[DonValleyRainbow]

drum118, who works closely in the industry photographing the construction sites, will deadpan that the Missing Link is not practical -- at least for many decades.

But, with a blank check from Feds very enthusaic about funding infrastructure projects ASAP -- things could change in a real huge hurry. Whether there should be one, is a separate legitimate question (deficit / taxpayer perspective).

It's a huge UrbanToronto-style "WHAT IF???"

I'm totally for the Missing Link, if it can happen. But it is a super-megaproject. HydroOne/407ETR/CN/CP/City/Provincial/Federal co-ordination super mega-project taking possibly 25 years in an incremental fashion. The Missing Link can be done incrementally -- we would all dream to achieve full passenger rail ownership of the prized Brampton section. That can be achievable before we fully take over the North Toronto subdivision -- making electrification to Kitchener much more feasible (and, consequently make much easier the HSR service Ontario so much wants to build).

It could still be done with corridor sharing, but would Missing Link become cheaper and easier for all the benefits we can get to own prized passenger rail corridors south of the 407? (Just as DonValleyRainbow said)

Surprising transit developments do happen suddenly, as seen from politics. So who knows?

The real incentive here is the Milton line. After Lakeshore, it is the most heavily used line, and it serves rapidly growing communities. Trains are full to the brim, and whenever a new train is added (after much negotiation with CP), it fills right up. There's pent up demand, and it's not going to improve much once the Hurontario LRT is built and additional residents move into condos alongside it.

The federal government has a real incentive to act here, because the freight railways are federally regulated, and it will demand some serious cash. But to steer us back to the thread topic, it is absolutely an extra incentive if VIA trains could operate along the Missing Link, and take cars off the 401.

I will also add that I think it's an opportunity for VIA to establish a new corridor along the Halton and York subs, and serve Richmond Hill Centre. If it develops any serious density.

 

[smallspy]

My office must be much smaller, I can just reach over....

April 1967 - 3:59 (Pre Delivery)
October 1968 - 3:59 (Inaugural)
Feb 1971 - 4:05 (Post First Refit)
April 73 - 4:10 (Notional Post Second Refit)
April 74 - 4:10 (Actual Post Second Refit)
Oct 76 - 4:10 (VIA)
April 77 - 4:30 (VIA)



Timetable? Bah. Nothing like an A-B-A of MLW's and a devil-may-care hogger. Or, in other times, a CN 4-8-4.

- Paul

Well, considering that most of our older timetables are still boxed up....yeah, I guess so. Thanks for the timings.

In any case, thanks for those. And for the record, according to the memo's in the bosses archives, the train arrived on time in that first 6 week period when it was running about 6 times. So yes, it did run at the same schedule as the LRCs did 25 years later.

And for the record, you've seemed to have forgotten that until the advent of the Rapido service in the early 1960s, the fastest times to Montreal were in the range of 6 hours, not 4. Well, not forgotten in the sense that you're that old but.....okay, I'll shut up now.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

And as I commented before, looking at the current table, I've never seen so many trains that were less than 5 hours - far more than when I was taking it weekly in the 1980s, or less frequently in the 1990s and early 2000s.

 

[dowlingm]

But to steer us back to the thread topic, it is absolutely an extra incentive if VIA trains could operate along the Missing Link, and take cars off the 401.

I will also add that I think it's an opportunity for VIA to establish a new corridor along the Halton and York subs, and serve Richmond Hill Centre. If it develops any serious density.

I can't imagine CN/CP going for this if they also have to have passenger traffic, particularly CN. What's their incentive to have the complications that would bring?

 

[Duck]

John Tory and Kitchener mayor Berry Vrbanovic met today to try and push for HSR between our cities.

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=806413

 

[kEiThZ]

I'll bring this up to take it out of the VIA Rail discussion. Could the TKL HSR line simply become an express GO service? How would the business case change?

I envision something like all day, 2-way till Guelph eventually. And HSR that stops at Union, Bloor, Pearson, Brampton, Guelph, Kichener, Stratford and London. With the extra stops, Kitchener-Toronto would be around an hour. Guelph-Toronto becomes less than an hour. Toronto-London ends up at around 1.5 hrs. 30 mins frequency during rush hours. Hourly frequency outside that.

To me, offering it under GO changes the business proposition completely. It changes it from the business class type HSR service to a long-distance commuter service. This avoids the mistakes made with UPE. And it might also free up VIA, while saving corridor space and moving profitable passengers to GO. I would think VIA might quit the North Main Line. And focus on the southern corridor.

And given that fares are $15.28 with Presto (or $17.20 with cash) today, it's easy to see fares around $20 from Kitchener to Union on a GO HSR and probably $30 from London to Union. GO already charges $545 for a monthly pass from Kitchener to Union. They could probably get away with a $600 pass for a service like that.

 

[rbt]

I'll bring this up to take it out of the VIA Rail discussion. Could the TKL HSR line simply become an express GO service? How would the business case change?

While it's not uncommon in Europe to have a local state owned rail corp lease tracktime to the national HSR company, it's not something we do in Canada anywhere that I can think of.

So, it'll almost certainly be a Metrolinx run service (whether GO or something else) if the province pays for it. Frankly, unless VIA relocates head-office out of Montreal, it would have really poor political optics to have them operating Ontario's HSR line too.

 

[crs1026]

I'll bring this up to take it out of the VIA Rail discussion. Could the TKL HSR line simply become an express GO service? How would the business case change?

