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

[kEiThZ]

Having just travelled on almost every shinkansen line in Japan over the past 2 weeks (highly recommend it for any railfan), I honestly do not see why high-speed rail here cannot be a success, especially if travel times are within 4 hours. Windsor, a city of 218,000 people (and more importantly, Detroit, with a pop of 600K) takes over three hours to drive to from Toronto. Compare this to Niigata city on the Joetsu shinkansen (810K), and populations are fairly similar for a similar distance. Trains on the Joetsu Shinkansen run at speeds of 240 km/h, and see 43 million passengers annually. With a line length of 270 km, it's pretty similar to that of the proposed HSR. What has to be noted that in both scenarios (tokyo-Niigata/Toronto-Detroit), the driving times are at least 4 hrs without traffic, while high-speed lines would take 2 hrs to traverse. While the population of Tokyo is much larger than that of Toronto, it's still fair to say that there is a lot of potential benefit that can arise from building this line, especially since unlike the Joetsu shinkansen, the HSR requires almost no tunnels here.

While I'd love to have what they have in Japan, let's not forget that the Japanese taxpayer had to bail out the Japanese railways to the tune of $200+ billion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_National_Railway_Settlement_Corporation

We need a model that works for us. I always fear that looking at Europe and Japan leaves Canadians just hopeless and with no intent to change. This is why I've always liked ideas like HFR. They provide a solid example of what can be built in Canada. They get the public actually riding on quality rail services. And they provide a reasonable alternative to the car. It'd be great to get to London in 1.5 hrs. But it also would be a substantial improvement over today to have hourly train service that takes 2 hrs to get to London.

Hopefully, they can push some sort of HFR proposal for Toronto-Kitchener-London, along with the Toronto-Peterborough-Ottawa push.

 

[Urban Sky]

I'd agree with that. It'd go a long way to making Waterloo more palatable as an exurb and to do business it. They need a relatively frequent and somewhat speedy connection to Pearson and the core. Doesn't have to be HSR. But also shouldn't be a 2 hr long GO Train ride that only runs every few hours.

As I've wrote before, I'm currently writing my Master Thesis about different railway timetabling strategies and the Kitchener Corridor is my case study. I'm far from being a signalling engineer and I didn't have access to specialist railway timetabling software, but this is the kind of timetable pattern I've calculated in Excel:

Notes: Station stops are indicated by bold times and highlighting in bright colours, while all other times are passing times. Extended dwell time of InterCity trains in Guelph, due to splitting/joining of trains from/to Cambridge. All train timings repeat themselves every 60 minutes.

In terms of infrastructure, I am assuming the existing right-of-way upgraded to a design speed of 110 mph (177 km/h) and expanded to at least two tracks along the entire Corridor (four tracks Union - Woodbine Jct., three tracks Woodbine Jct. - Peel and west of Brampton Station to Silver Jct.) and a signalling system which I have modelled to reflect my limited understanding of what is currently installed on the Weston Subdivision. I've calculated the same frequencies for five different scenarios (individual trips, partially periodic timetable, periodic timetable, symmetric timetable and integrated fixed-interval timetable), but I'll let you guess which timetable class I've presented above:

While I'd love to have what they have in Japan, let's not forget that the Japanese taxpayer had to bail out the Japanese railways to the tune of $200+ billion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_National_Railway_Settlement_Corporation

We need a model that works for us. I always fear that looking at Europe and Japan leaves Canadians just hopeless and with no intent to change. This is why I've always liked ideas like HFR. They provide a solid example of what can be built in Canada. They get the public actually riding on quality rail services. And they provide a reasonable alternative to the car. It'd be great to get to London in 1.5 hrs. But it also would be a substantial improvement over today to have hourly train service that takes 2 hrs to get to London.

Hopefully, they can push some sort of HFR proposal for Toronto-Kitchener-London, along with the Toronto-Peterborough-Ottawa push.

Amen.

 

[WislaHD]

There's also the potential for HSR to be a catalyst for urban development outside of Waterloo in the future, potentially creating urban sprawl outside the greenbelt area, which would seriously hurt a lot of greenspace and worsen the transit density problems the region currently has. If HSR is built, the greenbelt would need to be extended to encompass Waterloo and surrounding towns.

But why is this accomplished by HSR and not by RER?

 

[cplchanb]

But why is this accomplished by HSR and not by RER?

While I'd love to have what they have in Japan, let's not forget that the Japanese taxpayer had to bail out the Japanese railways to the tune of $200+ billion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_National_Railway_Settlement_Corporation

We need a model that works for us. I always fear that looking at Europe and Japan leaves Canadians just hopeless and with no intent to change. This is why I've always liked ideas like HFR. They provide a solid example of what can be built in Canada. They get the public actually riding on quality rail services. And they provide a reasonable alternative to the car. It'd be great to get to London in 1.5 hrs. But it also would be a substantial improvement over today to have hourly train service that takes 2 hrs to get to London.

Hopefully, they can push some sort of HFR proposal for Toronto-Kitchener-London, along with the Toronto-Peterborough-Ottawa push.

