daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 19th, 2014, 12:45 AM   #41
saiho
Registered User
 
saiho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 多伦多/多倫多
Posts: 1,357
Likes (Received): 1289

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Super vague, it could just be faster trains.
saiho no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 19th, 2014, 07:21 PM   #42
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Just watch: If any HSR docket ever be brought beyond its study status, then it would either independently or collaboratively be federated provinces themselves that would turn out to be its driving force, not Ottawa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Toronto-Montreal ... the corridor ... few realignments would really need to be made as the corridor is typically very, very straight
Very-very, eh? Maybe so for daydreaming Canadia/ens, what with our collective amnesia (remember the Turbo débâcle, mightcha?), but NOT for most folks originating from anywhere else. As a passenger transported along that trunk route, smelling the acrid mustiness from braking for yet another bend occurs FAR TOO often. So stop trying to embarass me, wouldja :clips_the_titch_of_a_blighter_about_its_earhole: ? Besides, what regrading might be required to eliminate the endless succession of its topsy-turvy undulations .. it might be wiser to first choose the type of power driving the conventional traction motors, although by the time any such advent occur along that corridor, technolgical advances might very well have rendered this matter a non-issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Quebec city would probably require a new tunnel under Mount Royal in Montreal
Abandoning the north shore (bank) route, Quebec City services were withdrawn from the Mount Royal tunnel about ¼ century ago; plus the rotten, dire condition of the massive Quebec bridge way downstream there was recently reported as being unacceptably dangerous. North shore, south shore ... the QC spur will -uhm- (quote)probably require(/quote) its status as some unmitigatedly dormant notion being duly honoured. Besides, in the wake of Lac-Mégantic, we all have the matter of railway-encircled Côte-St-Lucois defying the transport of dangerous cargo being transported on a massive scale all around them here on the island.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
I believe
WTF people consent to does NOT interest me AT ALL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Europeans tend to view Bombardier's rail division as a uniquely European operation, but it's not at all
And so they ought to. I mean; wouldn'tcha also become aghast from merely glimpsing the unsightly, rotten premises housing the manufacturer's HQ here in this regally, saintly, virgin-Mary burgh of mine?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunfuns View Post
Do they actually build passenger trains in Canada? I've only heard of factories in Europe...
About 60 miles (100Km) away from the firm's HQ, there's an adequately tooled plant of theirs in upstate NY's North Country, although it's about to start - if it hasn't already done so - churning out (US) Amfleet (stock) replacements. Alas, you are right for the most part, because, e.g., the island's fleet of electro-diesel commuter engines were/are still being shipped here; each locomotive is entirely produced and assembled by some German plant of theirs.

Me, I suspect the term HSR would be supplanted by something of the likes of HSG around this continent. I've an unwavering hunch that an advent of high speed maglev rakes plying guideways would tie conveniently into some attempt at staging the continent's comeback into the global théâtre.
__________________
.
hee hee
.

Last edited by trainrover; April 19th, 2014 at 07:51 PM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2014, 07:40 PM   #43
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by saiho View Post
Super vague, it could just be faster trains.
a bit more has come out, they are now claiming it will be 320km/h. the real deal so to speak.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2014, 12:49 AM   #44
Tower Dude
Registered User
 
Tower Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: 76th Street Station
Posts: 1,044
Likes (Received): 593

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
About 60 miles (100Km) away from the firm's HQ, there's an adequately tooled plant of theirs in upstate NY's North Country, although it's about to start - if it hasn't already done so - churning out (US) Amfleet (stock) replacements.
I know that this question is more appropriate for the US rail thread but do you have a source for this because I would love to see it. I've been trying to find one for months.
__________________

