High-speed rail in Canada?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

we recently took the train from Washington to Philadelphia
The regular train was $35 and took just under 2 hours. The Acela Express "high speed" train cost $140 and took 90 minutes. Who would pay an extra $100 to save 30 minutes?

My point being, they need either more time savings or better price point to make it a reasonable option over existing transportation choices. Given the cost of the equipment and infrastructure, I doubt they can do it economically

Lots of people do, the Acela is an all business class train designed primarily for business travelers.

[Maccalus]

Originally Posted by MattyC

My thought was that the Fed and Prov governments would probably front a decent amount of the cost. And I think its a little off to compare prices to VIA rail. Although the initial cost of the train would obviously be massive, because of its nature the turnoverover of people using the train would far outnumber the people who use VIA rail, and thus the revunues would be higher due to more frequent use. I think this would drive down the cost of the train tickets to something reasonable. At a quick glance it looks like it costs $50-$100 to take the high-speed from London to Paris, and that goes under the freaking ocean. Obviously theres a huge amount of traffic between those two cities, but I would think the high-speed has a lot to do with that. (ie build it and people will use it).

How much true demand would there be across much of Canada for a transportation system which costs close to or more than flying, takes longer and still doesn't allow you your car in the destination city? People underestimate the size of our country and overestimate the speed of high speed rail. Cities in Europe are relatively close together with large population bases, and have lots of smaller connecting cities between them to add ridership. In a country the size of Canada, no one is going to sit 24 hours on a high speed train to travel from Toronto to Calgary when they can get there relatively affordably for 4 in a plane. On top of that, there is only a couple of cities of significant size to stop at along the way.


High speed rail has potential in small areas of the country. The Toronto-Montreal corridor and area and potentially the Calgary-Edmonton corridor in approx. 50+ years. A national system is a waste of money when we are already covered by an efficient air travel network.

On a side note, the rail networks in Europe are heavily subsidized by the governments. For most of the routes, they can only offer fares as low as they do due to subsidies. So if countries in Europe, with high densities and low travel distances have trouble making profits off of high speed rail, it would be a massive black hole in Canada.

[Maccalus]

To add, Rail is great at serving medium size routes, quickly and affordably. I am talking about the 100-250km distances in areas where the build of the lines can be relatively straight. At those distances the time savings of aircraft can by cancelled out by the hassle of travel to the airport and time required at the airport. At longer distances than that, the speed of an airliner quickly outclasses other options. Unfortunately, Canada is full of long distance travel.

[COGENT]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Yeah I agree. Rail travel is as much about the experience/journey as it is the destination.

When I was young we took the train from Moncton to Toronto for Xmas. On the way home, we got delayed because the train for frozen to the tracks, then when it did move our car had no heat.

I suspect, that much of Via's customers are non/new Canadians.

I agree. My wife and I took Amtrak from Havre to Minneapolis a few years ago and it was awesome especially since it was in the middle of a huge snow storm and driving would have sucked. It was way cheaper than flying but a little more expensive than driving which is the way it should be.

[Addick]

As the crow flies, the distance between Calgary and Vancouver is probably within the range of HSR. Since HSR routes require direct routes that mimic how the crow flies, one between the two cities would provide a tremendous improvement on the current travel time (e.g. people currently travelling by car could save 9 hours). Unfortunately, this improvement would come at a tremendous cost. I'd really like to see a cost/benefit report as I believe the route, as implausible as it is, is probably more plausible then most people think.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Addick

As the crow flies, the distance between Calgary and Vancouver is probably within the range of HSR. Since HSR routes require direct routes that mimic how the crow flies, one between the two cities would provide a tremendous improvement on the current travel time (e.g. people currently travelling by car could save 9 hours). Unfortunately, this improvement would come at a tremendous cost. I'd really like to see a cost/benefit report as I believe the route, as implausible as it is, is probably more plausible then most people think.

You think constructing a rail route through the Rockies that mimics a 'how the crow flies' path between Calgary and Vancouver is remotely plausible? Do you have any idea how difficult building a railroad or roadway of any kind through that area is? It's already a massive undertaking, and that's for something that curves through the terrain. You'd basically need to blast a tunnel through an entire mountain range.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by valo403

You think constructing a rail route through the Rockies that mimics a 'how the crow flies' path between Calgary and Vancouver is remotely plausible? Do you have any idea how difficult building a railroad or roadway of any kind through that area is? It's already a massive undertaking, and that's for something that curves through the terrain. You'd basically need to blast a tunnel through an entire mountain range.

I wasn't saying it is plausible because it isn't by any stretch of the imagination, which is why I said: 'as implausible as it is'. I was saying that the potential for the route is higher than most people would expect as they often associate it with the current drive.

[atb]

What really needs to be done is Air Travel needs to become cheaper, whether this is through reduction of taxes on air travel or regulation on the improvement fees charged by airports.