You are asking the proverbial 64 million dollar question. Unfortunately, all that you will get from hearing the answer is frustration at how badly set up our rail passenger system is.

There is no merit to keeping VIA on this route, because VIA is a half-starved hostage of Cabinet that is never going to be given the tools or mandate to do anything bold or effective - on this route, anyways.

GO Commuter is not a good solution, either. Creating a GO Regional is possible but now we have an additional agency in play.

There is definitely merit in the Province saying 'this is our problem to solve'. But I doubt VIA will be permitted to extricate itself, because the optics of that are poor, even if today's VIA service is badly in need of improvement.

The ideal solution would be a US 403b style arrangement where Ontario funds and VIA operates. That will never happen, because it would create a success for VIA. Ottawa will never allow that. VIA will be starved to death eventually.

- Paul

 

[rbt]

GO Commuter is not a good solution, either. Creating a GO Regional is possible but now we have an additional agency in play.

From the moment I heard of Ontario funded HSR proposal I wanted the service to be called GO Fast. I still like that name.

Also, I'd like to rebrand UPX as GO Fly.

 

[mdrejhon]

High(er) speed GO Trains as a possible future consideration are hinted in Table 30 (page 147 PDF, page 131 labelled) of the new GO RER Business Case

Existing line speeds are assumed with a top speed for the technology of 160 kilometres per hour maximum, achievable on all routes subject to alignment and other constraints. Future options for consideration include evaluation of the case for 200 kilometres per hour or faster running on Niagara, Kitchener and Barrie routes, potentially in conjunction with HSR (which may be faster than 200 kilometres per hour).

 

[ssiguy2]

At 1.5 hours one way for London to Toronto, that kind of time savings wouldn't be worth the money spent. If the city ever gets back it's London Express then it can do that time without any expenditure.

I remember taking the London Express in the 80s and it was about 1 hour & 40 minutes.

 

[kEiThZ]

@ssiguy2

I think there's a weee bit more traffic today than the 80s. The HSR would get a rider from London to Pearson in 1 hr and to Union in 1.5 hrs. I'd say that's worthwhile.

 

[mdrejhon]

At 1.5 hours one way for London to Toronto, that kind of time savings wouldn't be worth the money spent. If the city ever gets back it's London Express then it can do that time without any expenditure.
I remember taking the London Express in the 80s and it was about 1 hour & 40 minutes.

I suspect the higher speed GO would initially be Kitchener only, with a faster HSR to also include London. The use of 200kph or 240kph GO RER semi-expresses might actually be more cost effective interim step before true HSR.

I'd imagine this could be part of GO RER Phase II, assuming the Brampton Question (...CN...) is solved.

 

[MisterF]

@ssiguy2

I think there's a weee bit more traffic today than the 80s. The HSR would get a rider from London to Pearson in 1 hr and to Union in 1.5 hrs. I'd say that's worthwhile.

1 hour 11 minutes from London to Union Station according to the pre-feasibility study. So London to Pearson would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of 50 minutes. Of course those numbers could change with the EA process, but they're the most official numbers we have so far.

 

[mdrejhon]

1 hour 11 minutes from London to Union Station according to the pre-feasibility study. So London to Pearson would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of 50 minutes. Of course those numbers could change with the EA process, but they're the most official numbers we have so far.

I am curious what they intend as the Pearson connection.
It would be 50 minutes only to the Pearson station which likely won't be on Peaeson grounds.

I don't see a rail corridor bypass....

My favourite corridor-preserving connection would be a LINK upgrade to also reach a nearby station (Malton or the infill Woodbine/Pearson RER station) but could also interchange with UPX at an infill Woodbine RER station. Or a speedier replacement LINK peoplemover on the UPX spur replaces UPX, and the HSR/RER options only go to Woodbine/Pearson RER. The huge pro of a LINK upgrade is direct link to all terminals, unlike UPX. And LINK runs every 4 minutes or 8 minutes, which fits reasonably well with some of the higher-frequency RER options (5-8min). There is a scenario of 15min Bramalea and 15min UPX so that translates to 7.5 minutes reaching the UPX spur, so a little jiggle around, you might be able to run the people overs in sync with the timetable of non-delayed trains. Given the probably 20 year timeline of HSR, this is a comfortable lifetime for the current UPX station before modifications needed to connect LINK ROW to the UPX ROW, in such a theoretical scenario.

Then this terminates direct UPX service but activates a multi-terminal connection for all commuters (RER, VIA, HSR), could eliminate crossing conflicts without an expensive grade separation -- Possibly paying for the cost of the Woobine RER station alone just by avoiding that --

If UPX spur rail-to-rail grade separation at shallow grade is needed anyway eventually (to reduce crossing conflict bottleneck), it may become better use of money building GO/RER/VIA/HSR Pearson infill station at Woodbine for all rail services and upgrading LINK. LINK could terminate south of mainline tracks, with a much cheaper pedestrian underpass with escalators.

And reduces the Wesron double-back effect for Western visitors to Pearson while speeding up the Pearson for most despite mandatory LINK transfer that was already semi-mandatory for some anyway. Any train passing by would stop at GO Pearson, no matter what train. GO RER scenario in that recently released 200 page document had 7.5 minutes passing spur (UPX and RER combined)... So future 7.5 minute service + transfer to LINK + direct connection to all terminals on LINK. Unless Malton is used (renamed to GO Pearson Station, perhaps...) for the LINK connection to HSR, which may slow the trip for people travelling from downtown but be a cheaper scenario for the not-discontinuing-UPX scenario (assuming no UPX spur grade separation).