News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 662     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 1.2K     5 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 3.1K     8 

VIA Rail

ARG1 said:
Are you really comparing the 7.5 hour ride from Chicago to St. Paul, with the 32 hour ride from Edmonton to Vancouver? That's like adding an extra train from Denver to San Francisco, and even then at least that service runs through major cities like Salt Lake City and Reno...
Click to expand...
Notice how you do not go from NYC to Seattle on the Empire Builder? Maybe the same should happen with the Canadian.
 
micheal_can said:
Notice how you do not go from NYC to Seattle on the Empire Builder? Maybe the same should happen with the Canadian.
Click to expand...
I didn't say anything about NYC to Seattle, I'm specifically talking about your idea of Edmonton to Vancouver. I think you're severely underestimating how long it takes to get between these cities...
 
ARG1 said:
I didn't say anything about NYC to Seattle, I'm specifically talking about your idea of Edmonton to Vancouver. I think you're severely underestimating how long it takes to get between these cities...
Click to expand...
That section is already being run by a train. That is why I mentioned it.
 
The federal parliament’s Transport Committee has released the transcripts about the ten-hour delay of train 622 on August 31:

Evidence - TRAN (44-1) - No. 126 - House of Commons of Canada

Evidence - TRAN (44-1) - No. 126 - House of Commons of Canada
www.ourcommons.ca

@nfitz will be surprised to learn that they contacted 10 bus companies and none had buses available…
 
Towered said:
Please - how long have successive governments sat on this proposed line? Why would now be suddenly different?
Click to expand...

Ask Rick Mercer. The more recent serious proposal mileatones were VIA Fast, somewhat actioned during the Harper government in 2008-2010, and then the VIA HFR proposal which was first announced in 2014, revised in 2015, and first reached the Trudeau Cabinet in 2017.

PS - What is different this time? Driving times have increased thanks to congestion in the GTA and west Montreal, air terminals are closer to capacity, population is growing, and climate change is being taken more seriously. Of course, costs keep escalating so sticker shock just keeps growing.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
Ask Rick Mercer. The more recent serious proposal mileatones were VIA Fast, somewhat actioned during the Harper government in 2008-2010, and then the VIA HFR proposal which was first announced in 2014, revised in 2015, and first reached the Trudeau Cabinet in 2017.

- Paul
Click to expand...
My point precisely.
 
Towered said:
Please - how long have successive governments sat on this proposed line? Why would now be suddenly different?
Click to expand...
I understand the malaise - but the current intention is to sign a hard contract with the contractor some time early next year. After that the government is "locked in" and would start spending real money on it.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I understand the malaise - but the current intention is to sign a hard contract with the contractor some time early next year. After that the government is "locked in" and would start spending real money on it.
Click to expand...
Since the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, no intercity passenger rail project has ever received as much government attention and money as HFR. Progress is slow, with design and construction expected to take another 12 years (if I recall the Toronto Star article correctly), but that is in line with planning and construction times in Europe:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1550675830564601857

For reference purposes, we have entered the design phase only this year with the RFP submissions…
 
innsertnamehere said:
I understand the malaise - but the current intention is to sign a hard contract with the contractor some time early next year. After that the government is "locked in" and would start spending real money on it.
Click to expand...
If the government changes as we all predict, will it still be locked in?
 
nfitz said:
I believe that something similar was widely reported.

I never said they should contact bus companies. But that they should do what they used to do, and contract bus companies in advance.
Click to expand...
Given the current state of the bus industry, I believe that it would be better value-for-money to assign the responsibility for evacuating stranded trains in (with the available means) inaccessible areas to a civic emergency-response unit, as that way a much more efficient use of the capabilities can be ensured than paying g private companies to acquire buses and hire drivers at multiple locations for what is (for each such location) less-than-annual events…
 
innsertnamehere said:
I understand the malaise - but the current intention is to sign a hard contract with the contractor some time early next year. After that the government is "locked in" and would start spending real money on it.
Click to expand...
Towered said:
If the government changes as we all predict, will it still be locked in?
Click to expand...
The selection of the preferred proponent only marks the beginning of the “co-development phase”…
IMG_6975.jpeg


… which is expected to take years before there is the final decision of the federal government, i.e., way past the next election:

Timeline​

While there is no explicit timetable for completion of the High Frequency Rail project, nor for when construction would even begin, Mr. Imbleau stated that he expects the co-development process (during which VIA HFR and the co-developer will establish the details of the eventual project) to take “a couple of years” before the government and the co-developer make a final investment decision. He also told the Committee that VIA HFR’s mandate “is to take adequate time and apply the right resources to pin down the right scope for Canadians and ensure that what we build is at the right cost and is affordable but is also economical for the future.”
Click to expand...

Committee Report No. 18 - TRAN (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada

Committee Report No. 18 - TRAN (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada
www.ourcommons.ca
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top