French train smashes world speed record

[prometheus the supremo]

:lol

at full speed, there wouldn't be enough track from union to pearson for it to stop!

of course we could always use one of those cable/hook systems the aircraft carriers employ.

 

[EnviroTO]

I was kind of hoping they would push it beyond the speed record of the Maglev establishing, once and for all, that magnetic levitation rail transit is white elephant technology; the ICTS of high speed rail.

They were operating at a speed only possible because the track is completely new, the train was specially enhanced to break a record, and it was not in public service. The train began to noticably vibrate at 380km/h. It is unlikely that a normal high-speed train will operate in regular service at speeds in excess of 400km/h due to a risk of derailment. Maglevs have a bracket around the rail virtually eliminating the possibility of derailment and therefore will reach much higher speeds in regular service. The JR-Maglev that holds the maglev speed record at 581km/h runs on a test track only 18.4km long. At 581km/h a distance of 18.4km passes in 1 minute and 54 seconds so when you factor in time to accellerate and decellerate there is a high probability that the short length of the test track is playing a part in limiting the maglev speed.

 

[bizorky]

Thanks for the response Antiloop. I'm looking forward to reading the document.

With respect to a high speed direct route from Toronto to Ottawa, the present VIA rail line is not a great option at all. It would be nice to see a more direct line rather than one which presently takes the train north from Brockville. Such a route would save considerable time and could even allow such a train to continue on to Montreal within a very reasonable time limit.

 

[unimaginative2]

There were countless studies done on Quebec-Windsor high speed rail in the early and mid-90s, culminating in the Lynx proposal. Obviously they've all sort of fallen through the tracks. The report I have suggests a Toronto-Montreal (via Ottawa) express travel time of about 2 hours 18 minutes.

I've ridden the Transrapid (yes, the one that crashed) and I can say that maglev is an incredible technology that is definitely a technological leap from any steel wheel on steel rail technology. That Japanese record is limited by the length of the track, but its speed potential is near unlimited. It's unlikely that TGV-style trains will ever get much above 350 km/h, since 30 years of evolution from the first TGV has only succeeded in raising speeds from 270 km/h to 320 (on a few short segments). Maglev would be perfectly suited to the Canadian corridor, since the main advantage of steel wheel on steel rail is ithe ability to connect with other rail lines and expand the network. None of the proposals suggest doing this at all, and a lack of electrification would prevent it.

I think this will be a long time coming - if ever. The Windsor Quebec corridor is actually the Toronto-Montreal-Ottawa corridor, as this is where most of the passenger traffic is concentrated.

I believe that they would be astonished by the amount of traffic generated on the Kitchener-Toronto route, for example. When Spain built the first AVE, they barely paid attention to some smaller cities near Madrid. Now, the bulk of service on the line (30 trains a day or more) is shuttles between those outlying cities and Madrid.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

I agree that the routing is not ideal, but, there are not many other options. The big issue is the terrain and geography that exists once you head north from the shores of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence. Much of it is hills of granite and lots of lakes in between. Thats most likely why the line was chosen too run through the area it did since it would have required far less earthwork.

Even if you were able to go from Toronto to Ottawa in straight line and increased cost of infrastructure was not an issue, you likely would not shorten the distance by a great deal (40 km perhaps). So just from the point of view from the trip between those two cities heading off at Brockville is still probably the best choice for a line given that a high speed line would mean another 15 minutes at most too cover 40 km.

I also understand the point about being able to make one line that goes from Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal. The problem is such a line is going to for certain avoid Brockville and Cornwall, and Kingston and most likely other communities along the shores of Lake Ontario. This would leave them without any benefits whatsoever and probably hurt them more in the long run. I don't see keeping the existing Brockville-Ottawa-Montreal (Cocteau Junction to more exact) triangle as a bad thing at all. By doing so you end up with a more direct Toronto-Montreal route, an Ottawa-Toronto route that is still going to be a great deal faster than it currently is and only marginally slower than a more direct (but expensive too build) route. And in terms of the need for more track length with the triangle, it is only going to amount to about an additional 80km of track which is not that much given the size of the corridor. So long as you make the best use of the triangle then I don't see a problem with keeping that route roughly the same.

 

[spmarshall]

With respect to a high speed direct route from Toronto to Ottawa, the present VIA rail line is not a great option at all. It would be nice to see a more direct line rather than one which presently takes the train north from Brockville. Such a route would save considerable time and could even allow such a train to continue on to Montreal within a very reasonable time limit.

