News   Mar 28, 2024
 196     0 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 207     0 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 266     0 

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

Standing ovation to the engineers that built that quality. Chinese is no longer synonymous with crap.

Chinese have long built what gets ordered. If you order and pay for crap, they're happy to build and deliver crap. Of course, if you don't mention quality requirements in the spec and fail to hire 3rd party QA to sit in their factory (something common in North America too) then you might get crap anyway.
 
Also EN is a good station for people driving on the 401 to get on the GO rather than continue their journey downtown.

I know people hate parking lot stations, but guess what, if you hate cars you should support them, because if not than those car drivers are just going to drive downtown.

I think they should keep Etobicoke North and alternate service between Woodbine station and EN, just like they are planning to do with Mimico/Park Lawn.
Look at that stopwatch.. 25 minutes of a coin balanced on edge at 350kph!

Standing ovation to the engineers that built that quality. Chinese is no longer synonymous with crap.
The other side of the coin: the Chinese railway company is $1 Trillion in debt and growing
 
The other side of the coin: the Chinese railway company is $1 Trillion in debt and growing
https://www.ft.com/content/ca28f58a-955d-11e8-b747-fb1e803ee64e

As of March, China Railway’s total debts stood at Rmb5tn. According to Li Hongchang, a transport expert at Beijing Jiaotong University, as much as 80 per cent of the company’s debt burden is related to HSR construction. .... Prof Zhao estimates that China Railway’s overall debts will grow 60 per cent over the next few years, reaching Rmb8tn by 2020.

HSR is an expensive luxury item when the business case isn't there. The London-Toronto corridor doesn't have the business case to justify the cost. It is Mirabel all over again.

More from the article:

The Lanzhou-Xinjiang line that Mr Liu travelled is the longest, and most controversial, link in China’s HSR network. Built at a cost of Rmb140bn, it connects three large north-western provinces inhabited by 53m people — a relatively low total for China — in a combined land area bigger than Argentina.

This flies in the face of the basic economics of high-speed railways, which work best at relatively short distances through densely populated corridors. “The sweet spot distance is 300-500km,” said Jonathan Beard, head of transport consultancy for Arcadis Asia. “Any shorter and road tends to be more competitive. Any longer and air tends to be more competitive.”

Domestically, they consider a line that connects 53m people to be a boondoggle.

I wonder what they would think of spending that money on London to Toronto.
 
Last edited:
The Chinese northwestern lines are political tools more than economic ones, used to tie faraway regions to Chinese heartlands and push Han economic and domestic growth in those regions.

It's not unlike the reason why the transcontinental railway was built in Canada.
 
https://www.ft.com/content/ca28f58a-955d-11e8-b747-fb1e803ee64e



HSR is an expensive luxury item when the business case isn't there. The London-Toronto corridor doesn't have the business case to justify the cost. It is Mirabel all over again.

More from the article:



Domestically, they consider a line that connects 53m people to be a boondoggle.

I wonder what they would think of spending that money on London to Toronto.

You're right. Let's just keep everything as is, with the aging Via Rail trains trundling along shared freight tracks that they don't even have priority on, instead of investing in the future. In reality HSR isn't even "the future", but compared to our joke of a passenger rail network which uses a mishmash of different locomotives and carriages, its practically space-age technology.
 
You're right. Let's just keep everything as is, with the aging Via Rail trains trundling along shared freight tracks that they don't even have priority on, instead of investing in the future. In reality HSR isn't even "the future", but compared to our joke of a passenger rail network which uses a mishmash of different locomotives and carriages, its practically space-age technology.
I didn't say to not invest in our system.

There are alternatives to HSR that are more appropriate. These alternatives have been suggested by VIA Rail management for years, but are perpetually ignored because of this HSR politicking by the provincial governments and the media.
 
I didn't say to not invest in our system.

There are alternatives to HSR that are more appropriate. These alternatives have been suggested by VIA Rail management for years, but are perpetually ignored because of this HSR politicking by the provincial governments and the media.

So then what happens in a few decades when HSR is far more "appropriate", as you say? We'll be stuck with these band aid solutions brought forth from VIA due to their fear of losing influence in the passenger rail business, because let's be real, thats the main reason why VIA is even suggesting things like dedicated tracks and High Frequency Rail. Meanwhile, what we could have been doing is actually taking the initiative to go a little outside of our comfort zone, and at least try to catch up to many other developed nations.
 
