High Speed Rail in Canada

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Russia has a couple of HSR lines. Not sure if this is a satisfactory example for you.

Yep, I'd say so.

[MalcolmTucker]

Big drifts here. Not going full speed though.
https://youtu.be/nvOViVoO8XA?t=2m14s

There are videos on youtube of german ICE trains entirely clearing a track.

[haljackey]

High speed rail plans may yet again be a election ploy

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/07/11/on...ncial-liberals

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by haljackey

High speed rail plans may yet again be a election ploy

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/07/11/on...ncial-liberals

At least it is now set up as an issue for the next election.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by Acajack

China also has HSR up into northern parts of the country like Harbin, which is pretty darn cold in the winter.

I've never heard that harsh winter conditions were an automatic deal-breaker for HSR.

Yes, China's HSR system is the system that operates in the coldest conditions in the world. The parts that are up near Harbin are designed to operate in temperatures down to -40.

[haljackey]

Ontario NDP seems to be for the project now:
http://www.lfpress.com/2017/08/04/an...ed-rail-friday

They really haven't had a clear stance. Could prove crucial if the next Ontario government is a minority.

[ssiguy]

One thing that the article correctly stated is that it runs thru vote rich areas that could determine the next election. Of the 9 core urban ridings in Windsor/London/KWC, the Tories only hold 1 seat and none in London or Windsor.

The Tories continue to show strenghth in SWO but that is VERY deceptive. Their support in rural areas of SWO are very high which masks the fact that they are weak in the urban areas particularly more left-leaning cities of Windsor & London. The Tories need to turn their fortunes around in these 3 key metros if they hope to get government and especially a majority.

This is not only about inftrastructure and construction jobs but also about how people in SWO feel completely ignored by Queen's Park as Wynne is viewed much more as the Premier of Toronto, not Ontario. People in SWO want their big slice of the infrastructure spending which the GTA has gotten in spades with no contribution expected from the local cities. The Tories have to be very sensitive to this view.

People in SWO are not homogeneous and the Tories already have the rural areas by a long shot but are very weak in London/Windsor urban voters and these are the voters who would benefit the most from HSR.

[swimmer_spe]

Anything said or done by any of the 3 parties from now till the dropping of the writ is all just trying to buy votes.

So, what looks worse - The Common Sense Revolution, or the Rae Days?

[FFX-ME]

Probably never going to get built but hey, would be cool.

Toronto to Montreal in 39 minutes? Hyperloop judges say this route is a winner

The Toronto-Montreal travel corridor has been identified as one of the strongest candidates for a hyperloop system that could cut the travel time between the cities from five hours to just 39 minutes.

The route is the only Canadian winner among 10 international entries chosen in a competition sponsored by Los Angeles-based Hyperloop One and now will be studied to determine commercial viability.

Hyperloop is a technology promoted by Tesla founder Elon Musk which would place passengers or cargo in a cylindrical vehicle which accelerates via electric propulsion through a low-pressure tube, lifting above the track using magnetic levitation. The vehicles are expected to glide at airline speeds for long distances due to ultra-low aerodynamic drag.

The route proposed by the Canadian arm of U.S. engineering firm AECOM would include a stop in Ottawa. The proposal suggests a trip from Toronto to Ottawa would take 27 minutes and the Ottawa-Montreal leg would take another 12 minutes.

It says the next logical step would be to extend the hyperloop system into the U.S., west to Detroit from Windsor, Ont., and east from Quebec to Niagara Falls and Buffalo and on toward Chicago, New York and Boston.


It adds that connecting Canadian ports to an extended network could enable long-haul cargo deliveries to customers within hours instead of days.

The nine other winning entries include four in the United States, two in each of the United Kingdom and India, and one in Mexico.

Hyperloop One also announced it has struck a public-private partnership with the Colorado Department of Transportation and AECOM which will begin a feasibility study for a system in that state.

One of the winners was a proposal to connect Colorado cities Cheyenne, Denver and Pueblo with commute times between any cities clocking in at under 30 minutes.

