HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #961  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2018, 2:26 AM
White Pine White Pine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtrainUser View Post
That was not the reason Bombardier lost the contract. The real reason is that they have a poor track record on delivering their products on time.
Not only that, but they would have had to make much more significant design changes, while Siemens had a more or less suitable product already in production. That saves a lot of time.

I like Bombardier as much as anyone, but the contract award was made based on good reasons. Via is operating on a tight schedule and can't afford the uncertainty. Looking for bugs in the selection process makes them look like poor losers IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #962  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2018, 6:50 AM
Catenary Catenary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,306
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
In the video it shows an engine at each end, but you are right that this picture shows a cab car. All of the pictures show the pointed nose, which is more like the Brightline engines.
I really like what they did with the nose. The Brightline trains look great, but the nosecone is problematic, prone to damage and low enough to potentially impact snow removal. On the other hand, the Amtrak States units are somewhat polarizing, and while I don't hate them they aren't particularly good looking. VIA's design strikes a nice middle ground.

I don't think we can evaluate the engine horsepower by the nose design though, it is merely cosmetic. I was wrong about the Brightline length, but I believe they are future-proof for eventual expansion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #963  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2018, 11:58 AM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catenary View Post
I really like what they did with the nose. The Brightline trains look great, but the nosecone is problematic, prone to damage and low enough to potentially impact snow removal. On the other hand, the Amtrak States units are somewhat polarizing, and while I don't hate them they aren't particularly good looking. VIA's design strikes a nice middle ground.

I don't think we can evaluate the engine horsepower by the nose design though, it is merely cosmetic. I was wrong about the Brightline length, but I believe they are future-proof for eventual expansion.
I agree on all accounts.

Last edited by roger1818; Dec 14, 2018 at 12:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #964  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2018, 5:26 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Tucked away in the press release announcing the selection of Siemens they re-announced some things that I hadn't read before. Presumably they were added to appease Quebec:

Quote:
VIA Rail’s Modernization

The Quebec City – Windsor corridor fleet replacement is part of VIA Rail’s transformation plan for Canadian passenger rail service. This plan also includes renovating a part of the rolling stock that operates on VIA Rail’s long-distance routes. Accordingly, the following work was announced earlier in 2018 at several locations:
  • 17 accessible cars – Bombardier Transportation – La Pocatière
  • 25 economy cars – Cad Railway Industries – Montréal
  • 4 dining cars – Rail GD – Gaspésie
  • 33 economy and business cars – VIA Rail – Montréal
This renovation work represents an investment of approximately $154 million, undertaken by 300 workers in Quebec.
The original press releases for 3 of the 4 are as follows (I can't find the one regarding 33 economy and business cars):

April 3rd, 2018April 10th, 2018October 10th, 2018
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #965  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2018, 7:38 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catenary View Post
I don't know about that - the VIA Rail release shows cab cars. https://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-rail/fleet-renewal
The Railway Gazett has more information in their article that confirms your speculation:
Quote:
Each trainset will be formed of one locomotive and five coaches, including a driving trailer; both economy and business class seating will be provided, with around 285 seats per train. The Siemens Charger diesel-electric locomotives will be similar to more than 70 in service in the USA and will meet US EPA Tier 4 emission standards.
from: VIA Rail selects Siemens to replace Québec - Windsor corridor fleet
12 Dec 2018
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #966  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2018, 4:40 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,193
VIA ‘confident’ Ottawa will announce decision on new rail lines following $1-billion purchase of new trains

Bill Curry, The Globe & Mail
Published December 14, 2018 | Updated 3 hours ago


After this week’s purchase of nearly $1-billion worth of new trains, VIA Rail President Yves Desjardins-Siciliano is setting his sights on the Liberal government’s 2019 budget in hope that it will green light a multibillion-dollar expansion of its passenger rail network.

The Crown corporation’s plan has strong support at the federal cabinet table from Infrastructure Minister François-Philippe Champagne, who told The Globe and Mail this week that he is convinced of its merits.

Via’s proposed “High Frequency Rail” project – or HFR – would see the installation of dedicated passenger rail lines along the Quebec City to Toronto corridor – and possibly further west to Windsor, Ont. – so that travellers are no longer left waiting along the line as freight trains receive priority on the current lines owned by other companies, primarily CN Rail.

