Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[twoNeurons]

Oooh... not directly related to this thread, but this is a really cool animation of the Maglev under construction in Japan. It will be 80% in tunnels.

https://scmaglev.jr-central-global.com/maglevline/

Cool Construction status page as well:
https://scmaglev.jr-central-global.com/status/

This made me think that any line from Vancouver to Calgary would be primarily in tunnels as well.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Oooh... not directly related to this thread, but this is a really cool animation of the Maglev under construction in Japan. It will be 80% in tunnels.

https://scmaglev.jr-central-global.com/maglevline/

Cool Construction status page as well:
https://scmaglev.jr-central-global.com/status/

This made me think that any line from Vancouver to Calgary would be primarily in tunnels as well.

I think it would have to be. Super-high Maglev speeds would be impossible unless the line were straight, and with as little change in grade as possible. Only tunnels could provide that, not surface rail.
That said, I doubt there will be any HSR, let alone Maglev, from Vancouver to Calgary in many decades. The cities just aren't big enough to support such a super $$$ infrastructure project

[chowhou]

At the very least Kelowna and uh Radium? are on the direct route from Vancouver to Calgary.

Bear in mind that the Japanese project is a 250km rail line between two of the largest cities on the planet.

Vancouver - Calgary would be 675km and not even connect the two largest cities in Canada.

Maybe this could be considered once Vancouver and Calgary both reach 10m residents.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by chowhou

At the very least Kelowna and uh Radium? are on the direct route from Vancouver to Calgary.

Bear in mind that the Japanese project is a 250km rail line between two of the largest cities on the planet.

Vancouver - Calgary would be 675km and not even connect the two largest cities in Canada.

Maybe this could be considered once Vancouver and Calgary both reach 10m residents.

Yeah outside of Asia the only city pairs you're going to find at that population size and relative distance are going to be on the northeast corridor in the US, and besides NYC none are even close to 10M.

Vancouver's best option for any form of long range passenger rail will be to Seattle, other than that airlines will win on price & speed.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by mcj

Yeah outside of Asia the only city pairs you're going to find at that population size and relative distance are going to be on the northeast corridor in the US, and besides NYC none are even close to 10M.

Vancouver's best option for any form of long range passenger rail will be to Seattle, other than that airlines will win on price & speed.

I don't know what sorta population figures you need to justify Maglev, but I think North America would have plenty of HSR lines if we were anything like the rest of the world. Some of the worthy city pairs include:
- Dallas (7.7 million) to Houston (7.1 million) at 380 kms
- L.A. (13.2 million) to Vegas (2.3 million) at 430 kms
- L.A. to SF (4.6 million) at 600 kms
- SF to Sacramento (2.4 million) at 140 kms
- Vegas to Phoenix (4.8 million) at 490 kms
- K.C. (2.4 million) to St. Louis (2.8 million) at 400 kms
- Nashville (2.0 million) to Atlanta (6.1 million) at 400 kms

And there are many more pairs that could make sense including Minneapolis and Milwaukee, Chicago and Milwaukee or Indianapolis or Detroit, San Antonio and Austin, Portland and Seattle, Pittsburgh and Cleveland, Toronto and Detroit, Montreal and Boston, etc.

I would guess that almost all of those pairs have sufficient air traffic between them to justify a HSR line, and that they are close enough together that HSR would be as fast or faster than flying. North America may never have a coast-to-coast HSR network, but I can definitely imagine separate networks in the southwest, Cascadia, Texas, the great lakes region, the northeast, and the south that are slowly stitched together.

[chowhou]

Don't forget about Toronto (6m) - Montreal (4m).

[mcj]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Don't forget about Toronto (6m) - Montreal (4m).

Best we can do is HFR, which depending on how the next federal election goes may or may not happen.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by mcj

Best we can do is HFR, which depending on how the next federal election goes may or may not happen.

Alstom had put out a proposal for HSR between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. So, it may be the winning bid and it may happen. We shall see.

[madog222]

WCE 907 has made it to the Lower Mainland. https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?15,5681935

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by madog222

WCE 907 has made it to the Lower Mainland. https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?15,5681935

Interesting read and nice photos in that link. And I enjoyed a nice diversionary peramble through some other sites talking about Larry's Truck and Electric.

[MaxHeadroom]

After a multiyear absence, Translink announced the return of trains W2 and E2 to the West Coast Express.

https://voiceonline.com/west-coast-express-service-boosted-with-extra-train/

[logicbomb]

Looking at California's HSR to see what it would take.

100 bil with a 15 year timeline.

At least they are moving along...
https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/high-speed/rfq-issued-for-california-high-speed-fleet

I just do not foresee a government in Canada willing to invest this amount in any transportation system that isn't roads.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Looking at California's HSR to see what it would take.

