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

[Urban Sky]

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.

I was not speculating on what is possible with the current infrastructure, I was simply speculating on what might be possible with upgrading the existing ROW, while avoiding the need to construct punitively expensive HSR segments. Does this exceed the measurements budgeted in Metrolinx' RER plans? Possibly. Does this get anywhere near the eyewatering amounts HSR would cost? Most certainly not.

As for speeds, the FRA rules seem to be mostly the same for 110 mph as for 80 mph:

Source: FRA (2011, p.20) [First posted in Post #2807 of the VIA Rail thread]

Concerning Canada, the legal limit for level crossings seems to be 110 mph as well:

New Grade Crossing
Prohibition
Marginal note:Construction

29 A person must not construct a grade crossing if

• (a) the railway design speed would be more than 177 km/h (110 mph); or
  
  
• (b) the road approach of the proposed grade crossing would be a freeway, taking into account the characteristics set out for rural roads in Table 10-3 of the Grade Crossings Standards or the characteristics set out for urban roads in Table 10-4 of those Standards, as applicable.

Source: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2014-275/page-3.html#docCont [first posted in Comment #4080 of the VIA Rail thread]

There are regional trains all over the world which exceed 80 mph. Just to provide two examples from Germany: the DB AG Class 423 (the standard train for S-Bahn service, which is the German equivalent for RER) is operated at 140 km/h (87 mph), while the München-Nürnberg Express (a regional train using former Inter-City rolling stock) operates at 200 km/h (125 mph)...

 

[syn]

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.

Agreed. Kitchener/Waterloo is too far from Toronto for RER to be a viable high-speed transit solution.

HSR is obviously not guaranteed, but it would be a boon to Southern Ontario in a way that RER simply couldn't be.

 

[mdrejhon]

No Class 7 track in Canada (as far as I know).

Yet China has many thousands of kilometers of 350kph Class 9 track already (including Bejing-Shanghai which is back to 350kph again since last year).

Why can't we just settle for small segments of happy Class 7 track for Ontario "HSR" ... Basically water down the HSR plan into a HFR-style plan as an enhancement to GO but makes it practical to add London to the GO Transit system.

 

[KevinT]

Why can't we just settle for small segments of happy Class 7 track for Ontario "HSR" ... Basically water down the HSR plan into a HFR-style plan as an enhancement to GO but makes it practical to add London to the GO Transit system.

With CN having just taken back a portion of the west-of-Kitchener GEXR track, would we be allowed to electrify to London without a whole new corridor? My suspicion is no, and I can't see anyone wanting to make daily use of London GO if it's a 2+ hour trip to Union. (Though AD2W today's speed GO would open up commute possibilities between London, KW, and Guelph -- but would that be enough to justify the extension?)

 

[mdrejhon]

With CN having just taken back a portion of the west-of-Kitchener GEXR track, would we be allowed to electrify to London without a whole new corridor? My suspicion is no, and I can't see anyone wanting to make daily use of London GO if it's a 2+ hour trip to Union. (Though AD2W today's speed GO would open up commute possibilities between London, KW, and Guelph -- but would that be enough to justify the extension?)

With proper Paris RER style express service layering, London can be slightly less than 2 hours.

That is closer than today's Kitchener/Niagara/Barrie.

But it may require some express tracks (sidings) of Class 6 and 7 in various sections to help add express capability.

Paris RER trains can do up to 200kph when doing express sprints.

 

[Urban Sky]

Paris RER trains can do up to 200kph when doing express sprints.

As this sounds very counter-intuitive to me, do you have any source at hand...?

 

[Urban Sky]

In response to the other points:

With proper Paris RER style express service layering, London can be slightly less than 2 hours.

That is closer than today's Kitchener/Niagara/Barrie.

But it may require some express tracks (sidings) of Class 6 and 7 in various sections to help add express capability.

RER (S-Bahn in germanophone Europe) is frequent and all-stop (note that the word “Express” refers to high acceleration/deceleration capabilities, rather than the omission of any stops) AD2D suburban service with typical frequencies of 10-20 minutes in peak hours and 30 minutes at most other times. Serving commuter markets like Toronto-Guelph/Kitchener/London (in this case: population centers of 100-500k people, located 70-200 km away from the relevant metropolitan center) are the domain of InterCity rail, not RER, while the smaller places inbetween (like Georgetown, Acton and Breslau are best served by InterRegional rail)...

Express tracks are necessary where train volumes are so high that Express trains can't get scheduled without being slowed down by Local trains or causing them extra standing time while overtaking them. In the case of the Kitchener Corridor, this only applies to the segment east of Georgetown and that just happens to have at least one Express track (and even more east of Woodbine Jct.) on its entire length (spare a short gap around Brampton Station) if not already now then very soon...

 

[Streety McCarface]

In response to the other points:

RER (S-Bahn in germanophone Europe) is frequent and all-stop (note that the word “Express” refers to high acceleration/deceleration capabilities, rather than the omission of any stops) AD2D suburban service with typical frequencies of 10-20 minutes in peak hours and 30 minutes at most other times. Serving commuter markets like Toronto-Guelph/Kitchener/London (in this case: population centers of 100-500k people, located 70-200 km away from the relevant metropolitan center) are the domain of InterCity rail, not RER, while the smaller places inbetween (like Georgetown, Acton and Breslau are best served by InterRegional rail)...