"Make no small plans they lack the magic to stir men's blood!" - Daniel Burnham

"The scale is Roman and will have to be sustained."
- Charles Follen McKim (In a letter to a friend concerning the design of Penn Station)
Tower Dude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2014, 10:29 AM   #45
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Woah, I'm FINALLY being suckered into 'sharing' one of dem godawful promo productions:
Nah, your question's MORE than appropriate .. my preceding the metric unit with the imperial one (60 miles) was a tip of the hat to American endeavours and to the fact that their blah-blahing about HSR proposals (comparatively speaking, that is) as actually bearing some bite, and has nothing to do with the fact that this country's rail sector being the only area that still needn't effect any conversion (hmmm, flight maintenance centres around here might also be exempt from metric conversion)
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 12:33 AM   #46
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680




Quote:
London, Ontario, Canada / (CFPL AM) AM 980
Jacquelyn LeBel
April 30, 2014 12:57 pm

The Ontario Liberals are fleshing out plans to introduce high-speed rail to London.

At a news conference Wednesday afternoon at the Western Fair District, Transportation Minister Glen Murray announced the government plans to finalize the business case and begin assessment as soon as this fall.

The assessment phase would last three to four years and if approved, construction would take roughly the same time period.

According to Murray, by 2025 the rail line would attract 6 million passengers per year and would take about 20,000 cars off the 401 each day.

A one-way ticket from London to downtown Toronto would likely cost about $40, Murray said.

The trains would run between London and Toronto with stops in Kitchener-Waterloo and at Pearson International Airport and would run on the half hour. In all, it would take a train 71 minutes to get from downtown London to downtown Toronto at a speed of about 320km/hr.

Premier Kathleen Wynne’s $29 billion dollar transportation masterplan would include spending the next decade building the infrastructure needed to provide all-day rail service between each city.
http://www.am980.ca/2014/04/30/trans...eed-rail-line/

Quick stats:

71 minutes London - Toronto (compare to 130 today on the fastest VIA train)
~45 minutes from Toronto to Kitchener
trains every 30 minutes
6 million annual passengers
around $40 from Toronto to London
Environmental assessment to begin in the fall, design completed with construction starting in around 3 years.
Completion 8-10 years from now.

Last edited by Innsertnamehere; May 1st, 2014 at 12:46 AM. Reason: spelling
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 10:21 AM   #47
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,885
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Quick stats:

71 minutes London - Toronto (compare to 130 today on the fastest VIA train)
~45 minutes from Toronto to Kitchener
trains every 30 minutes
6 million annual passengers
around $40 from Toronto to London
Environmental assessment to begin in the fall, design completed with construction starting in around 3 years.
Completion 8-10 years from now.
This must be a joke. 71 minutes for approx. 120 km add up to a travel speed of 101 km/h. For that kind a performance a top speed of 160 km/h would be sufficient. So why exactly is this line proposed to be designed for 320 km/h? It is neither advisable to built a high speed line for such a short stretch nor do the targeted travel times reflect the higher speed somehow.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 02:02 PM   #48
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
This must be a joke. 71 minutes for approx. 120 km add up to a travel speed of 101 km/h. For that kind a performance a top speed of 160 km/h would be sufficient. So why exactly is this line proposed to be designed for 320 km/h? It is neither advisable to built a high speed line for such a short stretch nor do the targeted travel times reflect the higher speed somehow.
It's closer to 180km. It's 100km just to get to kitchener. The average speed is closer to 180km/h, and the portion in the city will run at 150km/h due to corridor constraints. They looked at 200km/h rail and it took 30 minutes longer, more if you didn't realign it.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 06:02 PM   #49
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,885
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
It's closer to 180km. It's 100km just to get to kitchener. The average speed is closer to 180km/h, and the portion in the city will run at 150km/h due to corridor constraints. They looked at 200km/h rail and it took 30 minutes longer, more if you didn't realign it.
180 km length in 71 min would still mean that the travel speed is no greater than 152 km/h. That can still be achieved with a much lower vmax than 320 km/h.
High speed services between Hamburg and Berlin reach a travel speed of up to 165 km/h currently with a top speed of just 230 km/h. That makes me wonder where these proposed services lose their minutes when they can run much faster.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 09:07 PM   #50
Haljackey
Registered User
 
Haljackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 703
Likes (Received): 107

I would assume the 71 min travel time from London to Toronto includes wait times at the Kitchener and Pearson stations. It would not be a non-stop ride.

