News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

My first step in creating this project was using a website (which may now be defunct) to find the location of historic stations. I connected the dots and searched for obvious routes between them on google earth. Then I came across the Southern Ontario Railway map and realized that they had done it already!

Under their creative commons license I filled in their missing links, removed trackage which I felt to be irrelevant or duplicate and re-aligned routes that had been developed over.

Everything north of North Bay is 100% me and the same methodology was used.

My next step is to develop a service plan and turn these random lines into a logical route, but that's a long ways away. Anything beyond that is bonus.

One thing I did come across was a shortage of data for southern Quebec, so keep at it!
 
What part of Southern Quebec? I have been working on getting information on the area just north of the Ottawa River (The Pontiac, Gatineau/Hull, etc) so if there is anything from that area you might need let me know. Same is true of the Ottawa area in general. The city archives here can be quite good for that sort of stuff.
 
Great job on the whole project. I haven't read every single comment, but may I suggest adding colour to separate the individual companies, be it historical or by current vs. defunct.
 
Great job on the whole project. I haven't read every single comment, but may I suggest adding colour to separate the individual companies, be it historical or by current vs. defunct.

I would actually suggest using colour to distinguish lines that may be more important than others in a first pass at a functional rail network.
 
I hadn't heard of that Southern Ontario project. Thanks so much for linking to it. Those maps are very impressive.

It's likely not practical in the modern era to restore rail to all of the historic lines. Even in the pre-car railway boom era, many of these routes were abandoned because they just weren't economic. Still, we could definitely do with a much more extensive rail network.

What you seem to be getting at is the need for consistent branding, as is done in Europe and other places, for different service levels. I'd suggest three levels for Ontario:
  • Regional Rail meaning high frequency rapid transit style services in major urban areas, comparable to a European RER or S-Bahn service. These would be predominantly in the GTA and perhaps the Ottawa area. They'd run at least every twenty minutes, twenty hours a day, and would make all local stops
  • Intercity Service. Sort of a hybrid between a European TER/Regio train and an intercity train. It would connect all of the major cities in Ontario and run at least every hour. Trains would be more comfortable with spacious seating and at least some on board service. This would take over destinations like Barrie from Toronto. Trains should be able to reach at least 160 km/h on all lines.
  • High Speed Rail. The English-speaking world is the only area where high speed rail isn't taking off. It's not just France and Japan anymore. Even Morocco, Turkey, and Argentina are building 300+ km/h railway lines. Canada is home to the largest rail equipment builder in the world. This is way, way overdue. It should operate on a trunk line from Quebec City to Windsor.

The key to all this is an integrated fare structure and timetabling so that passengers can connect seamlessly between different modes. When I lived in Berlin, I used to routinely catch long distance trains to ride one or two stops within the city. My city transit ticket was valid on all trains except ICE (and I may or may not have ridden those a few times too. Shh... "But I'm a confused tourist!") so I could take the next train no matter what it was.

I think a key to all of this is to reject the flawed FRA safety regulations and adopt a European model, at least on lines that are equipped with the most modern Positive Train Control systems. I'm aware that North American freight trains are much bigger than their European counterparts, but I don't think that the brute force approach of the FRA is the best way to ensure safety.

The comparison I like to use is the highway. We allow motorcycles and eighteen wheelers on the highway with amateur drivers separated by inches and no signalling systems to keep them apart. Signalized railway lines are far safer.
 
Great job on the whole project. I haven't read every single comment, but may I suggest adding colour to separate the individual companies, be it historical or by current vs. defunct.

I would actually suggest using colour to distinguish lines that may be more important than others in a first pass at a functional rail network.

There is a problem with the data that makes it very difficult to do this, as each historic line is drawn in several parcels. Some parcels are hundreds of KM's long while others are only a few metres long. The creators of the data grouped it by CN family / CP family / other (great for a historical purpose), but my next step is do what mpd is suggesting - very hard when you have to figure out which parcels should go where.

I hadn't heard of that Southern Ontario project. Thanks so much for linking to it. Those maps are very impressive.

I think a key to all of this is to reject the flawed FRA safety regulations and adopt a European model, at least on lines that are equipped with the most modern Positive Train Control systems. I'm aware that North American freight trains are much bigger than their European counterparts, but I don't think that the brute force approach of the FRA is the best way to ensure safety.

The comparison I like to use is the highway. We allow motorcycles and eighteen wheelers on the highway with amateur drivers separated by inches and no signalling systems to keep them apart. Signalized railway lines are far safer.

I really agree. I understand that the FRA has a mandate to keep us safe and you can't blame someone for doing their job, but we would be able to build a much better transit system if we could use tram trains and cheap european equipment that has been around for years.

It's difficult to compare rail safety though. Passenger trains derail rarely in both jurisdictions, but our freight trains derail all the time. Is it because our freight network is less safe or is it because we move a lot more cargo by train then they do in countries where they can ship by seas?
 
Just got back from vacation today and I saw this thread! RR, I read your blog post on this a week or two ago and I have to admit I kind of skimmed through it and missed a lot of information. Now that I've read it through, I'm amazed at the detail that's gone into this RailOntario thing. I guess it should be expected, and I'm sure that what looks like really small distances would actually be a pretty touch walk, but I'm really surprised at how much rail there is and used to be! To have a rail network like this, along with better coordination to allow for more efficient freight rail movement and an electrified system for passengers would just be awesome.

Actually, I'm getting giddy just thinking about HSR running from Quebec to Windsor/Detroit while speeding across farmland at 300 km/h, along with little EMUs branching out from big cities, connecting every town with quick service that beats using a car, running at 10-30 minute frequencies. And every morning, factories would send out a couple of railcars instead of a fleet of trucks to deliver their goods to larger cities and ports on the great lakes. Northern Ontario would undoubtedly have to be serviced by trains like VIA or ONR has right now, but at much better frequencies, and in the end providing a much faster and more comfortable service than a car would.

