kEiThZ
Superstar
I think I saw signs in Oshawa months ago. I dunno how I feel about advertising this before it's funded and has shovels in the ground. Setup for disappointment if it doesn't happen.
Maybe trying to avoid creating much excitement about a project just to minimize disappointment if it doesn’t get approved would rather risk becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Better to talk to the people which are most likely to benefit from it by extensively using it (i.e. current users) and to have them talk and convince their friends that this would be a good idea until maybe even the local federal MP becomes aware that this is a project which is creating buzz among his/her constituents...I think I saw signs in Oshawa months ago. I dunno how I feel about advertising this before it's funded and has shovels in the ground. Setup for disappointment if it doesn't happen.
It's meant to be a fantasy map. I should have specified that. However, rail service in this country is s***y. I would love to see actual service on all of the major corridors.Therefore, I’m with @lenaitch , who categorized this map in the same way as these London Underground style world maps (they are Fantasy Maps - lines drawn onto maps for the sake of drawing lines onto a map) and for as long as these points are not clarified, there is no point in losing another word about this map in this forum...
These projects have been proposed for 50 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Canada#Early_high-speed_rail_in_CanadaI've been told these signs are up in the Ottawa and Kingston Stations. Photo credit Johnny Renton.
View attachment 228736
View attachment 228737
View attachment 228738
View attachment 228739
Maybe trying to avoid creating much excitement about a project just to minimize disappointment if it doesn’t get approved would rather risk becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Never before has a megaproject happened in such a vacuum of stated support. “We have a HFR project? Gosh, we do. Wonder how that happened”.
I am astounded at how utterly noncommittal Ottawa has been about HFR....
I’m left with the impression that the feds anticipate such a “perfect storm” of downer implications should they approve this project. And an equal number of political repercussions if they gave it a firm no. They just want it to fade away and remove the dilemma.
I can certainly see the political risks....they would have to defend spending money in Quebec
It's meant to be a fantasy map. I should have specified that. However, rail service in this country is s***y. I would love to see actual service on all of the major corridors.
These projects have been proposed for 50 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Canada#Early_high-speed_rail_in_Canada
I doubt this project will get built. *I hope it does, I just think the non-committedness of Ottawa makes it impossible. *
There are two types of fantasy maps: one which extrapolates from the current network to add new corridors and lines first between the main nodes and then branching out, whereas others just draw lines for aesthetic reasons. The ideas presented by @micheal_can here fall under this category (even without posting any maps) because even though he might be overly optimistic, he’s not ignoring the fact that trains can only run where there are still any tracks left, that new dedicated passenger tracks will not be built anywhere outside the Quebec-Windsor or Edmonton-Calgary corridors within our lifetimes, and that the services offered must somehow follow the existing travel flows and that means that most lines will.It's meant to be a fantasy map. I should have specified that. However, rail service in this country is s***y. I would love to see actual service on all of the major corridors.
HSR (like “these projects” you are referring to) have indeed be studied for almost half a century, but HFR is a much more sober look at what can be done within the next 5-10 years with $4-6 billion to be funded mostly by private investors rather than within the next 15-25 years with $20+ billion to be funded almost exclusively by the taxpayer...These projects have been proposed for 50 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Canada#Early_high-speed_rail_in_Canada
I doubt this project will get built. *I hope it does, I just think the non-committedness of Ottawa makes it impossible. *
I can certainly see the political risks....they would have to defend spending money in Quebec, they would have to manage the optics of having perceived “welfare corporations” such as Bombardier and SNC Lavalin within the competing vendors, plus fend off opposition from air and highway interests, plus perhaps fuel public mistrust of federal procurement processes generally.
