News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Why can't we have express non-stop trains on the Toronto - Montreal and Toronto - Ottawa routes every, say, 30 minutes and local trains on the same routes every 30 minutes?

Just because the train passes on a corridor does not oblige every train to stop at every station. Heck, our own GO Transit understands this.
 
Although, I would personally support a routing through Kingston, I will throw out a radical suggestion: Railfans should support Dean Del Maestro's campaign.

Any routing along the shoreline will undoubtedly create demands for a stop. It'll be no different than Blue 22 being forced to put in a stop at Weston. In a classic Canadian compromise, we'll end up with a high speed train that takes 3 hours probably has ten stops between Union and Ottawa. The only stops we'd probably eliminate are the obvious ones like Port Hope and Trenton.

Conversely, a northern routing would likely result in far fewer stops. We would get a metro-to-metro service with the odd stop such as in Peterborough.

Okay, personally I'd rather have the 3 hr ten stop train ride....but I am throwing it out there for discussion. Would the northern route be faster because there would be less demands for intermediate stops?

This problem with too many stops could easily by solved by building spurs or by quadrupling track around stations. The Acela Express/Local Service in the US and countless other systems do this today. The infrastructure can have express service between Canada's main metropolitan centres while still having the fringe benefit of improving local service.

A Peterborough routing would never reach fruition due the comparative cost of building a true high speed rail line through the canadian shield, despite being physically shorter than the lakeshore route.
 
Quadruple tracking would add significant cost to the system since it adds 50% more space (at least - including safety zone), widens all road crossings to 4 lanes (there can be no level crossings for highspeed), etc.
 
Why can't we have express non-stop trains on the Toronto - Montreal and Toronto - Ottawa routes every, say, 30 minutes and local trains on the same routes every 30 minutes?
I'm sure that's exactly what they would do. And what I've seen on other high-speed lines.
 
Quadruple tracking would add significant cost to the system since it adds 50% more space (at least - including safety zone), widens all road crossings to 4 lanes (there can be no level crossings for highspeed), etc.
Quadruple tracking at stations, not the whole line.
 
Quadruple tracking at stations, not the whole line.

The French TGV uses this system. Trains not stopping at a station stay on the inside tracks and stopping trains switch to outside tracks. What really surprised me is the express trains don't seem to slow down at all, they just whip through at 300 km/h.
 
Toronto High Speed Rail Public Symposium Saturday April 25, 2009

Just wanted to let people know that there are still 65 seats left for the High Speed Rail Canada Public Symposium in Toronto this Saturday April 25th 2009 from 12:00pm to 4:30pm at the University of Toronto, Bahen Centre for Information Technology, 40 St. George Street, Room 1130

High Speed Rail Canada, a national citizen's advocacy group dedicated to the education on, and the implementation of, high speed trains in Canada, has announced the line-up of guest speakers for their 2nd in a series of Canada wide public symposiums on high speed rail.

The confirmed speakers at the symposium include; Key note speaker - Greg Gormick - Railway Age Contributing Editor, Honourable MP Dean Del Mastro - Peterborough - Chair of the All Party Rail Caucus, Ashley Langford - Alstom Transportation and Mario Peloquin from Siemens Canada.

Preregistration is mandatory to attend the April 25th Toronto symposium. The cost to attend is only $10.00. Seating is limited to 160 in the auditorium. To register for the symposium go to the High Speed Rail Canada website at http://highspeedrail.ca

Call me if you have any questions, 519-654-0089;)
 
The French TGV uses this system. Trains not stopping at a station stay on the inside tracks and stopping trains switch to outside tracks. What really surprised me is the express trains don't seem to slow down at all, they just whip through at 300 km/h.

The Shinkensen in Japan does that too.
 
The Walrus has an article in it's latest issue on HSR in Canada.

