robmausser
Senior Member
Its an opinion piece
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Its an opinion piece
crs1026
Superstar
LOL. The next time someone asks me “Why is it that Canada is so far behind in building better passenger trains?” My answer should be “because Canadian journalists always do such a poor job of writing about it”.
Speaking about rail passenger improvements as a “National Project” is a good example. Province A may have an immediate need and an application that makes sense, but Province B may not.
- Paul
Frank_Lee
Active Member
Meanwhile in Alberta/Dreamland: https://www.masstransitmag.com/alt-...-of-its-ultrahighspeed-transportation-project
I should say that I do think government investment in R&D for new transportation technologies is useful and should be done. But these kinds of proposals invariably detract from practical solutions to transportation problems. The two biggest problems with new transit by orders of magnitude are getting the right of way and controlling construction costs, and somehow that never breaks through to the powers that be or the general public (at least in North America).
I should say that I do think government investment in R&D for new transportation technologies is useful and should be done. But these kinds of proposals invariably detract from practical solutions to transportation problems. The two biggest problems with new transit by orders of magnitude are getting the right of way and controlling construction costs, and somehow that never breaks through to the powers that be or the general public (at least in North America).
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Wait ... Canada has provinces other than Ontario and Québec?
nfitz
Superstar
Yeah, they added a few after the first 75 years or so ...
I do wonder how anything other than regional services (Corridor, Calgary-Edmonton, Regina-Saskatoon, Fredricton-Moncton-Halifax (year, I know there's no tracks to Fredricton). Maybe even Vancouver-Kelowna one day with the way their population is growing - though hard to imagine how that would be very fast, given the geography.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
In other countries they have high speed between cities that are close and then not so high speed trains in the rest. And then commuter and intercity trains in-between.
We are missing those layers.
roger1818
Senior Member
That is what I have been saying for years. While high speed rail gets all the attention, it is only one piece of the puzzle. Conventional speed, intercity trains are the backbone that HSR trains rely on. Without that backbone, it would be difficult for HSR to be successful.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
You could build a simple station with a lit platform and a kiosk with a small shelter for commuter rail. This could be used for places that don't warrant intercity trains.
You would need to build passing tracks somewhere likely at bigger stations. This is where commuter trains would dwell to allow express trains to pass.
However a bus would be cheaper and more effective. Also bus service between HSR and the Kingston Sub in some places would also help ridership
roger1818
Senior Member
I stumbled across this video from last November. He lists the Top 10 stations in North America that could be the backbone for High Speed Rail by using a gravity model to generate a gravity score and then multiplies it by a factor that indicates its competitiveness to driving or flying.
He gave Toronto an honorable mention (10:48) as it didn't quite make the top 10, but as he says, it was negatively effected by its CMA not including either Hamilton or Oshawa. Interestingly, if you look at the map at 11:08, both Toronto-Detroit and Toronto-NYC outperform Toronto-Montreal (with scores of 4.9, 3.5 and 2.1 respectively). Granted one of the flaws with a gravity model is it ignores synergy between the city pairs (he alludes to that issue when talking about how Atlanta didn't make the cut (12:03)).
Regardless, it is an interesting watch.
He also did a "High Speed Rail vs. Air vs. Car: Canada Edition! Toronto to Montreal" video in October which assumes there is Toronto-Montreal High Speed Rail. This doesn't attempt to measure demand, but instead is more of a foot race to see which would be fastest.
He gave Toronto an honorable mention (10:48) as it didn't quite make the top 10, but as he says, it was negatively effected by its CMA not including either Hamilton or Oshawa. Interestingly, if you look at the map at 11:08, both Toronto-Detroit and Toronto-NYC outperform Toronto-Montreal (with scores of 4.9, 3.5 and 2.1 respectively). Granted one of the flaws with a gravity model is it ignores synergy between the city pairs (he alludes to that issue when talking about how Atlanta didn't make the cut (12:03)).
Regardless, it is an interesting watch.
He also did a "High Speed Rail vs. Air vs. Car: Canada Edition! Toronto to Montreal" video in October which assumes there is Toronto-Montreal High Speed Rail. This doesn't attempt to measure demand, but instead is more of a foot race to see which would be fastest.
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Something fun. There is a Twitter account dedicated to fake train paint schemes, thought you would all appreciate this:
lenaitch
Senior Member
^^ Well done, though.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I like his stuff and I do subscribe to his channel. That said, I am skeptical that the gravity model can cleanly be applied across international borders. For one, as pointed out there, both countries calculate metro area populations differently. Next, there's obviously a lot less friction on domestic travel than international travel. This is most obvious looking at flights. Has Toronto-NYC or Toronto-Detroit ever had more passenger traffic than Toronto-Montreal or even Toronto-Ottawa? Also, geography has an impact here. Diverting around Lake Ontario makes getting to NYC by rail a lot tougher than usual straight line distances between many city pairs.
roger1818
Senior Member
I do tend to agree. His explanation was that driving and flying will suffer similar issues when crossing the boarder as a train will, but that ignores there is just less demand when you have to cross a boarder. That is where synergy can have an effect. Even provincial/state boarders can have an effect on synergy as there are a lot of reasons people will want to travel within their jurisdiction (medical appointments or government business).
Regarding NYC-Toronto, It wasn't clear but it appears that he did some extra compensation for getting around Lake Ontario and didn't just use average a straight line over the lake with the driving distance.
Better than a gravity model is an actual demand analysis which will tell how many people actually travel between those city pairs, but that is obviously more difficult to do. Regardless, it does put things in perspective when people talk about building HSR in Canada. I would love to see a similar analysis done for Europe, to see how their demographics compare.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Another important factor, and I keep harping on this, is cost and weather. It is cheaper to drive or fly in the US. And they don't have it as bad on the roads, as winter driving here. I would argue that Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal could well see demand numbers approaching something like New York-Boston because of these differences.
roger1818
Senior Member
That is a valid point. I will also add that there is also a common myth that HSR is as cheap as driving while as fast as flying (I know you didn't say HSR, but I thought I would say it anyway). In reality, HSR tends to be only marginally cheaper than flying, so those on a budget may still end up driving if there aren't any other options. In Europe, those on a budget will tend to take conventional intercity trains as they are cheaper. Even in the NE Corridor, the Acela gets all the attention, but there is also frequent and affordable Northeast Regional service.