Should canada have high-speed rail?

[bobnoorduyn]

The Chinese build awesome railroads. They built ours.

Chinese people contributed a lot to the building of our railroads, but there is danger in confusing nationalities or ethnicities with governments. The Chinese government has a really good track record of building woefully substandard infrastructure, and covering it up when need be.

 

[Risus]

Chinese people contributed a lot to the building of our railroads, but there is danger in confusing nationalities or ethnicities with governments. The Chinese government has a really good track record of building woefully substandard infrastructure, and covering it up when need be.

Yes the chinese made our railroads to OUR standards, The chinese government makes their's to their inferiour standards. Petros might figure it out eventually.

 

[TenPenny]

Yes the chinese made our railroads to OUR standards, The chinese government makes their's to their inferiour standards. Petros might figure it out eventually.

Yes, I can see that the maglev in Shanghai, that goes 430 km/h, is certainly inferior to anything we have.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Just a comment here on the scenery issue...A lot of people are concerned that if the train is too fast, people wouldn't be able to enjoy the scenery. Or, that the train ride might be too fast to be relaxing.

The point on scenery could be true in some cases, where the amount of the scenery (or the length of it) is short. I never found that to be a problem on the many bullet train rides I've taken in Japan. Even at around 300 km/hr. things pass by more quickly, but they're not a "blur", unless you're focusing on something that is quite close to the train. It's one of those "the further away it is, the better it looks" things.

A comparison might be airline travel...if you watch an airplane go past the one you're riding in, heading in the opposite direction, even at fairly close (legal) range they don't shoot by like a bullet. And the combined speed must be well over 1,000 km/hr, I would think. (I'm thinking of a couple of 747s, for example)

On ride quality, I found it to be so smooth that it is indeed relaxing...no sway or "clickey-clack"...I guess that would be unsafe at those speeds anyway. You really don't experience a sensation of high speed on a bullet train...on the night rides, I used to fall asleep for most of the trip. (Of course, that had nothing to do with the Kirin Golden Bitter beer that was served...) :-|

It's all perspective, they do actually shoot by like a bullet. I had the opportunity only once to see it so perfectly and potentially photogenically. Enroute to Prince Rupert one morning, our TCAS, (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) picked up an Alaska Ailines 737 we already knew was coming, 15 miles ahead of us. Our closure rate was about 860 knots, just under one minute 'till we met. From the time we made visual contact untill we passed was under 14 seconds. It was an impressive sight, big beautiful contrails in the rising sun shining on him, (he was headed to Seattle, to the south east), precisely nose to nose, only 2000' apart vertically, I wish I had my video camera going, but it happened far too fast.

Now for the math geeks, a nautical mile is approximately 6075 feet, I figured out that our closing speed was close to 1400 fps, 500 fps better than my .45 and 200 fps better than my 12 gauge and .22. I'm terrible at math, so I would like to know what our closure rate was, in both nautical and statute mph, as well as kph, fps and mps.;-) BTW, a nautical mile is approximately 1.15 statue mile. A statute mile is 5280 feet. There is a virtual beer for the correct answers.

 

[gerryh]

from what I have seen as the "proposed routes" for a high speed rail line, this thread should be renamed to " Should the u.s. have high speed rail", because 90% of the rasil line would be in the u.s., not Canada.

 

[TenPenny]

from what I have seen as the "proposed routes" for a high speed rail line, this thread should be renamed to " Should the u.s. have high speed rail", because 90% of the rasil line would be in the u.s., not Canada.

thing is, it would require completely new routes and right-of-way, it's going to be very, very expensive in populated regions, and the only places where there would be enough ridership is in populated regions.

 

[Machjo]

As I was thinking about it, one thing that could maybe work would be a Pacific rail line extending from Vancouver to Los Angeles, and an Atlantic one along the US Atlantic coast, going through NYC of course along with other major cities along the US Atlantic coast, and then maybe curving inwards in Canada along the St. Laurence past the Great Lakes through to Toronto. That could be workable, since much of North America's population is in fact on the coasts, especially the Atlantic one.

To make it worthwhile for Canada though we would certainly want to make it easier for Canadians to travel to the US and vice versa.

