VIA Rail

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

Fixed that for you. No reason VIA can't run bus service, just like Amtrak.

I agree. We need to stop subsidizing private companies. If we are going to subsidize something, it should be government run.

The reality is all transportation modes need some subsidy.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

From the contracts tendered for engineering services we know the JPO has been quite active and are getting to the decision gate. We'll get more transparency then I suppose.

I honestly think that this project will get the go-ahead as long as they have something "shovel ready" by either the next or following Federal budget, so it's imperative that detailed engineering reports be released by then.

The Feds have practically begged municipalities to submit a list of shovel ready infrastructure projects in the past, and I expect that they will be even more generous when they create a post-Covid stimulus package. I don't even think the government will care that much about the pricetag. But if the project isn't at a point where the government can show that people were hired and put to work, then all bets are off.

[Gat-Train]

Originally Posted by wave46

Nouvellecosse has the right idea IMO.

I think VIA has to come to a point where they view themselves as an interprovincial transit service that uses a combination of rail and bus, including private operators Maritime Bus, Orleans Express, Ontario Northland and Rider Express.

It would focus on a land-based transit system that serves long-distance transit as a public good. It wouldn't have the government competing with private operators for the same passenger. It would help overcome the barriers and limitations of a patchwork of independent operations.

Would it work? Maybe, but I don't see the long-term future of VIA as bright given the fiscal problems of governments today. You can only defer capital spending so long before you're in a position of serious commitment or abandonment.

Interprovincial fare integration would be a nice start.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I saw those there too. First thoughts were if they don't fix the curve, they will not get the speeds needed to gain the time to be competitive. We are not getting tilting trains, so a straighter track is needed. The fact that this is not explicitly stated in the proposals I have seen leads me to doubt the speed gain. Please show me that Via has proposed straightening the ROW and then I can agree.

Again. You're dismissing the entire project based on your feelings, not what we know to be their assessments.

If you want to persist in doing that, and keep having circular discussions go for it. I don't want to waste my time. I prefer to discuss things we know. And to that end, that bit of amateur analysis confirmed that it's geographically feasible to attain the planned travel times. It's a question of investment. Which we'll know about when the JPO finished their work early in the new year.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Maybe it is time for a Grand Central fix. Tunnel under the tracks for Via's Corridor service. Make the tunnel high enough for bilevel cars so that in the event of needing more platforms, GO can use it, or if Via ever decides to go with bilevel cars, they will fit.

None of this is necessary. Track space can be rationalized with more efficient operations. It's a massively unnecessary expense and hugely disruptive to transit in Toronto, which Metrolinx would never agree to, let alone pay for.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

And this makes me wonder how successful at speeding the trains up it will be. I agree that it will have a much higher frequency of trains between Toronto and Montreal. I am just hesitant to believe it really will be much faster than the current route.

Since it's a through service, by definition Toronto-Montreal will be the only route where it could be slower than today. And even that's not supposed to be the case. Again, freight really, really slows down current service.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Initially, it would be slower than all modes, but it would be cheaper than flying. Mind you, maybe with enough investment it could compete with driving. Realistically, if it can have an average speed over the whole line of 60mph (which on that area looks possible), then it can.

On a short distance like Calgary-Edmonton, if it's not faster than driving, it's not worth doing. Simple as that. It needs to beat driving downtown to downtown. And at least be marginally competitive with flying.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

How much would the 300km line cost?

$3-4B. And would be worth every penny.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

Fixed that for you. No reason VIA can't run bus service, just like Amtrak.

Exactly.

A lot of the lower frequency services on Amtrak have connecting bus service. Plenty of it is just contracted. I've used some of their bus service to connect to a train. It's great. Why people think this is odd for VIA is beyond me. It'd be a much better experience than anything VIA does today.

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

Interprovincial fare integration would be a nice start.

Not sure how necessary it is, since intercity travel isn't so frequent. But it would be nice to have Presto and Opus integration to cover most of the Toronto-Quebec City corridor.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

A lot of the lower frequency services on Amtrak have connecting bus service. Plenty of it is just contracted. I've used some of their bus service to connect to a train. It's great. Why people think this is odd for VIA is beyond me. It'd be a much better experience than anything VIA does today.

Maritime Bus uses the train stations in Moncton and Halifax as their depots. Some effort has been made to coordinate at least some of their arrivals (and departures) to the schedule of the VIA Ocean. Maritime Bus also serves the airports in Halifax, Moncton and Freddy.

