kEiThZ
Superstar
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/p...ive+fire+strands+them+bush/1899736/story.html
Here's why I got stuck last night.
Here's why I got stuck last night.
|
|
|
Rail: Ontario-Quebec High Speed Rail Study
- Thread starter isittimetomoveyet
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
Average Train Speeds +
As to average train speed:
I was on the GO train over the weekend, and sat behind the cab when they were driving from within it, and watched the speedometer as I rail fanned.
Its in MPH.
Top Speed between Danforth GO Station and Port Credit was 74mph (or about 120kmph)
Average speed, based on trip time was about 58km/ph.
This suggests to me that speed is more a function of stop spacing and of track issues and/or congestion that anything else.
The big slowdown was Union Station, as usual, where they really must fix the switches and track layout.
There was also a bit of slowness near Mimico GO and the big rail yard, there was some track work going on and a GO train going the other way was being held.
*****
Glad to see your trip difficulties hasn't slowed your posting Keithz!
Then we'd all have to give VIA a hard time!
They really shouldn't be sending out crappy engines, they have a lot of parked power and coaches in the west end yard. I counted at least 6 trains, and 4 different types of coaches and 3 diff. types of engines.
As to average train speed:
I was on the GO train over the weekend, and sat behind the cab when they were driving from within it, and watched the speedometer as I rail fanned.
Its in MPH.
Top Speed between Danforth GO Station and Port Credit was 74mph (or about 120kmph)
Average speed, based on trip time was about 58km/ph.
This suggests to me that speed is more a function of stop spacing and of track issues and/or congestion that anything else.
The big slowdown was Union Station, as usual, where they really must fix the switches and track layout.
There was also a bit of slowness near Mimico GO and the big rail yard, there was some track work going on and a GO train going the other way was being held.
*****
Glad to see your trip difficulties hasn't slowed your posting Keithz!
Then we'd all have to give VIA a hard time!
They really shouldn't be sending out crappy engines, they have a lot of parked power and coaches in the west end yard. I counted at least 6 trains, and 4 different types of coaches and 3 diff. types of engines.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
If we're looking at a true high speed rail system (300km/h) that means curves with a radius of at least 4km. I've been thinking of something like this between Kitchener and Georgetown:
Bright Red: New High Speed ROW
Dark Red: Existing ROW upgraded to High Speed
Blue: Existing Passenger Rail Service
Cyan: Existing Rail, New Service
Purple: New Conventional Rail and Service
Black: Freight Rail
Bright Red: New High Speed ROW
Dark Red: Existing ROW upgraded to High Speed
Blue: Existing Passenger Rail Service
Cyan: Existing Rail, New Service
Purple: New Conventional Rail and Service
Black: Freight Rail
Last edited:
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
^^ I guess that bypassing Guelph would save a fair bit of money when improving the ROW. I would have thought there'd be at least a bit of value in running it through Guelph, to serve it with Regional stops though.
Just curious, what do the black, blue and pink lines mean?
Just curious, what do the black, blue and pink lines mean?
dunkalunk
Senior Member
I would have liked to kept Guelph on the high speed line as well, but there is no room to expand/straighten trackage through downtown. Also, by bypassing, there are less issues with dealing with the topography of the Eramosa and Speed Rivers. If you can avoid creating bottlenecks in the system, go for it. Guelph would still be serviced by local GO trains and by continued and new VIA service.
See the map for the explanations on the other line colours.
See the map for the explanations on the other line colours.
Last edited:
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
I see. I don't know the area very well at all, so I'll take your word for it.
I don't think I'd extend all-day Go service to Guelph or Waterloo. I'd let HSR with regional stops serve those areas, with Go providing commuter service using HSR trackage.
In the even further future, you could provide service to every single one of the little towns along the rails. You could provide it with little 4 train EMUs that'd run on another ROW. In the end, lines like Toronto-Kitchener-London could have 5 or 6 tracks; 2 for freight, 2 for HSR, and 2 for such a local service.
I'm dreaming right now, aren't I
EDIT: I'm sure that sort of service could actually be possible on some lines, but the government will never provide the capital to get it started.
I don't think I'd extend all-day Go service to Guelph or Waterloo. I'd let HSR with regional stops serve those areas, with Go providing commuter service using HSR trackage.
In the even further future, you could provide service to every single one of the little towns along the rails. You could provide it with little 4 train EMUs that'd run on another ROW. In the end, lines like Toronto-Kitchener-London could have 5 or 6 tracks; 2 for freight, 2 for HSR, and 2 for such a local service.