 

[countryboy]

It's all perspective, they do actually shoot by like a bullet. I had the opportunity only once to see it so perfectly and potentially photogenically. Enroute to Prince Rupert one morning, our TCAS, (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) picked up an Alaska Ailines 737 we already knew was coming, 15 miles ahead of us. Our closure rate was about 860 knots, just under one minute 'till we met. From the time we made visual contact untill we passed was under 14 seconds. It was an impressive sight, big beautiful contrails in the rising sun shining on him, (he was headed to Seattle, to the south east), precisely nose to nose, only 2000' apart vertically, I wish I had my video camera going, but it happened far too fast.

Now for the math geeks, a nautical mile is approximately 6075 feet, I figured out that our closing speed was close to 1400 fps, 500 fps better than my .45 and 200 fps better than my 12 gauge and .22. I'm terrible at math, so I would like to know what our closure rate was, in both nautical and statute mph, as well as kph, fps and mps.;-) BTW, a nautical mile is approximately 1.15 statue mile. A statute mile is 5280 feet. There is a virtual beer for the correct answers.

I am sure you've seen it far more often than me, but I recall on my many trips between Tokyo and Minneapolis (via Seattle, after North-West cancelled the old Flight 5) seeing lots of 747s going by off to the side and either slightly above or below our plane (separated properly, I guess) and they went by fast, but not so fast that I couldn't see it happening. I was trying to relate it the bullet train scenery issue, but of course, the train speed wouldn't be anything close to a couple of 747s!

 

[countryboy]

from what I have seen as the "proposed routes" for a high speed rail line, this thread should be renamed to " Should the u.s. have high speed rail", because 90% of the rasil line would be in the u.s., not Canada.

It's one of many thoughts, but I think you might be a bit off on the Toronto-Buffalo route...That would be more like 99% Canada, 1% U.S.

 

[talloola]

Whoa!!!. A day and a half each way for a round trip? From where to where? My daughter's proposed trip from St. Petersburg to E Katerinaburg was scrapped because it would have taken 36 hours each way, which would have beaten the sh*t out of her 3 days off, (and there was no way I could get her a pass on Aeroflot with a clear conscience.) She hopped a train to Helsinki, which you can darned near see from there :lol:, while her buddies endured a trip to Moscow, (6 and 8 hours each way respectively). They all have similar stories, but took it all in stride, it is Russia after all.

I know they took plane from paris to, I think st. petersburg, then a train south, and they stayed with friends right on the black sea coast,
actually it's the crimea area, which isn't really russia
proper.

 

[Risus]

It's one of many thoughts, but I think you might be a bit off on the Toronto-Buffalo route...That would be more like 99% Canada, 1% U.S.

I can't see why anyone would want to go to Buffalo, the armpit of the states.
Toronto to Montreal would make sense.

 

[gerryh]

If the discussion is about Canadian high speed rail, I don't see why american destinations are being mentioned period.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

I am sure you've seen it far more often than me, but I recall on my many trips between Tokyo and Minneapolis (via Seattle, after North-West cancelled the old Flight 5) seeing lots of 747s going by off to the side and either slightly above or below our plane (separated properly, I guess) and they went by fast, but not so fast that I couldn't see it happening. I was trying to relate it the bullet train scenery issue, but of course, the train speed wouldn't be anything close to a couple of 747s!

Yeah, I know, kind of like pointing at the sun and following it as it goes 1000 mph across the sky 93,000,000 miles away. Seeing aircraft go by at a distance is normal, but that particular day just happened to be a unique exprereience where there was no conflict and high speeds were involved. However, I have had conflicts, much closer ones, at lower speeds, where evasive action was required, that I still have nightmares about, but at least I'm still able to have nightmares;-).

 

[Machjo]

If the discussion is about Canadian high speed rail, I don't see why american destinations are being mentioned period.

Canada borders the US and we have about 1/10 of their population, not to mention about 90% of Canadians live within 100 km of the US border and about 50% of Canadians live in the corridor between Toronto and Montreal. So it would seem logical that if our goal is to introduce a profitable high speed rail line within Canada's borders, it would make sense to start with transportation between areas of high population density, and that would mean North-South rail lines between such locations as Montreal and New York City, for example. Unless you're proposing the Iqaluit-to-White-Horse line? I'm sure we could build a bridge to get the train off Baffin Island, but I have my doubts about the profitability of such a line.

