Hey guys, hoping to get some insight from some fellow transit enthusiasts. I've been working with a group called High Speed Rail Canada which is pushing the Calgary-Edmonton and Quebec City-Windsor corridors as the first candidates for high speed rail. It got me thinking, why don't we start looking at building a national high speed rail line running from Vancouver to Halifax? When I talked about this with someone in the group, he said that it isn't possible because of high costs. I'm just wondering if this is something worth considering? I've heard Alberta and Saskatchewan may be building a line to connect both provinces together. If this is so, shouldn't we have it link up with the line in Ontario? This would be great in terms of really allowing for labor mobility and would also provide an economic 'push' for some communities. We are already behind many developing and developing nations with high speed rail and we should at least start doing studies on stuff like this. What do you guys think?

sorry guys, wrong section!

High speed rail to cross a land mass the size of Europe with 5% the population? Even a Vancouver-Seattle-Portland link is barely feasible with how much things cost these days.

If it costs $400 round trip to take a high speed train from Vancouver to Calgary it would be about $100 cheaper than taking a plane and would probably be just as fast if you counter in the fact that it takes up to 4 hours to get from downtown Vancouver to downtown Calgary. Add an extra hour to get from Calgary to Edmonton and you're golden.

If rail stole half of the airlines marketshare, (currently Air Canada and West Jet is each running 14 and 9 daily return flights to/from Calgary and Edmonton respectively, in addition to West Jet's 2 flights to/from Abby and Calgary and 2 flights to/from Abby and Edmonton) that's 2700 passengers a weekday and maybe 2000 passengers a weekend, that's 910,000 passengers a year for a total revenue of $180m a year, and that's not considerring business and first class seats. $136m a year is not enough for a private company to come in and build this thing for billions of dollars though... it would have to be heavily subsidized by the government probably. Add to the fact that building anything through our mountainous terrain is terribly painful and expensive.

The Edmonton-Calgary corridor probably makes more sense as it'll probably attract more passengers @ $150+ round trip each with a quarter as much rail to build on much easier flat terrain. The Hwy 2 right of way is huge, you could build a few more highways in the median between the northbound and southbound lanes.

Canada Considers Québec-Windsor HSR Corridor, Again (http://thetransportpolitic.com/2009/02/25/canada-considers-quebec-windsor-hsr-corridor-again/)
High-speed line running through Toronto and Montréal getting another think-over

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said yesterday that Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper is frowning on the idea of a high-speed rail line between Québec City and Windsor, via Montréal and Toronto, reports the Canadian Press. Mr. McGuinty, along with his centrist Liberal Party ally Québec Premier Jean Charest, have been strong supporters of the line, which would do quite a bit to connect the biggest cities in the two provinces. Mr. Harper’s conservative party has been notoriously uninterested in the project over the past twenty years of proposals, though recently the conservatives made a few moves that indicated they were interested in supporting the line.

Conservatives have agreed to spend $3 million to study the 1,200 km corridor once again. It will be considered by Wilbur Smith, an engineering consulting firm; Deutsche Bahn, the German rail operator; and a few other groups. According to the Toronto Star, the corridor has been studied at least 16 times since 1973. Ontario’s NDP Party leader Howard Hampton, on the left of Canada’s political spectrum, criticised the government’s reluctance to get moving:
“They’re going to study it again? You don’t need to study it again. The biggest issue is purchasing all of the land and purchasing some of the rail bed that belongs to CN or CP that you need to make this run… Everybody wants to study it because they think it will give them a good headline. We’re long past the study stage. Where’s the money to start doing it?”

The project, which I ranked as relatively worthwhile in the transport politic’s study of high-speed corridors, would cost upwards of $30 billion if built at international high-speed standards, using electric propulsion and 200 mph trainsets. It would require a massive federal government intervention that doesn’t seem to be forthcoming from the ruling conservatives, but it would reduce the travel time between Canada’s two biggest metropolises from 4h today to 2h18. Air traffic between the cities likely would, based on international experience, be almost entirely replaced by train travel.

The Québec-Windsor line has become Canada’s top rail priority over the past few years after Québec province dropped its efforts for a fast line between Montréal and New York City. Long-time Montréal mayor Jean Drapeau dreamed of implementing such a corridor and saw it as the third step in realizing his city’s dominance over rival Toronto, after the successful Expo ‘67 and less praised (and very expensive) ‘76 Olympics there. Those dreams have slowly faded as Montréal’s position compared to Toronto has diminished since the 1970s as a result of anglophone business moving to the latter city because of fears of a French Québeçois secession.

