Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
High-Speed Rail (HSR) - Toronto/Pearson/Kitchener/London
#16
Canada: the only country to have a high speed train and give it up.
Reply
#17
Yeah, the two power units had seating up above the turbine, behind the driver's area, for a lounge!

I can't believe we took such a huge step backward after the Turbo was withdrawn. Montreal-Toronto in under 4 hours. I'm a child of the LRC era, and it broke my heart when those engines got pulled from service. I have an HO scale LRC on order from Rapido to fill that void in my heart... (they make a Turbo, too).

I highly recommend Jason Shron's TurboTrain: A Journey for a fantastic illustrated history of where we've been, and where we might hope to be again one day. It's a fantastic read.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#18
They cancelled the 3:59 operation time because they were always running late. As the internet saying goes, this is why we can't have nice things!
Reply
#19
Hmm, I hadn't heard that.  Do you mean that 3:59 service was only offered during the first little while, then the timetables for Turbo service were later adjusted toward the end of the 70's?

Check out this section of Japanology's Shinkansen segment, with regard to delays, and a driver stressing out about trying to make up a 15 second delay:





(This should have jumped right to 9:40 but for some reason it appears the forum does not recognize the time index suffix ("start at") from YouTube)
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#20
I'm curious what factors are considered for the viability of a stop.  Why isn't Guelph under consideration when past studies of the full Windsor-Québec corridor include comparably-sized Kingston and Trois-Rivières?  In 2031, perhaps a realistic timeframe for operation, the projected population has Guelph marginally larger than the other two cities at 175 000.  I imagine there's also more travel between Guelph and Toronto/KW compared to Kingston and Toronto/Ottawa given the proximities.

Is it simply that stopping in Guelph would slow down the KW-Toronto segment too much?  Speeds of 300km/h can be reached in 4.5 minutes and less time is required to brake.  If boarding takes a couple minutes, this would add under 10 minutes to the trip.  Would it be practical if only half of the trains stopped in Guelph with the rest being express between KW and Toronto?

I'm a bit biased living downtown Guelph and working downtown Kitchener.  A 10 minute HSR commute would be glorious!
Reply
#21
I really have my doubts about whether the Province is really talking about HSR or rather is thinking of a faster conventional system. Time will tell, but I will be surprised if it is true HSR, which would make little economic sense west of K-W, imho.
Reply
#22
(12-07-2014, 04:09 PM)willow Wrote: Is it simply that stopping in Guelph would slow down the KW-Toronto segment too much?  Speeds of 300km/h can be reached in 4.5 minutes and less time is required to brake.  If boarding takes a couple minutes, this would add under 10 minutes to the trip.  Would it be practical if only half of the trains stopped in Guelph with the rest being express between KW and Toronto?

If we go by how it works in Germany, we would have both a London-KW-Union Station express and a London-KW-Guelph-Pearson-Union Station run taking slightly longer. IMHO we could easily see 50-60K trips a day on that corridor. Something like 5Kx2 between London and KW, 5Kx2 KW-Guelph, 10Kx2 KW-Toronto, 5Kx2 Toronto-KW and 10K people going to Pearson, provided that the train is sufficiently faster than driving. If this sounds too high just keep in mind that the Shinkasen moves 800,000 people a day.
Reply
#23
(12-06-2014, 06:41 PM)jgsz Wrote:
(12-06-2014, 03:15 PM)Canard Wrote: Is anyone here old enough to have ridden (or remember having seen) the Turbo in operation?  I wish I had been alive when it was in operation.  Such a beautiful machine.

Ah, the Turbo.  I was living and working in Montreal so I took the Turbo to Toronto every chance I got.  It had a nice elevated  bar, from what I can remember.   

...still waiting for a high-speed train. 

"Is anyone here old enough to have ridden (or remember having seen) the Turbo in operation?" 