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...te-is-a-winner

[SpongeG]

The vehicles are expected to glide at airline speeds for long distances due to ultra-low aerodynamic drag.
TransPod Inc.

http://globalnews.ca/news/3747224/to...edium=Facebook

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

Looks like something out of Futurama....what the hell.

[FFX-ME]

I wonder how loud that would be. I assumed they would bury the thing. Would be pretty scary to see something going at airline speeds so close and if it's above ground like that if it breaks it could damage a hell of a lot of other stuff.

[caltrane74]

Don't know if this is old news or not, but Ontario Govt is moving forward with the advisory board for implementing the high speed rail line.

From my understanding the RER upgrades being made on the Toronto portion of the route will be compatible with High Speed Rail.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Don't know if this is old news or not, but Ontario Govt is moving forward with the advisory board for implementing the high speed rail line.

From my understanding the RER upgrades being made on the Toronto portion of the route will be compatible with High Speed Rail.

Not clear to me that there was any real substance to Wynne's announcement - there was no detail offered re the mandate of such an "advisory board".

[caltrane74]

Very true. But also, better than nothing.

[Denscity]

Washington State governor is in BC today stating he is almost ready to announce further plans for high speed rail between Seattle and Vancouver.

[MolsonExport]

Liberals' $11B pledge for high speed rail highlights long list of major infrastructure promises

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The Quebec-Windsor corridor and its rail dreams perfectly illustrate the problems for private investors in this space. Realistically, the actual financial rate of return is quite low
May not be a loss. But would not be investment grade either. And then there's portions of the Corridor where return is much higher and others where projections show a loss. So no investor will only want the portions that provide returns. Makes it hard to sell as a cohesive proposal.

This problem is universal. Which is why elsewhere government books the infrastructure and usually only fully privatizes the actual services. Tracks are usually government owned or managed by a non-profit trust.

We've been talking about HSR on the Quebec-Windsor Corridor for half a century now. As long as we insist HSR is the minimum improvement, we'll get no improvement. I strongly suspect a big part of that is airline lobbying behind the scenes. The TOM triangle, despite the competition, is extremely profitable for the airlines. HSR would kill Porter and substantially injure Air Canada. I've previously read that the airlines raised concerns about HFR. Imagine the fight they would launch against HSR.

The value in HFR is three fold. First it will show that a business case exists and that not all intercity rail is a money pit. Next it regularizes train travel for a lot of the population. May be not for business travel. But certainly for personal and tourist travel. Third, if done properly, there should be a path to slowly upgrade towards HSR. People forget that most HSR lines in Europe aren't totally brand new. They were upgraded to allow for faster speeds, with grade separations being the biggest expense. If done right, HFR could basically be Acela a decade after service launch.

Doubtful. And I say that as someone who really does support such an investment. I can't think of any city pair in the world, where two cities of about 1.5 million each have enough traffic between them to make a multi-billion dollar rail investment profitable. The justification for building something between Calgary and Edmonton is entirely about the economic and environmental benefits. Increased productivity from more efficient travel, avoided investment in road construction and reduced GHGs from air travel. I'm fairly sure WestJet and Air Canada would fight this hard though.

I mostly agree with what you're saying. The problem is two fold: lobbying from the airlines and politicians' willingness to take campaign donations in exchange for slowing down the development of rail infrastructure. It's quite frustrating to have a Government who claims the fight against climate change is a top priority, yet is unwilling to make any policy changes that might hurt some of the largest polluters, and campaign donors. It reminds me of City Councillors who collect most of their campaign donations from developers and then approve any proposal that comes in (from a campaign donor).

I would prefer HSR, but will be happy to take HFR if that's the only option offered. As you've said, HFR can build the business case for future HSR, though I am unsure how we could upgrade the HFR corridor to HSR in an efficient and economical way without effecting service (think Trillium Line).

