Calgary - Edmonton Corridor High Speed Rail Gets A Boost

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Red

Great points, especially about getting to the train station. If it's downtown then I need to add 30 minutes of extra driving and add the cost of parking just to get to the train.

And if I live way in the South, it takes me an hour to get to the airport, vs a half hour downtown. More convenient for some, less for others. Such is the way of the world as it is. Ever try to get to the airport via transit? That's a nightmare. But it sure is fairly easy to get downtown via transit... in both cities.

A trip to edmonton via a car will cost you $30 and will take 2.5 hours. Why would I spend 30 minutes to drive in to downtown (or an hour via transit) and then spend $18 for parking, take 1 - 1.5 hour trip to edmonton for what $70? where I'll be stuck at the downtown station with no means of transportation?

$30? That's wicked! My friend and I are going to Edmonton in her 2004 Honda Civic and it'll take just over a tank of gas... which cost her $54 dollars to fill yesterday. WTH are you driving that it only takes $30?

It just doesn't make sense. That project would never make any money, not in this market where everyone owns a car. Unless the population doubles this will not attract enough people to make it profitable.

About 3 years ago the estimated cost of a ticket was $57. I am sure we wouldn't see that now.

It doesn't make sense to you. I live downtown, it would take me 10 minutes to get to the train station via transit. If I go to the airport, it takes over an hour due to the poor transit scheduling to the airport. Not to mention the headache of going through airport security. So while it may be more convenient for you, there are 1 million people in this city... I'm sure some of them would prefer the train. Like those who currently take the 3+ hour bus ride to Edmonton. Or those would drive it, but would rather not, and would also rather not take the bus. Or any number of people.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Well, whatever they do, I just hope they don't use bombardier.

Why? Bombardier has developed the perfect technology for what Alberta would need, the Jet Train. It uses a jet turbine engine to generate electricity, elminating the need for overhead catenary wires like the C-Train. It travels at up to 240km/h, and is specifically designed to function on regular (freight) trackage, rather than specialized high speed rail which is maintenance intensive and as others have noted, probably not suitable for our climate.

-Scott

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by HOZ

I am in the

"Nice Idea BUT it is a white elephant" group.

This kind of project needs a lot of money and a population 3 or 4 times greater than all of Alberta to work and be kind of profitable.

Look at the problems.

1. Where are we going to lay the track?
2. How much would it cost to buy up that land?
3. So politician will have the track running through their constituency in no time. The thing will snake through Alberta and it will become the slowest fast train inthe world.
4. Stations: Where? How? How many? Best place? People will have to drive to the station...might as well drive to Edmonton or Calgary and have the convenience of a car at hand.
5. Airplanes are faster (so far), cheaper, more convenient, getting less noisy, and more fuel effficient.

Money best spent elsewhere.

Poor points. This will be, at least partially, privately funded. What do you care how much the land costs or where it is? It's not your money and it's not your land... or if it is your land, you don't have to sell it. Something tells me it'll run parallel to the QE2 though, just a guess. After all, the government already owns that land. It's the land in the city they're more concerned with, the land for the stations is already purchased, at least in Calgary and Edmonton. Stations are in downtown Calgary, Edmonton, and somewhere in Red Deer... not in every little town in Alberta. That defeats the purpose of the whole thing, in addition to not bringing any money to the areas that it goes to, so would have no benefit to politicians for trying to put track there.

Yeah, cause the half hour to the train station... you may as well just tack on another 3 hours driving time so you have a car at hand. Makes perfect sense.

Airplanes might be faster... until you figure in the time to get to the airports and pass through security, etc. Cheaper? For who? The airline? The consumer? Says who? With a train you can fit more people on them, and they cost less to operate. Seems to me it'd be cheaper for the train. More convenient? Again, for who? The people who live in NE Calgary or near the airport in Edmonton? What about people who are afraid of flying, etc? Less noisy? How loud do you think this train will be? It would sound much closer to the C-Train than the CP Rail train... not to mention.. have you heard an airplane? More fuel efficient? Jet fuel? Are you serious? Planes also pollute more.

Seems to me that some here are afraid of change.

[Red]

Originally Posted by FireFly

And if I live way in the South, it takes me an hour to get to the airport, vs a half hour downtown. More convenient for some, less for others. Such is the way of the world as it is. Ever try to get to the airport via transit? That's a nightmare. But it sure is fairly easy to get downtown via transit... in both cities.



$30? That's wicked! My friend and I are going to Edmonton in her 2004 Honda Civic and it'll take just over a tank of gas... which cost her $54 dollars to fill yesterday. WTH are you driving that it only takes $30?



It doesn't make sense to you. I live downtown, it would take me 10 minutes to get to the train station via transit. If I go to the airport, it takes over an hour due to the poor transit scheduling to the airport. Not to mention the headache of going through airport security. So while it may be more convenient for you, there are 1 million people in this city... I'm sure some of them would prefer the train. Like those who currently take the 3+ hour bus ride to Edmonton. Or those would drive it, but would rather not, and would also rather not take the bus. Or any number of people.