So it isn't only at the municipal level that they use studies to keep from ACTUALLY starting a project!

Canada's centre of power is beginning to shift from central to western Canada which is something that Ignatieff talked about as well. If Central Canada wants to re-orient itself it needs to start working more collectively as a larger region. I think Montreal and Toronto are beginning to realize this and high speed rail will be vital to make that happen. It will also be able to change communities like Windsor which is getting battered by the decline in the auto industry. If Harper put the funding in to get this project started right away he might even see more support in Central Canada :)

If it costs $400 round trip to take a high speed train from Vancouver to Calgary it would be about $100 cheaper than taking a plane and would probably be just as fast if you counter in the fact that it takes up to 4 hours to get from downtown Vancouver to downtown Calgary. Add an extra hour to get from Calgary to Edmonton and you're golden.

If rail stole half of the airlines marketshare, (currently Air Canada and West Jet is each running 14 and 9 daily return flights to/from Calgary and Edmonton respectively, in addition to West Jet's 2 flights to/from Abby and Calgary and 2 flights to/from Abby and Edmonton) that's 2700 passengers a weekday and maybe 2000 passengers a weekend, that's 910,000 passengers a year for a total revenue of $180m a year, and that's not considerring business and first class seats. $136m a year is not enough for a private company to come in and build this thing for billions of dollars though... it would have to be heavily subsidized by the government probably. Add to the fact that building anything through our mountainous terrain is terribly painful and expensive.

The Edmonton-Calgary corridor probably makes more sense as it'll probably attract more passengers @ $150+ round trip each with a quarter as much rail to build on much easier flat terrain. The Hwy 2 right of way is huge, you could build a few more highways in the median between the northbound and southbound lanes.

High speed rail from Calgary to Vancouver? Have you ever driven between the two cities? There is this little range of mountains called the Rockies in the way. Building high speed rail between those two centres would probably cost 10s of billions of dollars and be one of the most ambitious railway engineering projects every undertaken in the world. With about 7 milion people living between the two Provinces, you'd have to increase the population by tenfold to even begin to try and make an economic argument for this and even then, all that population would have to live in close proximity to the railway line.

I generally think High Speed is a waste of money. Getting from Mon to Tor is already fast annd high speed does NOTHING for most of the travelling public or emissions.
Those billions would be far better used on urban transit where people really travel everyday and where most emissions are produced.
If the rail line doe go thru it should have have a few major stops or it just becomes an expensive commuter line. Wind/Lon/Tor/Mon/QC and that's it. Sorry Ottawa but you are too far off the beaten track.

It is more essential to get some form of express rail between Cal/Edm. Its a busy corridor and its a disgrace that you can't get to Canada's fourth largest city by train.

rather poor the money into the airline industry

Imagine if the US didn't spend a trillion dollars on the war and we didn't throw 1.5 billion at the DTES, and 4-5 billion at the auto workers... the continent could be buying up HSR lines like candy.

I generally think High Speed is a waste of money. Getting from Mon to Tor is already fast annd high speed does NOTHING for most of the travelling public or emissions.
Those billions would be far better used on urban transit where people really travel everyday and where most emissions are produced.
If the rail line doe go thru it should have have a few major stops or it just becomes an expensive commuter line. Wind/Lon/Tor/Mon/QC and that's it. Sorry Ottawa but you are too far off the beaten track.

It is more essential to get some form of express rail between Cal/Edm. Its a busy corridor and its a disgrace that you can't get to Canada's fourth largest city by train.

Its not just about two cities but connecting a region which represents about 50% of the canadian population and a lot more than half of its economy. Its a region that could be one of the leading places in the entire world in terms of business and commerce and industry and science and technology, but, is losing ground to rapidly developing competitors. I wrote about this in another thread:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=33334608&postcount=10

HSR would fully integrate the region and it should be much faster and more economically efficient. And, most smaller cities dont have regular flights.

You wouldnt expect to go from Toronto to Waterloo on a plane.

Imagine if the US didn't spend a trillion dollars on the war and we didn't throw 1.5 billion at the DTES, and 4-5 billion at the auto workers... the continent could be buying up HSR lines like candy.
These are incredibly immature, unintelligent and just plain stupid comments, what are you, like 12?

well , even though I served with the Canadain Armed Forces and support the war , I too have to think what if...

Imagine what we could have done with the money we are sending to Afganistan.

Vancouver to Seattle (and Portland) is definitely feasible.

