News   Jun 25, 2024
10 Storeys Proposed to Float Over Annex Heritage Building
 670     0 
News   Jun 25, 2024
Madison's Alias Ascending with Height Bump into Downtown Skies
 700     0 
News   Jun 25, 2024
How Toronto Is Responding as the Fastest Growing City in North America
 1.3K     3 

VIA Rail

Nothing is going to built. The fact that they are still looking for a private partner to take over the project just speaks volumes. They've been trying this for how long now? Yet no one was willing to touch the project under the Infrastructure Bank.

What keeps getting left out and is literally what will make or break the HFR is whether CN or CPKC will allow trains to access their network. That would be the first step. If the Infrastructure Minister isn't willing to address that (does he even know that the Railways have the Government by the balls?) then it's pointless to go beyond that.
 
Mid 2030s {realistically 2040} to bring back, after untold billions spent, VIA's plan is to bring back the speeds that we enjoyed in the 70s. Only in Canada would this be considered progress.

The lines are there, the issue is political not financial. CN/CP unwillingness to share a corridor so VIA can have exclusively use of the other could be solved with the stroke of a pen. All Ottawa has to do is let CN/CP know that if VIA cannot have one of the corridors than it will bring in VASTLY stronger safety regulation. They could simply state that any rail crossing that involves a road/street that carries more than a thousand vehicles a day has to be grade separated NATIONWIDE. This would cost CN/CP, at a minimum, tens of billions. The great thing about it is that there is nothing they could do about it nor even take it to court because safety transport regulations of freight are 100% the domain of Ottawa.

It's called blackmail and is the only thing CN/CP will understand because they already have it down to a fine artform.
 
Is it normal for CDPQi to be involved in things like this? Coming off the back of the REM, this is an interesting angle for them- they’d certainly be who comes to mind for a “private builder-operator”. Almost fits into a Brightline-esque goal for HFR here. I wonder if that’s who the government may have wanted (BL), at least early on given the expectations.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Mid 2030s {realistically 2040} to bring back, after untold billions spent, VIA's plan is to bring back the speeds that we enjoyed in the 70s. Only in Canada would this be considered progress.

The lines are there, the issue is political not financial. CN/CP unwillingness to share a corridor so VIA can have exclusively use of the other could be solved with the stroke of a pen. All Ottawa has to do is let CN/CP know that if VIA cannot have one of the corridors than it will bring in VASTLY stronger safety regulation. They could simply state that any rail crossing that involves a road/street that carries more than a thousand vehicles a day has to be grade separated NATIONWIDE. This would cost CN/CP, at a minimum, tens of billions. The great thing about it is that there is nothing they could do about it nor even take it to court because safety transport regulations of freight are 100% the domain of Ottawa.

It's called blackmail and is the only thing CN/CP will understand because they already have it down to a fine artform.
Click to expand...
yup its time to grab that pair of pliers and apply some pressure to CN/CP's balls. its just like the defence corporations in murica. the posture of the feds is to bend over, spread cheeks and offer lube to them.
 
I invite anyone dreaming about inversing the power relationship between the big freight rail corporations and the government (or more generally: between freight and passenger rail) to quickly look up the relative amounts (e.g. per capita or as % of GDP) invested annually into rail infrastructure of European countries with Canada and to compare their respective modal shares for rail in the freight transport market…
 
Last edited:
Urban Sky said:
The following poll was posted on the Rail Fans Canada Discord server:
View attachment 493599
strawpoll.com

Which of the 4 HFR RFQ consortiums got eliminated? - Online Poll - StrawPoll

What's your opinion? Vote now: CDPQi, SNC Lavalin, Systra, Keolis, SNCF, Teachers Pension Fund, Bechtel, John Laing, WSP, DB, Fengate, Hitachi, Siemens, Meridian, EGIS, EllisDon Cap...
strawpoll.com strawpoll.com
Click to expand...

I'm skeptical that Hitachi and Siemens would both be in a consortium given that they're rival rolling stock manufactures.

The other consortia seem to have investors, designers, constructors, and service operators, but no rolling stock makers. Perhaps they'll have to select this for their formal Proposals and we'll get the details in 2024 when a team is selected.
 
IRT_BMT_IND said:
Given the current geopolitical situation I can't imagine the Liberals would allow a Chinese company to win this contract in any case.
Click to expand...
And thus, they'd find it very difficult to get Canadian partners.