Edmonton is 300 Kms so a Honda Civic will burn about 20 litres of gas each way. That's just over $20 each way.

If you live in the south you can take the outside to get to Hwy 2. You don't have to go thru downtown.

I would like to see how many people take the bus to edmonton. Something tells me that each run would be a huge loss for the train.

Look, you like the idea and that's great, but you can't deny the fact that this project would be losing tons of cash each year. We just don't have enough reasons to leave the car in the garage and take the train. We are just two small-ish cities in a land of cheap cars.

[Red]

You need to look no further but the c-trains and buses in non rush hours.
They are empty, people like to drive their cars and Edmonton is not far enough for them to look for alternate transportation.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Red

Look, you like the idea and that's great, but you can't deny the fact that this project would be losing tons of cash each year. We just don't have enough reasons to leave the car in the garage and take the train. We are just two small-ish cities in a land of cheap cars.

Again, it'll be privately funded. It's not your money that they're going to lose if it does lose money, so why do you care so much is some millionaire loses a pittance? And yes I can deny the 'fact' that this project will lose money, because:
A) It's not a fact, that's your guess, and
B) My guess is that it'll make a killing each year.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Red

You need to look no further but the c-trains and buses in non rush hours.
They are empty, people like to drive their cars and Edmonton is not far enough for them to look for alternate transportation.

Calgary has the highest transit use per population in North America. Just as a little tidbit. The C-Train cars aren't empty, besides which, duh. Of course it'll be less busy during off rush hours. That's why theres a different schedule during peak vs. non-peak periods. The train would likely run with the same idea.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FireFly

I would say $50-$100 per person. More than the bus, less than airfare? I imagine there'd be some sort of frequent traveller options though.

Those are some pretty optimistic prices. It already costs 60 bucks just to take the bus to Edmonton. Unless you drive an '82 Coupe de Ville you can get there in your car for that much money and it's more convenient, although you don't get the free Digestive cookies.

When (well, if) this train is built and those generous investors are looking to take their pound of flesh, a ticket to ride is going to cost a hell of a lot more than a hundred bucks.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Those are some pretty optimistic prices. It already costs 60 bucks just to take the bus to Edmonton. Unless you drive an '82 Coupe de Ville you can get there in your car for that much money and it's more convenient, although you don't get the free Digestive cookies.

When (well, if) this train is built and those generous investors are looking to take their pound of flesh, a ticket to ride is going to cost a hell of a lot more than a hundred bucks.

They cannot price themselves out of the market though. What does airfare cost? That's your target audience, really, as well as bus users. It has to be more convenient for bus users... (bus station is also downtown so it's the same convenience or inconvenience to get to the train station, and it's also quicker to take the train so you also take that into consideration.) If they charge $150/ride now it's more expensive than airfare. Again, it's cheaper to operate than a plane, as well as holding more passengers. In theory, depending on how full the train is, you could have prices be lower than that of bus fare. All variables included, I'd say it's probably a decent ballpark.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by FireFly

I think magnets are generally just used as breaking systems... At least they are for roller coasters. Jet propulsion and then magnets to stop them.

The magnets are used to levitate the train above the tracks.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

Problem is, most trips aren't to the Edmonton core. We've established that Edmonton has no real downtown, .

really?

How did you establish that?

[ricoFlame]

i'd never use it.

...but if monorails have been successfull in brockway, ogdenvill and north haverbrook, well then we have no choice.

nice work cliche!

[Dodsdomd]

Originally Posted by SaskaBushFire

How about a double laned high way from Saskatoon to Calgary. Regina has one, we have one to Edmonton... its our turn.

I've done that drive on that terrible highway so many times I want to cry like baby jesus.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FireFly

It has to be more convenient for bus users... (bus station is also downtown so it's the same convenience or inconvenience to get to the train station, and it's also quicker to take the train so you also take that into consideration.)

The convenience of the bus user is clearly low on the list of priorities. I say this as a daily (and daily frustrated) user of public transit.

Anyway, long before there is a high-speed train rocketing out from underneath downtown Calgary headed to points north there will be a C-Train station at the airport. The inconvenience of getting to the airport will no longer be a factor.

I'm with you -- planning for this kind of thing is a good idea, but a railway like this is decades away from actually being functional. Look how long it's taking them just to decide on the plans for the new library.

[Resolute 14]

One key thing you are forgetting about the convienence factor of airplane vs train, firefly: It seems like there are about 500 flights between Calgary and Edmonton every day. Especially during the peak morning and evening hours. There are enough flights that you dont need to schedule around them.

With the train through, on a single line, you would only have one train. Assuming this thing takes just one hour to complete the journey one way, and assuming that it spends 30 minutes at each station, with only Calgary and Edmonton as stops, that is a three hour round trip. At most, there would be eight trips a day. Maybe just 5 or 6 given it would be highly unprofitable to run this thing overnight.

If my only choices for the train ride are 6AM, 9AM, 12PM, 3PM, 6PM and 9PM, I'll take the plane, thank you.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The convenience of the bus user is clearly low on the list of priorities. I say this as a daily (and daily frustrated) user of public transit.

