Author Topic: Maclean's Magazine. Where's Canada's High Speed Rail Network? (Read 5407 times)

50362 · « **on:** July 13, 2007, 02:30:17 pm »

In the July issue of Macleans theres a short story (page 12) on high speed rail systems in Europe. The story compares the economic benefits of the system, the short travel times, and taking the congestion of roadways. The author asks where's Canada's high speed rail system?

Like I tell my friends who have never traveled outside of central Ontario, Canada is decades behind the rest of the civilized world when it comes to our transportation infrastructure.

Snowman · « **Reply #1 on:** July 13, 2007, 02:38:19 pm »

Quote from: 50362 on July 13, 2007, 02:30:17 pm

In the July issue of Macleans theres a short story (page 12) on high speed rail systems in Europe. The story compares the economic benefits of the system, the short travel times, and taking the congestion of roadways. The author asks where's Canada's high speed rail system?

Like I tell my friends who have never traveled outside of central Ontario, Canada is decades behind the rest of the civilized world when it comes to our transportation infrastructure.

Add 50 million people and shrink the total of Canada’s land mass to the size of Ontario and you will understand why we do not have such a system.

Scaerio · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2007, 02:50:04 pm »

As most veterans of this board know, I LOVE trains, and would love nothing more than to see such a thing in this country. High speed rail would only make sense in the Québec City to Windsor corridor. High speed rail in Canada would require a major investment in dedicated, passenger train-only lines where you could sustain speeds of at least 300km/h (meaning roughly 2 hours from downtown MTL to downtown TO). It would also need to be electrified, increasing the infrastructure costs due to the construction of catenary (overhead wires). With the emergence of low-cost airlines, I'm not sure if such a railway would be able to recover its costs. It also needs to compete with the Greyhound. While the bus isn't particularly fast (although I have always found it to be faster to TO than the current train), it offers the convenience of hourly departures. I doubt high-speed rail would be able to offer than kind of frequency.

tpl · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2007, 03:32:39 pm »

Weather. The european high speed trains do have to contend with snow and cold but nowhere near as often as happens here. It is probably quite difficult to have a 300 km/h train in an ice storm.

And there are just not enough people Sandman says "add 50MM people and shrink the total ..."
Just for France,Belgium,Germany, Spain and Italy alone try adding 150M people just into Ontario's area and you'll have density enough for a high speed rail network.

Also for Canada as a whole, stage lengths are just too long except for train fanatics. Aircraft will always win over 2000km or so. You don't have to maintain 2000 km of expensive track with all its crossing points and you can dodge bad weather AND the natives cant block the air.

Last weeks Economist had an article on Euro high speed rail. The UK where railways were invented, lags behind as well.

CSH · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2007, 03:40:41 pm »

We can still have a HS Rail Network within the GTA, Kitcherne-Waterloo-Cambridge-Guelph corridor and connecting these regions to Ottawa, Buffalo(New York) Detroit. I am sure the existing polulation in these regions can support the building/maintainance cost.

tpl · « **Reply #5 on:** July 13, 2007, 04:10:45 pm »

but why bother? Unless you mean High speed to be say 150 km/h it is pointless to spend the energy to accelerate the trains to high speeds in that small space. In the Euro context, high speed means 250-320 km/h to compete with short haul air. Now with our local CoU region if you got rid of all at grade crossings, electrified and got dedicated rights of way not owned by cncp that would make enough difference to be worth while. I suggest that would take 15 years to do with cncp and Nimbys fighting it all the way and I am being optimistic in assuming that a gov serious about this wouls repeal some of the Environmental impact and planning public hearing laws and disallow court challenges... if you dont do that then it is 30 years.

Our gov with the fed/prov division of powers and the feds not daring to use their overrides cannot do these projects and dare not allow private enterprise to do them either.

PJungnitsch · « **Reply #6 on:** July 13, 2007, 04:12:47 pm »

Even in Europe I was surprised about how they were punching through those expensive high speed lines. I understand that compared to short trip plane flights they save a huge amount of trouble, delivering you directly from city center to city center without the hassle of check in, security, taxi to the airport, etc. And since most European cities have good subway systems it's often easy to get from the train station to the destination.

