[steveintoronto]

I think it's pretty farfetched to suggest that no engineers have worked on the Via dedicated tracks proposal or, worse, to question their competence based on a hunch or some Google Maps measurements. Even if the work that's been done so far has been in house or not made public, I think that Via has some knowledge of how fast a train can go around a curve. And it's safe to say that the people working on the proposal know a lot more about that than us lay people on the internet.

I'm led to believe that there's more than one study been done. 'In depth'? Probably not, but Transport Canada as well as VIA have done at least cursory analysis. I can't provide reference at this time, but the pros and cons have to be balanced with the *availability* and most importantly, an extant RoW that is now protected by the Province and is, with the exception of only two sections that I can find owned by Bell Telecommunications, in public hands. Bell is governed by both provincial and federal utility acts that require sharing the corridor with other users.

Yeah I'm aware that the other two mainlines have gentler curves, but I was interested in the West Coast Mainline specifically. With trains going 200 km/h, it no doubt isn't as curvy as the Havelock sub, but it would be interesting to see the comparison.

In fact, parts of the WCML were as curvy as the old O&Q, but like the O&Q is touted be, (within 100 metres of the centre of the RoW) the curves were softened within the terms of the UK Railway Act (albeit the Brits are far more amenable to supporting passenger rail).

But even more important than the softening of curves, which was always the plan on the O&Q, along with grade separation rendering stretches well above 110 mph:

Implementation of Tilt Activation Speed Supervision on West Coast Mainline Agenda
Mike Hoptroff
Head of Operations Strategy
http://digitalrailway.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Mike-Hoptroff.pdf

File attached.

The challenge isn't the route and the technology to deal with it at all. The real challenge that I can garner is the *business model* and the expected growth of passengers as projected. There's a lot, as others have alluded to, yet to be made public. The reason we have to wait for answers is (and perhaps rightly so) that the InfraBank is not up and running yet, and it will take *private engineering surveys* as well as what's been done to satisfy all parties concerned before an investment is made.

The route and technology aren't a problem, a number of nations have been doing this with the Pendolinos and competition for well over a decade. Early bugs are long ago figured out.

Here's the term "balise" defined and well-explained:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurobalise

 

[crs1026]

None of us know the technical details of the proposal. Maybe speed is an issue in that curvy section around Sharbot Lake and maybe trains would have to slow down to, say, 135 there instead of 177. Maybe they're proposing to straighten out some curves in areas where it's not so expensive to do it. Maybe those travel times are only for trains that don't make any intermediate stops. I just don't see it as impossible as you guys make it seem.

We aren't questioning if it's technically possible....we are questioning how VIA's pitch can combine a) projected ridership increase and revenue b) (implied) reduced travel time and c) a fairly modest capital spend. The reduced travel times (which the VIA graphic about the plan says will be about 25%) appear to demand that VIA not only match its existing speed envelope but improve on it. That implies expense, particularly on the Havelock line. Sure, we're speculating about the fine detail, but hopefully based on some informed understanding of the problem.

It's not a "bluff" to use Plan B as a negotiating price point, if that Plan B is the only available option left when you can't get Plan A. No different than using the price of a Ford when you are trying to dicker for a Chev. I agree, the dealer will already know what a Ford is selling for, and will also argue that the Chev is worth the extra money anyways. So you can't talk them down on bluster alone. But the dealer also knows that if you can't afford the Chev price, then you will be buying the Ford. There's no bluff in that.

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

So someone else must have done the hard-core engineering.

I think it's pretty farfetched to suggest that no engineers

I actually don't think it's all that far-fetched. They've spent so little of the $3 million, it makes you wonder what work was done before. Could this be like the first cut of the TKL HSR where they just wagged it right before the election?

I, too, question how much actual surveying and engineering they've done. Nevertheless, I am hopeful something comes of it. And if the proposal isn't fleshed out, hopefully, the infra bank will sort them out and get the proper studies and analysis done.