Mr. Desjardins-Siciliano told The Globe on Thursday that he expects a decision will be made early next year, either with traditional infrastructure funding or through the new Canada Infrastructure Bank.

“We’re still confident that a decision will be made on this file by the government of Canada early in 2019,” he said.

Via Rail announced on Wednesday that it is awarding a $989-million contract to Germany’s Siemens for new passenger rail cars and locomotives that will be manufactured in Sacramento, Calif. The decision was sharply criticized by Canada’s Bombardier Inc. – which had submitted a competing bid – and by Canadian labour leaders who said the contract should have supported local jobs. Federal Transport Minister Marc Garneau said Canada’s international trade obligations prevent Ottawa from favouring domestic firms.

Via’s proposal for dedicated passenger lines would cost at least $4-billion. The cost would rise to about $6-billion if the line is equipped to run trains using electric power.

Over the past three years, the Liberal government has offered tentative support for the idea with in-depth studies, but it has not fully endorsed the project.

Mr. Champagne, who represents the Quebec riding of Saint-Maurice-Champlain that would benefit from a new passenger rail line between Montreal and Quebec City along the north shore of the St. Lawrence River, told The Globe he is “totally” behind VIA’s plan.

“It’s in line with our vision for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, it’s in line with our vision to promote public transit and, for me, it’s a great tool [for] empowering labour mobility,” he said.

Mr. Champagne is a key voice at the cabinet table as the government weighs its options for big infrastructure spending items that could be announced in 2019, a federal election year.

One of the challenges in terms of timing is that federal officials view Via’s project as a potential candidate for funding through the infrastructure bank. The new Crown corporation has a $35-billion budget, but has only funded one project. The bank is designed to operate at arm’s length of government. As a result, its leadership may not be moving at a pace that coincides with the Liberal government’s desire to announce infrastructure projects in the run-up to the fall 2019 election.

Some passenger-rail advocates accuse Via – and Ottawa – of thinking small. The HFR plan is based on running the new, traditional-style passenger trains at top speeds of about 177 km/h with frequent departures. That is very different from full high-speed passenger trains that can reach speeds of 250 km/h or more. However, high-speed rail is much more expensive because of the need to eliminate at-grade crossings with intersecting roads and rail lines.

There are also questions about the proposed routes. Rather than running parallel to the existing CN Rail lines between Toronto and Montreal, a new HFR line would run from Toronto through Peterborough, Ont., toward Ottawa and then on to Montreal. On the Quebec side, Via’s existing service along the south shore of the St. Lawrence River would be complemented by a Via-owned track linking Montreal and Quebec City along the north shore. The federal studies – which have not been released – included looking at extending the plan through Southwestern Ontario to Windsor, but that would not likely be part of the initial stage of the plan.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...nes-following/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #967  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2018, 5:48 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketphish View Post
Some passenger-rail advocates accuse Via – and Ottawa – of thinking small. The HFR plan is based on running the new, traditional-style passenger trains at top speeds of about 177 km/h with frequent departures. That is very different from full high-speed passenger trains that can reach speeds of 250 km/h or more. However, high-speed rail is much more expensive because of the need to eliminate at-grade crossings with intersecting roads and rail lines.
That argument always bothers me. Every proposal for HSR has died because it is too expensive. I would rather see the two biggest problems, frequency and reliability with only a slight increase in speed, resolved now at a price the government might actually pay. Once VIA owns all of the track it uses on the corridor, we can start thinking of upgrading it for HSR. People are just impatient and want everything right away.

Quote:
There are also questions about the proposed routes. Rather than running parallel to the existing CN Rail lines between Toronto and Montreal, a new HFR line would run from Toronto through Peterborough, Ont., toward Ottawa and then on to Montreal. On the Quebec side, Via’s existing service along the south shore of the St. Lawrence River would be complemented by a Via-owned track linking Montreal and Quebec City along the north shore. The federal studies – which have not been released – included looking at extending the plan through Southwestern Ontario to Windsor, but that would not likely be part of the initial stage of the plan.
I am very curious to see that study. I am especially curios to see if they plan to continue using Union and Central stations in Toronto and Montreal. VIA is concerned that ,since they don't own the stations and since commuter rail is expanding, they may not have as much access to platforms as they would like. I think they view Ottawa's station as a model to replicate, being on a major transit line for those going downtown and easily accessible by car.

The fact that VIA is so optimistic makes me think that the study went well, but only time will tell.