This is the way it should be.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Maritime Bus uses the train stations in Moncton and Halifax as their depots. Some effort has been made to coordinate at least some of their arrivals (and departures) to the schedule of the VIA Ocean. Maritime Bus also serves the airports in Halifax, Moncton and Freddy.

This is the way it should be.

This is a good example of what VIA should do more of. But even out West, for say the Canadian, VIA could operate shuttle services to connect.

The real benefit of VIA offering services is that they can be coded and booked through VIA. That's how Amtrak's buses work in the US.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The Feds have practically begged municipalities to submit a list of shovel ready infrastructure projects in the past, and I expect that they will be even more generous when they create a post-Covid stimulus package. I don't even think the government will care that much about the pricetag. But if the project isn't at a point where the government can show that people were hired and put to work, then all bets are off.

What I've seen of municipal politics so far during covid has been pretty disappointing. The prevailing attitude back around the spring and summer was to shelve projects because of low demand or potential problems working during the pandemic, and to delay capital spending because of the higher risk to the budget. But economically this is a time when there is spare capacity, labour and materials are likely to be cheaper, and a lot of public works will actually be easier to complete.

Hopefully this isn't what's happening and we will see some ambitious infrastructure development in Canada for the next few years. It's badly needed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I honestly think that this project will get the go-ahead as long as they have something "shovel ready" by either the next or following Federal budget, so it's imperative that detailed engineering reports be released by then.

The Feds have practically begged municipalities to submit a list of shovel ready infrastructure projects in the past, and I expect that they will be even more generous when they create a post-Covid stimulus package. I don't even think the government will care that much about the pricetag. But if the project isn't at a point where the government can show that people were hired and put to work, then all bets are off.

I fully expect the HFR between Toronto and Ottawa will have shovels in the ground within the next 5 years. Even if there is a change in government, I don't think this project would get cancelled.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Again. You're dismissing the entire project based on your feelings, not what we know to be their assessments.

If you want to persist in doing that, and keep having circular discussions go for it. I don't want to waste my time. I prefer to discuss things we know. And to that end, that bit of amateur analysis confirmed that it's geographically feasible to attain the planned travel times. It's a question of investment. Which we'll know about when the JPO finished their work early in the new year.

We know there is a proposal to take a current abandoned ROW and reactivate it and run Via trains on it. We do not have final designs for the ROW, so, we could expect that there will not be any changes. However, once we have a detailed plan, or a finalized contract plan, then we will know what changes to the existing ROW will happen.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

None of this is necessary. Track space can be rationalized with more efficient operations. It's a massively unnecessary expense and hugely disruptive to transit in Toronto, which Metrolinx would never agree to, let alone pay for.

I am not suggesting it be done now. I am thinking that if HFR is as successful as we all want it to be, it may be a good thing. Combining HFR with GO RER, plus other Corridor trains and the Canadian, Maple Leaf, Northlander, etc, with only 12 slots, it may get too crowded. I would think 5-15 years after HFR and GO RER are operational we may see it happen.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Since it's a through service, by definition Toronto-Montreal will be the only route where it could be slower than today. And even that's not supposed to be the case. Again, freight really, really slows down current service.

I understand the slowdowns are currently caused by freight. I wonder if leaving the exiting ROW as is will be faster. I hope it is, but I will reserve judgement for when it opens.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

On a short distance like Calgary-Edmonton, if it's not faster than driving, it's not worth doing. Simple as that. It needs to beat driving downtown to downtown. And at least be marginally competitive with flying.

So, everything Via has been doing to the Corridor has been worthless and a waste of resources?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

$3-4B. And would be worth every penny.

No arguments that it would be worth it, but where do you get that from?

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Maritime Bus uses the train stations in Moncton and Halifax as their depots. Some effort has been made to coordinate at least some of their arrivals (and departures) to the schedule of the VIA Ocean. Maritime Bus also serves the airports in Halifax, Moncton and Freddy.

This is the way it should be.

Agreed!
What is really needed across the country is synergy between local transit, the intercity bus companies and rail service so that everything is as seamless as can be.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I fully expect the HFR between Toronto and Ottawa will have shovels in the ground within the next 5 years. Even if there is a change in government, I don't think this project would get cancelled.

