News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.7K     0 

Let’s re-use the good ol’: ‘Stop the Gravy Train’
 
micheal_can said:
Lets say that the line through Peterborough is to be used. What is preventing the consortium from raising it up high enough so that the level crossings are gone, and the bridge is high enough to clear boats?
Click to expand...
Much more difficult to dampen noise, it would be quite loud (and arguably an eyesore) with its proximity to many properties.
micheal_can said:
The curve within the city could be near a station which would negate the speed limit. All of this would assume the station won't be bypassed.
Click to expand...
It will without doubt be bypassed. A Peterborough stop can only generate so many trips. Let’s not ignore the fact Montreal and Toronto have 20 and 30 times greater population, respectively. Peterborough will grow rapidly when this train is in service but early days will see many trains bypassing their stop.
micheal_can said:
Even if it is bypassed, what speed would that existing curve handle?
Click to expand...
I’m no rail expert, I respect there are many factors in determining max speed through a curve. Suffice to say, the curve in downtown Peterborough could not be traversed at even 150km/h – even on a new elevated guideway built for speed.
 
I’ve been wondering how many trips would even stop in Peterborough. Barcelona-Madrid for example, a very popular HSR route, is largely express with only a fraction of the stops in Zaragoza, which falls right on the high speed line. Get the network running between Ottawa and Toronto with some token park n’ ride stop in Peterborough to make all parties happy. If Peterborough wants a downtown station in twenty or thirty years, maybe it’ll sync with Metrolinx’ plans and there will be some shared wins.
 
Last edited:
ownthesky said:
I’ve been wondering how many trips would even stop in Peterborough. Barcelona-Madrid for example, a very popular HSR route, is largely express with only a fraction of the stops in Zaragoza, which falls right on the high speed. Get the network running between Ottawa and Toronto with some token park n’ ride stop in Peterborough to make all parties happy. If Peterborough wants a downtown station in twenty or thirty years, maybe it’ll sync with Metrolinx’ plans and there will be some shared wins.
Click to expand...
What this project needs is connections to non high speed rail travel methods at Peterborough to make it useful.

Without that you will need huge parking lot.

Downtown Peterborough doesn't have a rail line anyway and downtown is built up so there is no way to get HSR there.
 
I'm not sure why people keep talking about trains going high speed through downtown Peterborough. Nothing going through downtown is going to be anywhere close to high speed. Any trains going through the city as opposed to bypassing it will be slow.

Bordercollie said:
What this project needs is connections to non high speed rail travel methods at Peterborough to make it useful.

Without that you will need huge parking lot.

Downtown Peterborough doesn't have a rail line anyway and downtown is built up so there is no way to get HSR there.
Click to expand...
The existing line through the city goes just south of the downturn core.
 
Bordercollie said:
Downtown Peterborough doesn't have a rail line anyway and downtown is built up so there is no way to get HSR there.
Click to expand...

??? The old raiil line is still there at the south end of the downtown, as is the old station building. It's currently rated at 10 mph I believe because it's been allowed to decline pending a decision on its future. It's true as someone mentioned that even elevated, you couldn't run the curve at HSR speeds, but you probably wouldn't go through the city at 300 kph anyway. Only about 7 km of the line goes through the city. Slowing down to 100 or 150 isn't a fatal flaw but isn't the best option either. It will be interesting to see what solution ALTO comes up with.

1740226440636.png
 
I'm very keen on Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal HSR.

I especially think they should build Ottawa-Montreal and get it into service first, with Ottawa-Toronto built and in service second, and Montreal-QC last.

