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

[ssiguy2]

No matter what route they take now, it would be political suicide for any party to cancel the plan. Anyone doing so can write off the entire SW Ont electorate not only due to having hopes raised only to be pulled out from under them but also because it will again seem like only Torontonians benefit from Queen's Park largess. A cancellation would be seen as yet another indication that if something is not needed in the GTA then nobody needs it and that all public policy and infrastructure must serve Torontonians first, last, and second or it's considered a frivolous waste of money.

 

[BurlOak]

No matter what route they take now, it would be political suicide for any party to cancel the plan. Anyone doing so can write off the entire SW Ont electorate not only due to having hopes raised only to be pulled out from under them but also because it will again seem like only Torontonians benefit from Queen's Park largess. A cancellation would be seen as yet another indication that if something is not needed in the GTA then nobody needs it and that all public policy and infrastructure must serve Torontonians first, last, and second or it's considered a frivolous waste of money.

I think most people in SW Ontario see HSR as an empty campaign promise that was made to buy votes and nothing more. I do not think anyone seriously thinks it will actually happen anywhere close to the promised timeframes.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The idea seems to be surprisingly popular in southern Ontario. The reception from what I can tell has been the pretty good considering that part of the province usually rejects the liberals.

 

[jcam]

I assume at Union you may make another mini-station like UPX for a service like this?

The other interesting part of the preliminary study are the largely redacted appendices. Of particular note is the "GO Opportunities East", where one part suggests that 3-car DMUs could be profitably run to Kingston.

Are we looking at 5-types of Metrolinx Service? GO regional (electric and diesel bi-level), GO RER (EMU uni-level), UPX (DMU to EMU unilevel), GO InterCity (DMU uni-level), GO HSR (electric bi-level)?

Are we going to you kiss VIA goodbye for intra-Ontario?

 

[rbt]

I assume at Union you may make another mini-station like UPX for a service like this?

I expect they will use the UPX station component as the HSR station.

 

[muller877]

The idea seems to be surprisingly popular in southern Ontario. The reception from what I can tell has been the pretty good considering that part of the province usually rejects the liberals.

SWO is not a homogeneous electorate. It is divided between the ciities (London, KW/Guelph, Windsor) and the rural areas. The swing ridings are in the cities and that is where Wynne is trying to get the votes. In London and Windsor the popularity will be split between those that think this is a waste of money and those that want the convenience of not having to drive the 401. I think this split will not impact the votes significantly.

In KW/Guelph there will be excitement. But in the next 4 years they will have much better GO service so I'm not sure if there will be huge swings in votes to save 5-10 minutes off of a commute (compared to the cost).

In the rural areas, Wynne will be expropriating land, cutting down trees and closing roads. And NO new train stops (maybe less as VIA withough the traffic from London will have less frequent trains). It will be seen as Wynne out of touch with the rural population (again)....so the safe PC seats will become even more safe.

 

[mdrejhon]

I think most people in SW Ontario see HSR as an empty campaign promise that was made to buy votes and nothing more. I do not think anyone seriously thinks it will actually happen anywhere close to the promised timeframes.

I agree and I am skeptical. However, just add a decade of delay. So all signs point to a 2030s reality of it finally happening. It is quite amazingly brilliant, really, how all the existing initiatives are converging!!

- Existing corridor to Kitchener is very straight past Pearson.
.....It is already capable of 40minute HSR for Kitchener-Union including time for a Pearson stop. Needs extra tracks.
- Ontario now owns most of the Kitchener corridor.
- Totalling the statistics, Multiple million already take intercity bus/train/charters annually from KW; HSR will capture a lot of this.
- Electricification "beginnings" of corridor to Pearson is pretty well darn near assured
.....SmartTrack uses HSR corridor to very near Pearson
.....UPX uses HSR corridor to Pearson
.....GO RER Kitchener electricification is the HSR route
.....They are now seeking tenders for electricification for the Pearson leg!
.....All the above electricification are compatible and interchangeable (overhead wire at standardized height).
.....All the above would need to be simutaneously cancelled for electricification not to happen.
.....HSR frequently "taxis" over existing commuter lines at medium-high speed worldwide enroute to their express tracks.

