News   Apr 30, 2024
Void If Removed
 384     0 
News   Apr 29, 2024
Sustainability Month: Alternative Energy Sources Help Drive Sustainability in Building Industry
 1.6K     0 
News   Apr 29, 2024
Hidden Histories to be Revealed at Doors Open Toronto 2024
 1.1K     1 

High Speed Rail: London - Kitchener-Waterloo - Pearson Airport - Toronto

Haljackey said:
High Speed Rail should have very few stations on the route to maximize the speed at which the trains can travel at. Ideally, you'd want a stop every 150-200km, so Kitchener's stop could be deemed too close. These distances are typical throughout Europe, but there are some exceptions.
Click to expand...
Not at all.

This is for 300 km/hr high-speed service. What Ontario is proposing is 200 km/hr high speed service, similar to what they use in UK, on likes such as the Great Western mainline from London to Cardiff. Which has stops about every few km. Not all trains stop at every stop.

Even if you look at countries that do run 300 km/hr services, they also run local services, often on the same tracks.
 
nfitz said:
Not at all.

This is for 300 km/hr high-speed service. What Ontario is proposing is 200 km/hr high speed service, similar to what they use in UK, on likes such as the Great Western mainline from London to Cardiff. Which has stops about every few km. Not all trains stop at every stop.

Even if you look at countries that do run 300 km/hr services, they also run local services, often on the same tracks.
Click to expand...

Yep. If this corridor is built by the province, it will closely resemble either British diesel high speed services (The Midlands Main Line between London St. Pancras and Yorkshire is another example, the "Intercity 125" concept has been around since the British Rail days) or US higher-speed routes (there are several upgrades being built that increase train speeds to 110MPH/175km/h).
 
ShonTron said:
Yep. If this corridor is built by the province, it will closely resemble either British diesel high speed services (The Midlands Main Line between London St. Pancras and Yorkshire is another example, the "Intercity 125" concept has been around since the British Rail days) or US higher-speed routes (there are several upgrades being built that increase train speeds to 110MPH/175km/h).
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Also worth pointing out that such lines typically are 2 tracks (with additional sidings), and also carry freight, and even have level crossings. There seems to be perception by some that what is being proposed would have to be exclusively passenger and grade-separated.

The UK has been doing this for 40 years ... often with diesel.
 
innsertnamehere said:
The main difference is that K-W is its own metro while Brampton is some arbitrary municipal border in the Toronto metro.
Click to expand...

Not sure why that matters if that is where people are? Again, we seem very hung up the concepts/models of other nations' experiences....while it is very good to look around the world to see what has happened and how they have done things but at some point you have to insert your own realities in there....and, again, I find it quite bizarre to be thinking of building a new service that will serve only 3 cities but on the way pass through one that, by then, will have a population of somewhere between 600k and 650k and not stop to pick up or drop off passengers.
 
nfitz said:
Not at all.

This is for 300 km/hr high-speed service. What Ontario is proposing is 200 km/hr high speed service, similar to what they use in UK, on likes such as the Great Western mainline from London to Cardiff. Which has stops about every few km. Not all trains stop at every stop.

Even if you look at countries that do run 300 km/hr services, they also run local services, often on the same tracks.
Click to expand...

I used to use that line regularly (about 2 times a month) between London and Cardiff.....1 hour and 55 minutes to Cardiff...with stops along the way and beating driving time by anywhere from 1 - 2 hours. If you ever mentioned driving instead of the train people would look at you and say "why would you do that".
 
TOareaFan said:
Not sure why that matters if that is where people are? Again, we seem very hung up the concepts/models of other nations' experiences....while it is very good to look around the world to see what has happened and how they have done things but at some point you have to insert your own realities in there....and, again, I find it quite bizarre to be thinking of building a new service that will serve only 3 cities but on the way pass through one that, by then, will have a population of somewhere between 600k and 650k and not stop to pick up or drop off passengers.
Click to expand...

Brampton only has 525k, and will be getting 15 minute service, which is more then the currently 1/2 hour buses they get. HSR is overkill for a suburb, which is what Brampton is.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Brampton only has 525k, and will be getting 15 minute service, which is more then the currently 1/2 hour buses they get. HSR is overkill for a suburb, which is what Brampton is.
Click to expand...

First off, Brampton had 525k in 2011....it also has the highest growth rate of any of the largest 20 cities in the country (20.8% between 2006 and 2011)....eventually that growth slows...no evidence it has yet but lets say it only grows by 10% every 5 years.....that would put it at 635k by 2021...this line is 10 years out (2024ish).