Oh I fully expect any Conservative government to see this as a project solely for the benefit of Easterners and can it. Paul Martin had ambitious plans for VIA. They all got junked when Harper took over. And eventually they spend a few hundred million help CN move more freight than helping VIA move passengers....

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

We know there is a proposal to take a current abandoned ROW and reactivate it and run Via trains on it. We do not have final designs for the ROW, so, we could expect that there will not be any changes. However, once we have a detailed plan, or a finalized contract plan, then we will know what changes to the existing ROW will happen.

We know a bit more than that from what has been revealed through through those FOIA requests. Those numbers that the Globe and Mail go weren't just random.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I am not suggesting it be done now. I am thinking that if HFR is as successful as we all want it to be, it may be a good thing. Combining HFR with GO RER, plus other Corridor trains and the Canadian, Maple Leaf, Northlander, etc, with only 12 slots, it may get too crowded. I would think 5-15 years after HFR and GO RER are operational we may see it happen.

A train running once or twice per hour doesn't need substantial track. Good management should handle that. Let alone trains like the Maple Leaf and Northlander which run a few times per day or per week.

GO could probably combine a few platforms for its trains too. Especially since most of them will still be at or above 15 mins with RER.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I understand the slowdowns are currently caused by freight. I wonder if leaving the exiting ROW as is will be faster. I hope it is, but I will reserve judgement for when it opens.

Since there's no way that CN will ever give up priority or control of the existing ROW, there is no way that the Havelock sub will be slower. The Kingston and Belleville sub upgrades that VIA got hosed on should have been an adequate lesson on this discussions. Hundreds of millions spent to effectively stand still. I am pretty sure it is that experienced which has convinced VIA that they cannot achieve anything without a dedicated track.

Also, a dedicated corridor can be upgraded slowly over time with future capital projects. Spent a few million on grade crossings in one stretch. Spend $200M to straighten out a stretch. Etc. If VIA owns the ROW, they can and will slowly improve it as capital allows. And they'll be able to quantify exactly how much improvement each dollar buys. Which makes for an easier pitch to government.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, everything Via has been doing to the Corridor has been worthless and a waste of resources?

Pretty much. Ridership went down after spending hundreds of millions on the Kingston and Belleville subs. VIA is barely holding on in the Corridor. And if freight traffic picks up and their trains get slower with worse on-time performance, ridership will drop, and yield will drop even faster. VIA will end up a highly subsidized student and senior shuttle. HFR is needed to avoid this fate.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

No arguments that it would be worth it, but where do you get that from?

$10-13M per km seems like a good guess. Also, I believe one of the previous HSR proposals was around $5B. So with less grade separation, I would guess $3-4B.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I would argue that garbage rail is anything that is slower than 100km/hr, with a frequency that does not match the ability to go to a city for the day and come back the same day.

If you think a train that is slower than 100km/h is garbage rail, most of what you are fighting for (putting trains on existing shared tracks without any upgrades) is garbage rail by your own definition.

The problem is the new HFR between Toronto and Ottawa. it is very twisted and goes through small towns, and has level crossings, and.... In short, shaving that hour is going to be very costly. Not impossible, but maybe not worth it either.

If nothing else, time will be saved just by using a shorter route. VIA's current route between Toronto and Ottawa is 446 km. I estimate the new HFR route to be about 404 km. That is a 9.5% savings which works out to about 25 minutes. That doesn't take into account reduced congestion, full control over their schedule and higher speeds.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If nothing else, time will be saved just by using a shorter route. VIA's current route between Toronto and Ottawa is 446 km. I estimate the new HFR route to be about 404 km. That is a 9.5% savings which works out to about 25 minutes. That doesn't take into account reduced congestion, full control over their schedule and higher speeds.

Yep. And ~404 km over 3 hrs and 15 mins, with only 5 stops en route really isn't the onerous average speed requirement that people make it out to be. If we assume ~30 mins and 30km of deceleration and acclereation is taken up by the stops en route, that works out to an average running speed of 85 mph. Hardly some crazy ambitious number. There will be sections where it runs slower and where it can run faster. All they have to do it make the investments to have it average out to that speed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Oh I fully expect any Conservative government to see this as a project solely for the benefit of Easterners and can it. Paul Martin had ambitious plans for VIA. They all got junked when Harper took over. And eventually they spend a few hundred million help CN move more freight than helping VIA move passengers....