It literally makes Kitchener gives a defacto HSR-trainset-ready line, except for track capacity management for HSR purposes. UPX and SmartTrack shares the same electricified route, according to a PDF mapping of the six tracks that goes past Bloor. Add (or use preexisting, if track capacity allows) one HSR compatible express passing track (with precision concrete ties and tighter tolerances, instead of usual wood ties) and voila!

Kitchener-to-Toronto HSR for probably under a billion dollar increment relative to what they are already doing anyway (billions) for all the other services. HSR becomes an "increment" at this stage with relatively minor Toronto-Kitchener corridor upgrades. The London-Kitchener leg is harder to justify, but it makes a lot of sense if you are building (er, simply upgrading/enhancing) the Kitchener-Toronto leg.

And what if they combine GO RER with HSR? Basically make the "Express" GO RER trains a HSR trainset!

For Kitchener-Toronto, only a few meters of just a few backyards (plus retaining walls to turn a sloping track valley into a sunken wider area) may need to be expropriated to add extra track. other than that "politically difficult part", it does seems unusually easy to add a HSR if you are electricifying+expanding anyway.

It appears relatively easy compared to most past HSR initiatives in many other countries... The Kitchener corridor is already HSR ready. London is harder, but requires very little residential expropriation, so may as well bundle that in.

 

[mdrejhon]

In KW/Guelph there will be excitement. But in the next 4 years they will have much better GO service so I'm not sure if there will be huge swings in votes to save 5-10 minutes off of a commute (compared to the cost).

You're kidding about "5-10 minutes", right? It takes two hours for a GOTrain to get from Kitchener to Toronto, and an express GOTrain will still take 1h10min. A HSR version of the express train over exactly the same track in exactly the same corridor (upgraded to HSR tolerances), the HSR version of GO RER express, would easily save at least half an hour, with not much cost increement.

Go RER includes all-stop and express trains. If you are spending a billion to add an super express electric passing track anyway for GO RER direct-to-Union express trains, throw in the HSR tolerances for a "few" million extra. Buy a HSR trainset for GO RER express trains. Done. Brilliant politics. Homer Simpson No Brainer. Even for the Cons.

(Now if GO RER Kitchener is cancelled fully, instead of delayed, then that is a different story...)

 

[muller877]

You're kidding about "5-10 minutes", right? It takes two hours for a GOTrain to get from Kitchener to Toronto, and an express GOTrain will still take 1h10min. A HSR version of the express train over exactly the same track in exactly the same corridor (upgraded to HSR tolerances), the HSR version of GO RER express, would easily save at least half an hour, with not much cost increement.

Go RER includes all-stop and express trains. If you are spending a billion to add an super express electric passing track anyway for GO RER direct-to-Union express trains, throw in the HSR tolerances for a "few" million extra. Buy a HSR trainset for GO RER express trains. Done. Brilliant politics. Homer Simpson No Brainer. Even for the Cons.

(Now if GO RER Kitchener is cancelled fully, instead of delayed, then that is a different story...)

From post 669...and other posts around there....please read as they are very instructive

Assuming modest track improvements the max speed should be about 160km/hr from here to Kitchener. Assuming 0 stops it will take 4 minutes 30 seconds faster with HSR (200 km/hr)....and that is with a train going through Brampton station at 200 km/hr.

The incremental improvements over 200km/hr are negligable since there is only a very small portion of the track that the train can get that fast.

In 4 years time I would expect that there will be express trains and the rail from Kitchener to Brampton will be fixed. With an limited stop train the time will be around 1:15. and an all-stop around 1:30.

This is the earliest that they will start thinking about building. Will the electorate agree to the couple of billion to build HSR to Kitchener at that time? And the billions more to London? For Kiticher and a 5 minute savings, I'm guessing no.

HSR tolerances are not a "few million extra". The rules and regulations for travelling at that speed are quite rightly much more stringent than normal rail (can we slap a new bit of pavement on the DVP and make it a 200 km/hr zone? No...the width, access, base, slope, turning radius, etc would all have to be corrected....just like HSR.

 

[mdrejhon]

From post 669...and other posts around there....