There is a great chart showing cost, distance, population, etc. of new HSR lines at:
http://www.infrastructurist.com/2009/04/06/chart-comparing-new-hs-projects-around-the-world/#more-1800

For example, the Lyon-Torino line is costing $9.4 billion, is a similar distance, and will serve cities of similar populations. A Vancouver-Seattle line might even be less expensive as Lyon-Torino line includes a 32 mile tunnel under the Alps.

It is time to start planning now so it can be completed by 2020 or 2030. Unfortunately HSR is not even on the radar of the Province or Metro Vancouver. We are so far behind here

Vancouver's mayor is clearly interested in high speed rail to Seattle and Portland. I wonder what route it would take. If it's the Amtrak route, then there is a lot that could be done here in BC to let the current trains go faster. Overpasses, bridges, etc.

yes the new west crossing needs to be upgraded - there was plans or toalk of the line ending in surrey near scott road - build the amtrak station out there to avoid the river crossing and vancouver side

I see that from a cost perspective but I believe you will lose many riders with them having to go onto a second train to reach downtown. Remember that the advantage of a train is that they can reach into the downtown areas of major cities. Besides, if there were to be a WCE upgrade in the next 10 years to go to White Rock, that bridge will have to be replaced.

^^ There are on-and-off proposals to tear up the track by the waterfront in White Rock and build it parallel to the 99 corridor. Seems reasonable to me.

For example, the Lyon-Torino line is costing $9.4 billion, is a similar distance, and will serve cities of similar populations. A Vancouver-Seattle line might even be less expensive as Lyon-Torino line includes a 32 mile tunnel under the Alps.
This is not the while picture. Lyon - Torino is part of a trans-Europe corridor. Imagine Paris - Milan in 4 hours. Marseilles - Vienna in 3 hours.

Perhaps far into the future when the airline industry vastly downsizes, there could be express trains from Vancouver to San Francisco, for instance.

The airport could be a big source of passengers. In my dreams, the train might originate in downtown Vancouver and somehow use the Arbutus right-of-way to get to the airport, and then on to Seattle.

^^Yay, cheap flights out of seattle instead of YVR! Your route makes better sense, but building HSR infrastructure across northern Richmond to get to Surrey instead of using the existing WCE corridor is going to be mighty expensive. And the west-side nimbies will have none of it, even though they'll probably never use the tram that they want instead for the arbutus corridor.

They wouldn't use the WCE corridor. They'd likely take the trains through the Grandview Cut, the north side of Burnaby Lake and cross at either a new Sapperton Bar tunnel, a new bridge near the Patullo or, if possible, under the new Port Mann Bridge (I think they should build the ability to put trains across it from the start... hopefully they will have thought of this in the design)

Europe is far difference than the PNW. They have higher centrations of people without the endless sprawl of Van/SeaTac/Port, they have a populace that view rail as a norm and not novelty, there is no international border, and have the same monetary unit.

^^Yay, cheap flights out of seattle instead of YVR! Your route makes better sense, but building HSR infrastructure across northern Richmond to get to Surrey instead of using the existing WCE corridor is going to be mighty expensive. And the west-side nimbies will have none of it, even though they'll probably never use the tram that they want instead for the arbutus corridor.

Yeah, it's unlikely. But I think the nimby folks along Arbutus might actually prefer a HSR there because it (a) would have no stops or stations and (b) would clearly have to use underpasses at all major intersections. Connecting Waterfront with YVR, then on to Abbotsford airport and then Seattle, SeaTac, and on to Portland etc, might be quite interesting.

Fast trains might stand a better chance here if they're seen as a supplement or alternative to the airplane and not the car.

These are incredibly immature, unintelligent and just plain stupid comments, what are you, like 12?

Why can't he voice his opinion without this personal attack. I am also very much against spending bucket loads of money on a senseless war - the only winners are the arms manufacturers. I did not know there were still supporters of this incredible waste of human life! This money could have been spent much better - and for the record I am not 12 either.

I don't know why anyone would want to have HSR between Vancity & YVR Airport. The Canada Line does just fine.

I don't know why anyone would want to have HSR between Vancity & YVR Airport.

Who said that?


As far as I know they want it run between dt Vancouver and dt Seattle.

Who said that?


As far as I know they want it run between dt Vancouver and dt Seattle.

I was thinking that HSR could run between downtown Vancouver and downtown Seattle (because one of the main attractions of rail is that is connects city centres), but also stop at YVR to pick up more Seattle-bound passengers. It would not take passengers from Vancouver to YVR, as the Canada Line does that, though perhaps Seattle to SEATAC might work. Just a thought... some HSR in Europe do connect airports, and that is awesome.