Last edited by roger1818; Dec 15, 2018 at 6:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #968  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2018, 6:27 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,806
My hope with the new route is VIA will be able to spend a lot more time operating at speed.

Even the current LRC equipment is not really all that slow when it gets going. The problem is you get slowed down in places like smith falls or due to other rail traffic.

Going 150km/h+ is not slow.

Going 40 or 50 is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #969  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2018, 6:42 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by c_speed3108 View Post
My hope with the new route is VIA will be able to spend a lot more time operating at speed.

Even the current LRC equipment is not really all that slow when it gets going. The problem is you get slowed down in places like smith falls or due to other rail traffic.

Going 150km/h+ is not slow.

Going 40 or 50 is.
Yup. That is where most of the travel time improvements will come from. If you compare new and old schedules, every year the trains take longer than the previous because of increased freight traffic, so VIA is having to add a bit of a buffer to their schedules. With their own tracks, they are the masters of their own schedule.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #970  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2018, 8:00 PM
GoTrans GoTrans is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
Yup. That is where most of the travel time improvements will come from. If you compare new and old schedules, every year the trains take longer than the previous because of increased freight traffic, so VIA is having to add a bit of a buffer to their schedules. With their own tracks, they are the masters of their own schedule.
The following are potential solutions to solve the slowdowns due to freight traffic;
1) double track the CP mainline and build a new connection outside Montreal for freight traffic to move back to the CN line and provide access to CN's yards. The route would be operated jointly as in other co-production agreements. CN would still retain local freight service on the current CN line.

2) move CN's freight traffic to the ex CPR route Via wants to use for HFR via Peterborough and relay trackage as a double track freight line and build a new access to CN's yards in Montreal as mentioned above. CN would still retain local freight service on the current CN line.

3) re-open the CP or CN or some combination of both from Sudbury/Capreol to Smiths Falls, and have joint ownership of the line from Smith Falls to some point on the line to Montreal so CN could diverge from the CP track and to CN yards in Montreal. The railways should be forced to send a minimum number for freight trains on the Ottawa valley line in order that it is financially viable just as they had agreed to do previously before CN backed out over the use of unionized labour.

4) option 3 but CN freights would split off from the CP ROW at Pembroke or Arnprior to access the Beachburg subdivision and use the Alexandria subdivision to access the CN yards via Coteau as they historically did. Ottawa to Montreal Via trains would use the ex CP ROW which Via owns for trains going to Montreal with access to CN rails to gain access to Central Station. This would mean no interference from freight trains and would provide access for VIA to operate a train on the same line with out much interference from freights.

5) rebuild the line as per option 3 or 4 and transfer the line to Ontario Northland. Have Ontario Northland perform local freight services to be interchanged with CN or CP at North Bay, Ottawa, Smiths Falls or Montreal. ONR would provide the dispatching service, track maintenance and would likely be more amenable to having passenger trains operate on the same track.

Although all of these options would include significant amount of funding it would benefit both the freight railways and Via Rail. All of these options should be examined before any funding decision is made with respect to HFR between Ottawa and Toronto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #971  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 12:09 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,788
Quote:
That argument always bothers me. Every proposal for HSR has died because it is too expensive. I would rather see the two biggest problems, frequency and reliability with only a slight increase in speed, resolved now at a price the government might actually pay. Once VIA owns all of the track it uses on the corridor, we can start thinking of upgrading it for HSR. People are just impatient and want everything right away.
High Speed rail can be incremental as I saw on my trip between Prague and Berlin. Train speeds can be increased on sections of track that have been improved to HSR standards. It is not mandatory that an entire rail line meet HSR standards. It is not an all or nothing choice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #972  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 12:12 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,788
Lots of 1950s stainless steel train cars including a dome car were at Ottawa station late this afternoon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #973  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 12:35 AM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Lots of 1950s stainless steel train cars including a dome car were at Ottawa station late this afternoon.
I arrived on train 35 and it was all HEP cars and the Eastern stub track also had HEP cars. I didn’t notice any dome cars though (then again I wasn’t looking for them).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #974  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 7:28 AM
PHrenetic PHrenetic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
That argument always bothers me. Every proposal for HSR has died because it is too expensive. I would rather see the two biggest problems, frequency and reliability with only a slight increase in speed, resolved now at a price the government might actually pay. Once VIA owns all of the track it uses on the corridor, we can start thinking of upgrading it for HSR. People are just impatient and want everything right away.