...Since the Turbo’s demise, a parade of proposals to restore high-speed passenger rail to Canada have come forward. The restoration of rapid rail to the corridor between Quebec City and Windsor has been studied (or had a study initiated) at least sixteen times since 1973, most recently with a $3-million review launched in February of 2009, as part of a rapprochement between Quebec premier Jean Charest and Ontario’s Dalton McGuinty.

“What’s the point of another study?†asks Paul Langan. “It was viable in the 1980s. It was viable in 1995. Like all the previous studies, this one will come back and say, ‘Yes, we have the population to support it. Yes, people will ride it. Yes, it will pay for itself.’â€

Langan, who lives just off Highway 401 in Cambridge, Ontario, and leads a citizens group called High Speed Rail Canada, says a Quebec City–Windsor line would pay for itself in three ways: First, even modest ridership projections indicate that passenger fares will cover operating costs, with enough left over to recoup the cost of building the railway within a few decades. Second, because the rail line would reduce congestion on the 401 and at airports, it would save millions of hours of passenger downtime, as well as sparing taxpayers the expense of further expanding highway and air infrastructure. And third, because high-speed trains use about one-third the energy of flying — and one-fifth that of driving — such a line would dramatically slash carbon use, just when caps and taxes designed to reduce carbon consumption start to take effect...

Its mostly a fluff piece, though the history on the Turbo train is somewhat nifty. I was more than a bit dismayed to see the article referring to a transcanadian HSR, running from Halifax to Vancouver in "less than 24 hours." If there were ever an utter waste of untold dozens of billions of dollars, that would be it.

I also think this is the first time a Walrus article has been posted here.
 
Ottawa Halts Vancouver Train


As if ignoring high-speed and discouraging US rail investment were not enough, the Harper governmentt now blocks even slow-speed rail. Third of four.
By Monte Paulsen
Published: May 29, 2009

TheTyee.ca

Joe Zaccaria is a regular on the Amtrak to Seattle.

"I have not driven to Seattle or Portland for the past three years," he said. "And I go there extensively. I'm in Seattle at least twice a month, if not four times a month."

But Zaccaria doesn't board the train in Vancouver.

"Service from Vancouver is a nightmare," he said. "It seems like half the time, no trains even show up. You pay for a train ticket, then get put on a bus."

So Zaccaria, a security consultant who lives in the Fraser Valley, drives across the border to Bellingham, Washington, and boards a southbound train at 8:35 a.m. He can meet with clients all day in Seattle, have dinner, and be back in Bellingham by 9:05 p.m.
Off the Rails

On the morning of December 10, 1968, a shiny new locomotive left Toronto's Union Station, pulling a gleaming train packed to its "power dome" with journalists. Just four short years earlier, Japan had rolled out the world's first 200-kilometre-per-hour bullet train, and now scores of reporters were aboard to witness North America's technological response: the TurboTrain, designed by Sikorsky Aircraft, built by Montreal Locomotive Works, and proudly operated by Canadian National. An hour later, the TurboTrain slammed into a truck. The hapless meat man survived. Canada's efforts to develop modern passenger rail service did not. Four decades later, we remain the sole G8 nation without high-speed rail. -- From "Off the Rails: How Canada fell from leader to laggard in high-speed rail, and why that needs to change" by Monte Paulson in the June issue of The Walrus.

That's not an option when traveling from Vancouver, which is served by only one train per day. When it runs at all, Amtrak's lone Vancouver-to-Seattle train departs at 5:45 p.m. -- a schedule that eliminates the prospect of a day trip.

Amtrak has fought for years to bring that second train -- which departs in the morning -- to Vancouver. It almost happened last fall, after the province of British Columbia built a new rail siding in Delta. But then the Government of Canada stepped forward, and literally prevented Amtrak from crossing the border.

B.C. ponies up money for track

As The Tyee reported Wednesday, Washington State has spent 16 years -- and hundreds of millions of dollars -- gradually improving passenger rail service along the corridor between Eugene, Oregon, and Vancouver, British Columbia. And as reported yesterday, the government of British Columbia was largely unsupportive through most of those years.

But in March of 2007, the B.C. Liberal government agreed to split the cost of the minimum track upgrade required to bring a second slow-speed Amtrak train to Vancouver.

"This project will boost tourism dollars, reduce traffic congestion, and ease vehicle emissions on our major transportation corridors and at our border crossings," Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon said in a 2007 press release announcing the agreement.

The province put up $4.5 million toward the construction of a new rail siding near Colebrook Road in Delta, with Amtrak and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway sharing the balance of the cost. The siding is basically a three-kilometer-long passing track that will allow one train to stand aside so another can pass. With the siding in place, Amtrak planned to continue to extend to Vancouver the additional Cascades service already running to Bellingham.

"The siding was completed last year and the second Seattle-to-Vancouver train was supposed to start running in August 2008," explained Vicki Sheehan, a spokesperson for the Washington State Department of Transportation.

"Then, at the last second, concerns were raised by the Canadian Border Services Agency," she said. "That’s what’s holding up the second train."

'Pennywise and pound foolish'

The Canadian Border Services Agency demanded that Amtrak reimburse the agency for the cost of providing another shift of customs inspectors in Vancouver.

The border agency cited its cost as $1,500 a day, or more than a half million dollars a year. The CBSA refused The Tyee's request for an interview on this subject.

But Ujjal Dosanjh had plenty to say about the agency's demand. The former premier and current MP for Vancouver-South is lobbying the Harper cabinet to waive the fees.

"The government is being pennywise and pound foolish," Dosanjh told The Tyee.

"Tourists spend money. This one train would bring an estimated $33 million a year worth of spending to Vancouver. And that does not include the long-term advantages of making it easier for Canadian business people to travel to Seattle and Portland," he explained.

"I understand that rules may have been made years ago, and that we were going to charge recovery fees -- which is what government is going now-a-days, trying to recover costs from the institution being served," Dosanjh continued. "But to let a half-million dollar levy deprive British Columbia of $33 million in spending? I think in this particular case it just doesn't make sense. It's asinine."

Dosanjh, a Liberal, blamed B.C.'s Conservative MPs for ignoring the problem. "No one from British Columbia is telling Peter van Loan to get his bureaucrats to back off," he said. "The Government is asleep at the switch."

"I would urge Premier Campbell to actually not only pay attention to this, but also prod the federal government to pay attention to this on behalf of British Columbia," he added. "The Obama administration is prepared to spend billions of dollars, and we should take advantage of that."

Part of a larger pattern?

Dosanjh spoke of the border agency interference as if it were a simple snafu, a mistake to be remedied quickly.

But railway advocates view the incident as merely the latest example of the Government of Canada's longstanding pattern of undermining passenger rail travel. Rail historian Christopher Greenlaw points to Canada's "insincere flirtation" with high-speed rail as a prime example.

Canada's habit of purporting to support passenger rail improvements while quietly stalling them is also the subject of a report in the June edition of The Walrus, entitled, "Off the Rails: How Canada fell from leader to laggard in high-speed rail, and why that needs to change."

The restoration of rapid passenger rail service to the corridor between Quebec City and Windsor, for example, has been the subject of sixteen studies since 1973 -- seventeen, if you count the one launched in February of this year. Meanwhile Bombardier, which once built cutting-edge high-speed trains at Montreal Locomotive Works, has relocated its rail division to Europe. The iconic Canadian company now builds high-speed rail systems in every corner of the globe -- except for Canada.

Joe Volpe is the Official Opposition Transport Critic, and part of a Parliamentary committee that has recently been reconsidering the reestablishment of high-speed rail. The Liberal MP said things will be different this time.

"As you know, this thing has been studied to death," Volpe told The Tyee. However, "the economic conditions in which we find ourselves really make it much more propitious for us to consider this today."

In addition to the need for long-term stimulus investment, Volpe said political leaders are lining up behind the idea.

"Michael Ignatieff has come out very vigorously, openly, for passenger rail," he said. "The premier of Ontario and the premier of Quebec both want to do this," he added. "Even our own committee, which until about a month or so ago seemed to be rather dissident about it, is today much more enthusiastic."

'It's about the economy, stupid'

Amtrak regular Joe Zaccaria laughed when told why his Bellingham train does not roll across the border to Vancouver.

"It amazes me," he said. "We have all this know-how in North America, and yet the Third World does a better job of facilitating customs. They collect your passport at the beginning of the trip. At the end of the trip you are handed your passport with a visa stamped in it. And they do entry and exit enforcement."

Zaccaria's experiences aboard the Amtrak Cascades have been part of what lead him to help form a citizens' group called South Fraser OnTrax, which is lobbying for the creation of light rail and the restoration of streetcar service in the Fraser Valley.

"When I started riding the Cascades three years ago, it was dead during the week and really active on the weekends. Now the ridership has exploded. Sometimes I've got to book three days ahead of time to be able to get on the train," he said.

The relative easy of travel to Seattle has cut Vancouver out of his life.

"I go to Seattle far more often now," he said. "If I get to Vancouver once every six months, that's too much for me, because I just hate that commute. To go to Vancouver, I've got to get up at like four o'clock just to beat the traffic... I can make more money in Seattle, and it's a much easier commute."

Zaccaria suggested Vancouver will continue to lose business until the Government of Canada gets on board.

"I see all these business connections between Vancouver and Seattle and you've got to shake your head and wonder why we haven’t done this 20 years ago," he said.

"It's about the economy, stupid. What part of that does Ottawa not get?"

On Monday, The Fix: A new rail corridor from Vancouver to Langley could serve both Fraser Valley residents and Seattle-bound passengers for less than the cost of doing the two projects separately.
 
Obama's Billions Bypass BC

A decade of disinterest has cost Vancouver passengers the benefit of U.S. billions targeted for track improvements north of Seattle. Second of four.
By Monte Paulsen
Published: May 28, 2009

TheTyee.ca

The Washington State Department of Transportation is preparing to spend more than $700 million upgrading the century-old railway that links Portland, Seattle and Vancouver.

The funds could flow as soon as this fall, as part of President Barack Obama's $8 billion plan to stimulate the U.S. economy by pouring money into shovel-ready improvements to that nation's passenger rail lines.


But Washington State does not plan to spend a single penny of that windfall improving tracks north of Seattle. Rather, it will all be poured into the Seattle-to-Portland section.

Why? Because for more than a decade, Washington State has been dribbling its own money into rebuilding the international railway, while urging British Columbia to do the same. And for just as long, the government of B.C. has been blowing off the American overtures.

Obama throws open the throttle

As The Tyee reported yesterday, Washington State has spent the past 18 years laying plans to incrementally improve rail service from Eugene, Oregon, to Vancouver, British Columbia.

The 750-kilometer route was designated as a "high speed rail corridor" in 1992, in preparation for federal funds that were expected to flow after the election of U.S. President Bill Clinton. But Republicans took control of the U.S. Congress two years later, and choked passenger rail for the next decade and a half.

U.S. President Barack Obama revived American rail last month with the announcement of an $8 billion "down payment" on passenger rail improvements, along with $1 billion a year for the next five years and the promise of more to follow.

In order to get that $8 billion stimulus pumping through the veins of the American economy as quickly as possible, the Obama administration put relatively simple rules on how that money can be spent. Basically, it must be used for shovel-ready construction (as opposed to planning) along existing high-speed rail corridors (as opposed to new routes).

The announcement was a boon for the Washington State Department of Transportation, which had spent the past decade not only planning passenger rail projects, but also shepherding them through slow-moving environmental review processes.

"We've got several projects we can put forward to go after that money," State Rail and Marine Office spokesperson Vicki Sheehan told The Tyee.

Sheehan said Washington State would be requesting "more than $700 million" worth of rail stimulus money.

"We've still got another project or two we're trying to get on the list," she added. "This is more than the U.S. has ever previously invested in passenger rail."

