lenaitch
Senior Member
Thanks. Seems like a bit of creep.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Allandale25
Senior Member
VIA Rail CEO's opening remarks to the Federal Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities:
media.viarail.ca
I assume the video of the Q and A will be posted to the CPAC YouTube channel at some point.
Opening Remarks of Martin R Landry, President and CEO of VIA Rail, before the Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities (TRAN) | VIA Rail
Mr. Chair, dear committee members, thank you for having us today. I would like to address my very first words to our loyal passengers, their families, friends and loved ones. On behalf of VIA Rail Canada, I apologize to all of you that were on the trains that were delayed for an extended...
media.viarail.ca
I assume the video of the Q and A will be posted to the CPAC YouTube channel at some point.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
It also seems like a strange response to such an open-ended project which almost explicitly invites you to completely reimagine it around your own vision:
„Your project sucks, do this instead!“
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
It's the most insane approach to a major capital project I've seen. And to be fair, I actually saw it once in my career looking at search and rescue aircraft. Government wanted us to look at all kinds of solutions including privatization. Governments usually do this when they aren't serious and just want to waste time with analysis. I'm 50/50 on if this a serious procurement program or delay strategy.
nfitz
Superstar
The map in the proposal showed the downtown Montreal track very clearly (in white). It doesn't show station locations though.
As they appear to be using the CP track into downtown, then I assume the station would be near Lucien L'Allier. Or if we get lucky, they knock down the building blocking the tracks
and use Windsor Station. Though some have talked about a CP tunnel under La Gauchetiere from near Windsor to Central for years.I'd assume that they'd also use Parc station and De La Concorde station that they'll pass through, from Montreal to Quebec City. I wonder if it's worth stopping at Vendome as well.
I'd also assume they've gone for the CP, so that they can get into Montreal a lot faster, than the dipsy-doodle from St. Henri to Central.
crs1026
Superstar
I would have said this - up until the Board positions were appointed. And now the Minister is kind of saying they are committed to it. I would say they have crossed the threshold where they actually have to deliver something - it's increasingly hard to back away, at least until the initial bids are received.
I would now say that it is an admission that nobody, anywhere, in Ottawa has the slightest idea how to actually spec and design this thing, let alone execute it.... And, with this being a huge mystery that no one understands, their fears of the project being a failure or becoming tainted somehow are so great, they are desperate for someone credible to lead them out of their indecision.
They don't even dare hire a consultant to run the project, because they would have to decide whether to hire a company with inside Liberal connections, and take flak for that..... or turn the Liberal insiders away, which is a damned if you don't proposition.
Sadly, VIA's internal expertise has been basically discounted.
- Paul
MisterF
Senior Member
It doesn't have to be GO offering commuter service when Via can just do it themselves. Via already has commuter oriented services on its existing lines so there's no reason that they couldn't do the same for Peterborough.
A high speed route going through Kingston would mean a lot more new track than that. Sharing with CN isn't an option so it would need to be a new greenfield right of way from roughly Oshawa to Smiths Falls. That's around 300 km, roughly double the distance of going through Havelock. The terrain is mostly easier to build on but it would have higher land acquisition costs and a lot more grade separations.
You can look at it from a slightly different perspective - if Alstom's proposal is built and we can get to Ottawa in two hours in Montreal in three, that would create a major shift towards rail and a major reduction in greenhouse gases and the other negative impacts of car-based transportation. That would probably outweigh any negative impacts from the new line itself. I would expect that the new line would have wildlife crossings much like the 400 extension to Sudbury or some of the highways in the Rockies.
Xav
Active Member
Yes I saw that map, however in the article I posted here yesterday, the person they interviewed from Alstom mentioned that they would propose to skip downtown Montreal and build a "North" station so that the line could go from Toronto to Québec City without having to detour to Gare Centrale or Lucien-L'Allier.
Where that station would be is up to debate, as the spokesperson did not say, but the most likely candidates would be Canora or Parc (or even Namur could have some merits).
crs1026
Superstar
Which agency isn’t the issue, nor is serving Peterborough itself. The issue is the expectation that somebody will be wanting a train service that stops repeatedly between Agincourt and Peterboro. The past proposals eg Shining waters have all stipulated stops en route. (I’m strongly opposed, because that route runs through what is supposed to be Greenbelt, but that means nothing to the present provincial government).