Your assessment tbh is a bit skewed because Jr is not just the shinkansen but all public rail operations. Besides it appears as per the article that when Jr formed they were not held liable for most of the debt, so a large chunk was written off anyways.

What I think that most important regardless of what gets done is that something gets done instead of countless studies. However I do believe that hsr will for sure help in the local and regional economies, not to mention will stimulate the airlines to lower ticket prices to stay competitive

 

[TOareaFan]

Your assessment tbh is a bit skewed because Jr is not just the shinkansen but all public rail operations. Besides it appears as per the article that when Jr formed they were not held liable for most of the debt, so a large chunk was written off anyways.

The financial fallout was not so bad because most of the debt was written off?

What I think that most important regardless of what gets done is that something gets done instead of countless studies.

Just build something....even if it does not make sense....just to stop the cycle of studies?

 

[kEiThZ]

But why is this accomplished by HSR and not by RER?

To some extent, RER will do that. But a lot of they exurban growth is a function of total commute time. And a 1.5 hr ride from Kitchener to Union, effectively means a 2 hr trip in each direction. Very few people are willing to do that daily.

Make it a 1 hr train ride and that changes. Even if the ride costs more.

 

[Urban Sky]

To some extent, RER will do that. But a lot of they exurban growth is a function of total commute time. And a 1.5 hr ride from Kitchener to Union, effectively means a 2 hr trip in each direction. Very few people are willing to do that daily.

Make it a 1 hr train ride and that changes. Even if the ride costs more.

What makes you believe that you need to build HSR to cover Toronto-Kitchener in approximately one hour? The calculations I’ve been sharing here (just check my last comment) suggest otherwise...

 

[nfitz]

What makes you believe that you need to build HSR to cover Toronto-Kitchener in approximately one hour? The calculations I’ve been sharing here (just check my last comment) suggest otherwise...

I'd pull out the best-ever time for Union to Kitchener service to support you - but you are probably know where to find that number far faster than I do. Can't be too much more than 70 minutes, and included stops.

Gosh, 71 minutes from Cambridge (Galt?) to Union! Compare to 59 minutes just from Milton to Union today. I wonder what the best Galt time was back in the day.

 

[Streety McCarface]

But why is this accomplished by HSR and not by RER?

It is mores by HSR because of faster commute speeds into Toronto. Regional Rail is going to end up being a bit slower and therefore will have less of an effect on exurb growth than other means. With HSR, other cities (specifically London and Guelph) also need to be looked into, and since London is a larger population centre than KW (excl Cambridge) and Guelph, there are more potential challenges there than any of the other two city areas. That's not to say that these issues shouldn't be looked at with any new railway service coming to ROW, however, it's a much larger issue with HSR than RER.

 

[cplchanb]

The financial fallout was not so bad because most of the debt was written off?

http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10195.pdf
Further digressions aside, this paper give great insights on the results of the privatisation of JNR and how the debts will be paid off.

Just build something....even if it does not make sense....just to stop the cycle of studies?

There are merits to this as well as with HFR and RER. In fact all have their merits and minuses. the problem is that every election cycle
a new study comes up trying to trump the previous over the tiniest gains. The fact is from this exercise we can see that all of the options
are valid and have their benefits. They seriously just need to pick a direction, which this country has a hard time doing.

Its like trying to buy a car. BMW, Merc and Audi are all the same level. We did the research and we know their pluses and minuses. We just cant seem to decide on which
of the 3 to negotiate on let alone buy.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Your assessment tbh is a bit skewed because Jr is not just the shinkansen but all public rail operations. Besides it appears as per the article that when Jr formed they were not held liable for most of the debt, so a large chunk was written off anyways.

What I think that most important regardless of what gets done is that something gets done instead of countless studies. However I do believe that hsr will for sure help in the local and regional economies, not to mention will stimulate the airlines to lower ticket prices to stay competitive

This video (mind everyone, it's Japanese propaganda, but still a nice little series) shows the extent of actual rail lines JNR had to operate (in Hokkaido alone) and how so many of them have been running in the red for a while. Believe it or not, there were significantly more lines in the days of JNR than what JR currently has. It's also worth mentioning that the entire rail network accounts for thousands of kilometers of tunnels, bridges, and viaducts (on Shinkansen lines and local lines combined). Here in Canada, there's less of a risk of any of this happening with 1 or 2 high speed rail lines because these pieces of infrastructure are not really necessary. Yes, construction costs are much higher now, but comparing the Canadian and US rail systems/economy is a little ridiculous given the vast differences in situations.

 

[WislaHD]

To some extent, RER will do that. But a lot of they exurban growth is a function of total commute time. And a 1.5 hr ride from Kitchener to Union, effectively means a 2 hr trip in each direction. Very few people are willing to do that daily.

Make it a 1 hr train ride and that changes. Even if the ride costs more.

It is mores by HSR because of faster commute speeds into Toronto. Regional Rail is going to end up being a bit slower and therefore will have less of an effect on exurb growth than other means. With HSR, other cities (specifically London and Guelph) also need to be looked into, and since London is a larger population centre than KW (excl Cambridge) and Guelph, there are more potential challenges there than any of the other two city areas. That's not to say that these issues shouldn't be looked at with any new railway service coming to ROW, however, it's a much larger issue with HSR than RER.