B.C. 'contributed little or no funds'

About one-quarter of the Seattle-to-Vancouver line is located in British Columbia. Most of that right-of-way is more than a century old. As a result, even 21st century trains must slow to 19th century speeds of 10 miles per hour when crossing the antique Fraser River Swing Bridge, and 15 miles per hour while snaking through White Rock.

In 2006, the Washington State Department of Transportation published a long-range plan for Amtrak Cascades inter-city passenger rail that included a detailed list of improvements British Columbia would need to undertake in order to cut the travel time to Seattle from the excruciating four hours it takes today to a more respectable speed of two-and-a-half hours -- which is about what it takes to drive.

The list suggested by Washington State included several new sidings in Burnaby and Delta, higher-speed tracks in White Rock, a new traffic control system and one big-ticket item: a new rail bridge across the Fraser River. Altogether, Washington figured these improvements would cost about a billion dollars -- with the new bridge eating up more than half of that total.

The 2006 report noted that Washington and Oregon had already committed to more than $800 million dollars worth of such expenditures, while British Columbia had spent nothing.

"Without implementation of these projects, the build-out of the passenger rail program will not be achieved," the 2006 plan stated.

"The lack of detailed plans for the segments outside of Washington could result in the inability to continue Amtrak Cascades program development in Washington," the plan warned.

An unofficial paper co-authored by three top project managers within the Washington State rail office was more blunt.

"...the Province of British Columbia [has] contributed little or no funds toward the current service," stated the 2007 paper, entitled, "Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor -- Building Blocks Into the Future."

By 2008, when the state transportation department released a follow-up planning document, all mention of British Columbia's participation has been erased from the plan. It was as if Washington State had simply given up on the Vancouver run.

'Funding is probably a key element'

Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon refused The Tyee's request to be interviewed for this article.

The B.C. Transportation Plan includes no mention of the Cascades project or the required track improvements. Likewise, B.C.'s "major projects inventory," a list of foreseen provincial expenditures, has since 2001 carried forward only a vague note earmarking $20 million for unspecified Amtrak rail improvements.

Washington State rail office spokesperson Vicki Sheehan would not comment on why Washington was investing nothing in the northern route, except to politely direct The Tyee's attention to these reports.

"We've faced considerable difficulty in getting even a second train rolling to B.C.," Sheehan said.

She did note that as prior investments have improved service on the southern route, Vancouver has fallen from the third most popular destination on the Cascades line (behind Seattle and Portland) to fifth place (behind Eugene). She said that about 668,000 passengers stepped on or off the train in Seattle last year, and about 660,000 in Portland. Only 115,000 did so in Vancouver.

Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Warren Flatau was more direct.

"I don't think Washington State is going to seek funding for that [Vancouver route] unless they know that there is a strong partner on the other side of the border," Flateau said.

The Tyee asked Flateau, who works in the U.S. Department of Transportation's offices in Washington D.C., what American officials would need to see in order change their minds about Canada in general and British Columbia in particular.

"What we would expect to hear from Canadian governments at the federal and provincial level -- as well as at the local and regional levels, for that matter -- would be explicit statements of support for developing some type of rail connection," Flateau said.

What form might such statements take?

"Funding is probably a key element," he replied. "An expressed willingness that the government, presumably at the federal level, is prepared to commit resources to make it happen."
 
This country has a weird love-hate relationship with railways, doesn't it?
 
This country has a weird love-hate relationship with railways, doesn't it?

I would be inclined to substitute the word 'ridiculous' for 'weird'. The additional use of a controversial adverb is optional, but encouraged...
 
In this case, I don't know why the province or the city of Vancouver would not offer to pay the half a million dollar bill. It's quite easy to blame the feds but they have to think of the national impact of their policies. An exemption in BC might mean that Porter would seek an exemption on the Island. After all they bring in tourists too. In this case, it would seem a lot of the torturous history of the project has more to do with BC than the feds.
 

Back
Top