You bring up many great points...
...But these posts were made long before the release of the HSR studies this month (March 2014 studies released/leaked early December 2014)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documen...ronto-london-high-speed-rail-2014-03-11-2.pdf
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documen...350/memo-tkl-hsr-impacts-smaller-redacted.pdf

The HSR studies say 40 minutes in the existing corridor from Kitchener to Toronto appears possible with existing turning radiuses of the existing Kitchener corridor, with no new right of ways (just widening of existing). This is by a firm that has experience doing HSR studies of HSR routes that actually gotten built, so they know what they are talking about (even with a rushed study). This would be new information beyond what you already wrote. The study shows that the new HSR corridors only occurs between London-Kitchener; the existing railroad corridor is used for 40 minute Kitchener-Union. Which makes it an extremely low lying apple for future GO RER Kitchener expansion. Mind you, I'm ignoring the cost of the high-priced and harder-to-initially-justify London leg, focussing purely on the impressive congruence between GO RER electricification and the Kitchener-Union HSR leg.

This reinforces my view, that when Kitchener GO RER needs to intall new extra express passing track, they might as well make one of them HSR compatible, or protect towards a future HSR upgrade (e.g. replacement of wood ties with concrete ties, catenary tolerance tightening, etc). Obviously, I imagine some realigning may be needed (e.g. moving track sideways a few feet), which is something they do all the time worldwide overnight in sections at a time without stopping daily service, and readjusting positioning of platforms at stations (much bigger project) but the corridor is already apparently 40-minute HSR compatible on the existing Kitchener-Toronto right of way (no new ROW needed except widening and track realignments) according to professional mathematical calculations by actual HSR study professionals. If you're realigning anyway for additional new GO RER express tracks (adding track, adding catenary, etc), on an already-HSR-viable corridor, then you might as well protect for future HSR upgrade...

You're right, it may be a costly upgrade (e.g. replacing track, sideways shifting of track, concrete ties, new catenary) if they did not HSR-future-proof a GO RER express track addition (a multi-billon-dollar project, by itself, with relatively little further increment to make it HSR compatible if you don't need new ROW)...

According to these HSR study professionals, the Kitchener-Union corridor doesn't need any turn radius changes to accomodate 40-minute HSR Kitchener-Toronto. 40 minutes isn't the same thing as 1h15 minutes -- it makes it far more daily-commutable -- and in some countries, makes a rail almost an order of magnitude more popular than it otherwise would be (e.g. just look at France's first HSR that got so unexpectedly popular that route now uses bi-level highspeed trains with tight 3-minute headways, after incremental upgrades that quickly followed afterwards).

This doesn't cover the problem of noise abatement and other aspects, mind you...

 

[innsertnamehere]

Did you read the report? The 40 minute time comes with a bypass around Guelph. 1:07 without it. The part that shares tracks is not expected to exceed 200km/h.

 

[muller877]

You bring up many great points...
...But these posts were made long before the release of the HSR studies this month (March 2014 studies released/leaked early December 2014)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documen...ronto-london-high-speed-rail-2014-03-11-2.pdf
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documen...350/memo-tkl-hsr-impacts-smaller-redacted.pdf

The HSR studies say 40 minutes in the existing corridor from Kitchener to Toronto appears possible with existing turning radiuses of the existing Kitchener corridor, with no new right of ways (just widening of existing). This is by a firm that has experience doing HSR studies of HSR routes that actually gotten built, so they know what they are talking about (even with a rushed study). This would be new information beyond what you already wrote. The study shows that the new HSR corridors only occurs between London-Kitchener; the existing railroad corridor is used for 40 minute Kitchener-Union. Which makes it an extremely low lying apple for future GO RER Kitchener expansion. Mind you, I'm ignoring the cost of the high-priced and harder-to-initially-justify London leg, focussing purely on the impressive congruence between GO RER electricification and the Kitchener-Union HSR leg.