Express tracks are necessary where train volumes are so high that Express trains can't get scheduled without being slowed down by Local trains or causing them extra standing time while overtaking them. In the case of the Kitchener Corridor, this only applies to the segment east of Georgetown and that just happens to have at least one Express track (and even more east of Woodbine Jct.) on its entire length (spare a short gap around Brampton Station) if not already now then very soon...

Out of curiosity, is the presence of (relatively) high freight volumes on the corridor a cause for concern in this zone? I don't believe it is but I wanted to double check.

 

[mdrejhon]

As this sounds very counter-intuitive to me, do you have any source at hand...?

Correction, I confused some intercity trains (which are often used by commuters) that go along some RER corridors. I can't remember which one at the moment.

I made a mistake on the 200kph, but I'm definitely right on the express/allstop behaviour of RER B, as I will post below:

 

[mdrejhon]

RER (S-Bahn in germanophone Europe) is frequent and all-stop (note that the word “Express” refers to high acceleration/deceleration capabilities, rather than the omission of any stops)

Only in the core section.

Paris RER-B goes intermittently express in certain sections:

Since this is often confusing to foreigners, they use the "checkbox" signage:

(They now have these in videoboard format too)

That simplifies things for complex Express/Allstop layered timetables,
You simply glance: Is your station checkbox checked? Then board that currently berthed RER train.

See multiple different multilayered stopping plans for Paris RER B in this PDF file

To understand the structure of Paris RER B:

Over the long term Lakeshore East/West is slowly becoming similar to Paris RER B with the WestHarbour/Hamilton fork at the west end, and the upcoming Oshawa/Bowmanville fork at the east end.

I wish Metrolinx's Lakeshore West GO had the French style "checkbox" signage as it would simplify the 5 different Lakeshore West trains:

1. The Niagara Seasonal
2. The Exhibition Special
3. The Allstop to Aldershot
4. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Aldershot
5. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Burlington
6. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Hamilton DT GO
7. The Express to Oakville-thru-Hamilton DT GO
8. The Express to Clarkson-thru-West Harbour GO

I've seen all of these 8 different Lakeshore West trains, and the French style RER "checkbox" signage would really help me board the correct Lakeshore West train. It would also increase ridership of strange trains (e.g. special expresses like PanAm etc).

To Metrolinx's credit, they almost sorta nearly have a proto-"checkbox sign" technique already on Platform 24-27 (those signs list all the stations that the berthed train stops at, without scrolling) - though they omit missing stations rather than a cleared checkbox for those -- those signs are still not as clear as the French signage that makes it easy for me "Is my destination checkboxed? Great! Board now!".

But it needs to be massively improved, deployed to ALL platform entrances, in brand new overhead signs that are much better than those yellow scrollers that force you to squint your eyes. Preferably at the stairway entrances if possible.

Either way, I am getting offtopic as this is the high speed train thread.

 

[Urban Sky]

Out of curiosity, is the presence of (relatively) high freight volumes on the corridor a cause for concern in this zone? I don't believe it is but I wanted to double check.

West of Silver, the two freight trains per day certainly aren't. Between Halwest and Silver, things of course look differently: I'm inclined to say that the results of my thesis suggest that the problem is not accommodating the approximately 20 freight trains, but to motivate the freight railroads or the regulator to give operational priority to passenger operations.

Only in the core section.

Paris RER-B goes intermittently express in certain sections:

My point was that RER is the lowest order train service of a multi-layered passenger rail system in a heavily metropolitan area and that its low average speeds (due to frequent stops) and the low seating comfort (the high number of doors and low number of seats are the result of the necessity of accommodating high passenger turnovers at stations with very tight station dwell times) really don't make it a preferred choice for serving major urban centres 100 or even 200 km away from the metropolitan centres. At the same time, it is the backbone of such a high-performance rail system and will accommodate the vast majority of passengers. Therefore, RER is the pre-requisite of creating an Inter-Regional rail system, as any inter-regional trains will otherwise get clogged up by Suburban commuters which only travel within the metropolitan core, but displace passengers who have to travel much further distances (this is naturally more an issue in the PM than the AM peak, as regional commuters enter the train earlier than suburban commuters, but the latter will still cause significant delays).

Passenger rail (in any metropolitan context) is therefore best understood as a pyramid, with RER at the bottom, followed by Inter-Regional, then Inter-City rail and with HSR on the top, where passenger volume decreases the higher you get to the top, while average distance travelled increases. And like with all pyramids, every level is built on top of the next-lower level, while acting as foundation for the next-higher level...

Over the long term Lakeshore East/West is slowly becoming similar to Paris RER B with the WestHarbour/Hamilton fork at the west end, and the upcoming Oshawa/Bowmanville fork at the east end.