If a stopping service is pursued, the track requirements will multiply because the non-stopping ”express” trains will overtake the locals.
My theory was that Alstom sidestepped that by not proposing to build anything more than a basic vanilla HfR grade line that kept both stopping and express in a single envelope….. so that if somebody wants better, Alstom isn’t ponying up the money and the added cost is outside Alstom’s bid.
I don’t have data, but neither am I ignoring data. One hundred miles of construction in the Canadian shield is likely the same cost as 125-150 miles in better terrain. That gets one most of the way to Toronto.
Property costs for the thin stretch of land along or between the parallel CP and CN row’s west of Belleville will not be at commercial market rates, it’s land that can’t be developed intensively. Grade crossings may indeed add cost, I agree.
And then there is my long-stated belief that the legacy regional service on the Lakeshore route is not sustainable or growable on the existing CN trackage and will require investment eventually - that need could be met within a new HxR investment.
Environmental mitigations are an “and” not an “or” equation. You can’t wall off migratory or breeding paths for animal species and say that’s offset by carbon reduction. There will have to be an assessment of what impacts are created by an HSR quality infrastructure, and these will have to be mitigated.
- Paul
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
I don't think it's over doing it to have 3 stations in the GTA (Union, Eglinton/Agincourt, and somewhere near the 407 ETR)
Don't forget the Pickering Airport is still in the plans so there may be a provision to have a station there, eventually.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
VIA Rail Canada on LinkedIn: Notre président et chef de la direction, Martin R Landry, a comparu…
Notre président et chef de la direction, Martin R Landry, a comparu aujourd'hui devant le Comité fédéral permanent des transports, de l'infrastructure et des…
www.linkedin.com
This "apology" is just making excuses. What are they going to do better next time?
MisterF
Senior Member
HSR systems typically have different layers of services on the same tracks, sometimes including trains of different speeds. In the case of Alstom's proposal, the fact that the part of the network between Toronto and Peterborough is at conventional speed means that having express and local services is no more difficult than what Via and GO are doing already. Having commuter trains stop at stations that intercity trains don't serve would be relatively easy to implement here.
So you're thinking of putting a high speed line between the CN and CP lines? The two aren't really parallel in any meaningful sense. Sometimes they're right next to each other but for the most part they're several kilometres apart with farms and communities between them. The land is quite intensively developed and would need to be purchased at market rates.
Plus the geometry of the existing rail lines and the 401 are completely different from a high speed line. New HSR lines are typically built in the general vicinity of conventional lines but not following their right of way for most of the route. It would be a new right of way that has little relation to existing infrastructure.
We wall off wildlife with limited access freeways all the time. That's why mitigation measures like the wildlife crossings are used. Similar treatments could be used on an HSR line. HSR would probably have less of an impact than a freeway because it has a smaller ROW, no interchanges, no salt use, no emissions, etc.
lenaitch
Senior Member
And so far, that particular process is working out just swimmingly.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Has anyone heard any indication of how Alstom plans to overcome the hostility of CN and CP against any use of overhead line equipment (OLE) within their ROW? Or are they planning to build the world‘s first 300 km/h fast high-speed trainset which doesn’t depend on continuous electrification?
Also, a friendly reminder for those who apparently take Alstom’s 1, 2 and 3 hour promises (for MTRL-OTTW, OTTW-TRTO and MTRL-TRTO, respectively) for an alignment which seems to mostly follow the proposed HFR alignment at face value, that the Ecotrain travel time estimates for the E-300 (i.e. continuously electrified and entirely dedicated ROW) scenario were 0:57h, 1:50h and 2:47h, respectively:
Also, a friendly reminder for those who apparently take Alstom’s 1, 2 and 3 hour promises (for MTRL-OTTW, OTTW-TRTO and MTRL-TRTO, respectively) for an alignment which seems to mostly follow the proposed HFR alignment at face value, that the Ecotrain travel time estimates for the E-300 (i.e. continuously electrified and entirely dedicated ROW) scenario were 0:57h, 1:50h and 2:47h, respectively:
Last edited:
yrt+viva=1system
Senior Member
CN ignoring a committee hearing shows you how much the the railroads really care about the situation and passenger trains. They know the can get away with anything as the Federal government has no balls to enforce the acts.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/via-rail-holiday-delays-transport-committee-1.6726889
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/via-rail-holiday-delays-transport-committee-1.6726889