Plus for city workers they make the 'effective commuting distance' much greater. Even in England (which is only semi highspeed AFAIK) people working in London are able to live quite a distance away now. Cheaper house values, no fighting with traffic, work on the train, etc.

tpl · « **Reply #7 on:** July 13, 2007, 04:19:23 pm »

PJ you should see the complaints and whining about the trains in the UK. THings like ticket prices rising at twice the rate of inflation but no better service, queues so long that you cant buy a ticket in time for the train and have to pay double if you pay on the train. Season tickets prices for these "long" commutes of $8000/year and so on.

And in the UK they dont build more lines for similar reason to here... the gov doesnt dare. Nimbys vote

The french gov tho' does just draw lines on maps and send out the compulsory purchase orders by the next post when they want to built a line.

erich · « **Reply #8 on:** July 13, 2007, 05:06:37 pm »

There is also much talk about a Calgary - Edmonton line, I would like to see it reaching Fort McMurray.

PJungnitsch · « **Reply #9 on:** July 13, 2007, 05:33:11 pm »

Heh, I've been going to Britain for over twenty years now and there has never been a time when the Brits have been happy with their train system (for some very good reasons).

The Economist article is here:

http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9441785

Trainman · « **Reply #10 on:** July 13, 2007, 08:03:36 pm »

Quote from: Scaerio on July 13, 2007, 02:50:04 pm

As most veterans of this board know, I LOVE trains, and would love nothing more than to see such a thing in this country. High speed rail would only make sense in the Québec City to Windsor corridor. High speed rail in Canada would require a major investment in dedicated, passenger train-only lines where you could sustain speeds of at least 300km/h (meaning roughly 2 hours from downtown MTL to downtown TO). It would also need to be electrified, increasing the infrastructure costs due to the construction of catenary (overhead wires). With the emergence of low-cost airlines, I'm not sure if such a railway would be able to recover its costs. It also needs to compete with the Greyhound. While the bus isn't particularly fast (although I have always found it to be faster to TO than the current train), it offers the convenience of hourly departures. I doubt high-speed rail would be able to offer than kind of frequency.

I too am a train guy and fully concur with Scaerio. Both BC Rail and CP Rail did some tests (and in the case of BC Rail some actual running) of electric trains in the harsh reality of Canada's climate. Funny, the BC Rail line is now back to being diesel and CP never added the electrification. Canada is so different than Europe, trying to compare them is one of those cherries to watermelon things.

We have tried high speed (like the Turbo, still the fastest train in North America) and it did not make a go here or in the more heavily populated Northeast Corridor of the US.

On December 20, 1967 the United Aircraft TurboTrain rocketed to an amazing 170.8 MPH on the Pennsylvania Railroad in New Jersey. To this date, this is still the fastest speed ever achieved by a production passenger train in the United States or Canada.

On April 22, 1976 a Canadian National TurboTrain reached a speed of 140.6 MPH between Montreal and Toronto. This is still the Canadian speed record.

From http://www.rapidotrains.com/c-turbo02.html

50362 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 14, 2007, 12:07:42 pm »

Planes, trains and automobiles. Do we have any aircraft enthusiast on board? Would be pilots? Going for my Ultralight Pilot Permit.

safristi · « **Reply #12 on:** July 14, 2007, 12:17:26 pm »

LADY_BUG alert................

................. just build better KARS(Veyron in every POT) and increase the 401 speed limit to 320KPH...................

initial_D · « **Reply #13 on:** July 14, 2007, 12:31:51 pm »

Quote from: 50362 on July 13, 2007, 02:30:17 pm

In the July issue of Macleans theres a short story (page 12) on high speed rail systems in Europe. The story compares the economic benefits of the system, the short travel times, and taking the congestion of roadways. The author asks where's Canada's high speed rail system?

Like I tell my friends who have never traveled outside of central Ontario, Canada is decades behind the rest of the civilized world when it comes to our transportation infrastructure.

The author asks where's Canada's high speed rail system?

we is have Jet-N-Ride, Jet to Europe and Ride.

Very obvious the person who wrote the article don't have a complete understanding of the transportation system and Canada. Or have never seen a Big Moose in person other than what is printed on a beer bottle.

safristi · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2007, 12:37:46 pm »

There are BIG MOOSEHEAD bottles...

?

......jeroboams.............poisonally 6 methusallahs and I'm anybody's...........

