Highways in Canada

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by milomilo

That's incredible, thanks for sharing - but look at the cost. I don't know how Norway can justify spending that much money for what looks like some pretty small villages, but they do have a trillion dollar wealth fund, unlike us. It would be like NL building a superhighway to all its fishing villages.

I agree thought, this sort of thing should be funded federally as it is the national highway. It is unfair to place all the burden on BC when they have by far the toughest section to build.

It’s similar with Ontario too. It’s even more ironic for Ontario because TCH goes through where the province’s least populated and has low AADT and yet it’s the key link between Western and Eastern Canada (with bottlenecks that have seen numerous closures in the past).

All whining aside, what will it take for the feds to commit funding for TCH twinning, again? I mean, the TCH Act was rescinded long ago.

At this point, I should probably move the discussion to the overall TCH thread.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HCT-FurFVLQ

I know this is about Norway, but why can’t we have nice things like this too?

I think the situation in Norway is comparable to that in Canada in this video.

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I had BC HWY 1 in mind. The terrain’s almost similarly harsh but it’s in such crappy state now.


Oh shoot I forgot highways are provincially maintained in Canada so that’s why we don’t have nice things. I guess I answered my own question.

Perhaps because they're 5.3 million people with a GDP per capita $30,000 USD higher than us? (USD ~$75,000 vs. $45,000). They sit on a pile of oil that is easy to get to market and controlled by the state oil company (StatOil).

They have no debt. They have a huge wealth fund for the future. They are about 1/3 the size of Ontario in area, with most of the population concentrated in the Oslo and Bergen areas, so social services (healthcare and education) are more efficient per capita. They have much higher tax rates than Canada.

This stuff isn't hard to look up. Your zeal to justify 4-lane highways (almost to the exclusion of anything else of discussion on this board) when minimal such justification exists is tiring.

Yes, some other countries have these things. They are different places than Canada. They have different economic conditions, different landscapes and different priorities than Canada.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by wave46

This stuff isn't hard to look up. Your zeal to justify 4-lane highways (almost to the exclusion of anything else of discussion on this board) when minimal such justification exists is tiring.

Yea I figured. Time to bid everyone farewell then.

As for Norway, I admit I did assume quite a few things that turned out to be wrong, such as population density on the west coast, tax rate, and the country’s financial health. (When I saw $47BN, I was like, “Such a project would definitely be a pipe dream in Canada”.) I totally forgot about oil too.

As for the justification for twinning select sections of TCH, we shall just refer to what’s been suggested in the other thread.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Yea I figured. Time to bid everyone farewell then.

As for Norway, I admit I did assume quite a few things that turned out to be wrong, such as population density on the west coast, tax rate, and the country’s financial health. (When I saw $47BN, I was like, “Such a project would definitely be a pipe dream in Canada”.) I totally forgot about oil too.

As for the justification for twinning select sections of TCH, we shall just refer to what’s been suggested in the other thread.

I'm not trying to be an ass (even though re-reading my previous post, I came off that way), I'm asking you to perhaps consider that multiple factors in multiple countries lend themselves to different outcomes, even if you don't like them.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by wave46

I'm not trying to be an ass (even though re-reading my previous post, I came off that way), I'm asking you to perhaps consider that multiple factors in multiple countries lend themselves to different outcomes, even if you don't like them.

To be fair, I can see that, with my type of “persistence”, even the nicest person can grow tired of my rhetoric. When you first wrote it, I was like, “Oh snap, I crossed the line.”

I guess it’s after all not that appropriate to compare between countries then. Just like what’s Acajack said, there’s no true norm for something like this. I showed that video because a while back, people (not even I) were like, “Oh look at country X, it’s like Canada in Y way but it doesn’t have a cross-country freeway either”. That’s actually what prompted me to look at what freeways in European countries are like.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

To be fair, I can see that, with my type of “persistence”, even the nicest person can grow tired of my rhetoric. When you first wrote it, I was like, “Oh snap, I crossed the line.”

I guess it’s after all not that appropriate to compare between countries then. Just like what’s Acajack said, there’s no true norm for something like this. I showed that video because a while back, people (not even I) were like, “Oh look at country X, it’s like Canada in Y way but it doesn’t have a cross-country freeway either”. That’s actually what prompted me to look at what freeways in European countries are like.

I appreciate your passion for your project, if you will.

With respect to comparing between countries: it can be instructive and help point to places that things could be improved. However, you have to do a holistic look at what is similar and different between the two countries you're comparing before you jump to the conclusion that Country X has "Thing A" and Country Y should have the same "Thing A" just because they have the same population, or some such metric.

[Dengler Avenue]

Thanks for the clarification.

On another note, flying cars can be arriving sooner than we think, as soon as 2023.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/autos/they...-appear-in-urban-skies-by-2023-1.4220060

Does that necessarily make freeways obsolete, even from the military perspective?