There was a line until about 1990 that ran from Napanee to Ottawa via Smiths Falls (and avoided the CP yards bottleneck in that town). That corridor is a bit shorter, but the track was in poor shape by the end. You miss Kingston (the main intermediate market, population wise and trip generator wise) too.

 

[cacruden]

With respect to a high speed direct route from Toronto to Ottawa, the present VIA rail line is not a great option at all. It would be nice to see a more direct line rather than one which presently takes the train north from Brockville. Such a route would save considerable time and could even allow such a train to continue on to Montreal within a very reasonable time limit.

The "directness" of the line is not a major factor in the travel time to Ottawa, it is the quality of the tracks, signals, and priority that are the greatest factor. A rail line using a new corridor would cut maybe 35 (ex. 35 miles/ 200 miles per hr = 10.5 minutes on a 80sh minute trip) miles off of the trip to Ottawa (while at the same time cutting out other cities (possibly Belleville, Kingston, Brockville, Cornwall) out of the rail network (assuming that they don't have two completely separate tracks from Toronto to Montreal) -- while not going directly to Montreal (again a slight detour).

If they leave some of the cities in then that 35 miles will likely drop to 25 miles, not really that much of a time saving when you are talking about a high-speed train.

If the line branched at Kingston, that would change the savings of direct vs through Kingston at around 17 miles (around a 5 minute saving), while continuing with the existing corridor (1 out of 3 trains to Ottawa, 2 out of 3 trains to Montreal) -- while encouraging the development of Ontario east of Toronto.

Of course the more ridings you cut out of the service, the less support you are going to have for it in government....

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

Maglev would be perfectly suited to the Canadian corridor, since the main advantage of steel wheel on steel rail is ithe ability to connect with other rail lines and expand the network.

Other than the insane price tag of Maglev. I cannot see how this could ever be justified as a reasonable investment in Canada.

I believe that they would be astonished by the amount of traffic generated on the Kitchener-Toronto route, for example.

Depends on who you mean by they. I have never had any doubts that a proper K-W rail connection (via Pearson) would be hugely successful. Actually a proper line also connecting Guelph, Stratford and London that had reasonable times and reliability would probably be able to generate a fair bit of revenue. The Lynx group misses this point but I have read other articles and pieces which would put as a high priority.

There was a line until about 1990 that ran from Napanee to Ottawa via Smiths Falls (and avoided the CP yards bottleneck in that town). That corridor is a bit shorter, but the track was in poor shape by the end.

I know that line well. When I was growing up in Kingston my father and I spend a lot of time exploring the abandoned rail lines in that area. Some parts where fairly straight and simple too navigate but others sections would hug lakeshores and had radii that would have made it difficult to get over 100km/h, if that. It would make a beautiful scenic line, but not a great area too push a high speed line through.

Edit: It also just occurred to me that one more political hurdle has been removed for HSR. Mirabel. Now that it has closed its doors for good there will be no more suggestions of creating an Ottawa-Montreal route that intersects it. Not that it was a huge issue but still one that was so wrapped up in politics that having it no longer be a concern is a good thing nonetheless.

Same is true in Montreal. Now that Autoroute 30 will be completed that project will no longer be a lingering issue. It will be interesting too see what projects take priority when the Ministry of Transportation develops a new long term plan (the current one in use is from 2000 and surprisingly, much of it has been completed in some form or another). It would be great if, as I have heard from a few people, one of the priority projects is too fix the incredible maze of tracks and crap that is the rail network in the downtown core. One project would include a new rail tunnel under Mont Royal, creating a McGill AMT station and doing something with the mess between Bonaventure and Dorval. Not a direct HSR project but one that would help serve as a catalyst for it.

 

[bizorky]

I also understand the point about being able to make one line that goes from Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal. The problem is such a line is going to for certain avoid Brockville and Cornwall, and Kingston and most likely other communities along the shores of Lake Ontario.

I was thinking more of a triangular arrangement. This would allow for a train that does Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal as one trip. The best line for a direct Toronto to Montreal would obviously be the mainline that includes those communities mentioned above. And I've been assuming that everyone here is talking about a dedicated track arrangement. I was just thinking that if such a service were to be established it should be as flexible as possible in terms of cities serviced and frequency.

Concerning Brockville, the track-switching can be dead slow as well.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

I was thinking more of a triangular arrangement. This would allow for a train that does Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal as one trip.