I was thinking that HSR could run between downtown Vancouver and downtown Seattle (because one of the main attractions of rail is that is connects city centres), but also stop at YVR to pick up more Seattle-bound passengers. It would not take passengers from Vancouver to YVR, as the Canada Line does that, though perhaps Seattle to SEATAC might work. Just a thought... some HSR in Europe do connect airports, and that is awesome.


The problem is what route would the HSR go? Vancouver doesn't have the best surface-rail network, meaning a lot of that would be new and would require quite a bit of money.

The problem is what route would the HSR go? Vancouver doesn't have the best surface-rail network, meaning a lot of that would be new and would require quite a bit of money.

I was thinking it could use the Arbutus right of way, without stations and trenching under the main intersections. The nimby factor would still be there, although without stations the line might be more acceptable than LRT. But of course, getting to Arbutus from downtown would probably require a tunnel, and as you say, a lot of new track and lotsa money.

In order to cut cost, the HSR should run between the two airports (Vancouver & Seattle) rather than between their downtowns. When the passengers arrive YVR, they can easily go to downtown by using the Canada Line.

In order to cut cost, the HSR should run between the two airports (Vancouver & Seattle) rather than between their downtowns. When the passengers arrive YVR, they can easily go to downtown by using the Canada Line.

Forcing people to transfer in this instance isn't a good idea. Besides, if it runs from Sea-Tac, Seattle's downtown is technically along the way. I can understand, however, it the line ran to Waterfront, stopping at Bridgeport, so passengers to the airport can make a transfer.

:cheers:



Cassiopeia Suite, The Cassiopeia(train)
(operating between Ueno Station in Tokyo and Sapporo Station in Hokkaido)

Photo taken by joendice
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ministerofbeards/2334808500/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2108/2334808500_9e6eb9220b_b.jpg

I think the Pacific Northwest needs to work on building one HSL between Vancouver - Seatac-Portland and Feeder Lines into the main line , like Seatac - Yakima- Spokane & Vancouver - Kamloops. Unlike mostly the US & Canada , this part of the Continent is pretty modern , and is no different. I regonise the are as a Separate Nation. The line should have a max of 170mph. Isn't the Cascades line already well enough to handle 90-140mph , except the Canadain side?

~Corey

I live in Kamloops. Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to take a train to Van, or to Seattle and points beyond. VIA Rail has trains to Vancouver, but as far as I can tell they are prohibitively expensive, slow, and intermittent.

The main issue is that, in British Columbia, we have mountains. Very, very large mountains. And on top of that, we have snow. Lots of it. Building any sort of rail line to the interior is a feat of engineering. And if it was high speed rail, it would be a monumental undertaking the world has not yet seen.

In Southern Oregon along the I5 there are some big hills. The locals seemed impressed with their size. Definitely the largest I've seen in the United States. These hills are smaller than the mountains my city occupies. That's right. Just to leave the city I live in for the south, I need to pass over mountains larger than anything along the I5.

To travel from downtown to the top of the city is nearly a 3000 foot elevation change. And this is just one of numerous valleys and mountain ranges.

Forcing people to transfer in this instance isn't a good idea. Besides, if it runs from Sea-Tac, Seattle's downtown is technically along the way. I can understand, however, it the line ran to Waterfront, stopping at Bridgeport, so passengers to the airport can make a transfer.

Yes - it could originate at Waterfront and stop at Bridgeport, then perhaps even continue to Abbotsford int'l airport before turning south to Seattle and SeaTac.

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/us-hsr-lines2.jpg

^^ That map's bound to be recurringly redevised....I can see HSR crossing the Adirondacks up to the valley as opposed to crossing the Green Mtns.

Dunno why they would leave Phoenix and Vegas out of the California network...

I think that having decent high speed rail in Canada is a good idea. In North America High Speed Rail is defined as having maximum track speeds in the 110-150 mph range which is slower than in Europe and Asia. 110-125 mph in the UK is the range of conventional Intercity rail routes. In this forum several routes have been identifies: Calgary-Edmonton, Vancouver-US Border (for Amtrak Cascades), and Quebec City-Windsor. I think that upgrading the rail line between Pacific Central Station and the US border is essential. The line should be Tipple/Quadrupple Tracked, Electricified with 25kV AC, fully grade seperated, fenced and upgraded to support speeds of 150 mph. Calgary-Edmonton should be built to the same standard. In Eastern Canada: Quebec City-Montreal-Ottawa and Durham Cty-Toronto-Windsor/Niagara Falls could be built to the same standard as there is less density on the North Shore of Lake Ontario.