I’ve always thought it’d be prudent to have some basic form of infrastructure in case things go south.

[milomilo]

What military perspective? We have roads.

Any article like the one you linked to predicting the future can almost invariably be immediately discarded, there is absolutely no way we will be using flying cars in our cities for a long time, if ever. Cities are sensibly beginning to regulate and ban drones, a flying vehicle (functionally, a helicopter) will be subject to much tighter regulations even if it was cost effective to use them for the general public.

[vid]

I've never seen a convoy of military vehicles using highways here, they put them on trains to move them around. But I haven't seen any of those for a while either.

[sonysnob]

The Military was consulted when the Ottawa Valley Branch of the CPR was pulled through Pettawawa. They obviously were satisfied enough with current transportation infrastructure that they didn't raise concerns that the railway was pulled. If the Military thought it was necessary to twin a section of that isn't already twinned, they have had ample opportunity to ensure funding for twinning was secured.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by milomilo

What military perspective? We have roads.

Any article like the one you linked to predicting the future can almost invariably be immediately discarded, there is absolutely no way we will be using flying cars in our cities for a long time, if ever. Cities are sensibly beginning to regulate and ban drones, a flying vehicle (functionally, a helicopter) will be subject to much tighter regulations even if it was cost effective to use them for the general public.

The energy required to fly very short distances is exponentially more huge than to drive. A stopped car uses almost no energy. A drone/helicopter uses huge amounts of energy to stay stationary yet airborne. Unless there's some huge breakthrough in energy storage, the future will remain anchored to the ground.

The damage cause by accidents in flight is exponentially more too, simply because the thousands of pounds of material that are now coming back to earth and raining destruction below.

[Airboy]

Originally Posted by vid

I've never seen a convoy of military vehicles using highways here, they put them on trains to move them around. But I haven't seen any of those for a while either.

Every few weeks you see a convoy running between The Edmonton Garrison and Camp Wainwright. Henday (216) to the Yellowhead (16) then east to the Buffalo Trail(41).
When there was the deployment to Afghanistan the convoy went from EG of the west side rail yards and were loaded on trains. Same thing happened in reverse when the came home.

There is the CN Main line runs by Camp Wainwright but for some reason the rail line into the Edmonton Garrison was removed. I think it was there when EG was CFB Edmonton (the Air Base).

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by wave46

The energy required to fly very short distances is exponentially more huge than to drive. A stopped car uses almost no energy. A drone/helicopter uses huge amounts of energy to stay stationary yet airborne. Unless there's some huge breakthrough in energy storage, the future will remain anchored to the ground.

The damage cause by accidents in flight is exponentially more too, simply because the thousands of pounds of material that are now coming back to earth and raining destruction below.

Exactly, there are a number of reasons why 'flying cars' cannot be a thing for the foreseeable future, and they are all deal breakers.

If we can develop far, far better batteries and we have vehicles carrying these autonomously with a proven safety record for a long time, only then will it even begin to be feasible to have day to day transport on them.

But in reality, I expect in 20 years time the roads will look much the same as today except with more electric vehicles and maybe some autonomous, but with the majority still having a driver.

[milomilo]

According to Wikipedia the Canadian military has in the order of less than 10,000 vehicles. So even if it had to move every single one through a 2 lane highway, it wouldn't take much longer than a few hours. And if we're fighting an enemy that requires that kind of response, we will have bigger concerns than whether we can quickly move them all through Roger's Pass.

[Airboy]

Originally Posted by milomilo

According to Wikipedia the Canadian military has in the order of less than 10,000 vehicles. So even if it had to move every single one through a 2 lane highway, it wouldn't take much longer than a few hours. And if we're fighting an enemy that requires that kind of response, we will have bigger concerns than whether we can quickly move them all through Roger's Pass.

If heading to the coast the Yellowhead will be the first choice. If there is a large earthquake I figure all the passes would be closed. I remember hearing some where that Kamloops would be the main staging area.

[Dengler Avenue]

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018...-take-effect-across-canada-tomorrow.html

It’s Canada-wise, so everybody pay attention!!

Also thanks for the responses about both flying cars and military mobility.

[FrAnKs]

Highway 401 at night in real time, filmed by me last summer after a non-stop 8-9hrs drive from Québec City before getting to my hotel room. Enjoy !

• Video Link

[Dengler Avenue]

Just a suggestion:
In western Canada and in Québec, people refer to the highways by their actual names instead of their numbers. In order to avoid further confusion, should we compile a glossary for each of the 5 provinces?

For example for Québec:
A5 - Gatineau Freeway/de la Gatineau
A10 - (in/dans Montreal) Bonaventure & (outside/hors de Montréal) Eastern Townships/des cantons de l’est

[craner]

Huh?
I almost always use the highway #.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by craner

Huh?
I almost always use the highway #.

SSPer’s from Alberta use terms like “Anthony Henday” and “Stoney Trail” and those terms always confuse me.