[Yeggy]

First of all Heathrow is not the only airport in London and I suspect way more people want to go to there than Dublin. An Iceland stop over or connection could be good for flights to various European destinations.

The majority of people flying to the UK from Edmonton would likely be going onto other destinations yes no?

Do you really think I dont know there are multiple airports in London (as well as other major cities) common friend. Now you tell me which airport has the best international connections, its Heathrow.

 

[Vanfan123]

Get ready for early March 2026, as Vancouver YVR - Edmonton YEG - YVR route, will see a few (AC) Air Canada Rouge planes operating it.

 

[David A]

The majority of people flying to the UK from Edmonton would likely be going onto other destinations yes no?

Do you really think I dont know there are multiple airports in London (as well as other major cities) common friend. Now you tell me which airport has the best international connections, its Heathrow.

I have no idea what you know or don't know. I thought it was useful to mention, perhaps for others. Lots of people do go to London as a destination, but I realize others also connect to elsewhere from there.

 

[AntonK]

TBH, I don't think that it would harm YEG very much, if any. It might even help YEG's tourism overall. Tourism to Banff has been rising rapidly, partly due to the new overseas direct flights. With a train from YYC-Banff, and to YEG, there's a better possibility of getting tourists to make a stop in Edmonton. I could be wrong, but it's a possibility, if the train is fast and efficient.

That's what I think too. It might even be a positive.

According to google there are on average 37 flights a week between Edmonton and Calgary. Most of those are 737's, so I'm going to do a very primitive calculation of 150 passengers per flight. It could be more it cold be less, but for arguments sake, I'll use 150. Over the course of a year that's a loss of only 288,000 passengers, which is only a small percentage of YEG's ~8 Million passengers a year, and that's worst case scenario with all flights between the two cities going away. Edmonton would have a chance of getting in some of Calgary and Banff's tourists. I would bet more tourists would be gained from the train than passengers would be lost at YEG. International tourists won't come here unless it's quick and convenient for them, and a train that terminates downtown would help.

 

[Vanfan123]

WestJet NS26 Domestic Service Changes – 22FEB26 — AeroRoutes

Published at 1200PST / 2000GMT 24FEB26 WestJet in recent schedule update gradually filed service changes to its domestic service for Northern summer 2026 season. Using calendar week 29 as general indication, planned frequency changes based on 2025 vs 2026 comparisons, as of 22FEB26, are

www.aeroroutes.com

 

[yeggator]

I would bet more tourists would be gained from the train than passengers would be lost at YEG. International tourists won't come here unless it's quick and convenient for them, and a train that terminates downtown would help.

I concur. It's so much easier to convince tourists flying into YYC to visit the mountains to add a quick stop in Edmonton by high-speed train. Heck, I'm sure for a lot of people, taking the HSR would be an attraction in and of itself.

 

[Yeggy]

Get ready for early March 2026, as Vancouver YVR - Edmonton YEG - YVR route, will see a few (AC) Air Canada Rouge planes operating it.

View attachment 717171

If I had to take a rouge plane anywhere, it would be van, but flair remains my most used for that destination.

 

[David A]

If I had to take a rouge plane anywhere, it would be van, but flair remains my most used for that destination.

It is a relatively short flight, so long as the plane is decent it doesn't matter if the signage on it is for Air Canada or its subsidiary carrier.

 

[David A]

I concur. It's so much easier to convince tourists flying into YYC to visit the mountains to add a quick stop in Edmonton by high-speed train. Heck, I'm sure for a lot of people, taking the HSR would be an attraction in and of itself.

I feel having more frequent rail and other regular schedule transportation service between Edmonton and Jasper, as well as a better located train station, could boost tourism here more than a high speed train to Calgary.

 

[blue12]

I feel having more frequent rail and other regular schedule transportation service between Edmonton and Jasper, as well as a better located train station, could boost tourism here more than a high speed train to Calgary.

I think the key is that to boost Edmonton's tourism a substantial amount, the Edmonton-Jasper rail link would have to be high speed, or else it doesn't really pose an advantage. For international tourists looking to go to the rockies, most would opt to fly into Calgary and take a 1.5h train to Banff as opposed to flying into Edmonton and taking a 4h train to Jasper. If the Calgary-Banff and Edmonton-Jasper travel times were much more equal, that's when I'd expect to start seeing more people funnelling through Edmonton.

