VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I took a look at the recently released HFR Request for Qualification. There are some interesting expectations in the Project Outcomes section:

https://hfr-tgf.ca/wp-content/upload...DDQ-TGF-EN.pdf [PDF Warning]

This is definitely leaning towards the low end of high speed rail or towards some kind of higher speed rail operation with substantial stretch of high speed, if those travel times are the minimum objectives. I think we're looking at something like Acela Express, as the likely outcome.

Something akin to Acela should have happened decades ago.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Agreed - but I think there'd be value in having a having a paralleling local service with a handful of trains a day between Toronto and Ottawa on the new route, that would stop in these hamlets. The local populations in these villages are very small, but there's a lot of potential for tourism - right now it's difficult to impossible to explore Canada's natural features without a car. Railway service to places like Sharbot Lake would go a long way to making activities like camping and kayaking accessible to car-free urbanites.

European countries have low-frequency regional trains in rural areas for this exact purpose.

The challenge becomes whether HSR and local service and operate on the same tracks without causing HSR delays.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

A bypass of Sharbot Lake would be difficult. The eponymous lake is in the way, meaning you'd likely need something like 15km of an entirely new ROW to get around the village, through terrain that is swampy/rocky. A trench through the town would still create many of the same dentrimental effects on the community (and would again be expensive due to rocky terrain). I imagine the original VIA plans put a station in Sharbot Lake precisely because they knew there was no way to get the line through the area without causing massive local disruption so they needed to give something to the locals in exchange.

Looking at the line though, it seems that none of the other hamlets present nearly as big of a problem as Sharbot Lake. The ROW through Tweed has been built on (there's a residential street taking up the former route) but a bypass of that village would be easy enough. And for other towns on the abandoned ROW section of the line, like Kaladar and Arden, the ROW doesn't really disturb anything if restored.

We aren't just talking about bypassing Sharbot Lake. I'm thinking they need a new alignment right through. Whether they go through the town or around them will be up to the developers.

A few years ago, a transit blogger (Ontario Traffic Man) looked at the realignments necessary to achieve VIA's goal of getting from Union to Ottawa in under 3 hrs. Here's their map for the stretch we are discussing:



And their look at the portions that could theoretically be upgraded to 110 mph/ 177 kph:



With all those upgrades and the high speed alignment they designed between Kaladar and Perth, they still couldn't get Toronto-Ottawa to under 2.5 hrs:



Some quick math suggests they need to design something that allows for an average running speed of about 256 kph between at least Norwood and Perth. The Avelia Liberty about to be deployed on the Acela Express has a planned service speed of 160 mph / 260 kph and a top speed of 186 mph / 300 kph with tilting. So I think if this is the bid, then Alstom would propose a fully new alignment between Peterborough and Smiths Falls that covers that distance in 40 mins. And what do ya know, that's what Alstom suggested in their recent public pitch:



Alstom's entire presentation is here.

Source: https://www.highspeedrailcanada.com/...io-Quebec.html

Alstom's proposal still doesn't consider things like speed restrictions in suburban sheds of the major cities or the requirements to stop in Casselman or Alexandria. But I think their proposal is probably closer to 4 hrs all stop (Toronto to Montreal) and 3 hrs express with stops at only the downtown stations (Ottawa and Montreal).

[JHikka]

Nothing would be more annoying than a Toronto-Ottawa/Montreal HSR train having like six station stops with one of them being Tweed. VIA is currently bad enough when it's stopping in Trenton/Belleville or Gananoque/Kingston/Napanee.

[Truenorth00]

There's a very specific reason that Alstom says it needs to get from Toronto to Montreal in 3 hrs:





Seems that 3 hrs is the real drop off where passengers migrate back to air. Given our air fares and transit options from airports to downtown stations, I'd suggest they could may be get with 3.5 hrs between Toronto and Montreal.

[1overcosc]

A brand new alignment between Peterborough and Smiths Falls would be expensive. Heck even a new one just from Kaladar to Perth would be pretty pricey. That's literally the most challenging geography in Southern Ontario. That back of napkin map for Kaladar-Perth appears to solve the Sharbot Lake problem with a 3km bridge over the lake!

The sticker shock on this project might be brutal once the bids come in.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

A brand new alignment between Peterborough and Smiths Falls would be expensive. Heck even a new one just from Kaladar to Perth would be pretty pricey. That's literally the most challenging geography in Southern Ontario. That back of napkin map for Kaladar-Perth appears to solve the Sharbot Lake problem with a 3km bridge over the lake!

The sticker shock on this project might be brutal once the bids come in.