 

[countryboy]

Yeah, I know, kind of like pointing at the sun and following it as it goes 1000 mph across the sky 93,000,000 miles away. Seeing aircraft go by at a distance is normal, but that particular day just happened to be a unique exprereience where there was no conflict and high speeds were involved. However, I have had conflicts, much closer ones, at lower speeds, where evasive action was required, that I still have nightmares about, but at least I'm still able to have nightmares;-).

When I lived in Japan I knew a number of airline pilots, Americans who worked for 3 different Japanese airlines. We all belonged to the same foreigners club in Yokohama...they used to tell me some rather hair-raising stories while we would be sipping beer in the tavern there. Many of them were Viet Nam / military veterans and the stories were endless. Maybe that's where I started to like the idea of high-speed rail! :lol:

 

[countryboy]

Canada borders the US and we have about 1/10 of their population, not to mention about 90% of Canadians live within 100 km of the US border and about 50% of Canadians live in the corridor between Toronto and Montreal. So it would seem logical that if our goal is to introduce a profitable high speed rail line within Canada's borders, it would make sense to start with transportation between areas of high population density, and that would mean North-South rail lines between such locations as Montreal and New York City, for example. Unless you're proposing the Iqaluit-to-White-Horse line? I'm sure we could build a bridge to get the train off Baffin Island, but I have my doubts about the profitability of such a line.

:lol::lol::lol::canada:

 

[gerryh]

Canada borders the US and we have about 1/10 of their population, not to mention about 90% of Canadians live within 100 km of the US border and about 50% of Canadians live in the corridor between Toronto and Montreal. So it would seem logical that if our goal is to introduce a profitable high speed rail line within Canada's borders, it would make sense to start with transportation between areas of high population density, and that would mean North-South rail lines between such locations as Montreal and New York City, for example. Unless you're proposing the Iqaluit-to-White-Horse line? I'm sure we could build a bridge to get the train off Baffin Island, but I have my doubts about the profitability of such a line.

I would expect from those proposing a CANADIAN high speed rail that it would be IN Canada. If it can't be built and run profitably, in Canada, then we don't do it.

 

[Machjo]

I can't see why anyone would want to go to Buffalo, the armpit of the states.
Toronto to Montreal would make sense.

Well, let's see. The Niagara Falls sit between Toronto and Buffalo, and so it's likely many international tourists get there either through Buffalo or Toronto. Add to that that the one and only time I'd ever had to go to Buffalo was to visit the Canadian Consulate there in order to renew some papers for my brother in law at the time since I was his legal guardian in Canada. So there could be plenty of reasons for many to travel to and from Buffalo. And the distance between Buffalo and Toronto is not as far as between Buffalo and Montreal either.

Now having said that, I've just checked the population stats for Buffalo and Montreal, and indeed Montreal is a much more important metropolitan centre than Buffalo. So now we could debate whether it would make more sense to build a line between Toronto and Buffalo or Toronto and Montreal. Bufalo has the disadvantage of a smaller population, but the advantage of proximity, thus reducing construction costs. Montreal has the disadvantage of distance but the advantage of being a larger population centre, meaning more commuters likely to get on the train.

I don't know which is preferable, but in spite of Buffalo's small population it does have advantages. As for places between, Of course a Buffalo-Toronto Line would include the Niagara Falls, whereas a Toronto-Montreal line could include Ottawa. Now that I think about it, perhaps a Toronto-Montreal line would be better, though a Montreal-NYC line would still have a population advantage too. Hard to say. But clearly we're not looking at developments in Northern Canada or smaller populaiton centres.

 

[Machjo]

I would expect from those proposing a CANADIAN high speed rail that it would be IN Canada. If it can't be built and run profitably, in Canada, then we don't do it.

Even if it could bring some tourists to Canada?

 

[JLM]

I suppose one other consideration for a high speed corridor would be if it reduced traffic on other congested nearby corridors.