I am very curious to see that study. I am especially curios to see if they plan to continue using Union and Central stations in Toronto and Montreal. VIA is concerned that ,since they don't own the stations and since commuter rail is expanding, they may not have as much access to platforms as they would like. I think they view Ottawa's station as a model to replicate, being on a major transit line for those going downtown and easily accessible by car.

The fact that VIA is so optimistic makes me think that the study went well, but only time will tell.
Good Day.

Yup.... incremental upgrading of RoW has always been a hallmark of good investment and reasonable progress when there is not a barrel of money to be thrown around. CN and CP have always been good at it (apart from the usual occasional SNAFU). It is the prudent way to go.

One thing we do need for all rail systems is a better push at eliminating more level-crossings sooner rather than later.
The federal program is there to do it, but seems painfully slow at getting it done, for whatever reason.
We can hope that in building a newly restored and upgraded RoW, VIA looks well at grade-separating as much as possible as soon as possible.

As for the stations.....
Montreal has just become far more difficult, with the REM taking over the MR tunnel, and a significant amount of space at Central station.
I really have no clue how VIA will approach a new solution there.
Toronto Union has been incrementally salami sliced away over the years as GO has grown, and looks to continue to be so with RER expansion, but they still have significant space there. I assume they will continue operations there in their continued operation of existing 'slower' services east and west.
So.... I wonder if the proposed Pearson high volume high density transportation hub is making traction here ? With UP Express in place and the proposed Eglington West reaching out there fitting into your suggestion of high volume local rail transit in place or going in place, and getting a more open growth location for a new station ?

Consideration ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #975  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 1:39 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
High Speed rail can be incremental as I saw on my trip between Prague and Berlin. Train speeds can be increased on sections of track that have been improved to HSR standards. It is not mandatory that an entire rail line meet HSR standards. It is not an all or nothing choice.
I think incremental high speed works if the line is already electrified, already separated from freight and local trains and already upgraded to a pretty high standard. I don’ think it would work here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #976  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 1:44 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoTrans View Post
The following are potential solutions to solve the slowdowns due to freight traffic;
1) double track the CP mainline and build a new connection outside Montreal for freight traffic to move back to the CN line and provide access to CN's yards. The route would be operated jointly as in other co-production agreements. CN would still retain local freight service on the current CN line.

2) move CN's freight traffic to the ex CPR route Via wants to use for HFR via Peterborough and relay trackage as a double track freight line and build a new access to CN's yards in Montreal as mentioned above. CN would still retain local freight service on the current CN line.
.
I think one of these would make way more sense than the various boondoggles being proposed. At the very least the cost of these options should be compared to the highway 7 nonsense. They are both publicly traded companies and will have a price, I would like to know what it is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #977  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 2:59 PM
CityTech CityTech is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,807
^ Agreed. The Highway 7 line proposed is in the middle of nowhere for the most part, the Lakeshore line is in the middle of the population concentration between Ottawa & Toronto. It makes more sense for the Highway 7 line to be freight and the lakeshore line to be passenger. I like GoTrans' 2nd idea, for VIA to build the Highway 7 line but as a double-track joint CN/CP freight line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #978  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 3:04 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
I think incremental high speed works if the line is already electrified, already separated from freight and local trains and already upgraded to a pretty high standard. I don’ think it would work here.
Isn't that what VIA will have after HFR (assuming they get funding electrify the line)? That is why I said it can be used as a stepping stone to HSR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
I think one of these would make way more sense than the various boondoggles being proposed. At the very least the cost of these options should be compared to the highway 7 nonsense. They are both publicly traded companies and will have a price, I would like to know what it is.
Hopefully the study the federal government asked VIA to perform will have looked at those options.

The one big advantage of the proposed plan is that they can pool the demand between Toronto-Ottawa, Toronto-Montreal, and Ottawa-Montreal. VIA has 10 trains a day from Toronto to Ottawa and 7 trains a day from Toronto to Montreal (plus 6 trains a day from Ottawa to Montreal), so assuming there is enough demand to support that, by using a route that is just as fast (if not faster) from Toronto to Montreal via Ottawa, they can have 17 trains a day.

By sticking to the lakeshore route, Ottawa becomes too much of a detour for that to work, so they can't get those high frequencies by pooling the demand.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #979  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 3:12 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
Isn't that what VIA will have after HFR (assuming they get funding electrify the line)? That is why I said it can be used as a stepping stone to HSR.