So then what happens in a few decades when HSR is far more "appropriate", as you say? We'll be stuck with these band aid solutions brought forth from VIA due to their fear of losing influence in the passenger rail business, because let's be real, thats the main reason why VIA is even suggesting things like dedicated tracks and High Frequency Rail. Meanwhile, what we could have been doing is actually taking the initiative to go a little outside of our comfort zone, and at least try to catch up to many other developed nations.
You may refer back to Post #2330 (Aug 20, 2018), where I explained with the examples of Germany and the US that HSR is usually preceded by frequently (hourly) and fast (Vmax=~200 km/h) InterCity service:
But there is plenty of demand. [...] Factor in London, Guelph, the airport and Brampton, and you have a serious business case for HSR.
As you apparently missed it, this is the intercity passenger rail standard offerred in Germany before High-Speed Rail was introduced (Note that until this day, only 248 km or 40% of the distance between Mannheim and Hamburg is actually covered by HSR infrastructure, the balance being legacy rail lines):
upload_2018-8-20_13-18-28-png.154004


Similarly, this is the intercity passenger rail standard which was offered in the Northeast Corridor before the Acela Express was introduced (not even talking about any HSR infrastructure here):
upload_2018-8-20_13-20-53-png.154005


Now have a look at the intercity passenger rail service offered on the Kitchener Corridor currently:
upload_2018-8-20_13-21-46-png.154007


Even when throwing in regional rail services (which are excluded from the timetable extracts provided for Germany and the NEC, but can be assumed to be hourly), we are only talking about this kind of service level and travel speeds:
upload_2018-8-20_13-23-21-png.154008


Is it that difficult for you to accept that there might be a few shades of gray between what we got now and full-scale Japanese Shinkansen service levels, which would still represent a dramatic improvement over the Status Quo...?

All the same, 100 mph on the existing corridor, double tracked, is all anyone needs. Service every second hour all day would be a huge increase in marketability for rail over what we have. We need to get incremental improvement going quickly, so we have something to sell, rather than pushing uphill to HSR with all the sticker shock and skepticism it attracts.
Amen.

Building HSR infrastructure is also no end in itself, which is why it is usually justified with its suspected ability to increase rail ridership, but for that aim HSR construction seems to be a rather ineffective measure as this review of 32 European countries suggests that the relative length of a Nation's HSR network only explains 10.9% of its per-capita rail ridership:
1545716624228.png

Sources: European Commission (2018), UIC (2018), StatCan (2016), Railway Association of Canada (2018, pp.18-19)

In case you want to try to figure out which dot belongs to which country (hint: Canada is the red dot in the bottom-left corner):
1545717364041.png
 
Last edited:
You may refer back to Post #2330 (Aug 20, 2018), where I explained with the examples of Germany and the US that HSR is usually preceded by frequently (hourly) and fast (Vmax=~200 km/h) InterCity service:
To be fair, Via Rail now has service to Montreal and Ottawa that's almost hourly to each city. Your point stands though. Despite the arguments of some of the HFR critics here, it would make a future HSR more likely, not less.
 
To be fair, Via Rail now has service to Montreal and Ottawa that's almost hourly to each city. Your point stands though. Despite the arguments of some of the HFR critics here, it would make a future HSR more likely, not less.
Agreed, though somewhat-near-hourly service so far only exists for passengers travelling between Toronto, Oshawa, Kingston, Fallowfield and Ottawa:
VIA is a bit inconsistent in its claim (well, D-S keeps making this pitch, badly) that their market leans to intermediate points. If this is so, why build a line on a route that skips the biggest intermediate points, and does not enhance service to these. The Havelock looks more air competitive than local. If frequency is the goal, the intermediate points on the Kingston sub should be getting more trains, not less. I find D-S’s pitch a bit disingenuous.
I suspect that you might find his pitch slightly less "inconsistent" or even "disingenuous" if you were more familiar with VIA's current timetable along the Corridor and/or if your definition of "intermediary markets" went beyond travel between Kingston and either Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal or their respective satellite stations (OSHA/FALL/DORV) only?
1545764574377-png.168768

Compiled from: official VIA Rail timetable (effective 2018/11/18)
Note: Count counts two departures to the same station within less than 30 minutes as one single departure. Also, train #51 (operating via Ottawa) was ignored for MTRL/DORV to KGON/TRTO, as train #61 offers a later departure and earlier arrival between these stations.