A good example is Australia, which has widely distributed population centers. I'm not sure how things work over there, but I believe there is some restriction on the level of tax on air travel? For a flight between Sydney and Brisbane (comparable distance between Calgary and Vancouver), a flight with Quantas at the end of October is $317 AUD ($323 CAD) all in.

As it stands now the air industry in Canada is a mess, $450 for a flight between Calgary and Vancouver is absurd.

edit: Just checked, for a return flight from Calgary to Vancouver at the end of October is $435.

[Ahuch]

You could build a high-speed rail link between Calgary and Edmonton... but you'd also have to build a bunch of rental car facilities at the terminal because you wouldn't be able to go anywhere after you got to your destination.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Addick

As the crow flies, the distance between Calgary and Vancouver is probably within the range of HSR. Since HSR routes require direct routes that mimic how the crow flies, one between the two cities would provide a tremendous improvement on the current travel time (e.g. people currently travelling by car could save 9 hours).

I've done the drive in 9h15 minutes... does this mean I can get there in 15 minutes by HSR?!?

Distance as the crow flies is 675km, so if you could actually build a line that could feasibly average 250+ km/hr and cost less than flying, I'd take it. I think the last calgary / red deer proposal was supposed to run at 240kph.

[SebC]

For what it's worth, here are some numbers I googled on the Calgary-Edmonton corridor:

NPV of revenues (min-expected-max) from Oliver-Wyman report (billions of 2006 $):

125 mph: 1.4 2.1 3.5
150 mph: 2.8 4.3 6.4
200 mph: 5.6 9.2 14.3
300 mph: 13.5 17.0 24.3

And the costs, estimated by the Van Horne Institute (billions of 2011 $):

CPR line (comparable to 125 mph) 2.5
Greenfield non-electric (comparable to 150 mph) 3.7
Greenfield electric (comparable to 200 mph) 5.0

300 mph (maglev) isn't costed, but based on these numbers it looks like a 200 mph Calgary-Edmonton train is just about can't miss economically.

[Redliner]

Calgary to Edmonton would be relatively straightforward to build and still people are having a hard time believing in its viability. Calgary to Vancouver is a whole different animal. HSR requires lines built to extremely high standards; heavy rail, concrete ties, crazy superelevation, elimination of crossings at grade, and extremely wide curvature. All of those things would be very difficult to do going through the mountains, and the cost associated with boring tunnels, blasting cuts and filling embankments, building the required bridges, and protecting the entire line from avalanches and rock slides would be astronomical. I'd love to see it but it will never happen.

[frinkprof]

There are really only two (vastly disconnected) corridors in Canada where High Speed Rail will ever be viable: the Quebec City - Windsor Corridor and the Calgary to Edmonton Corridor. The central part of the Eastern Canada corridor (Toronto-Montreal) is the closest to being viable, but isn't there yet.

If the Lower Mainland in British Columbia had the characteristics of a corridor, you could include it as well, but it doesn't. Vancouver could be possible as part of a Cascadia line that included Seattle.

The critical mass for high speed rail in Alberta isn't even close to being there. Maybe in 20 years, but probably closer to 50.

Alberta would gain much much more in the next couple decades by investing in the intracity rail transit infrastructure in the 2 major cities, and smaller-scale initiatives in the smaller municipalities. The same goes for the rest of Canada. That isn't to say that no thought should go into high speed rail, and indeed the current approach is probably best. Continue to strategically acquire land and reserve right of way. Land for stations in both downtown Calgary and downtown Edmonton has been purchased by the Province.

[Alberta_Beef]

I think we need to improve our rail transit period, nevermind put in high speed. Via rail misses most places, one that is improved then maybe something better can be looked at.

[OffsideSpecialist]

Quite frankly, I think the only area of the country close to having the required ridership for this is Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal. Though VIA rail does get heavy usage in this area, I don't think we are ready for it quite yet. From what I have heard, it sounds like the province (or someone) is planning high-speed rail at this point, so by the time it gets implemented this part of the country could very well be ready for it.

[The Yen Man]

If you think about it, high speed rail probably wouldn't even be feasible in the US, which is smaller landwise than Canada, but 10 times more in population. So that basically tells me its really not feasible in Canada. The only place it would be feasible would be places like China, where they have a massive population that would make it worthwhile.

[BloodFetish]

Now imagine these are Oilers fans travelling to the Saddledome at 200 MPH...

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I think we need to improve our rail transit period, nevermind put in high speed. Via rail misses most places, one that is improved then maybe something better can be looked at.

There's no point in having half-baked rail transit. It needs a certain "critical speed" to be economically viable.

[krazycanuck]

I think a Edmonton to Calgary train is very much feasable. The QE2 is nearing the point where it is going to need to be expanded to 6 lanes between Calgary and Edmonton, that is not going to be a cheap upgrade. A high speed rail line would delay the need for that.

At the very least you could reasonably say that a majority of those using air travel or bus (Greyhound and Red Arrow) between Calgary and Edmonton would opt for high speed rail.

[Flash Walken]

For a country the size of Canada, our rail system is appallingly bad.

Not talking high speed, but rail in general.