It's disappointing to see neither CN nor CP as part of any of the teams.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Mid 2030s {realistically 2040} to bring back, after untold billions spent, VIA's plan is to bring back the speeds that we enjoyed in the 70s. Only in Canada would this be considered progress.

The lines are there, the issue is political not financial. CN/CP unwillingness to share a corridor so VIA can have exclusively use of the other could be solved with the stroke of a pen. All Ottawa has to do is let CN/CP know that if VIA cannot have one of the corridors than it will bring in VASTLY stronger safety regulation. They could simply state that any rail crossing that involves a road/street that carries more than a thousand vehicles a day has to be grade separated NATIONWIDE. This would cost CN/CP, at a minimum, tens of billions. The great thing about it is that there is nothing they could do about it nor even take it to court because safety transport regulations of freight are 100% the domain of Ottawa.

It's called blackmail and is the only thing CN/CP will understand because they already have it down to a fine artform.
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with CN/CP if they are building a new corridor from scratch.

Wouldn't it be easier to build a 100mph corridor first with future provisions to upgrade it? As long as the curves can handle higher speeds the only thing left would be grade separation at crossings, which they could build as stage 2?
 
Bordercollie said:
What does this have to do with CN/CP if they are building a new corridor from scratch.
Click to expand...

CP and CN control the access to major urban centers. Any new line needs to use their tracks to reach the downtowns.

And there is the issue of continuing local service to places currently served on CN lines.

Bordercollie said:
Wouldn't it be easier to build a 100mph corridor first with future provisions to upgrade it? As long as the curves can handle higher speeds the only thing left would be grade separation at crossings, which they could build as stage 2?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If new stretches are built, it may be desirable to build the grade separations now. Signalling will have to be HSR ready.

The burning question is whether the HSR level investment is really needed. It is beginning to look like Ottawa is hoping for HSR simply to woo the taxpayer, who might be harder to convince if the system is plain vanilla. Once the pricetag gets into the billions, taxpayers lose sight of the price tag. Spending billions to get vanilla may not sell, even if the hard numbers say it's a better business proposition.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
CP and CN control the access to major urban centers. Any new line needs to use their tracks to reach the downtowns.

And there is the issue of continuing local service to places currently served on CN lines.



Not necessarily. If new stretches are built, it may be desirable to build the grade separations now. Signalling will have to be HSR ready.

The burning question is whether the HSR level investment is really needed. It is beginning to look like Ottawa is hoping for HSR simply to woo the taxpayer, who might be harder to convince if the system is plain vanilla. Once the pricetag gets into the billions, taxpayers lose sight of the price tag. Spending billions to get vanilla may not sell, even if the hard numbers say it's a better business proposition.

- Paul
Click to expand...
To get in and out of Toronto the territory is owned by Metrolinx for the most part.
Ottawa is owned by VIA.
Montreal and Quebec city are owned by CN. But could they not build tunnels in some places? Yes it's expensive but it's going to cost billions anyway.
 
crs1026 said:
CP and CN control the access to major urban centers. Any new line needs to use their tracks to reach the downtowns.
Click to expand...
Of what the EA map on the HFR website extrapolated with some Common Sense (like that the HFR route will terminate at the Gare du Palais in Quebec City, not that weird rail tunnel at the end of the ex-CP line) hints at, there might be very, very little exposure to CN (namely: Gare du Palais to whatever the junction with the ex-CP line is called like and th) and CP seems to be content with selling you the right to build your own tracks within their existing Corridor and letting you do whatever you want as long it doesn’t interfere with their operations.

And even if you can’t avoid sharing tracks: the intercerence between different rail service types increases with the distance over which tracks are shared, the frequency with which the trains are operated and the gap in speed between the different train types. With HFR only sharing tracks with CN/CP shorter segments at hourly service and (in relative vincinity to their metropolitan stations) rather low speeds, I imagine the negotiations for auch track sharing to be much easier than, say, for ONxpress…
 
Gare Palais may be fairly easy, but a more complicated bit will be entry into Montreal from Ottawa/Toronto. I can't see a new route with more intensive service reaching Gare Central without impact to CN's operations.

As well, Montreal-Quebec trains will need to access the MMC, or some other such facility. At the moment, the connection through Taschereau Yard (which is used by ViA's northern Quebec trains, at their peril) impacts on freight operations.. Add those equipment moves to the Dorval-Central revenue trains, too.

So while distances may not be great, I can't see a new operator having an easy ride with CN/CP.

And Metrolinx? Let's hope that the routing from Tapscott to Union is along CP tracks.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top