As you can see, there are four VIA stations between Brockville and Toronto (Gananoque, Napanee, Trenton Junction and Port Hope) which have no single direct connection to Montreal, of which two stations (Napanee and Port Hope) have direct connections to Ottawa in eastbound direction only. Looking at all these other "intermediary markets", which ones exactly would loose frequencies (assuming the frequencies Kingston's mayor shared and assuming that most trains will stop at all stations)? And that's before we look at how difficult it is currently to make day trips from or to some of these stations (especially on weekends, when not all these trains operate):
1545652096514-png.168704

1545652144109-png.168705

Compiled from: official VIA Rail timetable (effective 2018/11/18)
Note: cross-post from post #5,002 in the VIA Rail thread.
 
Last edited:
Ugh, Via getting dedicated tracks is just putting a bandaid on the gunshot wound that is the state of passenger rail in Canada. Either go all the way, modernize, and build HSR lines, or don't do it at all.

Please feel free to offer up the billions necessary to build HSR.

We'd all love HSR. But like so many other things, every government always finds some other priority. And while it's easy to slam VIA, the alternative is no intercity rail transport.

Stick around long enough and you'll see your view expounded by every new member to these parts. And eventually the realization dawns that the choice isn't HSR or plodding around. It's between some improvement and the eventual shuttering of VIA.
 
Please feel free to offer up the billions necessary to build HSR.

We'd all love HSR. But like so many other things, every government always finds some other priority. And while it's easy to slam VIA, the alternative is no intercity rail transport.

Stick around long enough and you'll see your view expounded by every new member to these parts. And eventually the realization dawns that the choice isn't HSR or plodding around. It's between some improvement and the eventual shuttering of VIA.

That's only here in Canada though because we live in a backwater when it comes to long term infrastructure planning and development. A government with any sort of capacity for rational thought and long-term vision would have gone ahead with HSR decades ago. Having HSR between London and Montreal is a no brainer. Instead we're at a point where the feds keep on stringing VIA and its barebones service along, dragging their feet on every single basic decision on the future of the service, to the point where if investments in rolling stock weren't made, VIA would have had to shutter shop. As a country we waste billions on jackass initiatives that cost billions (in Ontario alone, a google search will serve up pages of examples). There's no reason why Canada, Ontario and Quebec couldn't split the costs for HSR. Isn't that why the feds came up with the hare brained $35 billion Canada Infrastructure Bank? For projects of this nature? Didn't Ontario build in $11 billion of HSR in the last budget. Where's that money now? The only thing holding back HSR is a lack of ambition and short-sightedness. The money is there.
 
^Whether it's HFR, HSR, or whatever, the biggest mistake the current government has made is their holding off doing anything until it can be used as an election bauble. If the "project" had been launched in 2018, contracts signed, and shovels now in the ground - quite reasonable, had Transport Canada not been empowered to rag the puck with a round of due diligence that probably didn't change things much - there would doubtless be cries by the Tories that the plan is a white elephant, but it would have been too late to reverse the decision without huge penalties.

As it is, the Liberals will announce as an election promise (while doing nothing concrete, where they could act now), and that will induce the Tories to declare their opposition (and we know they won't be saying we need HSR and nothing less). So the whole project will turn on the result of the election.

I'm not saying who I'm voting for, but reading the tea leaves of friends, newspapers, social media, etc..... the election is not assured for either party.
We are truly wasting time and paying an opportunity cost on something that ought to be nonpartisan.

- Paul
 
Didn't Ontario build in $11 billion of HSR in the last budget. Where's that money now? The only thing holding back HSR is a lack of ambition and short-sightedness. The money is there.

I will leave the rest of your post to people with a better knowledge and understanding of VIA/intercity rail in Canada and whether or not London to Montreal with HSR is a "no brainer"....but I really have to challenge you on how you think budgets work.

When it is reported that a government (any government) puts "X billions of dollars" in a budget towards a specific project it does not magically make the money appear. They are just saying they plan to spend that much on that project over that time frame.

If the project is subsequently cancelled, it does not mean the money for that project is then sitting around with no purpose. It just means that, either, spending room has opened up elsewhere, or the government (or their replacement) will take on less debt (or lower income projections).

So when you ask what happened to that money.....the answer is "nothing, it did not really exist".
 

Back
Top