I'm sorry, I hear what you guys are saying but I remain unconvinced. Especially in regards to the cost associated to enable HSR.

As was said above, 70 minutes for GO is achievable, and even better speeds can be pursued by converting the entire corridor to Kitchener to RER. Kitchener will be better connected to Union Station than a lot of suburban Toronto is connected to Union Station.

As far as Kitchener is concerned, the benefits of HSR over RER seems marginal at best. And unless service is highly subsidized by Ontario taxpayer, GO-RER will be a significantly cheaper fare than HSR. And while we are on the discussion of total commute time, RER would be every 15 minutes (I believe?) whereas HSR would be less frequent.

If we are building an HSR, then by all means it would be a good idea to have a stop at K-W. However, connecting K-W to Toronto as a central argument for why HSR is a good idea to invest in, is I think, very lacking.

 

[kEiThZ]

What makes you believe that you need to build HSR to cover Toronto-Kitchener in approximately one hour? The calculations I’ve been sharing here (just check my last comment) suggest otherwise...

Sorry. Didn't mean to imply that you need HSR exclusively or some kind of separate HSR corridor. The sort of express service you've presented would do just fine if Kichener-Pearson-Bloor-Union can be anywhere close to an hour and 15 mins.

 

[Urban Sky]

I'd pull out the best-ever time for Union to Kitchener service to support you - but you are probably know where to find that number far faster than I do.

Fair enough, that's why I built my own little timetable archive and share it with you...

Can't be too much more than 70 minutes, and included stops.

Sorry. Didn't mean to imply that you need HSR exclusively or some kind of separate HSR corridor. The sort of express service you've presented would do just fine if Kichener-Pearson-Bloor-Union can be anywhere close to an hour and 15 mins.

The fastest travel time I found was 1:21 hours for Kitchener-Guelph-Georgetown-Brampton-Toronto (i.e. 3 intermediary stops) in 1988. I've assumed that the InterCity service I've described above would have the same number of stops (though Georgetown replaced by Mount Dennis, for transfers onto the UP Express), a higher maximum speed (110 mph) and higher acceleration/deceleration capabilities than what VIA had back then (or still has now) and tracks maintained to a higher standard (design speed of 110 mph, except for 45 mph on USRC and 80 mph on Fergus Sub). You will find the assumed speed limits (in mph, per segment) below:

Note: Shown are the scheduled departure times at passenger stops (bold times, highlighted in bright colours) or passing times at all other points. Assumed speed limits are shown in miles per hour with the limit shown below the train type representing the assumed speed limit of that particular service (Inter-City: 110 mph, Inter-Regional and Airport Shuttle: 100 mph, RER: 90 mph and Freight: 50 mph). Assumed track speed limit for taking the diverging track at any switches is 45 mph.

Gosh, 71 minutes from Cambridge (Galt?) to Union! Compare to 59 minutes just from Milton to Union today. I wonder what the best Galt time was back in the day.

The best time I found was 62 minutes in 1964 and it was still 65 minutes before the service got abandoned in 1971:

Source: CP timetable, effective 1971/04/25

 

[Streety McCarface]

Fair enough, that's why I built my own little timetable archive and share it with you...


The fastest travel time I found was 1:21 hours for Kitchener-Guelph-Georgetown-Brampton-Toronto (i.e. 3 intermediary stops) in 1988. I've assumed that the InterCity service I've described above would have the same number of stops (though Georgetown replaced by Mount Dennis, for transfers onto the UP Express), a higher maximum speed (110 mph) and acceleration/deceleration capabilities than what VIA had back then (or still has now) and tracks maintained to a higher standard (design speed of 110 mph, except for 45 mph on USRC and 80 mph on Fergus Sub). You will find the assumed speed limits (in mph, per segment) below:
View attachment 156283
Note: Shown are the scheduled departure times at passenger stops (bold times, highlighted in bright colours) or passing times at all other points. Assumed speed limits are shown in miles per hour with the limit shown below the train type representing the assumed speed limit of that particular service (Inter-City: 110 mph, Inter-Regional and Airport Shuttle: 100 mph, RER: 90 mph and Freight: 50 mph). Assumed track speed limit for taking the diverging track at any switches is 45 mph.


The best time I found was 62 minutes in 1964 and it was still 65 minutes before the service got abandoned in 1971:
View attachment 156279
Source: CP timetable, effective 1971/04/25

Are they really running trains anywhere near 110 mph on the Weston Sub, or any sections of new track on the existing GO lines? The fastest I've seen is 60, and 90 for the entire system. All over the world, 80 mph (130 km/h) pretty much the standard for regional rail. I'm not sure it's feasible to run them that fast due to excessive at-grade crossing requirements now and the long acceleration times required to achieve those speeds. 110 mph is only 15 miles away from HSR speeds, so it might as well be classified as HSR (it's really higher speed rail, but it would be the fastest rail speed in Canada).

It's also important to note that upgrades to 110 mph on the Kitchener line will require upgrades to all at-grade crossings on the line, which I don't know if its covered by the existing RER package.