nfitz
Superstar
The federal government can fix this with legislation (if not simply regulation).
And what damages are there to CP? Most of this is single track. What's the ultimate capacity here - 4 tracks?
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
And what damages are there to CP? Most of this is single track. What's the ultimate capacity here - 4 tracks?
OntarioOnTheMove
New Member
Minister Alghabra, Member of Parliament Fragiskatos, Member of Parliament Young and Mayor Holder to make an announcement on passenger rail services in London
Minister Alghabra, Member of Parliament Fragiskatos, Member of Parliament Young and Mayor Holder to make an announcement on passenger rail services in London - Canada.ca
LONDON, ONTARIO – The Minister of Transport, the Honourable Omar Alghabra, the Member of Parliament for London North Centre, Peter Fragiskatos, the Member of Parliament for London West, Kate Young, and His Worship Ed Holder, Mayor of the City of London will make an announcement on passenger rail...
Allandale25
Senior Member
crs1026
Senior Member
The construction cost to grade the row so that it’s available for track from one property line to the other is the obstacle. Lots of retaining walls needed, some pretty steep.
It’s not as simple as “just share the width”
The Winchester Sub is a good example. Now that CP has single tracked parts, there is certainly enough useable width to the existing track bed to add a dedicated HFR track. But wherever CP has retained two tracks (the new sidings are roughly five miles long) VIA would have to add a third track. Likewise for wherever VIA wants its own sidings.…That could amount to demand for four tracks in spots. But the track bed is only two tracks wide. The landscape is fairly flat and it’s mostly farmland, so four tracks is fairly feasible…. but it would have to be graded, culverts and bridges widened….who pays?
And what happens when CP’s business grows to the point where they need to reinstall more double track, or even some third track? Can they just tell VIA to start a project to move over?
It’s solvable with enough money, but it’s easy to see why the freight railways don’t want to be hemmed in, with little guarantee that VIA can afford to move over in future years so the freight isn’t impeded.
- Paul
Last edited:
Allandale25
Senior Member
I'm very aware that CP would need to consent to allowing VIA into it's corridor. I definitely remember the AG report and the frequent discussions here on why VIA can't run more service on the Kingston Sub without dealing with CN, and all other ownership discussions as it relates to VIA expansion.
Maybe I didn't word my point well. What I'm suggesting is if VIA and GO's tracks for this particular Sub are separate enough that freight trains won't impact VIA trains. I'm thinking of Pickering to Oshawa where there are 2 GO tracks, a dis and 3 CN tracks that VIA also uses. So, in summary, without being an expert, what I'm suggesting for the Winchester Sub is different than the current arrangement for the Kingston Sub:
- Yes, CP would own the land
- That said, could VIA not just buy what it needs beside the CP owned land? I guess it would be pretty expensive given the distance.
- Maybe CP-VIA could reach an agreement where CP wouldn't have to be the constructor
- VIA would own its new tracks and they not physically touch the existing CP tracks (grade separate where needed). They could be laterally spaced similar to Pickering-Oshawa
- Signaling and RTCing for VIA/CP would be separate on this particular Sub. Heck, maybe VIA would even give the Sub its own name.
Allandale25
Senior Member
On the Rail Fans Canada discord, someone posted this and commented: "Not exactly VIA, but seems like track inspection of the VIA tracks done by CN's inspection RDC was happening"
reaperexpress
Senior Member
In this particular case, the main reason not to do that is that the Winchester sub would likely only be used by a couple express trips per day during busy periods. The vast majority of trips would travel along the VIA lines to serve Ottawa. With such low frequency, it wouldn't be economic to upgrade the CP line, so VIA presumably estimated that the relatively low speeds along the existing non-upgraded CP line (80 mph?) would be offset by the higher speeds along the new Toronto-Smiths Falls line, allowing the Winchester route to match or beat the current express train travel times via Kingston.
Allandale25
Senior Member
^ Good point and thanks
Urban Sky
Senior Member
The only reason I can see to include the Winchester Subdivision West of De Beaujeu within the HFR study scope is to document for everyone who doesn't already know it how little value-for-money an Ottawa bypass would provide.