This reinforces my view, that when Kitchener GO RER needs to intall new extra express passing track, they might as well make one of them HSR compatible, or protect towards a future HSR upgrade (e.g. replacement of wood ties with concrete ties, catenary tolerance tightening, etc). Obviously, I imagine some realigning may be needed (e.g. moving track sideways a few feet), which is something they do all the time worldwide overnight in sections at a time without stopping daily service, and readjusting positioning of platforms at stations (much bigger project) but the corridor is already apparently 40-minute HSR compatible on the existing Kitchener-Toronto right of way (no new ROW needed except widening and track realignments) according to professional mathematical calculations by actual HSR study professionals. If you're realigning anyway for additional new GO RER express tracks (adding track, adding catenary, etc), on an already-HSR-viable corridor, then you might as well protect for future HSR upgrade...

You're right, it may be a costly upgrade (e.g. replacing track, sideways shifting of track, concrete ties, new catenary) if they did not HSR-future-proof a GO RER express track addition (a multi-billon-dollar project, by itself, with relatively little further increment to make it HSR compatible if you don't need new ROW)...

According to these HSR study professionals, the Kitchener-Union corridor doesn't need any turn radius changes to accomodate 40-minute HSR Kitchener-Toronto. 40 minutes isn't the same thing as 1h15 minutes -- it makes it daily-commutable -- and in some countries, makes a rail almost an order of magnitude more popular than it otherwise would be (e.g. just look at France's first HSR that got so unexpectedly popular that route now uses bi-level highspeed trains with tight 3-minute headways, after incremental upgrades that quickly followed afterwards).

This doesn't cover the problem of noise abatement and other aspects, mind you...

Direct service without HSR will be under 1 hour. And HSR is only 5-10 minutes faster than a direct train. Comparing apples to apples. The 30-40 minutes faster is comparing current conditions (crappy track, track diamonds, all-stops) to direct HSR.

Once the various upgrades are done in the next 4 years Kitichener will be able to have a direct train it would be under 1 hour. (will they...that's a political decision and a supply and demand decision)

in 20 years, HSR will save them 5-10 mintues. That's it. The study's lump everything as a HSR benefit....as a election platform.

 

[mdrejhon]

in 20 years, HSR will save them 5-10 mintues. That's it.

That would already be darn near HSR, ala Acela Express style. 40 mins versus 45-50 mins. But wouldn't that require a bypass too?

The 40 minute time comes with a bypass around Guelph. 1:07 without it. The part that shares tracks is not expected to exceed 200km/h.

Hmm. OK, I see the issue, if the bypass alone is responsible for half an hour of delay through Guelph. Then, if we're adding bypass, we might as well make it HSR compatible.

Now we've got numerous conflicting figures I need to figure out. So to confirm:
40 mins -- full HSR including bypass (300kph+ through bypass)
1:07 mins -- "lite" HSR without bypass (200kph level service)

I'm trying to figure out where the "5-10 mins" difference comes from, reconciling the multiple numbers. Are we comparing ~1:15min current theoretical "regular express" trains on existing route, versus theoretical ~1:07mins for "lite" HSR over the existing route? If so, then yes, let's just settle for regular express trains -- you are right! 1h15 versus 1h07 isn't going to justify HSR cost.

...But if we're comparing 40mins versus 45-50mins (the "5 to 10 minute" difference referred) then even that still requires the Guelph bypass (now that I understand the 40min HSR would require that), then we might as well make the bypass HSR compatible.

So, not as simple as I hoped as 40mins requires the Guelph bypass (although much simpler than most other HSR initiatives worldwide).

 

[dunkalunk]

Question: are they 80km/h curves or 50km/h curves?

I somehow think the presentation slides weren't proofread as there seem to be a lot of inconsistencies between the slides and the report. Regardless of what the speed of those curves are, I do like the idea of bypassing Acton and Rockway due to the complications of being able to widen the existing curves and grade separate the line.

I still think it makes the most sense to run the HSR track through the middle of Guelph rather than bypass it, even with the property acquisition and grade separation that would be required. In my mind, it makes more sense to electrify, grade separate, and provide maintenance for one rail line instead of two.

In isolation, it may make more sense to bypass Guelph completely, however with all-day RER service on the line and the number of trains that would be on the line, the 5 km/h slow order at Kent St will need to be resolved one way or another, grade separation being the most likely.

 

[salsa]

^ I really hope they don't relocate Acton GO station. I also wonder if there are any plans to add a Rockwood station eventually.