There are no HSR routes in Canada that would even approach CAHSR in terms of cost or complexity, unless we build a route across the Rocky Mountains.

Vancouver to Portland is mostly pretty flat and only crosses a couple rivers.

Windsor to Quebec City has similarly friendly topography.

Calgary to Edmonton is a easy as they come, although at 300kms that route is just on the edge of competing with driving, especially considering the sprawling nature of the city.

CAHSR has to get through two mountain ranges which makes it very challenging to get from the valley to either SF or LA. Add California's especially stringent environmental approval process, the poor management of the entire process, and that this is the first true HSR project on this side of the Atlantic/Pacific, and you get what should be by far the most expensive HSR project we will see in Canada or the US. Everything is downhill (in a good way) from here.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Don't forget the NIMBYs (i.e. a detour around every little cud-de-sac) and the politicians (i.e. a station at every little town larger than 50k) and all the subcontractors (i.e. a whole lot of graft and mismanagement). A straight shot from San Fran to LA past Monterey, all in-house, would likely have been been much, much cheaper.

Anyhow, the last update puts ours at $36-63 billion, rather than $100b. Not great, not terrible... probably best to put this one on the backburner.

[madog222]

Via is spending some cash on Pacific Central. Unclear how much it is for now, $55M across Pacific Central and two other stations.

https://media.viarail.ca/en/press-releases/2023/rail-invests-more-80m-its-heritage-stations

[Sheba]

Trains along Vancouver's Arbutus Corridor stopped years ago. Why are the rail signs still there?

The Canadian Pacific Railway stopped running trains along the Arbutus Corridor in 1989, and the City of Vancouver purchased the old rail line for $55 million in 2016. Now, it is a popular greenway for cyclists and pedestrians.

But if you walk or ride along the old rail route, you will notice that some of the old infrastructure is still there, including railway signals and crossing signs. It’s like a ghost rail line.

Why? Because the city still has plans to build a streetcar line there. It’s part of Vancouver’s Transportation 2040 plan, which may come as a surprise to cyclists zipping up and down the corridor on the asphalt that was installed after the rail tracks were ripped out.

But retired Vancouver planner Sandy James said the asphalt was never meant to be permanent.

...

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Trains along Vancouver's Arbutus Corridor stopped years ago. Why are the rail signs still there?

1989? thats a lie. they didnt stop running trains until into the early 2000s. i walked down those tracks as a child and waved as the trains went by.

[logan5]

Why would somebody who lives in Senakw take a 5km circuitous LRT route around False Creek, when they could get downtown faster by a bus or even a canoe. If you build an Arbutus Line, you have to have direct routing into downtown, under the Burrard Street Bridge or by tunnel or something.


https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouver-arbutus-corridor-rail-signs

[Migrant_Coconut]

Because they might want to go to Chinatown, the stadiums, Yaletown, Olympic Village, or somewhere that's not along Burrard (which is basically the only part of downtown the 2 and 44 cover by themselves)?

The business case for the streetcar as a whole is a little dubious nowadays, but specifically as a feeder for Senakw - plus infinite money - it still works.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by logan5

Why would somebody who lives in Senakw take a 5km circuitous LRT route around False Creek, when they could get downtown faster by a bus or even a canoe.

I think the streetcar pretty obviously is meant to serve tourists the best. Basically it would be a public transit alternative to the water taxis and would also connect to Waterfront Station, Coal Harbour, and Stanley Park. I can imagine plenty of tourists might park their car in a downtown garage and then take the streetcar to visit (in order) Science World, Olympic Village, and Granville Island, and then maybe walk or take another form of faster transit back to their vehicles.

As far as local residents are concerned, the street car would have served me well when I lived in Burnaby and wanted to visit Granville Island sans personal vehicle. Riding to Science World Station and then transferring to the streetcar would have been a breeze. So for anyone who lives close to the Expo, Millennium, or Canada lines, a streetcar would make getting to Granville Island much easier (maybe a streetcar wouldn't be faster than a bus, but with segregated running lanes I hope it be more reliable and understanding the routing and schedule would be much easier).

For residents who actually live close to the streetcar ROW, it would make it easier to connect to the Skytrain lines to get to the airport, go shopping at Brentwood or Metrotown, or work in Surrey Central. But I agree, it would not be used by local residents to travel downtown unless they prefer that scenic route or something.

On Migrant's point, all of the benefits I pointed out are probably outweighed by the costs of the line. At what point will it make sense to pass on a transit project offering superior return to build the streetcar? Maybe never, although if urbanists were to have their dreams become a reality and Stanley Park was to ever go car-free, building a transit project offering locals and tourists direct access to the park might become a bigger priority. Some significant population growth along the ROW (Senakw, brewery redevelopment, densifying of south False Creek) would also really help.