^^ That map's bound to be recurringly redevised....I can see HSR crossing the Adirondacks up to the valley as opposed to crossing the Green Mtns.

You are correct and even the speeds have changed.

http://brokensidewalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/high_speed_rail_map_03.jpg

This my 1st post in canadian section. Hello everybody. :wave:

Le Québec étudie le financement d’une LGV

23/02/2011

Le ministre québécois des Transports Sam Hamad, qui doit venir prochainement en France, compte étudier l’organisation du financement d’une future ligne à grande vitesse (LGV) Québec - Montréal - Ottawa - Toronto. Il a indiqué à l’AFP qu’il allait rencontrer la ministre des Finances Christine Lagarde pour parler de « l’expérience marocaine » de construction d’une LGV financée en partie par un conséquent prêt français. Mais « cela ne signifie pas que le Québec demandera de l’argent à la France », a ajouté le porte-parole de Sam Hamad. Le projet est un serpent de mer depuis plus de vingt ans.
http://www.ville-rail-transports.com/content/15451-le-qu%C3%A9bec-%C3%A9tudie-le-financement-d%E2%80%99une-lgv

Google translate :

Quebec considering funding a HSR

23/02/2011

The Quebec Minister of Transport Hamad, who is to come soon in France, has studied the organization of financing for future high-speed line (HSL) Quebec - Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto. He told AFP he would meet Finance Minister Christine Lagarde to talk about "the Moroccan experience" of building a TGV funded in part by a loan so French. But "this does not mean that Quebec will ask for money to France, " added the spokesman Hamad. The project is a sea serpent for over twenty years.

^^ I believe you wanted to post it in the Canada Urban issue section.

^^ I believe you wanted to post it in the Canada Urban issue section.

I didn't see BC (British Colombia) before "Transportation and Infrastructure".

It seems that this thread is in wrong section :

Post 2 (man who created thread) :

sorry guys, wrong section!

Other post :

Canada Considers Québec-Windsor HSR Corridor, Again (http://thetransportpolitic.com/2009/02/25/canada-considers-quebec-windsor-hsr-corridor-again/)
High-speed line running through Toronto and Montréal getting another think-over

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said yesterday that Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper is frowning on the idea of a high-speed rail line between Québec City and Windsor, via Montréal and Toronto, reports the Canadian Press. Mr. McGuinty, along with his centrist Liberal Party ally Québec Premier Jean Charest, have been strong supporters of the line, which would do quite a bit to connect the biggest cities in the two provinces. Mr. Harper’s conservative party has been notoriously uninterested in the project over the past twenty years of proposals, though recently the conservatives made a few moves that indicated they were interested in supporting the line.

Conservatives have agreed to spend $3 million to study the 1,200 km corridor once again. It will be considered by Wilbur Smith, an engineering consulting firm; Deutsche Bahn, the German rail operator; and a few other groups. According to the Toronto Star, the corridor has been studied at least 16 times since 1973. Ontario’s NDP Party leader Howard Hampton, on the left of Canada’s political spectrum, criticised the government’s reluctance to get moving:
“They’re going to study it again? You don’t need to study it again. The biggest issue is purchasing all of the land and purchasing some of the rail bed that belongs to CN or CP that you need to make this run… Everybody wants to study it because they think it will give them a good headline. We’re long past the study stage. Where’s the money to start doing it?”

The project, which I ranked as relatively worthwhile in the transport politic’s study of high-speed corridors, would cost upwards of $30 billion if built at international high-speed standards, using electric propulsion and 200 mph trainsets. It would require a massive federal government intervention that doesn’t seem to be forthcoming from the ruling conservatives, but it would reduce the travel time between Canada’s two biggest metropolises from 4h today to 2h18. Air traffic between the cities likely would, based on international experience, be almost entirely replaced by train travel.

The Québec-Windsor line has become Canada’s top rail priority over the past few years after Québec province dropped its efforts for a fast line between Montréal and New York City. Long-time Montréal mayor Jean Drapeau dreamed of implementing such a corridor and saw it as the third step in realizing his city’s dominance over rival Toronto, after the successful Expo ‘67 and less praised (and very expensive) ‘76 Olympics there. Those dreams have slowly faded as Montréal’s position compared to Toronto has diminished since the 1970s as a result of anglophone business moving to the latter city because of fears of a French Québeçois secession.

Quebec didn't drop the 2 corridors into the US , there still on there. I Don't see anything forming till the 2020s....New England is restoring there network and when thats completed the Quebec routes will start.

9ixpMtzAWVQ

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/231/91087067.jpg (http://img689.imageshack.us/i/91087067.jpg/)