I don't mean the transit user, I mean the Greyhound/Red Arrow user who takes the bus to/from Edmonton/Calgary.

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

One key thing you are forgetting about the convienence factor of airplane vs train, firefly: It seems like there are about 500 flights between Calgary and Edmonton every day. Especially during the peak morning and evening hours. There are enough flights that you dont need to schedule around them.

With the train through, on a single line, you would only have one train. Assuming this thing takes just one hour to complete the journey one way, and assuming that it spends 30 minutes at each station, with only Calgary and Edmonton as stops, that is a three hour round trip. At most, there would be eight trips a day. Maybe just 5 or 6 given it would be highly unprofitable to run this thing overnight.

If my only choices for the train ride are 6AM, 9AM, 12PM, 3PM, 6PM and 9PM, I'll take the plane, thank you.

That's a heck of a lot of assumptions there! Any reason we can't have two lines and have multiple trains going each way at all times? Any particular reason the train stops for half an hour at each stop? Heck, the bus only stops for 15 minutes in Red Deer. 10 Minutes is likely MORE than enough. People who will be travelling heavily likely won't take the train, this is for your daily commuter, so you don't need a lot of time to get on/off.

Not only that, but even if there was only one track, there would be areas that trains can pull out... so at each station, there will be multiple tracks. Meaning that you could have a train at each station, and two in Red Deer at any given time.As one is unloading, the next is already loading.

Either way, your assumptions are ridiculous. No transit planner would be that dumb. There would be at least two lines.


Edited to add:

It seems that everyone who thinks this is a bad idea, also lacks faith in the people who are forking out the money for it. They look at Calgary Transit and see what a catastrophe that is, and assume this rapid train would be the same... It won't be planned by the government. It would be run by a private company, and God knows they're more efficient and way smarter than the planners the government has. Have a little faith that they've thought these things out!

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by FireFly

And that would be different from an airport how? Not to mention that you're already downtown in Edmonton and can probably walk to where you need to go, if it is indeed a business meeting. But I'll reiterate anyways, how is that different from the airport?

It's the routine business user 2x a week that will either make or break this train. Not Joe public that uses it 3x a year.

Few of the oilpatch crowd that make the EDM-CGY run have any need to go to Edmonton's downtown. Typically they're going to facilities or vendors located in one of Edmonton's many business parks, or destinations beyond Edmonton. A train to Edmonton's "downtown" has zero appeal to them. They'd have to rent a car or truck once they got there, and since many of them have company vehicles anyways, time and cost savings are irrelevant for them.

Red's already brought up the dislike of public transit here - your key user of this train has zero interest or reason to take this train. It's just more of a hassle than it's worth. I work at a company with field operations all over Western Canada and I know our "road warrior" area managers would rather jump in their F350 Super Duty than ride the train. Cost, minimal time savings and convienience just doen't work for the average business user of that train.

I'm not disputing the train would have some have some environmental benefits. And it's not a matter of change but the the economics that'll drive the sucess of this thing. It's easy to fall in love with the notion of a high speed train to Edmonton, but the economics just don't make sense.

[Flames09]

If the train comes into place I'll always chose between plane/ or train, driving to Edmonton is HELL!!!

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

It's the routine business user 2x a week that will either make or break this train. Not Joe public that uses it 3x a year.

Few of the oilpatch crowd that make the EDM-CGY run have any need to go to Edmonton's downtown. Typically they're going to facilities or vendors located in one of Edmonton's many business parks, or destinations beyond Edmonton. A train to Edmonton's "downtown" has zero appeal to them. They'd have to rent a car or truck once they got there, and since many of them have company vehicles anyways, time and cost savings are irrelevant for them.

Red's already brought up the dislike of public transit here - your key user of this train has zero interest or reason to take this train. It's just more of a hassle than it's worth. I work at a company with field operations all over Western Canada and I know our "road warrior" area managers would rather jump in their F350 Super Duty than ride the train. Cost, minimal time savings and convienience just doen't work for the average business user of that train.

I'm not disputing the train would have some have some environmental benefits. And it's not a matter of change but the the economics that'll drive the sucess of this thing. It's easy to fall in love with the notion of a high speed train to Edmonton, but the economics just don't make sense.

Well a train can safetly run in conditions that would be dangerous for automobiles, buses and aircraft a very important consideration with Alberta winters. Remember business travelers represent a sizable portion of their customer base so there are certaintly travelers who don't mind not having their cars with them.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Well a train can safetly run in conditions that would be dangerous for automobiles, buses and aircraft a very important consideration with Alberta winters. Remember business travelers represent a sizable portion of their customer base so there are certaintly travelers who don't mind not having their cars with them.

Very true. Too bad that white out conditions like that only account for what, 15 days a year max? Still not enough to fund a train for a whole year.

Are there travellers who don't mind not having cars with them? Absolutely. Are there enough of them to use the train frequently enough to turn a profit? I doubt it.