Assuming Alto happens, here are my two cents on what might come next:
  • The federal government should have a plan for good, rapid transit between capital cities, including any appropriate technology
    • Alto will connect three capitals: Ottawa, Toronto and Quebec City
    • The capitals of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta might one day make sense for HSR
    • HSR is not necessarily an appropriate technology for all capital-to-capital connections
  • The provincial governments should have a plan for good, rapid transit within provinces, including any appropriate technology
    • Alberta is already planning Calgary-Edmonton HSR
    • Ontario can reinstate the plan for Toronto-Windsor HSR
    • To get provincial HSR plans done will depend on a lot of things, including, IMHO, Alto getting built and in service
  • If we make friends with the US again, and if they eventually adopt HSR, the federal government should likely handle cross-border connections
 
I think we are all making a bunch of assumptions when we try to make connections between the former HFR and the current proposal. The ALTO website talks of 2:09 hours Toronto to Ottawa. I'm not smart enough to be able to figure out what kind of speeds that would require, but the government quoted "up to 300 Kph". The website show the stretch between Toronto and 'Big Rideau Lake' (Smiths Falls-ish) just as a 'concept corridor'. Assuming they will want to avoid a lot of speed changes, and assuming that there is some recognized standard for clearances of houses, buildings, etc. away from a high speed corridor, I suspect much of the current CPKC/abandoned O&Q corridor will be unsuitable for HSR.
 
MisterF said:
I'm not sure what you mean about trackage to facilitate a connection. Presumably a bypass would be built south of the city and connect to existing tracks at both ends. I'm this scenario the tracks going through downtown would have to be upgraded but would remain conventional tracks with grade crossings.
Click to expand...
Look at a map of Peterborough. There is virtually no track left in the city, save for the CP line which crosses through on a roughly east-west axis.

Assuming that the new high speed corridor is built to the south of the city, it would many new kilometers of additional new track and alignment in order to build a station close to downtown. Even if it's built to the north, the same thing applies. Thus building a connection to directly serve the city is going to increase costs substantially.

Now if you look at the high speed lines built in France, Spain or Germany you'll see that the lines also bypass the smaller centres, but have junctions with existing lines to allow trains to depart the high speed lines, travel on the old lines and reach the old stations located in the city centres. They then take those old lines to other junctions that have been built with the high speed lines, allowing the trains to rejoin those corridors.

That's part of the efficiency of high speed rail, provided that it is built to meet the existing standards - you can expand its reach pretty easily and cost-effectively by using portions of existing corridors where they exist. That will be much harder to do where those corridors no longer exist, or never existed in the first place.

Dan
 
Bordercollie said:
Why is there no station near Kingston?
Click to expand...
Because that is how you get scope creep and project failure. There's not much of an advantage for HSR to Kingston residents if they have to drive 50+ km away. That driving time cancels any savings from local VIA service. Meanwhile, it also slows down the whole line make it less attractive to all other customers.

Here's a simple rubric to determine station location. If you can't find a quarter million people within a 25 km radius of a place, it doesn't need a station. And if you wouldn't put a small airport there, it definitely shouldn't have a station.
 
smallspy said:
Look at a map of Peterborough. There is virtually no track left in the city, save for the CP line which crosses through on a roughly east-west axis.

Assuming that the new high speed corridor is built to the south of the city, it would many new kilometers of additional new track and alignment in order to build a station close to downtown. Even if it's built to the north, the same thing applies. Thus building a connection to directly serve the city is going to increase costs substantially.
Click to expand...
I'm very familiar with Peterborough. Why do you say that a new alignment would be needed? The small number of trains that would use a downtown station would just use a rebuilt CP corridor. This is what Via pitched with the original HFR plan.

smallspy said:
Now if you look at the high speed lines built in France, Spain or Germany you'll see that the lines also bypass the smaller centres, but have junctions with existing lines to allow trains to depart the high speed lines, travel on the old lines and reach the old stations located in the city centres. They then take those old lines to other junctions that have been built with the high speed lines, allowing the trains to rejoin those corridors.
Click to expand...
Yes and this is exactly what I'm suggesting could potentially be done with Peterborough.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top
NEWSDATABASEMAPFORUMSERVICESUTProLOG IN
CITIES