Also it would take a while for a train to accelerate to the 320 km/h top speed.
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Haljackey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 09:52 PM   #51
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Average speed is the key here... lowering the top speed will also lower the average speed.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 09:54 PM   #52
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Any way you look at it this doesn't seem to be a top class system...
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 10:55 PM   #53
Haljackey
Registered User
 
Haljackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 703
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunfuns View Post
Any way you look at it this doesn't seem to be a top class system...
It's a start, and if it is successful there may be a new railway renaissance in this country.

We may finally get our rail infrastructure into the 20th century!
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Haljackey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2014, 11:07 PM   #54
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

You are going to spend a lot of money for it in any case. Why not start with a top class system?
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 12:02 AM   #55
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,885
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post
Average speed is the key here... lowering the top speed will also lower the average speed.
Actually not in this case. High top speeds raise the travel speed only when it can be maintained for a long distance. In this case, however, the distance between stops is too short to have a significant impact. Hence my hint that the proposed travel time could be achieved with a lower top speed as well.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 02:02 AM   #56
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=13505...lpoovspeoy3i0t

Thats the little slide show from the presentation. the 320km/h rail saves 20 minutes over the 200km/h rail with a realignment, and an hour over 200km/h rail without a realignment. you need the realignment to even improve current train travel times from London (2 hours, 10 minutes). The biggest difference will be for Kitchener, which will go from a 2 hour 4 minute train ride to 48 minutes.


Most of the lost time isn't the stations or the time it takes to speed up, but rather the approach into Union. The tracks will be zoned for 150km/h (90mph) from Brampton, slow to 70mph going through the Weston tunnel, (then return to 90mph) slow to 50mph at Dundas, and slow to 25mph in the USRC approaching Union station. It'll take the train roughly 20 minutes to get from Brampton to Union, a distance of 40km. Apologies for the mix of units, Canada is a confusing place where we use metric in common language but imperial for railroad operations.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 02:42 AM   #57
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
Actually not in this case. High top speeds raise the travel speed only when it can be maintained for a long distance. In this case, however, the distance between stops is too short to have a significant impact. Hence my hint that the proposed travel time could be achieved with a lower top speed as well.
Until the system gets extended and there will be more express services with longer distances between stops, where 320 km/h does matter. If you have built a 180 km part of your system to only allow 200-220 km/h, you will notice it greatly.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 04:59 AM   #58
[email protected]
Global Citizen
 
R@ptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Frankfurt
Posts: 4,302
Likes (Received): 6407

Wouldn't a line Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec City make much more sense?
R@ptor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 06:01 AM   #59
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Probably not, in terms of cost to government. This thing is cheap for HSR because a lot of the expensive stuff has already been done. (Central station reno, urban corridor upgrades) They are saying that all but $500 million of the capital costs can be covered by fares. Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal would likely be in the billions in costs and would require co-operation from a government that up until a few weeks ago actively wanted to separate from Canada.

Total travel numbers between Toronto, Kitchener, and London are also much higher, and the highway system on the corridor is in much more need of relief on this corridor than on the corridor to Ottawa and Montreal. The closer distances mean much stronger existing travel patterns between cities.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2014, 09:05 AM   #60
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post

Most of the lost time isn't the stations or the time it takes to speed up, but rather the approach into Union. The tracks will be zoned for 150km/h (90mph) from Brampton, slow to 70mph going through the Weston tunnel, (then return to 90mph) slow to 50mph at Dundas, and slow to 25mph in the USRC approaching Union station. It'll take the train roughly 20 minutes to get from Brampton to Union, a distance of 40km. Apologies for the mix of units, Canada is a confusing place where we use metric in common language but imperial for railroad operations.
That makes the situation more clear. Would it be totally impossible to improve that?
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium