[Urban Sky]

@MisterFAnd more to the point, those cases will have to prove that the jump in benefits from $4 to $20 billion in capex is worthwhile. VIA's own CEO has made the specific argument that you can get 80% of the benefit (and ridership) of HSR for 20% of the cost. It'll be interesting to see who can argue against that.

Your cost comparison is incorrect. The $20 billion for HSR is for the entire 1100 km route from Windsor to Quebec City, while the $4 billion VIA Rail plan is for Montreal to Toronto only. Furthermore, that cost could be higher than necessary, since the 2010 study inflated costs with odd assumptions, like every side road having an overpass rather than just being closed. Estimates of the Montreal-Toronto section of a TGV style system vary, but VIA puts the cost at $9 billion. So a more fair comparison would be $4 billion for the VIA proposal (3h30m Toronto-Montreal) compared to $9 billion for full HSR (2h20m Toronto-Montreal). So a bit more than double the cost to make it an hour and 10 minutes faster. How much of each would be privately funded remains to be seen. If the VIA proposal gets built their plan is to gradually upgrade it to full 300 km/h HSR over time. While I fully agree that the VIA plan is much more likely to get built, the difference in cost isn't as stark as you think. And either one is worthy of support.

The relevant cost figure is $3 billion (the 4th billion is for electrification and therefore optional) and the correct pitch line used by Desjardins-Siciliano is therefore "a third of the cost [of HSR] for two-thirds of the benefit", as quoted by The Huffington Post Canada:

But the dedicated passenger corridor would cost $3 billion ($4 billion if the track is electrified) and attract an estimated 7 million passengers, “so it’s a third of the cost for two-thirds of the benefit,” Desjardins-Siciliano says.

Unfortunately, I have no travel time estimates to share at this point, but 3:30 hours for what is currently 539 km with a relatively direct alignment would translate into a rather ambitious average speed of 154 km/h (or 87% of the targeted maximum speed of 177 km/h). Note, however, that the main motivation for this project is to create the additional capacity needed to remain relevant within the tightest cost and time frame possible rather than to increase speeds or even prepare for HSR - and this is reflected by calling the project HFR instead of HSR...

 

[dowlingm]

maybe let's start with fixing the stuff that should already be working (or grade sep'd) https://twitter.com/Sean_YYZ/status/681537166208581632

 

[Bojaxs]

So a new "low cost" airline wants to setup shop in Hamilton's airport. If this new airline is going to offer low cost flights between Hamilton and Ottawa and/or low cost flights between Hamilton and Montreal. Than that's going to make HSR in Ontario/Quebec much more difficult to realise.

http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-st...ne-to-land-at-hamilton-international-airport/

I also truly believe that we should be maximizing Via's potential before we start planning HSR. Via rail can be so much more! We just need to give it more dedicated tracks, and help seperate it from frieght.

 

[ShonTron]

So a new "low cost" airline wants to setup shop in Hamilton's airport. If this new airline is going to offer low cost flights between Hamilton and Ottawa and/or low cost flights between Hamilton and Montreal. Than that's going to make HSR in Ontario/Quebec much more difficult to realise.

http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-st...ne-to-land-at-hamilton-international-airport/

I also truly believe that we should be maximizing Via's potential before we start planning HSR. Via rail can be so much more! We just need to give it more dedicated tracks, and help seperate it from frieght.

Some airlines that operated from Hamilton International Airport:
Greyhound Air (1995-1996)
WestJet (Hub 2000-2004; currently operates one daily flight to Calgary, as well as seasonal sun destinations)
CanJet (2003-2005)
Air Canada Jazz (2005-2008)

A new air start-up? Out of Hamilton? I don't think VIA has to worry about that, nor should it factor into higher-speed/high speed rail studies. Rail's main competitors are private automobiles, Greyhound, MegaBus, Porter, and to a lesser extent, WestJet and AC.

 

[Urban Sky]

So a new "low cost" airline wants to setup shop in Hamilton's airport. If this new airline is going to offer low cost flights between Hamilton and Ottawa and/or low cost flights between Hamilton and Montreal. Than that's going to make HSR in Ontario/Quebec much more difficult to realise.

http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-st...ne-to-land-at-hamilton-international-airport/

I also truly believe that we should be maximizing Via's potential before we start planning HSR. Via rail can be so much more! We just need to give it more dedicated tracks, and help seperate it from frieght.

Not sure what's your source for those routes, but the words "Ottawa" and "Montreal" are not mentioned anywhere in the article.

As for your desire for dedicated tracks and separation from freight operations, that is exactly the road VIA Rail is heading at the moment, as outlined by their CEO in an interview by RAC:

How do you achieve your vision?
"Well, you simply have to build a dedicated corridor for passenger trains in the busy and commercially viable Quebec City-Windsor corridor, starting with the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal legs. Why? Because we need to address the number-one issue: service reliability where trains leave and arrive on time 98 per cent of the time. In addition, we need to minimize the time to destination. The current shared-track environment allows neither of these two key components of reliability.

VIA Rail trains are capable of running up to 110 m.p.h. On average, they run at less than 65 m.p.h. They run on infrastructure designed for slower speed and heavier freight trains, but VIA Rail’s passengers need an infrastructure designed and operated for comfort and speed.

This hybrid or shared-use environment is no longer meeting the commercial imperatives of a modern passenger rail service. Frankly, I’m not sure it’s meeting the operating imperatives of freight railways either. We must remember that VIA Rail was created in 1977 to take over the passenger rail business from the freight railway. The time has come to consciously un-couple these two very distinct operations. This will allow both freight and passenger services to fuel the economic growth of the markets they serve at their full potential."

 

[rbt]

Not sure what's your source for those routes, but the words "Ottawa" and "Montreal" are not mentioned anywhere in the article.

As for your desire for dedicated tracks and separation from freight operations, that is exactly the road VIA Rail is heading at the moment, as outlined by their CEO in an interview by RAC:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/new-discount-airline-offers-canadian-flights-for-89-1.2726025

There are no planned flights (in the short-term) to Ottawa/Montreal from any location.

 

[Bojaxs]

Not sure what's your source for those routes, but the words "Ottawa" and "Montreal" are not mentioned anywhere in the article.

Key word in my previous post was "IF".

 

[MisterF]

The relevant cost figure is $3 billion (the 4th billion is for electrification and therefore optional) and the correct pitch line used by Desjardins-Siciliano is therefore "a third of the cost [of HSR] for two-thirds of the benefit", as quoted by The Huffington Post Canada:


Unfortunately, I have no travel time estimates to share at this point, but 3:30 hours for what is currently 539 km with a relatively direct alignment would translate into a rather ambitious average speed of 154 km/h (or 87% of the targeted maximum speed of 177 km/h). Note, however, that the main motivation for this project is to create the additional capacity needed to remain relevant within the tightest cost and time frame possible rather than to increase speeds or even prepare for HSR - and this is reflected by calling the project HFR instead of HSR...

You're right of course, the $3 billion figure is for diesel and $4 billion is for electrified. This article has some travel time estimates:

With dedicated passenger rail, the trip between Toronto and Ottawa could take between 2½ hours and 2 hours and 45 minutes, shaving as much as 1 hour and 15 minutes off the current run – and easily beating the time spent in a car.

The trip between Toronto and Montreal could run between 3½ hours and 3 hours and 45 minutes, an hour improvement from today.

I don't know if the variation is because of different service levels or the difference between diesel and electric trains. Or how much is expected to be covered by the private sector. But it seems like a bargain to take an hour or more off the trip to Montreal, vastly improve frequencies and on time performance, more than triple ridership, and make the service profitable.

 

[Admiral Beez]

While Toronto to Ottawa may be a good place to start, what about further on the corridor. Try taking the train to Quebec City, where you're forced to de-train in Montreal and wait for whenever the Quebec City and beyond train is scheduled/available.

 

[Urban Sky]

Key word in my previous post was "IF".

Which I apparently over-read. Sorry!

Not sure though if the same strategy will work on short-haul as their frequencies are really very low...

 

[gweed123]

While Toronto to Ottawa may be a good place to start, what about further on the corridor. Try taking the train to Quebec City, where you're forced to de-train in Montreal and wait for whenever the Quebec City and beyond train is scheduled/available.

I would think that the Feds would focus on Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal first. Ontario is already planning Toronto-London, so it wouldn't be outside of the realm of possibility to expect some Provincial action on Montreal-Quebec City once the Feds actually commit to something.

 

[nfitz]

While Toronto to Ottawa may be a good place to start, what about further on the corridor. Try taking the train to Quebec City, where you're forced to de-train in Montreal and wait for whenever the Quebec City and beyond train is scheduled/available.

Is there that much through traffic to Quebec City from Toronto?

There's already one through train a day from Ottawa to Quebec City.

 

[Urban Sky]

I would think that the Feds would focus on Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal first. Ontario is already planning Toronto-London, so it wouldn't be outside of the realm of possibility to expect some Provincial action on Montreal-Quebec City once the Feds actually commit to something.

I'm still not sure if even the Feds themselves know already what they are planning, but VIA Rail is committed to build themselves a dedicated HFR (High-Frequency Rail) corridor between Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto, eyeing at public and private sources of funding independently.

While Toronto to Ottawa may be a good place to start, what about further on the corridor. Try taking the train to Quebec City, where you're forced to de-train in Montreal and wait for whenever the Quebec City and beyond train is scheduled/available.

The main motivation for building a dedicated infrastructure for VIA Rail is to reduce interference from CN trains and their detrimental effect on achievable travel time, on-time performance and most importantly: frequency - therefore it's only natural to focus these efforts on the shared freight line where these concerns are the most pressing and that is beyond any doubt CN's Kingston subdivision. However, once the dedicated line opens for passenger train services between Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto, extending it towards Quebec and London-Windsor will be the next priority.

 

[gweed123]

Is there that much through traffic to Quebec City from Toronto?

There's already one through train a day from Ottawa to Quebec City.

No, but I think the advantage would be that HSR between Montreal and QC would effectively turn QC into a potential suburb of Montreal, at least for relatively affluent commuters.

 

[nfitz]

No, but I think the advantage would be that HSR between Montreal and QC would effectively turn QC into a potential suburb of Montreal, at least for relatively affluent commuters.

You don't drive between Quebec City and Montreal very often, do you ...