the southern route departures.
A small reality check of the Fixed Link to Vancouver Island with the Eurotunnel
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan
I quite like the submerged floating tunnel idea, and I had read awhile ago that Norway was seriously considering the idea to replace some of the ferry links along E39, which would have very similar issues to a Vancouver Island fixed link.
If you had actually read the link @acottawa posted, you would have realized that a submerged tunnel is unsuitable (and still seems to be about as unproven as a concept as the Hyperloop is):
Quote:
Submerged Floating Tunnel
Submerged-floating tunnels are tubes with approximately hydrostatic equilibrium constructed deep enough below the water surface to allow uninterrupted ship passage and held in place by cables anchored to the channel bottom. No submerged-floating tunnels have ever been built, so this technology is currently unproven.
Conceptually, a submerged floating tunnel to Vancouver Island would require large gravity anchors, which would be complicated given the deep, soft soil on the ocean bed in this area. A submerged-floating tunnel would provide better passage for large vessels than a floating bridge; however it would be vulnerable to marine accidents and earthquake damage. A tunnel breach would be catastrophic and could result in the loss of many lives.
Just a simple comparison of a fixed rail link between Vancouver and Victoria and the Eurotunnel:
Minimum width of the English Channel: 35 km / Minimum width of Georgia Straight: 40 km
Maximum depth of Eurotunnel: 75 meters / Maximum depth of potential tunnel route across Georgia Street: in excess of 350 meters
Population of the United Kingdom in 1985 (i.e. the year the construction proposal was awarded): 56.5 million / population of Vancouver Island in 2016 (i.e. most recent Census data available): 800k
Construction cost estimate for Eurotunnel in 1985: GBP 4.8 billion (US$6.2 billion or C$7.8 billion, which is equivalent to C$17.5 billion in 2021 prices) / Cost estimate for fixed link to Vancouver Island (even before choosing a technology): C$15 billion
Final costs of Eurotunnel: GBP 9.5 billion by 1994 (US $14.5 billion or C$18.1 billion, which is equivalent to C$30 billion in 2021 prices)
So, sure, Canada is going to invest more than what it would cost to build HSR to link 20 million people (or half of all Canadians), just to connect one-seventyth of the UK's population with a fixed link which would gap more distance than the Eurotunnel and deals with depths far more than 5 times that of the English channel...
Prev
Linear Mode
