Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

[bearcat]

Similarly HS2 skirts Birmingham International, and is not far from Heathrow ... but there are not served. There'll be a separate 2-km people mover at BHX - and there's no reason that we couldn't do the same from Malton or Woodbine GO (2.5 km). Deflecting the straight-line alignment into Pearson (or Dorval) seems unnecessary to me. Meanwhile at Birmingham, they'll continue to provide separate services into Birmingham International station (which still has a short people mover to the terminal).

At Heathrow, HS2 passes only about 5 km north of the current Great Western mainline - but there's no plan for connection, or even a station (let alone a deflection from the greenfield alignment). The plan being that travellers from points north would backtrack into Old Oak Common and change to the Elizabeth line for a 10-minute ride with 6 stops to Heathrow Central station.

Similarly in Paris, the TGV to Lille passes about 2-km from the (edge) of Charles de Gaulle Aeroport with no stop.

Yeah I feel like diverting the Kitchener GO line via a massive tunnel under the airport which would presumably need to be 4 track at least would be very very expensive. Perhaps much cheaper to have a station for GO and HSR on the current alignment and a frequent elevated people mover from there.

Maybe build the station where the current UP express elevated section curves off and you can perhaps even reuse the elevated structure to get to the terminals.

 

[Urban Sky]

I suppose that that the terminals might not always be in the same location they are now. They are a bit inconveniently located for transit, halfway between Malton GO and Renforth. Has there been any plan to move them? I imagine you could maybe build another north-south runway in the spot they are now, and build new terminals around Convair Drive, or in the infield. (I apologize if this has been said before). If you built new terminals in the infield, maybe you could combine a GO/HSR tunnel with an underground terminal link like the one in Atlanta? And maybe work in a Mississauga city centre GO diversion too?

View attachment 639238

If you want to serve all airport terminals conveniently with a single HSR or intercity rail station, you will need to build any new terminals close to where the existing ones are…

 

[Sauga89]

Has there been any plan to move them?

If you want to serve all airport terminals conveniently with a single HSR or intercity rail station, you will need to build any new terminals close to where the existing ones are…

I was thinking the existing terminals might be demolished and moved, and that might then allow for an extra runway to be built? But you could also keep the existing terminals and still build a terminal link between Malton GO and a MCC GO diversion, perhaps with HSR extending to both Kitchener and MCC. I was just thinking of how HSR could be paired with an airport expansion, and other regional needs, like an MCC GO diversion.

 

[bearcat]

Yeah I feel like diverting the Kitchener GO line via a massive tunnel under the airport which would presumably need to be 4 track at least would be very very expensive. Perhaps much cheaper to have a station for GO and HSR on the current alignment and a frequent elevated people mover from there.

Maybe build the station where the current UP express elevated section curves off and you can perhaps even reuse the elevated structure to get to the terminals.

Since I feel like drawing lines on a map today.

I suggest something like this. With a people mover (exact technology TBD) running from a combined GO/Alto station (black box). The people mover would use new elevated sections (orange), reuse UP express elevated sections (red), and reuse use ROW of the current people mover (purple). Would serve both terminals.

Both the UP express and current people mover would be decommissioned.

I am sure someone will tell me why this is technically a terrible idea lol.

For one, I see a massive garage in the way.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

I imagine the last mile stretch from airport to GO service would be best served by some kind of medium between frequent shuttle/people-mover and high capacity GO trains.

I say we leverage at least one of our existing LRT services and extend them through Pearson and a GO station. This service could run independently from the rest of the line (higher frequency) but share the existing tracks, rolling stock, and maintenance facilities.
That is either,

A) Extend Finch LRT to Woodbine GO (already proposed) then tunnel through to Pearson, perhaps elevated over Mimico Creek but underneath the highway spaghetti.

and/or

B) Extend Eglinton LRT tunnel to Pearson (already proposed) then tunnel through to Woodbine GO or Malton GO.

From either GO station you’re looking at 3-3.5km travel which is a sub 5 minute shuttle directly to the airport grounds.

EDIT to roughly illustrate A) from the above description:

 

[nfitz]

If you want to serve all airport terminals conveniently with a single HSR or intercity rail station, you will need to build any new terminals close to where the existing ones are…

Why not near Viscount station, east of Airport Road, where they are already talking about building the new passenger facility for all the terminals.

 

[guavadelic]

There are also other considerations: given the intense pressure to minimize dwell times at Union Station, extending the services to Pearson would increase the throughput at Union Station.

Precisely why the folks at the GTAA are proposing that ALTO trains terminate at Pearson instead Union, as part of expanded passenger rail service connecting Toronto to cities in SWO. However, the significant cost associated with building that new rail hub would make more sense as part of new/improved frequent rail services toward KW/London/Windsor.
Who knows, maybe all this talk from the federal political parties regarding ambitious projects will change the usual calculus.

The plan is for regular, K-W corridor GO service to pass through a new station/hub at Pearson. When that happens, UP will be axed.

Its still a long time away.......but there is serious intent there.

Glad to hear that the intent to finally implement that service is there, since the slow pace and lack of details from the Ontario government doesn't inspire confidence.

 

[micheal_can]

The whole HSR, UP and GO debate ignores the purpose of each. To assume one will be removed once HSR is up and running ignores those purposes and would give worst outcomes.

 

[bearcat]

I imagine the last mile stretch from airport to GO service would be best served by some kind of medium between frequent shuttle/people-mover and high capacity GO trains.