I think I follow now. So in other words instead of the Toronto-Ottawa train just ending at Ottawa station it would be there for maybe 10 minutes at most while people get on and off the train and then carry on? If so, then that I agree that it totally makes sense to do that. And everything I have mentioned/proposed is on a dedicated track.

Concerning Brockville, the track-switching can be dead slow as well.

So can the disconnecting of the trains. In places like that were you have two lines merging or diverging the simple solution is too use flyovers, just like highways do. And on a dedicated network there would likely be no need too connect trains since the need to maximize precious track time allotments would no longer be an issue, so that would take care of that problem.

 

[unimaginative2]

There are two plans that I have seen for the high speed line turning north from Lake Ontario up to Ottawa. One leaves the 401/Kingston Sub corridor at Napanee, running along the old Canadian Northern line, while the other turns north at Kingston. I think that the latter route is far superior, since Kingston is quite a major destination.

 

[cacruden]

^I would not call Kingston a major destination, but I agree with your analysis.

There are several points in favour of choosing to have a station in Kingston.

- It is the largest municipality between the GTA and GMA (on that corridor) [Ottawa is on a northern corridor].
- It is around half-way between the two largest cities, and could become a transfer point between express transit and local/regional transit (future).
- It would also be nice if the Ontario government could develop policies that encourage urban development in the area (sort of a center of urban development for eastern ontario) - which other towns/cities in the area could be "ride the coat-tails to prosperity" (i.e. Belleville, Gananoque, Napanee, and Brockville).

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

^Kingston does generate a respectable amount of traffic though. Probably 1 in 3 trips I take or end in Kingston there are enough passengers boarding to fill an entire car on their own. Every other time it is about 1/2 or 3/4 of a car. And as you said, it would work well as a transfer point between express and local trains. It would be mistake not too include Kingston as a station. Once it heads over the Rideau River though, it can head north pretty much any point after that (depending on what will be the easiest route to build a right of way through). I would prefer still that it diverted into separate Ottawa and Montreal routes after Brockville so that they would be able to keep direct local service too Ottawa, but if that turned out not to be a very economically sound choice, then so be it.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

Still on topic, sort of, but I finally found the latest documents pertaining to the new rail station at Dorval. If you check out the link to the .pdf file from Aéroports de Montréal you can see a plan of how the rail line will divert into the station (it looks a little wonky at the west end of the station but I suppose it will work). As well I have included links to a video presentation of the Dorval interchange and rail upgrade plan (in french only unfortunately) as well as a link to the Transport Quebec site.

Two things are interesting. The first is that VIA will use the new station, but AMT will continue to use the existing station. The second, and far more interesting is that they mention plans for a Dorval-Central Station express rail service. Leaving every 20 minutes and with a trip time of 20 minutes. Sound familiar? This is something I had not heard about (at least in an official manner) and for some reason why would I not be surprised to find out SNC-Lavalin is involved. Truthfully I have no idea how they plan on making the service work. They mention need to upgrade Central Station and the tracks between Dorval and downtown but that is no small project so I really wonder what the plan behind it will be.

Maybe another night I will see what I can dig up on Bleu Vingt.

Aéroports de Montréal .pdf on Dorval Interchange/Rail Upgrades
www.admtl.com/uploadedFiles/information_centre/intermodal-en.pdf

Video Presentation of Dorval Interchange and Rail Upgrades (in French only)
www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/images/regions/montreal/dorval_final_cd.wmv

Transport Quebec Dorval Info Page (in French only)
www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/regions/montreal/echangeur_dorval.asp

 

[unimaginative2]

If we are going to build high-speed rail in this country, we have to do it properly, not on the cheap like in the U.S. and U.K. They have had endless problems and failures because they always need to find a way to save a few bucks in the short term. Compare the Acela trains which were out of service for most of a year, or the IC 225 trains in Britain that have never operated at their promised speeds. I won't even get started on the APT. We need a dedicated, TGV-style, high-speed line.

In the reports I've read, it suggests that the difference in cost between building in an existing corridor and in a new corridor is quite small. There are benefits to splitting less land, and the land acquisition costs might be slightly lower, but on the other hand the cost of keeping the corridor open for existing services could be significant. Trying to re-use old routes like the Canadian Northern line is probably of minimal use, since they would have to be straightened to such a degree that only a small percentage of the new track is using the old corridor.