I hate to admit it, but I think you might be right. Hopefully things get started soon so it make cancelling it harder. I kinda forgot the Harper years and it's effect on Via.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

We know a bit more than that from what has been revealed through through those FOIA requests. Those numbers that the Globe and Mail go weren't just random.

Do you have a link that shows the speeds between stations or anything along those lines?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

A train running once or twice per hour doesn't need substantial track. Good management should handle that. Let alone trains like the Maple Leaf and Northlander which run a few times per day or per week.

GO could probably combine a few platforms for its trains too. Especially since most of them will still be at or above 15 mins with RER.

I am not saying it needs to be built on day one. I am also not suggesting that it cannot be managed. I am saying that it may come to the point that there will be a be a need for more than the existing platforms. With nowhere else to put them, underground or overhead are the only options.

I was wrong, there are 16 tracks, not 12. Grand Central has 67. As a side note, Montreal's Central has 20. So, how would you fit 4 more tracks?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Since there's no way that CN will ever give up priority or control of the existing ROW, there is no way that the Havelock sub will be slower. The Kingston and Belleville sub upgrades that VIA got hosed on should have been an adequate lesson on this discussions. Hundreds of millions spent to effectively stand still. I am pretty sure it is that experienced which has convinced VIA that they cannot achieve anything without a dedicated track.

Also, a dedicated corridor can be upgraded slowly over time with future capital projects. Spent a few million on grade crossings in one stretch. Spend $200M to straighten out a stretch. Etc. If VIA owns the ROW, they can and will slowly improve it as capital allows. And they'll be able to quantify exactly how much improvement each dollar buys. Which makes for an easier pitch to government.

I agree. However, day one they are touting wonderful speeds. They could over time make it a fast line. Mind you, having good frequency and not being held up by freight is a good plus.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Pretty much. Ridership went down after spending hundreds of millions on the Kingston and Belleville subs. VIA is barely holding on in the Corridor. And if freight traffic picks up and their trains get slower with worse on-time performance, ridership will drop, and yield will drop even faster. VIA will end up a highly subsidized student and senior shuttle. HFR is needed to avoid this fate.

I didn't realize things were that bad.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

$10-13M per km seems like a good guess. Also, I believe one of the previous HSR proposals was around $5B. So with less grade separation, I would guess $3-4B.

I didn't meant he number, I meant where in Via's budget will it come from. It would be nice if it could come from the subsidy freed up from when the Corridor breaks even. I have my doubts that will be where it can come from.

Originally Posted by roger1818

If you think a train that is slower than 100km/h is garbage rail, most of what you are fighting for (putting trains on existing shared tracks without any upgrades) is garbage rail by your own definition.

One does not equal the other. For the Calgary-Edmonton corridor, upgrading the line so that it can maintain speeds of 60mph is not unreasonable. However, upgrading the line for HFR, 90mph speeds is not realistic for the opening of the line. It is not that I am against it, it is more about what makes sense.

Originally Posted by roger1818

If nothing else, time will be saved just by using a shorter route. VIA's current route between Toronto and Ottawa is 446 km. I estimate the new HFR route to be about 404 km. That is a 9.5% savings which works out to about 25 minutes. That doesn't take into account reduced congestion, full control over their schedule and higher speeds.

The existing route is more twisty, so the speed will be lower. Providing they can at least match the overall speed, then yes, there is the potential.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Yep. And ~404 km over 3 hrs and 15 mins, with only 5 stops en route really isn't the onerous average speed requirement that people make it out to be. If we assume ~30 mins and 30km of deceleration and acclereation is taken up by the stops en route, that works out to an average running speed of 85 mph. Hardly some crazy ambitious number. There will be sections where it runs slower and where it can run faster. All they have to do it make the investments to have it average out to that speed.

Varied speeds is not unusual. The average speed is more of a concern. Providing the average speed goes up, then it will be faster.

What is the current average speed between Toronto and Ottawa?

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Oh I fully expect any Conservative government to see this as a project solely for the benefit of Easterners and can it. Paul Martin had ambitious plans for VIA. They all got junked when Harper took over. And eventually they spend a few hundred million help CN move more freight than helping VIA move passengers....

As much as I hate fuelling the same ever-circling discussions in this thread, your characterization of the last two Prime Ministers could hardly be further from the truth: Jean Chrétien was the one who had ambitious plans for VIA ("VIA Fast", i.e. the closest Canada ever came to modern passenger trains) and (despite the 2012 budget cuts to VIA) Harper allowed some improvements by providing generous capital funding for the partial triple-tracking of the Kingston Subdivision and for upgrading 8 Chateau and 4 Park cars to create the Prestige Class on the Canadian (which unlike the triple-tracking delivered very impressive results).

