VIA Rail

[robmausser]

Indeed - speeding up slower areas does tend to have a better return in time savings per dollar. Though relative to my table, the only slow areas to be improved are within Ottawa, Peterborough, and Toronto.

The Ottawa segment definitely needs to be upgraded regardless of HFR, HSR or status-quo. The elephant in the room is the O-Train Trillium line which already crosses the VIA line at grade every 5 minutes on average. It would be quite a project to grade-separate this crossing given the other grade separations in the area.
View attachment 264275
The O-Train line goes under Heron Rd and Bronson St, but then over the transitway. Meanwhile the VIA line goes over Heron Rd and over Airport Pkwy. I suppose a saving grace is that Ottawa would probably be interested in replacing some of those single-track O-Train grade separations anyway to allow the line to be double-tracked.

In Peterborough the frequency of level crossings would pretty much necessitate a full railway regrade, whether it be elevated or in a tunnel (political suicide and gigantic money pit, respectively). But most trains would be stopping in Peterborough anyway and the total length of the messy segment isn't that significant, so upgrading it wouldn't have that much impact on travel times.

Within Toronto, my 60 km/h estimate is already pretty optimistic so I don't think there's much room for further improvement. It's based on the GO Kitchener express to Bramalea (30 km in 27 min), to Downsview Park (17 km in 19 min) and VIA to Brampton (36 km in 34 min). The Weston and Newmarket corridors are less speed-restricted than the Don Branch and North Toronto corridor would likely be.



Absolutely. That's why I noted that the line shouldn't just be built to 200 km/h, it should be built with a design speed as high as practical. A railway in the ballpark of 220-240 km/h would hold up as part of an HSR route, while the additional cost should hopefully still be justifiable despite the initial limitation of 200 km/h equipment.



I too have also been known to promote a more southerly alignment in the past, as part of a 300 km/h high speed rail option.

Abandoned ROWs in faded green, CP in red, VIA in yellow and CN in blue.
View attachment 264280

I suspect the cost of a 200+km/h Kingston - Smiths Falls railway would be similar to the 200+km/h Kaladar - Smiths Falls line. The terrain is certainly easier, but it's also a lot more populated which means more road/rail grade separations, more expensive land acquisition and more political opposition.

Whether the southern route makes sense overall then depends on the intended speed. If the goal is 300 km/h high speed rail, then certainly the southern alignment makes sense - it's a lot easier to build there and can consolidate more of VIA's service onto the new line. But if the goal is only 110 mph at-grade rail, the prospect of reusing large parts of the Havelock ROW makes that option cheap enough that it probably makes more sense financially. Even with the costs of somehow getting VIA trains along and across the CP main line in Toronto and the need to continue running some service along the current CN route.

Via Rail has a "Northeast corridor" problem with the HFR route. That is, a curvy track that they want fast speeds on.

While the Northeast corridor is getting straightened, there are sections that are impossible to straighten due to land acquisition reasons.

The solution has been to use tilting trains with articulated bogies, which can take turns an average of 30% faster than traditional trains. The solution has been to solve the problem with the train.

Via should do the same in my opinion, at least in the interim. Plus, they will still be beneficial after track rebuilds as there will be curves even in the rebuilt "straightened" sections. As in, they can still take the lessened curves with this train tech faster than traditional ones. Its a 1+1= 2 situation, the outcome is still greater speeds overall.

 

[reaperexpress]

The solution has been to use tilting trains with articulated bogies, which can take turns an average of 30% faster than traditional trains. The solution has been to solve the problem with the train.

Via should do the same in my opinion, at least in the interim. Plus, they will still be beneficial after track rebuilds as there will be curves even in the rebuilt "straightened" sections. As in, they can still take the lessened curves with this train tech faster than traditional ones. Its a 1+1= 2 situation, the outcome is still greater speeds overall.

Tilting trains on the Québec City - Windsor Corridor? What a novel concept!