The one thing going for realignment along it vs the lakeshore is that there isn't a lot of properties to expropriate.

[Truenorth00]

I expect a new routing won't be anywhere near Sharbot Lake. And yes it will be expensive. But keep in mind that industry keeps saying they can do this. And that the overall business case is better for HSR, even if capital requirements are higher.

You'll notice there's no budget in the RFQ. There probably won't be one in the RFP. The idea is to have them propose a business case and financing and then the government gets to pick what requires the least subsidy to close the business case.

I fully expect Alstom to come back with a $25B proposal, with the government to pay $12B and pass some market making legislation. For example, we tax or ban short haul flights in the Corridor that aren't connecting.

This will all sound far fetched until you look at who the respondents are. For example CDPQ Infra built there REM in Montreal with a similar model. And they own 15% of Alstom.

For what it's worth, Alstom, is proposing to enable mixed services. So places like Sharbot Lake could get stations. But I think this depends on the business case ultimately:

• Video Link

[1overcosc]

If we're going to be shelling out billions to carve a new ROW through the Canadian Shield, I'd want someone to at least do the math on comparing to the traditionally-planned Lakeshore HSR route. The whole selling point of the northern line was that it was cheaper because there was a mostly existing but unused line that could be reused (the Havelock sub). But if the northern route means blasting through rocks and building 3km bridges over lakes...

The RFP unfortunately requires the northern route as they added Peterborough service as a requirement, so this math will unfortunately not be done.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If we're going to be shelling out billions to carve a new ROW through the Canadian Shield, I'd want someone to at least do the math on comparing to the traditionally-planned Lakeshore HSR route. The whole selling point of the northern line was that it was cheaper because there was a mostly existing but unused line that could be reused (the Havelock sub). But if the northern route means blasting through rocks and building 3km bridges over lakes...

The RFP unfortunately requires the northern route as they added Peterborough service as a requirement, so this math will unfortunately not be done.

My assumption would be that neither CN or CP want to share the ROW, even if it is all new track.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I expect a new routing won't be anywhere near Sharbot Lake. And yes it will be expensive. But keep in mind that industry keeps saying they can do this. And that the overall business case is better for HSR, even if capital requirements are higher.

You'll notice there's no budget in the RFQ. There probably won't be one in the RFP. The idea is to have them propose a business case and financing and then the government gets to pick what requires the least subsidy to close the business case.

I fully expect Alstom to come back with a $25B proposal, with the government to pay $12B and pass some market making legislation. For example, we tax or ban short haul flights in the Corridor that aren't connecting.

This will all sound far fetched until you look at who the respondents are. For example CDPQ Infra built there REM in Montreal with a similar model. And they own 15% of Alstom.

For what it's worth, Alstom, is proposing to enable mixed services. So places like Sharbot Lake could get stations. But I think this depends on the business case ultimately:

• Video Link

These are good points. The Sharbot Lake problem is certainly resolvable with enough money. I just worry that sticker shock will make the project DOA as soon as the bids come in.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If we're going to be shelling out billions to carve a new ROW through the Canadian Shield, I'd want someone to at least do the math on comparing to the traditionally-planned Lakeshore HSR route. The whole selling point of the northern line was that it was cheaper because there was a mostly existing but unused line that could be reused (the Havelock sub). But if the northern route means blasting through rocks and building 3km bridges over lakes...

The RFP unfortunately requires the northern route as they added Peterborough service as a requirement, so this math will unfortunately not be done.

Read the RFQ carefully. They say Peterborough has to be served. They don't say to where.... In theory, a proponent could negotiate with CN or CP and build HSR on the Lakeshore while offering some Union-Peterborough commuter service. Or even have that connect back south to the Lakeshore. The government is leaving this completely open and they even say they expect bidders to negotiate with the freight railways. I think the government is hoping that it's easier for the freight cos to cooperate with private sector developers than the government.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

These are good points. The Sharbot Lake problem is certainly resolvable with enough money. I just worry that sticker shock will make the project DOA as soon as the bids come in.

People who will day this too expensive were always going to say that. We've been doing this for decades. It's why nothing gets built. And it's why ambitions got reduced to a 5 hr ride originally. What's being proposed here is the the taxpayers pays the same cost we would have for HFR. Industry will finance the rest and build a business case that makes it work. Most likely by offering a service that can capture business from air travelers and by developing new commuter markets (Ottawa-Montreal, TR-Montreal, TR-QC).