The only thing Paul Martin deserves to be credited for is being an anti-rail entrepreneur (in the words of the Globe and Mail in 2003: "Then there is the bus company Mr. Martin owns that offers hourly service between Ottawa and Montreal. The bus industry has been very critical of the federal government because it believes grants to Via Rail are subsiding their opposition."), who single-handedly killed VIA Fast the moment he assumed control of the government:

Chrétien Liberals had plan for fast rail: report
$2.6-billion project for fleet of intercity trains cancelled by Martin government, ex-VIA boss said
Ottawa Citizen
9 Aug 2009
BY MIKE DE SOUZA

A newly released confidential report about speeding up Canada’s passenger rail service made a series of recommendations that could have been completed by today if it had not been lost in the transition between the Liberal governments of former prime ministers Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin.

The plan, obtained by Canwest News Service, projected substantial short-term improvements, including a new fleet of 200-km/h intercity trains, and a link to one of the country’s biggest airports.

At a cost of $2.6 billion over five years, the “VIAFast” plan from 2002 would have introduced faster service between Quebec City and Windsor, Ont., while building new tracks that would reduce congestion for both passenger and freight trains.

“This exciting project, to be realized over a period of 4-5 years, will radically change the role of passenger and freight rail in Canada’s transportation industry,” said the report — marked “strictly confidential” that was produced by VIA Rail. “The investment will produce a pos- itive return to all parties and will give the country a more robust, secure transportation system.”

The VIAFast plan, which was spiked by the Martin government, would have allowed passengers to travel from Toronto to Ottawa in two hours and 15 minutes, and then from Ottawa to Montreal in one hour and 15 minutes. The MontrealQuebec City trip time would be reduced by nearly half to two hours, while a Toronto-Windsor trip would be down to three hours and 20 minutes.

The former head of VIA Rail, Jean Pelletier, in an interview published by Quebec City newspaper Le Soleil after his death, blamed Martin for cancelling VIAFast and other infrastructure investments announced by the outgoing Chrétien government.

Other anticipated benefits included: The creation of 40,000 jobs during construction and 1,700 jobs during operation, a reduction in annual traffic equivalent to taking one million cars off the roads in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor, fewer serious road accidents and deaths, a new rail link from downtown Montreal to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport, annual savings of $125 million for VIA Rail, and annual savings of up to $200 million as a result of reduced maintenance and traffic from cars and trucks taken off the road and replaced by passenger and freight trains.

VIA Rail also predicted in 2002 that its plan would reduce Canada’s annual fuel consumption by 262 million litres and lower greenhouse gas emissions by 824,000 tonnes per year.

But Paul Côté, the Crown corporation’s president and chief executive officer, explained that it has now adopted an incremental approach to achieve elements of the plan, one step at a time, through new investments by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government.

“In the end, if VIAFast had been implemented, we still believe that we would have been able to achieve those (estimates) that had been listed in the document in terms of reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, car traffic and so on and so forth,” said Côté in an interview. “But at this particular juncture, we would have to identify specific benefits based on the incremental approach that we are taking now.”

Pelletier, the former head of VIA Rail, told Le Soleil he had reached deals with freight rail companies to launch VIAFast, but those plans were spiked by Martin.

Martin’s supporters, along with opposition MPs from the Canadian Alliance, were highly critical of new investments for VIA Rail announced during the last days of the Chrétien government in 2003.

Recent multimillion-dollar announcements of infrastructure investments between Montreal and Toronto were all part of the original plan to eliminate traffic congestion conflicts between freight and passenger trains that often cause delays on VIA Rail’s schedule, said Côté.

“We’ve used the VIAFast blueprint as the style to move forward,” said Côté.

A Transport Canada official estimated last spring that the current in- frastructure plan will help reduce the passenger train trip between Montreal and Toronto to three-anda-half hours, which is the same time estimated in the VIAFast document.

The Harper government said it did its own analysis of proposals on the table, and has worked to accommodate VIA Rail’s infrastructure needs.