Now that quote is making me feel reallllly old ... I know that was not your intention. :-) 


Wikipedia:
Canadian National Railway purchased the UAC Turbo Train in 1966

"In May 1966 Canadian National Railways ordered five seven-car TurboTrains for the Montreal-Toronto service. They planned to operate the trains in tandem, connecting two trains together into a larger fourteen-car arrangement with a total capacity of 644 passengers. The Canadian trains were built by Montreal Locomotive Works, with their ST6 engines supplied by UAC's Canadian division (now Pratt & Whitney Canada) in Longueuil, Quebec.. .... The Turbo's final run was on October 31, 1982"
Apparently 11 years of university education is not enough to make this forum editor work ... I fixed it four times (font and spacing) ... just leaving it.
Reply
#24
(12-07-2014, 05:23 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:
(12-07-2014, 04:09 PM)willow Wrote: Is it simply that stopping in Guelph would slow down the KW-Toronto segment too much?  Speeds of 300km/h can be reached in 4.5 minutes and less time is required to brake.  If boarding takes a couple minutes, this would add under 10 minutes to the trip.  Would it be practical if only half of the trains stopped in Guelph with the rest being express between KW and Toronto?

If we go by how it works in Germany, we would have both a London-KW-Union Station express and a London-KW-Guelph-Pearson-Union Station run taking slightly longer. IMHO we could easily see 50-60K trips a day on that corridor. Something like 5Kx2 between London and KW, 5Kx2 KW-Guelph, 10Kx2 KW-Toronto, 5Kx2 Toronto-KW and 10K people going to Pearson, provided that the train is sufficiently faster than driving. If this sounds too high just keep in mind that the Shinkasen moves 800,000 people a day.

It's disappointing that the "Moving Ontario Forward" plan has the conceptual alignment bypassing Guelph entirely with a new line detouring to the south of the city.  This would kill any chance of later implementing a non-express stop without rebuilding the line through the city.  However this plan is from before Windsor was included, so maybe that conceptual alignment could be reconsidered.
Reply
#25
(12-07-2014, 06:50 PM)willow Wrote:
(12-07-2014, 05:23 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: If we go by how it works in Germany, we would have both a London-KW-Union Station express and a London-KW-Guelph-Pearson-Union Station run taking slightly longer. IMHO we could easily see 50-60K trips a day on that corridor. Something like 5Kx2 between London and KW, 5Kx2 KW-Guelph, 10Kx2 KW-Toronto, 5Kx2 Toronto-KW and 10K people going to Pearson, provided that the train is sufficiently faster than driving. If this sounds too high just keep in mind that the Shinkasen moves 800,000 people a day.

It's disappointing that the "Moving Ontario Forward" plan has the conceptual alignment bypassing Guelph entirely with a new line detouring to the south of the city.  This would kill any chance of later implementing a non-express stop without rebuilding the line through the city.  However this plan is from before Windsor was included, so maybe that conceptual alignment could be reconsidered.

Not sure I follow.  Could non-express trains not just use the existing ROW?
Reply
#26
It's unlikely as high-speed trains (at least the kind we're hoping for) have very particular requirements, namely the elimination of all grade crossings. That's going to be an impossibility in Guelph, where the line runs down the middle of Kent Street for two blocks.

I think the problem with building stations in both KW and Guelph is that they're too close together. The train would barely be able to get up to speed before it had to slow down again. If the new alignment can't run in downtown Kitchener either, they could always build one by the airport, but I hope they'll be able to use the new station at King in Victoria. Passengers for Guelph can always switch to some sort of shuttle train or a GO train to reach Guelph.
Reply
#27
They have been saying 300 km/h, so that is true HSR, though!
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#28
My take is that it likely would have to be elevated at least for portions of the track, e.g. like within the city.
Reply
#29
I hope the addition of Windsor is fantasy only. Lets face it, Windsor is an automotive city on a downward spiral. Detroit is not a viable destination for passengers. If this fantasy portion of the plan remains intact, that is what will ultimately kill it.
_____________________________________
I used to be the mayor of sim city. I know what I am talking about.
Reply
#30
(12-07-2014, 08:17 PM)Drake Wrote: I hope the addition of Windsor is fantasy only. Lets face it, Windsor is an automotive city on a downward spiral. Detroit is not a viable destination for passengers. If this fantasy portion of the plan remains intact, that is what will ultimately kill it.

I agree, the only reason to go to Windsor would be if somehow the track would be used for cargo all the way to Chicago, and by cargo I mean package delivery. In France, La Poste has its own yellow TGVs for that purpose. In Canada this would likely be owned by UPS/Purolator/Fedex.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)