|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Fixing broken ties may address some slow orders, but we'd still have a 40 mph (64 km/h) line speed which is too slow to be useful to anyone. In my opinion the line needs a ground-up reconstruction to 95 mph (153 km/h) standard, with two additional sidings to enable hourly service in both directions. Then we'd have a line which would actually attract some measureable ridership/revenue, with downtown-to-downtown travel times faster than the best-case scenario by car.
Maybe if there are some very low-hanging repairs which could lift some slow zones at minimal cost, then they could do those, but I personally wouldn't spend any significant money on the current track infrastructure which (in my opinion) should be totally replaced.
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
A simple tie replacement program may be all that is needed to get the line back up to its historic line speed of 80mph. And would take far less time and cost than a full rebuild of the track structure (which may or may not be able to attain your 95mph wishes).
Dan
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Ah that's great to hear. I wasn't aware that the historic line speed was 80 mph (129 km/h). If tie replacement is all it takes to get it up to 80 mph, then that does sound worthwhile. If the current track structure is in decent condition, then a 95 mph upgrade could be postponed until it needs more serious work.
What is the scenario you're referencing where a 95 mph standard would not be attainable? Although some of the curves do indeed limit speeds to 80 mph or lower, that shouldn't preclude a higher track speed on the extremely long straight segments between stations.
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
Whether the investment the KW-London track segment is 10M or 100M or more; that segment needs to be in public ownership, rather than having a vast public subsidy to CN which would then still control access/schedule/slots.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that. It almost goes without saying.
Technically the purchase itself is also a subsidy to CN, but at least it's a one-time subsidy rather than a perpetual ball-and-chain on passenger operations.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Well, it looks like it's true today in any case... Apparently the train arrived in London on time but then accrued a 15 minute delay before St Marys, which grew to a 25 minute delay by Kitchener.
Times are 6 hours off because my computer is set to Central European Time
Oh and just for reference, the 10 mph (16 km/h) speed limit is still in effect:
Last edited:
C
christiesplits
Guest
What are the odds that the London GO train route makes it past pilot?
DirectionNorth
Active Member
I think it's fairly high. GO was originally a pilot, service to Kitchener was operated as a pilot, I doubt they would withdraw the service, if only because they don't want media backlash.
Richard White
Senior Member
That depends on ridership and delays. With an election coming up next year, nobody wants to be responsible for wasting taxpayers money on a train very few people ride.
If it starts having significant delays nobody will use it and it will quickly start operating at a loss. I doubt the PCs would want a multi-million dollar empty train scandal cropping up before election day.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
I doubt it. There seems to have been lots of media fanfare, and closing it only a single year after it opened would probably be worse (politics wise) than an empty train.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
There is absolutely no way the current service will attract any measureable ridership, even if it runs 100% on time. The travel time from London to the GTA is insane, there are insufficient connections at the current Kitchener station for it to provide convenient access to anything other than the handful of offices within walking distance, the frequency is basically nothing and the morning departure time is so early that London Transit hasn't even started running yet.
What is it exactly that they're claiming to be piloting? Do they seriously think there's a chance that a large number of people will drag themselves out of bed at 4:30 in the morning to drive to a train station with paid parking and take a train to Kitchener which itself already takes double the entire door-to-door driving time and them dumps them at a station which doesn't even have a direct pedestrian path toward downtown, let alone useful connecting transit services?
The ridership we (won't) see on the present London train service has absolutely no relation to the demand which would exist for a train service which had reasonable speed and frequency, and which provides convenient ontward connections via the future Kitchener Central Station. The most pessimistic view would be that the Province is trying to "demonstrate" that there's no demand for rail west of Kitchener, in order to kill off any larger future rail projects. But personally I don't think that's the case since the provincial Conservatives don't think that far ahead when it comes to transport or land use planning.
Last edited:
kingkam
New Member
Won't make it past the pilot. Bus service can replace it easily.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
They would have done a bus service first if they really wanted a bus service. Like Richard White said, they're usually not that far ahead when it comes to planning.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
I have to agree with @DirectionNorth, if they were using any kind of transportation planning logic they would have already started with a bus from day one. Clearly the point of this train is not to carry passengers, it's to create a headline about the Conservative government expanding the GO Train to new electoral ridings, while spending as little money as possible. They're fine with flushing the entire operating cost down the toilet because it's a relatively low price for votes in southwestern Ontario swing ridings. I think they're just hoping that nobody in those ridings actually tries to take the train and realizes how useless it is.