We really need to get past this "suburb v city" thing....trains (any transport link) are meant to move people not just vehicles. Since this is a bi-directional line serving Toronto and KW and London....if the latter two are hoping for the economic boost that this line brings by bringing people and jobs to their markets (as opposed to just a fast frequent way out of their markets) why would they not want it exposed to those 635k people...whether they live in a suburb or not? If one of the reasons for spending $1.6B on an LRT on Main/Hurontario is to provide network connectivity why would we as a province not insist that this HSR stop where it connects with that LRT? If we are trying to encourage transit use to the airport and this line is going to stop in the airport why would we not want that population to have that opportunity to transit to the airport?

To be clear, if the London-KW-Toronto service was proposed through the Milton corridor I would not be on here advocating it be re-routed to Brampton....but I would be equally dumbfounded if it was proposed in that corridor but was not going to stop in Mississauga....wouldn't you? The fact is the corridor best suited for that service seems to be the one that passes through Brampton....it seems ludicrous to me that it would not stop there to expose it to a lot of potential passengers and to link with that other piece of transportation infrastructure that we are building.
 
Filip said:
Still no comment on how this ties into Pearson and the existing UPX infrastructure?
Click to expand...

Actually I can add a bit of conceptual thought to that. I was at a breakfast seminar this morning that had two speakers. Glenn Murray and Kathy Haley.

Neither of them spoke specifically to your question but if we stitch together a few of their comments then it may shed some insight.

- Minister Murray very firmly stated that this HSR "is coming" (he was inspired by a ride on HS1 and a bit stunned when people told him there that it is 100% Canadian owned)
- Based on the knowledge that it is 100% Canadian owned he is going to be working with people to attract private investment in the line.
- There seems no doubt that it will be going into the airport. He told us he jokes with GTAA folks that 'terminal 2 will be less an aircraft terminal than a rail terminal" (note: I don't know if his continual use of "terminal 2" language indicates some future new development or a lack or knowledge of the airport or just a repeated casual slip...but I have no doubt he said "2')
- One of the main purposes of this line is to give the communities of London and KW "their own international airport"

Ms Haley did not speak of this line specifically (her talk was to update the audience on the UP Express) but one question from the floor specifically asked her is there any thought to using the newly built spur to provide access to the airport from other cities like "Kitchener and Hamilton"....I was really hoping she would answer with "the first challenge would be getting a train from Hamilton anywhere near the spur" but I guess she is less of a sarcastic jerk than me and she said "we are having ongoing talks with the ministry about how the plans Mr Murray spoke to you work with the UP" (note: throughout her talk she seemed to be really pushing the marketing idea of just referring to the UPX as "up".
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
It doesn't make sense for someone living in Brampton to use the HSR to transit to the airport.

AoD
Click to expand...

ShonTron said:
Of course not. It's probably better to take Brampton's own bus service to Pearson (route 115) or one of the local trains. I don't think anyone is arguing that.
Click to expand...

Well, the local trains don't (and from what I heard today won't) go into the airport.....so I will just ask how a 20-25 minute bus ride is better than what would likely be a 6 - 10 train ride?
 
ShonTron said:
Of course not. It's probably better to take Brampton's own bus service to Pearson (route 115) or one of the local trains. I don't think anyone is arguing that.
Click to expand...

Per the quote:

If one of the reasons for spending $1.6B on an LRT on Main/Hurontario is to provide network connectivity why would we as a province not insist that this HSR stop where it connects with that LRT? If we are trying to encourage transit use to the airport and this line is going to stop in the airport why would we not want that population to have that opportunity to transit to the airport?
Click to expand...

In other words, adding another HSR stop in relatively close proximity to another just so that it allows the LRT to feed into the line, for what is arguably short haul regional commute. Not a good idea in my books.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Per the quote:



In other words, adding another HSR stop in relatively close proximity to another just so that it allows the LRT to feed into the line, for what is arguably short haul regional commute. Not a good idea in my books.

AoD
Click to expand...

Would those KW/London folks (any of them) not have any reason to go to Mississauga? Would some of them not, say, get off the HSR and transfer to the LRT to do that?

In the thread about the HMLRT when I oppose the northern section (SQ1 to Brampton) part of it I am often given the argument of network connectivity...about how it is important that all our regional transportation links meet and connect so that passengers and seamlessly move around the region by transit........so why would it not be important for the thousands of people using this line to connect to another piece of transportation infrastructure?
 
TOareaFan said:
Well, the local trains don't (and from what I heard today won't) go into the airport.....so I will just ask how a 20-25 minute bus ride is better than what would likely be a 6 - 10 train ride?
Click to expand...

Making what is arguably a bad decision with one line doesn't mean we should make another bad decision on another.

In the thread about the HMLRT when I oppose the northern section (SQ1 to Brampton) part of it I am often given the argument of network connectivity...about how it is important that all our regional transportation links meet and connect so that passengers and seamlessly move around the region by transit........so why would it not be important for the thousands of people using this line to connect to another piece of transportation infrastructure?
Click to expand...

Actually, the more proper analogy in this case would be having GO as it is now stop at every arterial crossing just because it "adds to network connectivity".

AoD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top