It really surprises me how much even you two struggle to get your head around this project being targeted predominantly at funding from private investors and that the taxpayers’ role would be primarily to get the planning to a stage and to reduce risks to a level where investors have enough confidence to buy into the project. The only reason why the Montreal-Quebec was included into the planning scope was that the (back then: liberal) provincial government insisted on having it included, whereas their (just as liberal) peers in Toronto insisted on putting all of their eggs (for SWO) into the HSR basket instead. However, it will be the private investors who decide into which segments they are willing to invest themselves and into which they don’t and from all we’ve read so far in the newspapers, the Quebec taxpayers will have to pay a non-trivial share of the capital costs of Montreal-Quebec to make that project as profitable (from an investor’s perspective) as Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto...Fair points. But I have my doubts. Take a similarly important project. Say the Confederation Bridge? It happened with the public and local politicians pushing it. Not with some government agency lobbying for it.
[...]
Trudeau seems to have stepped up a bit since the election. And they do seem to be progressing. But I absolutely question their sincerity when they did almost nothing for 4 years with a majority. What happens when the deficit gets too high and they need to cut something? What happens when they realize that $4 billion in transit promises across the country might buy more votes than HFR?
The Montreal-Quebec City section is not very defensible on traffic. I believe that VIA or the CIB's own maths showed that. Yet, they are pushing this, with all the complications of not having access to the Mount Royal Tunnel on top of everything. All while not connecting to Pearson Airport and KWC, places which would have high demand for ridership. So yes, they sort of deserve the flack they are getting for this. Would it really have been hard to at least run through service at Union and reach Pearson at least?
All that said, I think a lot of the public is actually at a point where they'd understand spending a few billion on a train between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. But the process has to be squeaky clean. Can't at all be seen as another back door to pay a big Quebec megacorp.
It really surprises me how much even you two struggle to get your head around this project being targeted predominantly at funding from private investors and that the taxpayers’ role would be primarily to get the planning to a stage and to reduce risks to a level where investors have enough confidence to buy into the project.
It really surprises me how much even you two struggle to get your head around this project being targeted predominantly at funding from private investors and that the taxpayers’ role would be primarily to get the planning to a stage and to reduce risks to a level where investors have enough confidence to buy into the project.
Ottawa is not stepping up with a definitieve declaration that HFR fulfils an important public policy objective and is a driver for economic growth, or even carbon abatement. If they felt it is, they have enough data already to present that case. It sure seems they are looking for a cover story, so they can say to critics “Yeah, it may be dumb, but we don’t stand in the way of investors, and they seem to want it”. That’s hardly taking political risk.
Likely yes. Departs Union on Wednesdays, then heads up and through Richmond Hill.I saw what looks like the canadian parked on the bridge on bayview just north of steeles. Is it the canadian or some other train?
One just has to think of the 8% return which a provincial pension fonds is guaranteed to receive in the form of operational subsidies for a light metro scheme currently under construction in Canadas second largest city and which is complemented by billions in direct capital subsidies, when the provincial government could have borrowed the required funds for a project which is actually centred at the needs of the city and its passengers rather than those of said pension fonds at a relatively modest 2.75%...I’m not saying the business case isn’t there. There are undoubtedly investors - likely institutional - who would put up capital, especially given some level of government backstopping. It’s possible that the current round of “studies” is material to getting their buyin. But government has no trouble attracting investors when it incurs debt. It’s called “deficit spending”. The whole Investment Bank initiative seems to have fizzled. So, why not just borrow the money the old fashioned way and get on with it ?
If it’s at Bayview and Steeles it is most likely returning to Toronto. It usually heads out of town via the Barrie line, then CN York, because it is too long to turn at Toronto Maintenance Centre.Likely yes. Departs Union on Wednesdays, then heads up and through Richmond Hill.
One just has to think of the 8% return which a provincial pension fonds is guaranteed to receive in the form of operational subsidies for a light metro scheme currently under construction in Canadas second largest city and which is complemented by billions in direct capital subsidies, when the provincial government could have borrowed the required funds for a project which is actually centred at the needs of the city and its passengers rather than those of said pension fonds at a relatively modest 2.75%...