Trainman · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2007, 09:01:01 pm »

Quote from: 50362 on July 14, 2007, 12:07:42 pm

Planes, trains and automobiles. Do we have any aircraft enthusiast on board? Would be pilots? Going for my Ultralight Pilot Permit.

Take a look in the Off-Topic section, you may like these:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/forum/index.php/topic,53141.0.html

http://www.canadiandriver.com/forum/index.php/topic,53245.0.html

dr_spock · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2007, 09:55:56 pm »

Quote from: Trainman on July 13, 2007, 08:03:36 pm

Quote from: Scaerio on July 13, 2007, 02:50:04 pm
As most veterans of this board know, I LOVE trains, and would love nothing more than to see such a thing in this country. High speed rail would only make sense in the Québec City to Windsor corridor. High speed rail in Canada would require a major investment in dedicated, passenger train-only lines where you could sustain speeds of at least 300km/h (meaning roughly 2 hours from downtown MTL to downtown TO). It would also need to be electrified, increasing the infrastructure costs due to the construction of catenary (overhead wires). With the emergence of low-cost airlines, I'm not sure if such a railway would be able to recover its costs. It also needs to compete with the Greyhound. While the bus isn't particularly fast (although I have always found it to be faster to TO than the current train), it offers the convenience of hourly departures. I doubt high-speed rail would be able to offer than kind of frequency.

I too am a train guy and fully concur with Scaerio. Both BC Rail and CP Rail did some tests (and in the case of BC Rail some actual running) of electric trains in the harsh reality of Canada's climate. Funny, the BC Rail line is now back to being diesel and CP never added the electrification. Canada is so different than Europe, trying to compare them is one of those cherries to watermelon things.

We have tried high speed (like the Turbo, still the fastest train in North America) and it did not make a go here or in the more heavily populated Northeast Corridor of the US.

On December 20, 1967 the United Aircraft TurboTrain rocketed to an amazing 170.8 MPH on the Pennsylvania Railroad in New Jersey. To this date, this is still the fastest speed ever achieved by a production passenger train in the United States or Canada.

On April 22, 1976 a Canadian National TurboTrain reached a speed of 140.6 MPH between Montreal and Toronto. This is still the Canadian speed record.

From http://www.rapidotrains.com/c-turbo02.html

I rode the Turbo Train with my grandfather in Amtrak's Northeast Corridor. I still remember it like it was yesterday. I used to have a Turbo Train lunch box. (Wish I kept it.) The Americans have the Acela now but it's not without problems and Amtrak is still bleeding tax dollars...

Who's brave enough to put up the capital to build high speed rail in Canada?

barrie1 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2007, 10:42:45 pm »

I don't believe it has to be electric at all with the correct transmissions in them the Diesels of to-day could handle that with ease. Other then the cost in Britain to ride the rails they should all run on time as they bought around 1400 new locomotives around the year 2000-2003. I am sure these are still running well. The Royal Maroon and Gold was the majority of the colours but some were Jade Green and Gold as well. We built some electric locomotives for BC years ago but they did not last as the 1st issues of them were experimental and not all that reliable at all. They used them mainly for heavy freight and they were expensive to run for that purpose. Electric rail has its limitations and its mostly passenger service for them as the heavy work is too much on the designs they currently use. The new Diesel designs out haul the old ones by the marjon of close to 3 to 1 with the power being produced by them to-day. 6000Hp with either DC or AC traction motors.

tpl · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2007, 06:12:59 am »

"The new Diesel designs out haul the old ones by the marjon of close to 3 to 1 with the power being produced by them to-day. 6000Hp with either DC or AC traction motors. "

Hmmmmmm. I guess that an engine with a diesel engine, a generator and electric traction motors has more road hugging weight than an engine with electric traction motors and a catenary device to get its electricity externally. I see that weight is probably good in an engine and definitely a self contained unit saves the huge cost of electrification of the track but I fail to see why the pure electric would not be more reliable with far fewer moving parts.

Scaerio · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2007, 01:09:09 pm »

None of the world's high-speed trains are diesel-electric. Germany's ICE, France's TGV, Italy's Pendolino, and Japan's Shinkansen are all electric. Recently Bombardier developed the Jet Train, a gas turbine locomtive, but if I recall correctly it is a real pig on fuel, and development seems to have stopped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetTrain