High Speed Rail in Canada

[graupner]

How much money has been wasted over the years in publishing identical studies about what we all know ???

[vid]

Probably enough to build it!

If it wasn't for studies the government would actually have to do things!

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by canucklehead2

The more and more I think about HST for not only the Edmonton-Calgary corridor but the Windsor-Quebec City, I think that a Transrapid Maglev would be the best option. If only because it can operate commercially at 430-500 km/h and has the highest overall future potential for service growth, since trains could carry 1100 people at once, compared to roughly half that for a TGV style service. Don't get me wrong a TGV wouldn't be bad and it is a proven technology but a Maglev would be that much quicker and quieter...

Originally Posted by AylmerOptimist

Though I would LOVE to see that happen, you must factor in costs...

Simply not viable for these areas at these times. Currently, there are no inter-city maglev trains in existence, though last year, one was announced by Japan Railways for Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka, at a cost of US$44 billion, and planned to be completed by 2025. This is a 450 km route with 70-80 million or so people living along it.

Windsor-Quebec is approximately 1,100 km with a population of 20 million. Calgary-Edmonton, at 280 km with 2.5 million people.

The former is also of course, in a country with a well established "rail culture", the likes of which we don't have in Canada, or really, doesn't even exist anywhere in the world to the extent it does in Japan.

[vid]

But QUICKER and QUIETER!

[Metro-One]

Quick question, are there any high speed "bullet trains" in North America? I heard that California is looking at building one as well.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Quick question, are there any high speed "bullet trains" in North America? I heard that California is looking at building one as well.

Well, there is the Acela Express that runs between Boston and Washington, with a max speed of 240 km/h (138 km/h average...not sure if that includes dwell times). And yes, California's proposal was approved, and will have trains that operate in the 350 km/h range, and should be completed 2020-ish.

[graupner]

Do you think it will be possible to build a real High Speed Train (250km/h average) and operate it safely, reliably in our weather??

Ice storms, snow, etc will be a major issue that they don't have in Europe!!


I fear that if this project ever goes trough, we end up with a cheap, not-so-fast-diesel-high-speed-train.

[eemy]

There is a rail line between Moscow and Saint Petersburg which is currently capable of speeds up to 200km/h and is in the midst of being upgraded to 250km/h. The route is ~650km and I imagine the conditions would be similar to Toronto-Montreal.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Simply not viable for these areas at these times. Currently, there are no inter-city maglev trains in existence, though last year, one was announced by Japan Railways for Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka, at a cost of US$44 billion, and planned to be completed by 2025. This is a 450 km route with 70-80 million or so people living along it.

Windsor-Quebec is approximately 1,100 km with a population of 20 million. Calgary-Edmonton, at 280 km with 2.5 million people.

The former is also of course, in a country with a well established "rail culture", the likes of which we don't have in Canada, or really, doesn't even exist anywhere in the world to the extent it does in Japan.

Indeed. Good points. Given our laggard status and low density, it is unlikely that we would embrace this advanced, expensive technology.

[vid]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

There is a rail line between Moscow and Saint Petersburg which is currently capable of speeds up to 200km/h and is in the midst of being upgraded to 250km/h. The route is ~650km and I imagine the conditions would be similar to Toronto-Montreal.

St. Petersburg to Moscow is more comparable to Winnipeg-Thunder Bay. (Except for the population difference.)

[hagbard]

Originally Posted by vid

Probably enough to build it!

If it wasn't for studies the government would actually have to do things!

Well, three cheers for studies then.

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by graupner

Do you think it will be possible to build a real High Speed Train (250km/h average) and operate it safely, reliably in our weather??

Ice storms, snow, etc will be a major issue that they don't have in Europe!!


I fear that if this project ever goes trough, we end up with a cheap, not-so-fast-diesel-high-speed-train.

They don't have snow in Europe?

Japan is extending the Shinkansen to Sapporo, a city that gets 3 times as much snow as Montreal.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

There is a rail line between Moscow and Saint Petersburg which is currently capable of speeds up to 200km/h and is in the midst of being upgraded to 250km/h. The route is ~650km and I imagine the conditions would be similar to Toronto-Montreal.

I think that 300km/h should be the average running speed.

[canucklehead2]

I think it's wrong to look at HSR as a profitable business like a busline or airline, but rather a development and economic tool, more like an inter-provincial highway network...

Sure the upfront cost may be steep, but the long-term pay off will be even larger... And even with a say $50 billion price tag... (which would pay for a very large network) over a 10-20 year span, the price isn't that large... Especially if it can revitalize a large section of the nation...

Another way to look at it would be an inter provincial mass transit line akin to a subway or Go Train... Just think of the possibilities it could open up... People could say live in London or Kingston and work in Toronto or Ottawa...