 

[kEiThZ]

The solution has been to use tilting trains with articulated bogies, which can take turns an average of 30% faster than traditional trains. The solution has been to solve the problem with the train.

Via should do the same in my opinion, at least in the interim.

Tilting trains on the Québec City - Windsor Corridor? What a novel concept!

This would mean acquiring a whole other fleet. And then building a less than optimal corridor. Not a great term long term choice.

 

[reaperexpress]

This would mean acquiring a whole other fleet. And then building a less than optimal corridor. Not a great term long term choice.

Yeah tilting trains are can increase speeds in the short term, but they suck in the long term due to maintenance. Hence why VIA has stopped using tilting trains.

Tilting the body of the coach changes the angle of forces on passengers, but it does nothing to reduce the forces on the rails. So running really fast through tight corners will make the tracks more expensive to maintain, tilting trains or not. Then there's the additional weight and complexity which comes with the tilting system itself. VIA removed the tilting mechanism from the LRC coaches because it made the trains lighter, faster-accelerating and more fuel-efficient, and also saved a lot of money in equipment maintenance.

Remember that it is typically easier to secure capital funding for flashy infrastructure projects than it is to secure boring old operating funds. In order maximize VIA's chances of long-term survival, it therefore makes sense to use non-tilting equipment and focus the investments into improved infrastructure.

 

[micheal_can]

This would mean acquiring a whole other fleet. And then building a less than optimal corridor. Not a great term long term choice.

Lets talk HSR. Lets look around the world. No HSR train out there doesn't have some sort of tilting bogies. It is the nature of higher speed. If a line had to be built for speeds over 300 km/hr without tilting trains, you would need straight track the entire route. That doesn't work in the real world.

Lets go back to Via's HFR. Lets say they want to maintain 90 mph/ 150km/hr, tilting trains makes sense This means that some of the curves we think are too tight, might actually be fine for speeds over 150km/hr.

 

[kEiThZ]

Lets talk HSR. Lets look around the world. No HSR train out there doesn't have some sort of tilting bogies. It is the nature of higher speed. If a line had to be built for speeds over 300 km/hr without tilting trains, you would need straight track the entire route. That doesn't work in the real world.

Lets go back to Via's HFR. Lets say they want to maintain 90 mph/ 150km/hr, tilting trains makes sense This means that some of the curves we think are too tight, might actually be fine for speeds over 150km/hr.

You missed my point:

1) VIA already has options on their Siemens buy. Enough for 50% more than they bought. Buying a whole new fleet would mean much higher purchase prices, lack of commonality with spares, different support contract, etc. That is not cheap.

2) If you start out designing a line to require tilting trains at 90 mph, the potential to upgrade the line to higher speeds becomes severely limited.

 

[robmausser]

You missed my point:

1) VIA already has options on their Siemens buy. Enough for 50% more than they bought. Buying a whole new fleet would mean much higher purchase prices, lack of commonality with spares, different support contract, etc. That is not cheap.

2) If you start out designing a line to require tilting trains at 90 mph, the potential to upgrade the line to higher speeds becomes severely limited.

Im sorry I dont agree

1. So what? Sunk costs. If it costs $2 billion to straighten the line out, and only $500 million for a new tilting fleet, then better trains should be procured. The other Siemens trains could definitely be used in other parts of the VIA network, or to replace the Stainless Steel trains.

2. The upgrade to HSR will inevitably require many upgrades to the route that would be not only silly to invest in this early, but could cancel the project entirely. Higher class track, grade separations, straightening of track through Canadian shield etc. If costs escalate, it could cause the whole project to be cancelled outright. Via needs to bring the route to fruition at a price tag that wont have the federal government scoffing, and then when the route is established, interim upgrades that are a more digestible cost can be brought forward. Best value but highest price never goes well in the political sphere.

 

[nfitz]

Tilting trains on the Québec City - Windsor Corridor? What a novel concept!