“While we didn’t take VIAFast, the program the Liberals were asked (to approve) in 2002, and then did nothing with for four years, what we have done is work with VIA to provide the necessary components that they need to improve passenger rail service,” said Chris Hilton, a spokesperson for Junior Transport Minister Rob Merrifield.

CANWEST NEWS SERVICE

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/o...81500747264050

Pretty much. Ridership went down after spending hundreds of millions on the Kingston and Belleville subs. VIA is barely holding on in the Corridor. And if freight traffic picks up and their trains get slower with worse on-time performance, ridership will drop, and yield will drop even faster. VIA will end up a highly subsidized student and senior shuttle. HFR is needed to avoid this fate.

Indeed, ridership decreased after the triple-tracking was announced in 2009:


However, the ridership figures for the Corridor East (i.e. east of Toronto) have recovered substantially since then (just like they did in Southwestern Ontario):

2013: 2,627,775
2014: 2,569,131
2015: 2,625,500
2016: 2,778,776
2017: 3,129,535
2018: 3,397,637
2019: 3,633,990 (i.e. +41% vs. 2014)

This of course doesn't diminish the urgency for HFR to be approved, as maintaining the current ridership (let alone: growing it) will become increasingly impossible in the current operating and commercial environment.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by esquire

It's kind of funny, there is not enough demand for common carrier ground transportation on the prairies to justify a bus, and here we have people saying that we need to double down on that with more train service.



The train would make sense if buses were overflowing, not when there isn't even enough traffic to keep the buses running.

I approve of this meme.

At this point, there is no point even contemplating long distance rail service in the prairies. When and if a viable service between the obviously most viable pair of destinations (Calgary and Edmonton) is built, then, and only then, can extensions east be contemplated.

I say extensions east, as my prediction is that a rail line to Banff is the most likely thing to be built any time soon.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Yep. And ~404 km over 3 hrs and 15 mins, with only 5 stops en route really isn't the onerous average speed requirement that people make it out to be. If we assume ~30 mins and 30km of deceleration and acclereation is taken up by the stops en route, that works out to an average running speed of 85 mph. Hardly some crazy ambitious number. There will be sections where it runs slower and where it can run faster. All they have to do it make the investments to have it average out to that speed.

An average speed of 62% of max speed is on the high side. On the track it already owns Via currently operates at 50% of max speed, which is about what the Acela operates at.

In Europe it is common for routes to operate at 45% of max speed.

https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/spec...il-19-2018/en/

Again, not a technical problem but probably a cost one.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I was wrong, there are 16 tracks, not 12. Grand Central has 67. As a side note, Montreal's Central has 20. So, how would you fit 4 more tracks?

Have a closer look at the tracks in Montreal. Tracks 3-6 don't have platforms. The platform for tracks 7 & 8 is now not accessible from the station and have been sealed to create room for retail space. The platform for track 23 is not accessible from the main concourse (though that is where the customs pre-clearance will be done). That leaves only tracks 9-22, which is only 14 tracks.

What is the current average speed between Toronto and Ottawa?

Doing some quick math, it is a distance of 446 km and on the current schedule, the trains range from 4:30 (train 55) and 4:53 (train 52). That means the average speed ranges from 91 to 99 km/h.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

An average speed of 62% of max speed is on the high side. On the track it already owns Via currently operates at 50% of max speed, which is about what the Acela operates at.

In Europe it is common for routes to operate at 45% of max speed.

https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/spec...il-19-2018/en/

Again, not a technical problem but probably a cost one.

It's high but it's also a route that has few intermediate stops and sees a high proportion running through the wilderness and rural areas. It can be done. Cost would be a bigger barrier than anything technical. We'll know more when the JPO finally puts out their plan.

[milomilo]

An average speed for HFR of 85mph does sound high. For interest, I compared it to a route I know well - London (UK) to Newcastle, which while not HSR, is 125mph trains on high quality, fast, electrified track with only a few stops (perhaps only 1 - 3). It does the 270ish miles in about 3 hours 10 minutes - 85mph. Sometimes they can go a little faster, and slower also.

Happy to be corrected, but I cannot see a Siemens Charger on Canadian track spending anywhere close to as much time at a top speed of 125mph as they would on the East Coast Main Line in the UK, where it's basically full speed the whole trip.

[milomilo]

That image also clearly shows why the rail service I described is so well used - it presents a very favourable alternative to driving or flying. Even though its journey time is greater than flying, it gets you right where you want to be rather than having to mess around with airports. And it isn't even true HSR!