[Innsertnamehere]

Also - I think the Liberals may be fine with a bit of sticker shock here. High Speed Rail is the kind of thing that whenever an article on it is posted, the almost universal response from the public is “we should have had it decades ago, it’s an embarrassment we don’t”. This isn’t the US where republicans think transit is for the poors and republicans oppose rail investment. There is likely plenty of political appetite for a project that checks the “high speed” box for them politically. A project like Alstom’s proposal would check that box for them at a much lower cost than a true high speed line, which likely aligns with their goals. They can claim they are building high speed rail because they are building a line which goes up to 300km/h, without having to drop the $60-100 billion to actually build it fully.

The reason previous governments always dodged it was the $60-100 billion sticker. $25 billion is much more stomachable.

[Truenorth00]

The risk is that the next government takes the offramp after the development and design phase. Can't do anything about. If that's the politicians we have, it is what it is. And they probably would have canned a cheaper project too.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The risk is that the next government takes the offramp after the development and design phase. Can't do anything about. If that's the politicians we have, it is what it is. And they probably would have canned a cheaper project too.

The current government has been in power for 8 years and has done pretty close to SFA.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The current government has been in power for 8 years and has done pretty close to SFA.

Agreed. But no guarantee the next government can't be worse on this file!

Running against sticker shock has a long tradition in this country....

[GoTrans]

The most practical route to solve the problem with Sharbot Lake is to route a bypass from Mountain Grove north of Hwy 7 and Sharbot Lake to the eastern side of Silver Lake where it could reconnect to the ROW a bit south of Hwy 7.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

My assumption would be that neither CN or CP want to share the ROW, even if it is all new track.

Ottawa trying to force them to share tracks would end up in the courts for years and may not result in the decision Ottawa & VIA were hoping for.

Ottawa can, however, use it's power of persuasion and increase safety protocols and say that any level crossing of more than 2,000 vehicles a day would have to be grade separated. It wouldn't take CN & CP 20 minutes to miraculously find out that they can share the same tracks. This with Ottawa flashing a billion dollar check in front of them will seal the deal. The rail companies always balked at giving GO trains priority or to take over the tracks until ML waved a big juicy cheque in front of their face.

If the prices continue to soar thru having to upgrade track, straightening the route, build new rail lines thru very difficult terrain, and buy properties on the northern route than perhaps bribing CN & CP to share track and leaving one open to HSR would be worth the money. Such a system would also allow VIA's more regular milk run routes to service the heavily populated Lakeshore. Also a HSR stop in Kingston is a FAR better passenger base and destination than Peterborough will ever be. The section between Ottawa and Brockville and Ottawa and Montreal is already owned by VIA so that's not a problem. Also such a system could be brought in incrementally as electrification expands. Getting CN & CP off one of the tracks would result in immediate much faster and reliable rail service in the Tor/QC corridor.

Remember the dynamic have changed and it seems that we are going from HFR run by VIA to HSR possible run by a 3rd partner so perhaps the route should too. If Ottawa decides to force CN & CP to share a track, I don't think any potential bidder would even consider the interior route over the Lakeshore one.

[Truenorth00]

^ People still don't get it. Ottawa isn't dictating the route. They are dictating the level of service. It's bidders who will come up with the route. And unless the freight cos want to work with a bidder, HSR on Lakeshore isn't likely.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Read the RFQ carefully. They say Peterborough has to be served. They don't say to where.... In theory, a proponent could negotiate with CN or CP and build HSR on the Lakeshore while offering some Union-Peterborough commuter service. Or even have that connect back south to the Lakeshore. The government is leaving this completely open and they even say they expect bidders to negotiate with the freight railways. I think the government is hoping that it's easier for the freight cos to cooperate with private sector developers than the government.

Huh. I didn't think of that.

I wonder if a route that goes Toronto-Peterborough-Belleville-Kingston-Ottawa gets proposed. Such a route would avoid the most expensive parts of the Lakeshore route (higher land prices closer to Toronto) and the most expensive part of the northern route (the tough terrain between Havelock and Perth). A skip stop operation could be designed so that there's stations in Peterborough, Belleville, and Kingston, but with each train only stopping at 1 of the three cities, to maximize intermediate city ridership without slowing down the service by ensuring that Toronto-Ottawa riders only make one stop.

I doubt that'll happen but I can dream!

[lrt's friend]

Why do we keep discussing a Lakeshore route? How do we deliver a single route east of Kingston that is efficient for both Ottawa and Montreal? We can't. So, we have to split service, defeating HFR, a key part of any business case. Maybe, we can speed up trains but there are still limits of routing Ottawa bound trains via Brockville and if we end up with 8 trains to Ottawa and 8 to Montreal instead of 16 to both, what is the point of spending $20B?