News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.2K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 381     0 

Toronto Pearson International Airport

Riverdale Rink Rat said:
Hahaha... thanks for that. Really? I can say with 100% assurance that there will never be a TGV equivalent in Canada.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but there really should be a coordinated transportation strategy that takes all modes into account. The future demand for air travel that the Globe and Mail story talks about could be reduced with a proper HSR system. Different levels of government developing each mode in isolation doesn't make any sense.

The GO RER expansion is going full speed ahead and the related HSR line to Kitchener and London is further in the planning stages than any previous attempt at HSR. Plus it's looking more and more likely that Trudeau will win the federal election, maybe in a minority supported by Mulcair. I'd say a Canadian TGV equivalent is looking more likely than ever.
 
MisterF said:
I'd say a Canadian TGV equivalent is looking more likely than ever.
Click to expand...
More likely than ever true, but will still never happen in the next 30-40 years. We cant even go 4-5 years in this country without substantial cuts in VIA rail service.

But that's getting slightly off-topic, i'm surprised that the increased seating capacity in planes has reduced the demand for a 6th runway to the extent that it has so far. I guess that just goes to show that airlines love packing people in like sardines in economy and economy plus configurations.
 
I have believed for a long time that a true HSR is not really a practical use of resources in the corridor, unless we get a federal government radically different in its outlook on transport policy from any previous one.

It's just a too big an ask in terms of cost and time. But a huge amount could be done with passing tracks for freight conflicts, modern signalling, more frequencies etc. If the trip to Montreal was reliably 3.5 hours, and Ottawa say 2.5 hours, with departures every hour, you'd attract tons of people from planes.
 
I doubt HSR will really influence Pearson that much one way or another. AFAIK, Montreal and Ottawa account for ~8-9% of movements at Pearson. At least some of that is transfer traffic that wouldn't care about HSR.

It's a good chunk for two cities but hardly seems determinative of Pearson's future expansion plans (which seem to rely more and more on international travel growth).
 
jamincan said:
Don't short haul routes tend to take a disproportionate amount of gate space though?
Click to expand...

Well yes. But unless the airport goes full long haul flights only than shorter flights will always out number the long ones. Take for example New York, Chicago, or Montreal, there's close to a flight leaving every hour vs London where there might be 3 or 4 flights a day. Due in part to demand, but also aircraft choice, but also that one aircraft can complete multiple trips on the shorter flights.
 
diminutive said:
I doubt HSR will really influence Pearson that much one way or another. AFAIK, Montreal and Ottawa account for ~8-9% of movements at Pearson. At least some of that is transfer traffic that wouldn't care about HSR.

It's a good chunk for two cities but hardly seems determinative of Pearson's future expansion plans (which seem to rely more and more on international travel growth).
Click to expand...
Transfer traffic does care about HSR, which can replace transfer flights when it serves a hub airport (the last HSR study ignored this market while, AFAIK, previous studies at least acknowledged it). This happens with air-rail partnerships in countries like France and Germany. It would be interesting to see the numbers for how flights to Ottawa, Montreal, Kingston, Quebec City, and London compare to long haul routes. Even if they account for only 10% of total movements, that's still a significant amount of space that could be freed up for international traffic. And it's undoubtedly a much larger piece of the pie at Billy Bishop.

When I mention making rail a key part of managing airport growth, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. The EU recognizes the role that rail can play in reducing demand for flights.

"This has happened in Madrid and Barcelona, where 50% of the market has moved to high-speed rail. It is comfortable for everybody. Airlines can put emphasis on long-haul flights, which is better for their business."
"If we are successful in creating new railways they can take over short-haul airline connections. It makes it easier for the runway issue."

And the Spanish AVE network doesn't even serve Madrid's airport. Paris-Marseille, a similar distance as Toronto-Quebec City, is even higher at close to 70% modal share for rail.
 
MisterF said:
Transfer traffic does care about HSR, which can replace transfer flights when it serves a hub airport (the last HSR study ignored this market while, AFAIK, previous studies at least acknowledged it). This happens with air-rail partnerships in countries like France and Germany. It would be interesting to see the numbers for how flights to Ottawa, Montreal, Kingston, Quebec City, and London compare to long haul routes. Even if they account for only 10% of total movements, that's still a significant amount of space that could be freed up for international traffic. And it's undoubtedly a much larger piece of the pie at Billy Bishop.

When I mention making rail a key part of managing airport growth, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. The EU recognizes the role that rail can play in reducing demand for flights.

"This has happened in Madrid and Barcelona, where 50% of the market has moved to high-speed rail. It is comfortable for everybody. Airlines can put emphasis on long-haul flights, which is better for their business."
"If we are successful in creating new railways they can take over short-haul airline connections. It makes it easier for the runway issue."

And the Spanish AVE network doesn't even serve Madrid's airport. Paris-Marseille, a similar distance as Toronto-Quebec City, is even higher at close to 70% modal share for rail.
Click to expand...

The difference, of course, is that Paris-Marseille is 10x the number of people, many already connecting by train. Seriously, there's a better case to build a Billy Bishop-style airport on Nun's Island than there is for a Canadian TGV.

ETA: That 70% modal share doesn't include car traffic. And, in Canada, a TGV is going to have to siphon off a lot of drivers in order to have any chance of being economic. There's just not enough potential switchers from air travel.
 
Last edited:
Riverdale Rink Rat said:
The difference, of course, is that Paris-Marseille is 10x the number of people, many already connecting by train. Seriously, there's a better case to build a Billy Bishop-style airport on Nun's Island than there is for a Canadian TGV.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting that 10x figure from? The entire population of France is only 3.5 times the population of the Windsor-Quebec corridor. The catchment area of the Sud-Est line is, of course, significantly less than the entirety of France.

The scope of a Canadian HSR would be a lot smaller than France too. The French TGV network is over 2000 km already, with another 600+ km under construction and more planned. Spain has a bigger network (3100 km with a lot more planned) with lower population and and ridership. Conversely, even the most ambitious HSR plan for Windsor-Quebec is only 1200 km. In other words, a Windsor-Quebec system would be perfectly reasonable.

Riverdale Rink Rat said:
ETA: That 70% modal share doesn't include car traffic. And, in Canada, a TGV is going to have to siphon off a lot of drivers in order to have any chance of being economic. There's just not enough potential switchers from air travel.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but the 50%+ modal share on Spanish routes does include car traffic. On the Madrid-Seville line for example, within a couple years of opening 51% of the trips were by rail, 36% by car, and 13% by air.

There's plenty of demand for high speed rail in Canada especially in the context of managing demand for airport expansion.
 
Last edited:
France regards HSR as a "national champion industry" which it can export. In Canada we don't support an industrial policy, more of "throw money ad hoc at various automotive and aerospace concerns and hopefully they will stay open"
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top