The Feds talk about HFR a lot, but haven't done much to move it forward. They weren't even willing to invest in widening the Mount Royal tunnel to future-proof the Montreal-Quebec stretch of the proposed line.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I mostly agree with what you're saying. The problem is two fold: lobbying from the airlines and politicians' willingness to take campaign donations in exchange for slowing down the development of rail infrastructure.

Our campaign finance laws mean that the airlines aren't really buying off politicians, so much as lobbying against any development that would threaten their business model. And it's easy to do because rail investment can be portrayed as a taxpayer sinkhole that actively hurts profitable businesses.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It's quite frustrating to have a Government who claims the fight against climate change is a top priority, yet is unwilling to make any policy changes that might hurt some of the largest polluters, and campaign donors. It reminds me of City Councillors who collect most of their campaign donations from developers and then approve any proposal that comes in (from a campaign donor).

It's up to the public to really emphasize that climate change is important. And that business interests won't overrule that. We've done this for oil. It's disappointing that the public doesn't take a similarly aggressive stance on transportation.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I would prefer HSR, but will be happy to take HFR if that's the only option offered. As you've said, HFR can build the business case for future HSR, though I am unsure how we could upgrade the HFR corridor to HSR in an efficient and economical way without effecting service (think Trillium Line).

The biggest upgrades that can be done to increase speed is grade separation. And that can be done on active lines. It's not unusual, it's been done elsewhere. It's more challenging and expensive to do. But it also works out cheaper each year because the work is broken down over a longer period of time. Likewise, banking curves and twin tracks can also be built. Segments are done each year and open up zones of higher speeds, so that service can actually improve over time as fast as capital investment will allow.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Feds talk about HFR a lot, but haven't done much to move it forward. They weren't even willing to invest in widening the Mount Royal tunnel to future-proof the Montreal-Quebec stretch of the proposed line.

We'll see over the next year. The $85 million they've gotten over the last two budgets is supposed to lead to a procurement decision next year.

As for the Mount Royal Tunnel....Keep in mind that the original HFR proposal never included Montreal-Quebec. That was a change. And likely one made to get buy in from Quebec and possibly CDPQ investment. I suspect that VIA is simply going to leave it up to Quebec and REM owner CDPQ to solve that one. They can launch Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal without the tunnel.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Our campaign finance laws mean that the airlines aren't really buying off politicians, so much as lobbying against any development that would threaten their business model. And it's easy to do because rail investment can be portrayed as a taxpayer sinkhole that actively hurts profitable businesses.

They can't "buy off" politicians, but can't they make political or campaign donations?

It's up to the public to really emphasize that climate change is important. And that business interests won't overrule that. We've done this for oil. It's disappointing that the public doesn't take a similarly aggressive stance on transportation.

Aren't we already doing that? There's a reason why the Liberals, NDP, Block and Green Party received 64% of the 2019 votes cast, while Conservative campaigns only received 36%.

The biggest upgrades that can be done to increase speed is grade separation. And that can be done on active lines. It's not unusual, it's been done elsewhere. It's more challenging and expensive to do. But it also works out cheaper each year because the work is broken down over a longer period of time. Likewise, banking curves and twin tracks can also be built. Segments are done each year and open up zones of higher speeds, so that service can actually improve over time as fast as capital investment will allow.

The HFR proposal includes dedicated passenger rail tracks, a straighter alignment and grade separation, correct? And hopefully electrification.

What stands between HFR and HSR? Is it double tracking? Is it Fort Knox grade separation (elevated, trenches, heavy fencing)? Do they use the same type of tracking?

We'll see over the next year. The $85 million they've gotten over the last two budgets is supposed to lead to a procurement decision next year.

As for the Mount Royal Tunnel....Keep in mind that the original HFR proposal never included Montreal-Quebec. That was a change. And likely one made to get buy in from Quebec and possibly CDPQ investment. I suspect that VIA is simply going to leave it up to Quebec and REM owner CDPQ to solve that one. They can launch Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal without the tunnel.

I guess it goes back to the proof of concept and business case. We have to start somewhere, and that's the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal triangle. I hope that when the time comes to extend to Q.C., we'll be ready to fund a new tunnel through Mount Royal.