I wish Metrolinx's Lakeshore West GO had the French style "checkbox" signage as it would simplify the 5 different Lakeshore West trains:

1. The Niagara Seasonal
2. The Exhibition Special
3. The Allstop to Aldershot
4. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Aldershot
5. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Burlington
6. The Express to Clarkson-thru-Hamilton DT GO
7. The Express to Oakville-thru-Hamilton DT GO
8. The Express to Clarkson-thru-West Harbour GO

I've seen all of these 8 different Lakeshore West trains, and the French style RER "checkbox" signage would really help me board the correct Lakeshore West train. It would also increase ridership of strange trains (e.g. special expresses like PanAm etc).

Once, you create a clear distinction between RER (i.e. all-stop and high frequency service along a core network) and Inter-Regional (i.e. a lower frequency service with limited stops within the RER network and all-stop beyond), both train service groups will become significantly easier to understand - be it in Paris, Toronto or anywhere else where such a distinction is not yet made...

Different services of course need different fleets, as these two representative rolling stock types show:

Bi-level trains allow Inter-Regional trains to maximise the number of passengers seated, but at the expense of longer dwell times at stations, while single-level trains with many doors allow RER trains to minimize station dwell times, but at the expense of offering less passengers a seat...

Either way, I am getting offtopic as this is the high speed train thread.

You might be right, but I do believe that it is important to establish a shared understanding of what the role of the various train types is, before we start discussing a certain passenger rail type (in this case: HSR) while ignoring the near-total absence lower-order passenger rail services (i.e. the lower levels of the "pyramid") on which the viability of such a higher-order passenger service depends...

 

[steveintoronto]

No Class 7 track in Canada (as far as I know).

Yet China has many thousands of kilometers of 350kph Class 9 track already (including Bejing-Shanghai which is back to 350kph again since last year).

Why can't we just settle for small segments of happy Class 7 track for Ontario "HSR" ... Basically water down the HSR plan into a HFR-style plan as an enhancement to GO but makes it practical to add London to the GO Transit system.

I found and quoted a section in Transport Canada regs available on-line allowing for Class 7 and higher track (gist) *with the approval of the Minister*. The ability is already on the books. I'll see if I can find it and quote it again later.

Edit: Here's for Class 6

Track Safety Rules and Inspections
The Rules Respecting Track Safety (TSR) 7 prescribe minimum safety requirements for railway track that is part of the general railway system of transportation. Part II A establishes the maximum allowable operating speeds (in mph) for various classes of track (see Table 1). The railway operates the Halton Subdivision as Class 4 track.

Over track that meets all of the requirements prescribed in this part for: The maximum allowable operating speed for freight trains is: The maximum allowable operating speed for passenger trains is:
Class 1 track 10 15
Class 2 track 25 30
Class 3 track 40 60
Class 4 track 60 80
Class 5 track 80 95 (for Light, Rapid, Comfortable (LRC) trains, 100)
Class 6 track 110 110
Table 1. Maximum Allowable Operating Speeds

Part II D-II establishes the minimum standards for tie condition for each class of track. It states (in part):

• (c) Each 39‑foot segment of:
  • Class 1 track shall have 5 crossties;
  • Class 2 track shall have 8 crossties;
  • Class 3 track shall have 10 crossties;
  • Class 4 and 5 tracks shall have 12 crossties; and
  • Class 6 track shall have 14 crossties,

which are not:

• (1) Broken through;
• (2) Split or otherwise impaired to the extent the crossties will allow ballast to work through, or will not hold spikes or rail fasteners;
• (3) So deteriorated that the tie plate or base of rail can move laterally more than ½ inch relative to the crossties; or
• (4) Cut by the tie plate through more than 40 per cent of a tie’s thickness.

Transport Canada’s (TC) last inspection of the south track of the Halton Subdivision occurred on 15 June 2006. Eight defects were documented, including five for defective crossties on the south track. CN remediation work on the south track, including the installation of safety ties, plugging, and extra spiking was completed between June 16th and June 29th 2006. There are no TC inspection records indicating that the north track, in the vicinity of the derailment, had been inspected within the 2‑year period prior to the occurrence.

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2007/r07t0323/r07t0323.asp

I'll continue searching later for higher classes by the approval on the Minister. (IIRC, it is posted in this string by me a couple of months back)

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

...
Passenger rail (in any metropolitan context) is therefore best understood as a pyramid, with RER at the bottom, followed by Inter-Regional, then Inter-City rail and with HSR on the top, where passenger volume decreases the higher you get to the top, while average distance travelled increases. And like with all pyramids, every level is built on top of the next-lower level, while acting as foundation for the next-higher level...

+1
+1
+1
Also throw airport express service into the pyramid for good measure

 

[Allandale25]

The group questioning the need for HSR between London and Toronto has created a website. Can't recall if this was posted here before.

 

[Allandale25]

Wonder what the new Minister thinks of HSR?

"Natural Resources and Forestry Minister Jeff Yurek has also been promoted. The Elgin-Middlesex-London MPP will become the transportation minister, swapping places with longtime MPP John Yakabuski, who represents Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke." - CBC

Article here with some background on him which notes he worked to save a bridge over the 401 that was used by farmers:

http://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...iddlesex-london-for-progressive-conservatives