I say we leverage at least one of our existing LRT services and extend them through Pearson and a GO station. This service could run independently from the rest of the line (higher frequency) but share the existing tracks, rolling stock, and maintenance facilities.
That is either,

A) Extend Finch LRT to Woodbine GO (already proposed) then tunnel through to Pearson, perhaps elevated over Mimico Creek but underneath the highway spaghetti.

and/or

B) Extend Eglinton LRT tunnel to Pearson (already proposed) then tunnel through to Woodbine GO or Malton GO.

From either GO station you’re looking at 3-3.5km travel which is a sub 5 minute shuttle directly to the airport grounds.

EDIT to roughly illustrate A) from the above description:
View attachment 639282

What do you mean by run independently from the rest of the line? Like extra LRT's running on the same track shuttling between Woodbine GO and airport?

The main concern with just extending the LRT like this would be people getting off at Woodbine GO rushing to get.to the airport but being met with an LRT full of people it picked up earlier in the route also heading to the airport and not being able to get on.

Interweaving extra LRT's as a shuttle from Woodbine GO to the airport would be an option. However given the Finch LRT is mostly above ground with traffic lights I worry it will be difficult to reliably do this as the headway between the LRT's might be too variable.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

The main concern with just extending the LRT like this would be people getting off at Woodbine GO rushing to get.to the airport but being met with an LRT full of people it picked up earlier in the route also heading to the airport and not being able to get on.

Yes, which is why I suggest independent, more frequent service. Don’t get caught up in the exact details, this could be a totally separate train technology launching somewhere else at the Woodbine GO or Malton GO, it’s only a minor detail to my point.

There is merit to implementing a seperate service to bridge the gap between Pearson and a nearby rail hub. It allows you to eliminate the UPX, freeing up corridor capacity for local and regional/express services.

It also avoids the need to build mega tunnels for Bilevel coaches and creating branched service, which is difficult to balance/optimize.

 

[micheal_can]

What do you mean by run independently from the rest of the line? Like extra LRT's running on the same track shuttling between Woodbine GO and airport?

The main concern with just extending the LRT like this would be people getting off at Woodbine GO rushing to get.to the airport but being met with an LRT full of people it picked up earlier in the route also heading to the airport and not being able to get on.

Interweaving extra LRT's as a shuttle from Woodbine GO to the airport would be an option. However given the Finch LRT is mostly above ground with traffic lights I worry it will be difficult to reliably do this as the headway between the LRT's might be too variable.

Yes, which is why I suggest independent, more frequent service. Don’t get caught up in the exact details, this could be a totally separate train technology launching somewhere else at the Woodbine GO or Malton GO, it’s only a minor detail to my point.

There is merit to implementing a seperate service to bridge the gap between Pearson and a nearby rail hub. It allows you to eliminate the UPX, freeing up corridor capacity for local and regional/express services.

It also avoids the need to build mega tunnels for Bilevel coaches and creating branched service, which is difficult to balance/optimize.

I did not say that... No idea why it was attached to me.

 

[bearcat]

Yes, which is why I suggest independent, more frequent service. Don’t get caught up in the exact details, this could be a totally separate train technology launching somewhere else at the Woodbine GO or Malton GO, it’s only a minor detail to my point.

There is merit to implementing a seperate service to bridge the gap between Pearson and a nearby rail hub. It allows you to eliminate the UPX, freeing up corridor capacity for local and regional/express services.

It also avoids the need to build mega tunnels for Bilevel coaches and creating branched service, which is difficult to balance/optimize.

Lol, number one somehow you use the wrong username when quoting me.

Also, just above I suggest a people mover from a slightly relocated Malton GO, eliminating then UPX and avoiding building a mega tunnel for GO lol. Exactly what you just said here. Did you not read my post?

I agree with you completely other than using the specifics abound the LRT scheduling as the connection from the Kitchener GO line to the airport....

The main difference from.your post I was replying to and my suggestion IS the specific technology to serve as the shuttle service from Kitchener GO line and airport. So that's why I am getting caught up on it, as otherwise we agree.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

Lol, number one somehow you use the wrong username when quoting me.

I’m just as confused lol

Also, just above I suggest a people mover from a slightly relocated Malton GO, eliminating then UPX and avoiding building a mega tunnel for GO lol. Exactly what you just said here. Did you not read my post?

No I see it, I can appreciate the idea. Maybe it’s just me but I think of something lower capacity when I hear people mover, but we’re generally in agreement.

And Woodbine instead of Malton would add the extra hub connection of Finch LRT.

 

[bearcat]

I’m just as confused lol

No I see it, I can appreciate the idea. Maybe it’s just me but I think of something lower capacity when I hear people mover, but we’re generally in agreement.

And Woodbine instead of Malton would add the extra hub connection of Finch LRT.

Yes, I guess the argument would a lower capacity "people mover" but guaranteed to be empty when transferring from GO/HSR as it's it's a true shuttle be worse or better than a higher capacity "LRT" but the trains arrive mostly full.

There is nuance to the answer and I don't think the correct answer is immediately obvious.

Obviously from a network connectivity perspective the LRT idea you suggested is better.

Anyway, maybe it's the wrong thread to have this discussion. We don't even know for sure HSR is coming to Pearson.

 

[11th]

Far fetched idea: Might as well build the station at Thorncliffe Park.
Potential connections to the midtown line, a diverted Richmond Hill line, some sort of connection to the Ontario Line.
One station ride to Union, or use OL to get to East Harbour. Run airport trains via midtown if they want.
-fantasy mode done-