I'm dreaming right now, aren't I
EDIT: I'm sure that sort of service could actually be possible on some lines, but the government will never provide the capital to get it started.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
... uh ... starting from the east, you verge off south of the existing track, through the escarpment, through the Acton Quarry, and then through a series of provincially-significant wetlands.If we're looking at a true high speed rail system (300km/h) that means curves with a radius of at least 4km. I've been thinking of something like this between Kitchener and Georgetown:
It would never be approved. Escarpment crossing locations are hugely sensitive.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Where would you put the line?
nfitz
Superstar
Along the existing CN track. I don't see that anything better can be done to cross the escarpment where it curves just east of Acton. Perhaps the curve at Rockwood could be improved by looping further into the fields west of town ... but I don't know what the radius is. There should be existing VIA reports on high-speed rail through this section.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Any diversion off of the existing right of way would cause disruption to provincially significant wetlands, these are are the headwaters of the Speed and Eramosa rivers of course. With the alignment, I attempted to have the rail line follow existing concessions as to minimize the impact. Whether a by-pass is possible or necessary would be up to the work of an environmental assessment. If a bypass is eventually needed and the current line has already been electrified, it should hardly be a loss, we would be electrifying rail corridors regardless.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Following the concessions would be very unpopular ... as that is where all the houses are ... along the concession. And I don't see how you get up the escarpment that way; the concession roads that cross it at Acton are Third Line and 22nd Sideroad ... both have wicked hills.
The existing alignment is amazing ... I don't understand the desire to move it.
The existing alignment is amazing ... I don't understand the desire to move it.
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
Also there are a bunch of issues with that particular spot including having to avoid the expanded Bruce-Milton hydro corridor and watching out for operational quarries and old quarries that were rehabilitated into lakes (or future areas that will become lakes). The area is one of the most important for mineral aggregates in the province as it contains one of the country's largest quarries. There is currently a large proposal to expand the quarry.
MisterF
Senior Member
Using the existing right of way is problematic because it belongs to CN. HS trains and freight trains can't use the same tracks - North American freight trains would destroy high speed tracks. So the corridor would have to be 4 tracks, which is wider than the corridor will allow through the urban areas. If HSR takes over the corridor altogether, a new corridor would have to be built for freight, which defeats the purpose of using an existing ROW.
The other issue is going through small urban areas like Georgetown and Acton, and even Guelph. It's very unlikely that any of these places would get a stop (likely one high speed station will serve the whole K-W/Cambridge/Guelph area), so you'll either have 300 km/h trains roaring through these communities or trains slowing down so much through every community that they'll never get up to speed. The former would cause huge disruption to the communities, especially Guelph where it goes through downtown, and the fight they'd put up would make the Weston battle look like a cakewalk. The latter would defeat the purpose of HSR altogether.
The last HSR study contemplated using existing rights of way where CN and CP lines run parallel and could be consolidated, and where one of the two is actually suitable for high speed, ie relatively straight and not running through any significant towns. Like between London and Chatham.
The other issue is going through small urban areas like Georgetown and Acton, and even Guelph. It's very unlikely that any of these places would get a stop (likely one high speed station will serve the whole K-W/Cambridge/Guelph area), so you'll either have 300 km/h trains roaring through these communities or trains slowing down so much through every community that they'll never get up to speed. The former would cause huge disruption to the communities, especially Guelph where it goes through downtown, and the fight they'd put up would make the Weston battle look like a cakewalk. The latter would defeat the purpose of HSR altogether.
The last HSR study contemplated using existing rights of way where CN and CP lines run parallel and could be consolidated, and where one of the two is actually suitable for high speed, ie relatively straight and not running through any significant towns. Like between London and Chatham.
nfitz
Superstar
Perhaps a freight by-pass of urban areas might be an answer then.
Though there's lots of space left ... CN only has 1 track ... and I dare say they could get 4 tracks through much of the area.
Guelph is an interesting problem ... and a short tunnel might be in order.
Though there's lots of space left ... CN only has 1 track ... and I dare say they could get 4 tracks through much of the area.
Guelph is an interesting problem ... and a short tunnel might be in order.
Whoaccio
Senior Member
Wouldn't it make more sense to build to Hamilton and the Niagara Peninsula before London/SW Ontario? Those areas seem much more integrated into the GTA economy than say Kitchener or London, what with the tourism industry around Niagara and Hamilton's ongoing absorption into the GTA.
I wonder if a Toronto-SWOntario segment would be better integrated into a freight line. I'm not sure on the economics of freight, but I have trouble believing that traffic between Toronto and Windsor will ever justify a double tracked 300km/h HSR. I know in Europe they have combo HSR-freight railways (like the Gotthard Base Tunnel) which manage to let a passenger train through at high-ish speeds every few hours while also allowing freight traffic. Given the amount of freight that goes through the area, a more efficient freight rail link through to the USA could be a good thing. Especially if it got dragged down to the Mexican border or Gulf of Mexico.
I wonder if a Toronto-SWOntario segment would be better integrated into a freight line. I'm not sure on the economics of freight, but I have trouble believing that traffic between Toronto and Windsor will ever justify a double tracked 300km/h HSR. I know in Europe they have combo HSR-freight railways (like the Gotthard Base Tunnel) which manage to let a passenger train through at high-ish speeds every few hours while also allowing freight traffic. Given the amount of freight that goes through the area, a more efficient freight rail link through to the USA could be a good thing. Especially if it got dragged down to the Mexican border or Gulf of Mexico.