 

[David A]

I think the key is that to boost Edmonton's tourism a substantial amount, the Edmonton-Jasper rail link would have to be high speed, or else it doesn't really pose an advantage. For international tourists looking to go to the rockies, most would opt to fly into Calgary and take a 1.5h train to Banff as opposed to flying into Edmonton and taking a 4h train to Jasper. If the Calgary-Banff and Edmonton-Jasper travel times were much more equal, that's when I'd expect to start seeing more people funnelling through Edmonton.

Yes, but high speed rail from Calgary to Edmonton in itself does nothing to improve traveling from Edmonton to Jasper. However, people do not choose places to go to based on travel time alone.

Generally part of the appeal of places that are further away is that they are more unspoiled and less crowded. We can't change geography and move the mountains closer, but we can offer people better and more options to get there.

 

[AntonK]

I feel having more frequent rail and other regular schedule transportation service between Edmonton and Jasper, as well as a better located train station, could boost tourism here more than a high speed train to Calgary.

I hate to be a downer, but I don’t see that happening ever. Building high-speed rail from Edmonton to Jasper is 3 or 4 times the cost of Calgary to Banff, and would gather about 10% of the amount of riders that Calgary to Banff.
In a world where funding is limited, high-speed rail between Calgary to Banff or Calgary to Edmonton is where the funding will go, if it even happens.
Right now and for the foreseeable future, all of Alberta‘s international tourists are going through Calgary and onto Banff. High speed rail between Calgary and Edmonton is something that would make sense even without the tourism, and those international tourists that go to Calgary Banff would have easy access to Edmonton.
I’m not saying, I love the idea, but logically it might be the best way to get international tourists to come here.

 

[Tropical]

I hate to be a downer, but I don’t see that happening ever. Building high-speed rail from Edmonton to Jasper is 3 or 4 times the cost of Calgary to Banff, and would gather about 10% of the amount of riders that Calgary to Banff.
In a world where funding is limited, high-speed rail between Calgary to Banff or Calgary to Edmonton is where the funding will go, if it even happens.
Right now and for the foreseeable future, all of Alberta‘s international tourists are going through Calgary and onto Banff. High speed rail between Calgary and Edmonton is something that would make sense even without the tourism, and those international tourists that go to Calgary Banff would have easy access to Edmonton.
I’m not saying, I love the idea, but logically it might be the best way to get international tourists to come here.

I agree. And I also cannot see Parks Canada approving the habitat loss necessary for a high speed rail line to Banff. A line to Jasper faces the same hurdle, but would impact an even larger area of habitat. And we're not just talking about habitat destruction - the parks are already bisected by multiple highways and railroads that fragment habitat and migration. The legal mandate of Parks Canada is to priortize ecological integrity first under the Canada National Parks Act.

Thusfar, the provincial government is not signalling any consideration to this reality. Or to ecological integrity in general.

 

[David A]

I hate to be a downer, but I don’t see that happening ever. Building high-speed rail from Edmonton to Jasper is 3 or 4 times the cost of Calgary to Banff, and would gather about 10% of the amount of riders that Calgary to Banff.
In a world where funding is limited, high-speed rail between Calgary to Banff or Calgary to Edmonton is where the funding will go, if it even happens.
Right now and for the foreseeable future, all of Alberta‘s international tourists are going through Calgary and onto Banff. High speed rail between Calgary and Edmonton is something that would make sense even without the tourism, and those international tourists that go to Calgary Banff would have easy access to Edmonton.
I’m not saying, I love the idea, but logically it might be the best way to get international tourists to come here.

I agree, I don't see high speed rail to Jasper happening. Also, while the proposed passenger rail to Banff would be faster than the old passenger rail decades ago, I don't believe it will be high speed either.

The intention seems more to try relieve congestion from all the current vehicle traffic, not to make travel time extremely fast.

 

[Gronk!]

The legal mandate of Parks Canada is to priortize ecological integrity first under the Canada National Parks Act.

Thusfar, the provincial government is not signalling any consideration to this reality. Or to ecological integrity in general.

Thankfully, the national parks are under federal control instead of the province.