Of course, maybe it's just rail nostalgia, or maybe wanting to take a train from Union Station to Thunder Bay in January, with fresh snow on the tracks and a 6 or 7 hour trip. Obviously, it could also be wanting to see a High Speed train run across farm fields from Toronto to London. Then again, seeing little EMUs running all about Southern Ontario would be cool as well! Hm, I guess that there are a lot of reasons I support a huge integrated passenger rail network! :D

After what would undoubtedly be a rather large capital cost involving constructing stations and other infrastructure to service rail, electrifying the entire southern Ontario portion at least, adding track to allow for dedicated HSR, local and freight lines, and totally rebuilding or constructing track that has gone into disrepair or needs to be shifted. The government would then have to provide subsidies (right now they seem to be allergic to subsidies) but after a decade or two, the system will definitely be used enough for it to recover a fair bit of cost through fares.

This whole huge rail thing is definitely possible, even in our current car-based mindset, and I sure hope it happens soon. There are plenty of other places in Canada it could work, and where I would love to see it happen. Quebec, BC and Atlantic Canada definitely come to mind, and I guess the Federal Government would have to oversee the rail network as a whole.

Really though, this would be great. I'm sure that there would be an enormous cost, but it would be 100% worth it. Sorry for reviving what seems to be a kind of old thread but I couldn't resist sharing :rolleyes:
 
I feel like this thread should be revived from the depths of the far back pages for some more serious discussion about this idea and issues around it. If you ask me, there's plenty more areas that could and should have rail than currently. I've been playing around with the google map download, and I've come up with a few more routes from what I can see on Google, but of course it'd be hard to know exactly what demand and such are for different services, what speeds should be needed, and where exactly stops should be, especially in the small towns.

Some more services that I brainstormed would be interesting/good are as follows (more discussion-brewing material.)

-Some sort of farm freight service, coming at least weekly during the summer, to give farmers an easier job of shipping harvested food without needing trucks, and in a more cost-efficient manner, which could encourage farming as a bigger industry in southern ontario. Food would be collected over the day of travel in EMU trains with grain hoppers, fridge and freezer storage, and milk/liquids tanks, as well as regular (EMU) boxcars. It would then go to regional distribution centres, where it could be further processed, or shipped further by long-distance companies. Being a government subsidized program, it would indirectly help farmers, while giving farmers (especially more mechanized ones,) a very eco-friendly method of shipping their product. Further, there could be a train like this on Friday night/early Saturday morning to get farmers to more regional saturday farmer's markets without needing to drive. Myself, I'm kind of surprised at the lack of a lot of mechanization on Southern Ontario farmland, which is basically a quarter of a continent worth of rich soil in it's entirety. Of course the government needs other (eco-friendly,) ways of promoting better and more productive farming practices, but I don't think a service like this is really in effect, correct me if I'm wrong.

-A subsidized freight service in the north, to help Northern Ontario grow through industries like forestry, and mineral and ore extraction. Many of these communities are abundant with natural resources, but are far to remote for major exploration to be profitable to big industry. A government-subsidized freight service through the many areas that are close to rail lines could end up being a huge boost to the economy. This freight would go to centres in Sudbury, North Bay, Ottawa, Thunder Bay and Winnipeg, where they'd be turned over to long distance shipping companies. In the case where they were already being served, it allows the longer-distance shipping companies like CN or CP to move faster and operate more efficiently. On top of that, it'd bring in raw materials to Northern Ontario cities, where they could be processed. Of course, to get results like more jobs in the north or more manufacturing, it'd take more than just a subsidized freight service, but it should be a good start. Though I think, compared to Ontario Northland, the freight should remain separate from passenger rail, with the freight sections slowing the passenger rail and making it considerably less convenient. But the service could probably start as a freight+passenger hybrid.

Let the rediscussion commence!
 
Transporting goods is not something that makes society better in and of itself, and so should not be subsidized. I think we should leave food distribution to the companies that are experts in the industry. We enjoy some of the lowest food prices in the developed world, and trying to force how food is distributed could severely harm affordability.

If you don't like trucks, tax the heck out of diesel.
 
In terms of Northern communities, the real roadblock to industry and resource development is travel times. Northern Ontario is rich in all sorts of resources, including lumber, metal ores, and other minerals. The only reason they don't develop is because of how expensive it is to ship materials where they can be processed and sold. Rail is an extremely efficient way of moving materials, especially raw materials like lumber, stone, and metal or ore. If you tax the hell out of diesel to solve problems in northern communities, you won't accomplish anything, actually you'll probably hurt their economies more by increasing transportation costs. A subsidized, government run rail service for the north would make good use of already existing infrastructure, and allow northern communities to develop industry separate from their location.

Maybe the farm service isn't the best way to solve farming problems, but taxing diesel there wouldn't work either. A government run rail service for farm produce would give people a viable alternative. If the service becomes widespread enough, maybe it could accompany a heavier gas or diesel tax, but just taxing people without any alternative will only make them angry.

Idk, I'd just like this thread successfully revived. Maybe it's just a bad time, to discuss something non-Haiti, proroguing, or TC around here.
 
Transporting goods is not something that makes society better in and of itself, and so should not be subsidized. I think we should leave food distribution to the companies that are experts in the industry. We enjoy some of the lowest food prices in the developed world, and trying to force how food is distributed could severely harm affordability.

If you don't like trucks, tax the heck out of diesel.

Perhaps the answer then is to subsidize the construction of processing facilities in Northern Ontario. Sudbury, North Bay, Hudson Bay could all use an influx of job.
 

Back
Top