Hopefully the study the federal government asked VIA to perform will have looked at those options.

The one big advantage of the proposed plan is that they can pool the demand between Toronto-Ottawa, Toronto-Montreal, and Ottawa-Montreal. VIA has 10 trains a day from Toronto to Ottawa and 7 trains a day from Toronto to Montreal (plus 6 trains a day from Ottawa to Montreal), so assuming there is enough demand to support that, by using a route that is just as fast (if not faster) from Toronto to Montreal via Ottawa, they can have 17 trains a day.

By sticking to the lakeshore route, Ottawa becomes too much of a detour for that to work, so they can't get those high frequencies by pooling the demand.
We really have no idea what HFR would involve if it were ever implemented. They certainly seem to be lowballing the electrification cost.

Good point about Ottawa, although sharing the line would still be possible if passenger traffic ended up on the CP line. If it is the CN line Montreal-Toronto times would probably be a lot better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #980  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2018, 3:21 PM
JohnnyRenton JohnnyRenton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
That argument always bothers me. Every proposal for HSR has died because it is too expensive. I would rather see the two biggest problems, frequency and reliability with only a slight increase in speed, resolved now at a price the government might actually pay. Once VIA owns all of the track it uses on the corridor, we can start thinking of upgrading it for HSR. People are just impatient and want everything right away.
Yes, people are impatient, that is an inarguable fact. And though the HSR proposals were expensive there was another reason they never went anywhere; they cut service to smaller places in favour of only the biggest markets. Cities like Kingston had stations in scrubland north of where people lived. Smaller markets were erased completely. They were never going to gain any political support when so many ridings would have lost service as a result of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
I am very curious to see that study. I am especially curios to see if they plan to continue using Union and Central stations in Toronto and Montreal. VIA is concerned that ,since they don't own the stations and since commuter rail is expanding, they may not have as much access to platforms as they would like. I think they view Ottawa's station as a model to replicate, being on a major transit line for those going downtown and easily accessible by car.

The fact that VIA is so optimistic makes me think that the study went well, but only time will tell.
There might be capacity problems at those stations, but VIA will never, ever leave them. Being able to take a train to the heart of Toronto or Montreal is a central part of what makes its service popular. It is what has helped keep it alive while VIA has struggled over the past few decades. Those central stations are its competitive edge.

Does that mean that they can't look at adding other stations, on city edges, that bring VIA service closer to more people? Of course not. And in fact, VIA should add more fringe stations as the total number of trains and services offered grows. But that will take time before there are enough trains in service that you can look at new inner-city/region stations without taking service away from existing ones.

I think the biggest thing people need to realize, and remember, is that there is a lot of groundwork to be done to allow HFR/HSR to be successful. Union Station has needed extensive renovations in order to accommodate increased passenger volume, and could well take 20 years for all the projects there to be completed. The rail network in the GTA has had to be modernized, with double tracking, grade separations, eventual electrification, etc. There is new equipment for VIA, which was just done a week ago. There is the Mont Royal tunnel issue. There is HFR. Hundreds, if not thousands, of small to large projects have been completed, are underway, or will soon be underway, that will actually allow a modern inter-city rail network to exist. And there is still more to be done yet. A lot more.

And on the subject of HFR, I think its real value and purpose is being missed. There are parts of it which would be valuable on their own, such as double tracking sections through Ottawa, and onto Montreal. And it will add some customers, primarily by bringing service to Peterborough, and Perth. As a new line, its a bit of a dud. But as a detour, it is invaluable. At some point, when the lakeshore line from Toronto to Montreal is being built/rebuilt/realligned/seperated there is a good chance there will be even greater delays then what we see right now. There might even be times to major construction periods where the line is completely shut. And that is going to impact its customer base. With HFR, you can reroute trains during those times. All Ottawa bound trains could use the northern line if you need to reduce the number of trains on the lines. And in some cases, you could at least serve Montreal by routing them through Ottawa. Yes, it will mean a trip that is an hour or two longer, but at least then, in those extreme times, it can still offer train service.

I think if you look at the last decade of investments in passenger/commuter/regional rail, and what is also in the works for the next decade, there are some clear signs that HSR is not too far away, and HFR is one of the last, and major, steps before getting there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:24 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.