 

[Urban Sky]

I think it's pretty farfetched to suggest that no engineers have worked on the Via dedicated tracks proposal or, worse, to question their competence based on a hunch or some Google Maps measurements. Even if the work that's been done so far has been in house or not made public, I think that Via has some knowledge of how fast a train can go around a curve. And it's safe to say that the people working on the proposal know a lot more about that than us lay people on the internet. If Via is publicizing a proposal that isn't technically possible that would come out eventually. And if they're using an impossible proposal as a bluff to get more out of CN, they'd see right through it. Because CN also knows how fast a train can go around a curve.

None of us know the technical details of the proposal. Maybe speed is an issue in that curvy section around Sharbot Lake and maybe trains would have to slow down to, say, 135 there instead of 177. Maybe they're proposing to straighten out some curves in areas where it's not so expensive to do it. Maybe those travel times are only for trains that don't make any intermediate stops. I just don't see it as impossible as you guys make it seem.

Thank you! (I used to be exactly that I-can-see-something-they-don't-want-to-see critic you describe before I learnt about HFR and decided to join them...)

 

[kEiThZ]

Thank you! (I used to be exactly that I-can-see-something-they-don't-want-to-see critic you describe before I learnt about HFR and decided to join them...)

I just wish one of you insiders would give us reassurances that this thing is actually moving ahead and not DOA. ;-)

 

[MisterF]

I actually don't think it's all that far-fetched. They've spent so little of the $3 million, it makes you wonder what work was done before. Could this be like the first cut of the TKL HSR where they just wagged it right before the election?

I, too, question how much actual surveying and engineering they've done. Nevertheless, I am hopeful something comes of it. And if the proposal isn't fleshed out, hopefully, the infra bank will sort them out and get the proper studies and analysis done.

Surveying and engineering aren't really the same thing. Engineers work on feasibility studies and environmental assessments all the time before actual design work starts.

I just wish one of you insiders would give us reassurances that this thing is actually moving ahead and not DOA. ;-)

Me too! But if insiders gave us too much info they wouldn't be insiders for long.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Surveying and engineering aren't really the same thing. Engineers work on feasibility studies and environmental assessments all the time before actual design work starts.


Me too! But if insiders gave us too much info they wouldn't be insiders for long.

So I heard somewhere (I forget where) that last summer VIA had surveryers and engineers working along the Havelock sub for prep work for HFR. Would make sense if they were gonna submit it to Transport Canada (they have) for consideration.

 

[steveintoronto]

The decision isn't VIA's, so it's no use asking. D-S doesn't even know yet. The decision lies as much with Finance as it does with Transport. And even then that decision will be contingent, as always stated for HFR, on what private partners deem do-able for a PPP (or like) submission

 

[kEiThZ]

Surveying and engineering aren't really the same thing. Engineers work on feasibility studies and environmental assessments all the time before actual design work starts.

Engineer here. I know the difference. The thing is, you can't do solid analysis without some level of decent ground truth. They'd need survey data to really do a decent estimate. Doesn't have to be high fidelity. Just some basic info.

 

[nfitz]

I think it's pretty farfetched to suggest that no engineers have worked on the Via dedicated tracks proposal or, worse, to question their competence based on a hunch or some Google Maps measurements.

I don't recall suggesting that no engineers had worked on it. Particularly, as I was noting that the work must have been done before the current 5 contracts.

However, it's more than a hunch or Google Maps measurements. Just some simple back of the envelope calculations. 2.5 hours from Toronto Union station to Ottawa Station station just don't make sense. Not at 110 mph for the $2.5 billion of rail upgrades they are talking about (the rest of the $ are for rolling stock).

For comparison, look at the 1995 Quebec-Ontario report. They reported an express Ottawa-Toronto time of =2.2 hours, but that was at 125 mph. Okay, sounds comparable you say. But from just Montreal to Toronto this was to cost $5.4 billion in in 1993 $. Escalating this to 2017$ simply using the consumer price index is $8.3 billion - and probably a lot more with a construction price index.