I don't remember the Turbos ever tilting. Did they? Were they locked ... most of the time I rode them were in the last couple of years of service ...

LRCs were fun ... seemed to tilt randomly and wrong-way at times ...

 

[reaperexpress]

Lets talk HSR. Lets look around the world. No HSR train out there doesn't have some sort of tilting bogies.

Sure, let's look around the world at some 300+ km/h trains.

Siemens Velaro, used in Germany, England, China, Russia, Turkey, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, France - doesn't tilt

Alstom TGV, used in France, Korea, Spain, Morocco, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany - doesn't tilt

Alstom AGV, used in Italy - doesn't tilt

Bombardier Zefiro, used in Italy and China - doesn't tilt

TREVI ETR500, used in Italy - doesn't tilt

Hyundai Sancheon, used in Korea - doesn't tilt

Hitachi/Kawasaki E2, used in Japan and China - doesn't tilt

CRRC CRH380A, used in China and Hong Kong - doesn't tilt

CRRC Fuxing, used in China - doesn't tilt

The above list includes every wheeled 300+km/h trainset in service according to the wikipedia list of high-speed trains, except for the JR N700, E5, and E6, which have active tilting, and the Talgo 350, which has passive tiliting.

In general, 300+km/h high speed trains do not tilt. The main exception is in Japan where the Tokaido Shinkansen has a relatively low speed limit (around 270 km/h for non-tilting trains) since it's the world's oldest high-speed line and originally operated at only 210 km/h. The rest of the world's 300+ km/h high-speed systems build the lines to the intended operating speed and do not need tilting trains.

It is the nature of higher speed. If a line had to be built for speeds over 300 km/hr without tilting trains, you would need straight track the entire route. That doesn't work in the real world.

Yes, to run 300 km/h, they do indeed need to "straight track the entire route", as you say. That's what all those high-speed rail lines are about. They have enormous curve radii, to allow trains to operate at 300+ km/h.

High speed lines in red (>=250 km/h)

Lets go back to Via's HFR. Lets say they want to maintain 90 mph/ 150km/hr, tilting trains makes sense This means that some of the curves we think are too tight, might actually be fine for speeds over 150km/hr.

The curve radius on the eastern segment is about 550 metres. There is absolutely no way you're running 150 km/h with any kind of train, tilting or not. Sorry.

 

[reaperexpress]

I don't remember the Turbos ever tilting. Did they? Were they locked ... most of the time I rode them were in the last couple of years of service ...

The Turbos had a passive tilting system, similar to today's Talgo trains.

image via BlogTO

It's possible that they got locked in the upright position in their later years, I don't know.

 

[nfitz]

Ah! Didn't know that. Though if it's passive ... perhaps it worked, so not very noticeable! The LRC was eerie ... at times you'd complete the curve, be on the straight again, and then, a bit too late you could noticeably see it then tilt back to normal. Of course, one never would notice it much if it worked ...

 

[Allandale25]

This discussion about building a new route through the most problemmatic section of the old CP Havelock Sub is quite timely.

It was announced today that a business group in the Frontenac area are lobbying for VIA to build a bypass to the Sharbot Lake section of the old Havelock Sub. The issue is that the old CP line runs through the central section of that town, which sits on a very narrow peninsula. Residents have realised that restoring the rail line, and running hourly trains in each direction, will be hugely intrusive.

Here's a press report on the town's objection. They are proposing a roughly 18 km bypass around the town, roughly from Mountain Grove to Ungava, parallelling Highway 7.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took the town this long to object. A HFR line will really mess up this little hamlet. Having said that, it would probably be cheaper to buy out and move the entire downtown than build the proposed bypass. And curiously they seem to have no objection to four-laning Highway 7 through their town (albeit a touch to the north).

However, per @reaperexpress's work, if the proponents wanted to point out the minutes that would be saved by a bypass, it might just fly.... the bypass would eliminate one of the really tricky curvy portions of the line. Done right, it could be a very fast section.