For anyone interested in the Ottawa Bypass and how such a network of three airline-style point-to-point connections (TRTO-OTTW, TRTO-MTRL and OTTW-MTRL) would be quite the opposite of what countries like Germany did, I recommend this side discussion I had with @roger1818 on SSP:
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Any guesses?
My guess is. "We're launching the Toronto-Kitchener-London-Windsor HFR study today. In the meantime, please enjoy two more trains per day."
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Given that the Northern Line operates at only 50% (1 out of 2 daily trains) and the Southern Line at 40% (2 out of 5 daily trains) compared to pre-covid schedules, I highly doubt there will be any additional frequencies announced, as it would simply be an ordinary service resumption, just like VIA has done more than a half-dozen times (June 3rd, 2020 on TOM, July 14th on QMO, September 1st across the Corridor, September 11 on TOM, April 1st, 2021 on Corridor East, May 17th on TOM and June 12th on Corridor East) without any accompanying federal communications. Restoring 85 and 88 and extending it back to Sarnia would be a different thing, but it would be a very suspicious timing and a break with a decade-long tradition of the feds controling VIA's funding while letting VIA figure out what changes in frequencies allow them to stay within the prescribed funding envelope...
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
With faster speeds on the northern corridor how much faster can you get from Union to London through Kitchener instead of using the Dundas sub?
North Route 3:21
South route 2:19
Would be be possible to make it a 30min or 15 Mon difference?
Since they can travel through Guelph at 80km instead of 30kmph?
Last edited:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I did quite an extensive (but still strictly amateurish) comparative analysis of the Dundas and Guelph corridors in one of my very first posts in this forum:
High Speed Rail: London - Kitchener-Waterloo - Pearson Airport - Toronto
I think the argument is that proper RER requires so much investment that building a 320 km/h HSR wouldn't cost much more. The benefits outweigh the costs. RER trains that stop more frequently can use the same tracks, as they do in other parts of the world. The RER would use seperate tracks past...
crs1026
Senior Member
^I would not focus on Guelph. There are speed improvements possible all along the line. West of Stratford, VIA travels at an embarassing 65 km/hr.
There's no technical reason why the Kitchener-Stratford-London stretch can't be upgraded to the same quality as the Smiths Falls or Alexandria lines. The cost would not be unreasonable. The result would be time competitive or possibly better than the southern route. Higher frequencies would be possible, without approaching HFR.
However, investing in a line that VIA doesn't control brings the same challenges and uncertainties.
Metrolinx needs to finish its siding installations east of Kitchener before any meaningful service upgrade could happen.
And then there is the Silver-Bramalea stretch. Without getting shovels in the ground there, it's a very significant chokepoint.
- Paul
There's no technical reason why the Kitchener-Stratford-London stretch can't be upgraded to the same quality as the Smiths Falls or Alexandria lines. The cost would not be unreasonable. The result would be time competitive or possibly better than the southern route. Higher frequencies would be possible, without approaching HFR.
However, investing in a line that VIA doesn't control brings the same challenges and uncertainties.
Metrolinx needs to finish its siding installations east of Kitchener before any meaningful service upgrade could happen.
And then there is the Silver-Bramalea stretch. Without getting shovels in the ground there, it's a very significant chokepoint.
- Paul
Bordercollie
Senior Member
To highlight the need for more northern service, I drove from Toronto to Kitchener and back today on the 401 and there was an issue at Trafalgar resulting in a detour which took an extra 20 minutes on top of the extra 20 minutes it took to get from Winston Churchill to about Dixie.
It's extremely aggravating and not a fun drive at anytime of the day in any direction.
A normal 1 hour and 15 minute drive became 2 hour's or more. And that's not even going down the DVP to get downtown.
Post pandemic traffic is not going to get any better and the train may not be fast but at least you can get your work done.
It's extremely aggravating and not a fun drive at anytime of the day in any direction.
A normal 1 hour and 15 minute drive became 2 hour's or more. And that's not even going down the DVP to get downtown.
Post pandemic traffic is not going to get any better and the train may not be fast but at least you can get your work done.