And that was without trying to pretty much build an entirely new alignment from Peterborough to Smith Falls!

Even if the work that's been done so far has been in house or not made public, I think that Via has some knowledge of how fast a train can go around a curve.

Do they? VIA's engineering department has always been more about rolling stock than rail. To a great extend, they've relied on consultants and CN/CP. In the early days, through the 1980s, they were slowly building something that could do that stuff - but after they were decimated by the Mulroney cuts in 1989 or so, a lot of that went by the wayside.

Who at VIA has these skills now? Is there even a Director of Engineering any more - I don't know. Google tells me that there is a "Director of Capital Projects. But again they have s a mechanical/rolling stock background. I don't know ... but I'd assume they are relying on consultants. But which ones?

And it's safe to say that the people working on the proposal know a lot more about that than us lay people on the internet.

In some aspects probably. In others, not necessarily. If something doesn't pass the sniff test, then I wouldn't assume that it's fine.

If Via is publicizing a proposal that isn't technically possible that would come out eventually. And if they're using an impossible proposal as a bluff to get more out of CN, they'd see right through it. Because CN also knows how fast a train can go around a curve.

I doubt this is related to a bluff.

I just want to know what engineering is behind this. There must be a report. Presumably it's FOIable.

Maybe those travel times are only for trains that don't make any intermediate stops. I just don't see it as impossible as you guys make it seem.

I'd assume they are non-stop expresses. In fact, the Toronto-Montreal time being faster than the Toronto-Ottawa and Ottawa-Montreal times pretty much guarantees that.

And it's certainly NOT impossible to build this technically. But for only $2.5 billion. Gosh, I wouldn't be surprised if they blow $1 billion just getting from Union to Pickering Airport.

And then remember the old rail corridor was 1 track. The 1995 study called for 2 tracks. And even if they do try getting away with 1, they'll have to build some substantial sidings to pass at speed. And I can't imagine they wouldn't have to double track the approaches to Toronto. How much is that viaduct over the Don Valley going to cost?

Engineer here. I know the difference. The thing is, you can't do solid analysis without some level of decent ground truth. They'd need survey data to really do a decent estimate. Doesn't have to be high fidelity. Just some basic info.

Between the existing topography mapping of Ontario, and the original plans for the railway, there's enough info to plan a route. They wouldn't have to survey properly until they are getting ready for the design.

 

[kEiThZ]

The only thing that has me worried is what FCP did before the last election where they just went off Google Maps. Sincerely hoping that VIA has a higher fidelity on their ROM estimate.

 

[cplchanb]

On a side note, yesterday at around 8 I saw what looks like the Ocean passing over the DVP towards union. Does this train actually have a scheduled trip to Toronto or is it just a dead head>?

 

[Urban Sky]

On a side note, yesterday at around 8 I saw what looks like the Ocean passing over the DVP towards union. Does this train actually have a scheduled trip to Toronto or is it just a dead head>?

Are you sure it wasn't the Canadian? It's pretty late these days (the forest fires in BC don't help) and yesterday's arrival scheduled for 9.30am was so late that the departure was rescheduled from 10pm to 2.30am...

 

[cplchanb]

Are you sure it wasn't the Canadian? It's pretty late these days (the forest fires BC don't help) and yesterday's arrival scheduled for 9.30am was so late that the departure was rescheduled from 10pm to 2.30am...

youre prob right on that one... the last long via train that I took was the ocean so by default it popped in my mind. but then again if it was coming from the west wouldnt it be popping in from the lakeshore West?

 

[dowlingm]

youre prob right on that one... the last long via train that I took was the ocean so by default it popped in my mind. but then again if it was coming from the west wouldnt it be popping in from the lakeshore West?

Canadian comes down the Don Valley on the way into Union, and out via the Barrie line.