Their submission is attached. EDIT: Use this link https://drive.google.com/file/d/15zoc1B45FuAfbNQQzDe6EHikNwRPFFS7/view?usp=sharing

- Paul

If I get time I'm tempted to draw out what this Sharbot Lake bypass could look like.

 

[kEiThZ]

So what? Sunk costs. If it costs $2 billion to straighten the line out, and only $500 million for a new tilting fleet, then better trains should be procured.

Except that it's not just buying a different and more expensive fleet. It's the cost to support a whole other fleet. And the scheduling that would probably see the project delayed years. If they were buying another fleet, they would have to be generating draft RFPs as we speak.

The upgrade to HSR will inevitably require many upgrades to the route that would be not only silly to invest in this early, but could cancel the project entirely.

You assume an upgrade to HSR is coming. I'm not at all optimistic this will come for decades, given government debt levels. I am going to bet that once HFR is built, we will see no substantial improvements for at least two decades, as every other project takes priority, including rail investments elsewhere in the country. It's not going to be politically feasible to move on an HSR upgrade before Corridor West gets the HFR treatment, and Calgary-Edmonton gets service. How much do you think will be left in the kitty after? So I'd rather they build something that will serve us well for at least 2-3 decades.

 

[cplchanb]

Except that it's not just buying a different and more expensive fleet. It's the cost to support a whole other fleet. And the scheduling that would probably see the project delayed years. If they were buying another fleet, they would have to be generating draft RFPs as we speak.



You assume an upgrade to HSR is coming. I'm not at all optimistic this will come for decades, given government debt levels. I am going to bet that once HFR is built, we will see no substantial improvements for at least two decades, as every other project takes priority, including rail investments elsewhere in the country. It's not going to be politically feasible to move on an HSR upgrade before Corridor West gets the HFR treatment, and Calgary-Edmonton gets service. How much do you think will be left in the kitty after? So I'd rather they build something that will serve us well for at least 2-3 decades.

Shame really... maybe ill see the hsr dream realised when I get old and wheelchair bound....

 

[smallspy]

Lets talk HSR. Lets look around the world. No HSR train out there doesn't have some sort of tilting bogies. It is the nature of higher speed. If a line had to be built for speeds over 300 km/hr without tilting trains, you would need straight track the entire route. That doesn't work in the real world.

The only tilting 300km/h train in service today is the Japanese Shinkansen N700 - and it only tilts 1 degree, not enough to be noticeable.

No 300km/h-capable train in the world today tilts in the same manner as is being talked about in this thread. It is an unnecessary waste. A properly-engineered high-speed line doesn't need it.

What does exist is higher-speed trains (200 to 250km/h) which tilt - but those are done much like as is being talked about here, a way to increase speeds on existing lines without spending the money on a brand new, purpose-engineered corridor. They are also sometimes used on the high-speed lines, but as their top speed isn't the same as the true high-speed trains care must be taken when scheduling the runs.

I don't remember the Turbos ever tilting. Did they? Were they locked ... most of the time I rode them were in the last couple of years of service ...

LRCs were fun ... seemed to tilt randomly and wrong-way at times ...

The Turbos had a passive tilting system, similar to today's Talgo trains.

image via BlogTO

It's possible that they got locked in the upright position in their later years, I don't know.

The Turbo absolutely tilted as laid out in reaperexpress's attachment. In fact, on entering the approaches to both Montréal's Gare Central and Toronto's Union Station, announcements were broadcast over the PA telling passengers to remain in their seats as the trains would sway over the tight trackwork when entering the stations. Many younger passengers would ignore these pleas and would enjoy themselves in the gangways between cars, where the effects were particularly exaggerated.

One of the downsides of the system, however, was that it couldn't easily be locked out as the tilting system also formed a major part of the suspension of the train. VIA tried towards the end of its life but couldn't do it. Because of the design, even if stopped on a curve the train would continue to tilt - it couldn't come back up to straight.

Dan