[Jared]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

...one was announced by Japan Railways for Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka, at a cost of US$44 billion, and planned to be completed by 2025. This is a 450 km route with 70-80 million or so people living along it.

Keep in mind that this follows a different route than the "regular" Shinkansen (Maglev will take the Chuo route, regular Shinkansen takes the Tokaido route), and the Chuo happens to be right through the mountains, so a huge chunk of this project will be tunneled. Tunneling is expensive, and would costs a lot of money regardless of which technology is used. It's not like traditional HSR could be had along the proposed route for 10% of the price or something like that, it would still be very expensive, although obviously less than the maglev.

However, my point is that taking the cost and route length for Japan's proposed maglev and then extrapolating that as meaning Maglev costs X amount of dollars (or Yen, as it were) per km is a flawed way of measuring things in this instance. I'm not suggesting you were doing this; this is just for people's general info.

[canucklehead2]

Same is true for Maglev costs in China as well... It was built on sinking liquidy soil so the cost of pilings was FAR higher than a normal straight line on solid ground as would be the case for an Edmonton-Calgary Maglev or a Windsor-Quebec City line...

[waterloowarrior]

GLOBE EDITORIAL
Humans, as well as cargo
From Monday's Globe and Mail
December 15, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST

As the federal government hammers out a forthcoming economic-stimulus package, it should think seriously about helping passenger railways across Canada to follow the example of southern Ontario's GO Transit by buying up train tracks from CN and Canadian Pacific. This week, GO announced plans to acquire a good chunk of the Toronto area's network.

The freight operators' ownership of the vast majority of the country's tracks is a severe headache for commuter authorities in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, as well as VIA Rail, and the greatest obstacle to public investment in Canada's rail system.

Mere tenants of companies whose business is moving cargo, not people, passenger railways operate at the mercy of freight traffic. The consequences are many.

Passenger trains in Canada often have to pull on to sidings to let freight pass. Switches owned by CN have failed repeatedly in Ontario, inconveniencing tens of thousands of commuters, not to mention periodic freight derailments, one of which completely shut down VIA service between Toronto and Montreal last summer.

The freight railways' ownership of the tracks makes public investment in upgraded infrastructure less attractive, since riders may not enjoy their full benefits, and transit planners must get private-sector approval for service improvements.

If train travel is to be a viable alternative to driving within and flying between Canada's metropolitan areas, this situation is unacceptable.

Rectifying it should be part of a comprehensive plan to improve Canadian railways. Not only is this the only G8 country without high-speed trains, but the intercity network depends on 20-year-old diesel locomotives, now being refurbished by VIA for decades more in service. Of the four busiest Canadian airports, three have no rail links, and no trains connect Calgary and Edmonton, just 300 km apart.

Although the Conservative government has pitched in for some limited upgrades to commuter networks and released enough funds to halt VIA's long decline, much more is needed. Happily, rail agencies already have detailed but largely unfunded investment plans.

A modern rail system should be a principal goal of the infrastructure spending in January's federal budget. That means making sure that people, not cargo, take priority on the tracks.

[Policy Wonk]

the intercity network depends on 20-year-old diesel locomotives, now being refurbished by VIA for decades more in service.

The money being wasted on refurbing the F40PH's and LRC's is insanity, the only equipment in the VIA fleet that is worth keeping is the P42DC locomotives, everything else needs to be scrapped.

Here is a piece of trivia for you, every single passenger car in the VIA fleet from the Budd cars to the newest Alstom cars was rescued from the scrap yard by VIA Rail. The Budd's were to be scrapped by the CPR, the LRC's were Amtrak rejects and the Alstom's which aren't really that old were rejected for simply being the least efficient rail cars built in post-war Europe.

[DHLawrence]

The LRCs aren't, strictly speaking, cast-offs from Amtrak. Both railways tested them, but we were the only ones to buy. The Budds with both blue and yellow stripes above the windows are Amtrak cast-offs, though.

It has to be admitted, VIA has made the most of the little it's been given by the Powers That Be. And it's no secret that The Canadian won't be the same without the Budds, even if they're on the wrong tracks.

[Policy Wonk]

VIA didn't even want the LRC's at the time - they had already been rejected after trials by CN in 1970's. When Amtrak terminated their LRC acquisition Ottawa was stuck holding the bag and VIA was getting them whether they wanted them or not.

The only thing VIA has made the most of is being allowed to operate with virtually no governmental oversight coming out of total indifference.

For their own good I hope the F40PH and LRC refurb program is cut by Ottawa because that is a colossal waste of money and would be much better spent on an LRC replacement, but if completed no matter who is in power their going to be told to make do.

VIA needs to be investing in modern passenger cars to go with their GE Genesis P42DC's and nothing else, every dollar spent on the F40PH's and existing passenger cars is wasted.