News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     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
 5.4K     0 

IanO said:
Rail from Edmonton to Calgary still does not make sense given the potential market, population density and end of line connections.

YYC to Banff makes sense today and would have a significant premium clientele from Europe/Asia and potential for labour market mobility solutions.
Click to expand...
What bothers me about your first statement, is that you don’t even specify HSR, you just say “rail” is not feasible. That is insane considering the passenger rail connections all around the world servicing population centres much smaller than ours. Regular speed is what we need now. Buy some trainsets, build some platforms, upgrade parts of the CPKC mainline, and boom… you got the start of a provincial-wide network that will service all the regional centres, as well as the larger cities. This can be done relatively cheaply. HSR can come later. But for the love of god, please don’t tell me ”rail” doesn't make sense.
 
You don't just say hey traditional rail, let's make you HSR now. The infrastructure is completely different and far more capital intensive.

If you just want a rail connection and envision a modern version of this, great, but that won't attract or generate what people are talking about in this thread, period.
Fl4fZlMagAAG4Qk.jpg
 
Yes and CABR is working with CPKC. The proposed line would be right next to their existing line to Banff, so it's possible. The main thing is to work constructively with CPKC (and CN in other parts) and incentivize them to work with the GoA/rail project proponents. The tricky part is that in order to 'buddy up' with CP/CN, the passenger train can't be electrified. This is why the CABR project is proposed to be hydrogen powered. Luckily hydrogen trains (especially shorter commuter trains) are already a real thing an in active use in Europe. But longer trains of the HSR or HSR-lite variety are not a reality yet. So using the existing rail right of way for a line from Cgy to Edmonton is not that easy. Not impossible, but not that easy.
 
Ok, so you want a low-floor LRT to Calgary that holds 120 people or about 60 cars worth?

If Alberta is going to do it, DO IT. Every hour, on the hour, 10 car trains with 1000+ people and an average speed of 150-180km/h.
 
IanO said:
Ok, so you want a low-floor LRT to Calgary that holds 120 people or about 60 cars worth?

If Alberta is going to do it, DO IT. Every hour, on the hour, 10 car trains with 1000+ people and an average speed of 150-180km/h.
Click to expand...

You really have no clue do you, lol. This train is not a low floor LRT. It operates at the speeds you mentioned and more than one unit can be coupled up. This is literally the train they proposed to use for the CABR project from YYC to Banff. And it has been operating in Europe for years. And that picture was taking in QC this summer.
 
Well aware and am working in support of that connect/CABR and the hydrogen train, so it was a but tongue in cheek, but my point stands about doing it right or don't do it.

I've been in invited a few times to build support at an industry level and we plan on having Bruce from CABR to come speak at an upcoming luncheon. We want to see this built and it just makes sense to expand a rail network to Edmonton at the right time, I just do not think that is before I get a senior's pass.

Screenshot 2024-01-26 at 7.57.08 AM.png
 
Last edited:
I don't disagree with the doing it right, but what exactly 'right' is is debatable. One could argue that HSR from Edmonton to Calgary would work better if we have a train that doesn't fly past all the population centres in the corridor, but rather has stops along the way. You could still have express trains but this way it could also benefit small communities (Leduc, Wetaskiwin, Lacombe, Ponoka, etc. etc.).
 
IanO said:
You don't just say hey traditional rail, let's make you HSR now. The infrastructure is completely different and far more capital intensive.
Click to expand...

Actually you can, and many places do mix HSR with regular passenger traffic. The important part is having services in place so a modal shift can start to happen. There are tons of examples of 200km/h trains using the same tracks as 120-160 km/h trains. I’m still not convinced that Alberta will ever need true HSR. The distances between the major cities are not that great. Higher speed express trains travelling between Edmonton and Calgary in just under 2 hours would be sufficient.
 
IanO said:
Well aware and am working in support of that connect/CABR and the hydrogen train, so it was a but tongue in cheek, but my point stands about doing it right or don't do it.

I've been in invited a few times to build support at an industry level and we plan on having Bruce from CABR to come speak at an upcoming luncheon. We want to see this built and it just makes sense to expand a rail network to Edmonton at the right time, I just do not think that is before I get a senior's pass.

View attachment 535395
Click to expand...
I don’t believe the polling numbers.
 
If the only two alternatives presented are do something uneconomic and expensive or do nothing, guess which one probably wins.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top