Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend
Aren't you talking both ways? Why the smaller cities are not benefiting from HSR and then saying that there are too many cities in Ontario that will receive HSR service, which really consists of three, Toronto, Peterborough and Ottawa. Other towns will likely see only a few trains per day.
|
What I meant is that the mid size cities on the lakeshore aren't getting the HSR service. I wasn't talking both ways. According to the diagram, it looks like the ON alignment is linking the much smaller towns when I said that it should've linked the mid-sized lakeshore cities due to having larger density and population, hence more riders.
Even though I preferred the lakeshore alignment, because Canada has already made their alignment, it's Parliament's decision as to where the alignment should be placed, despite our wishes on here on SSP. I can't stop where the alignment can be placed, only can weigh my opinions on a forum right here.
I still don't believe it's the best alignment and don't really have the faith that it will happen like that plus the budget, inflation, the possible cost overruns, and even potential protests but Canada has made it's decision regarding it's HSR future, and once more, if Trudeau gets it built, it's more power to him and Canada as a whole for at least building HSR in Canada.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend
You are talking about the political support and the speed of service. This is part of the planning process and the cost/benefit analysis. What level of service is politically acceptable and its cost and I will grant you that this plan will be particularly vulnerable to a Conservative government which will inevitably get into power at some point.
|
I'm assuming that the Conservatives are similar in Canada to the Republican Party in America, in that both parties don't like to spend as much money as the Liberals in Canada and the Democratic Party. Personally, I'd like to see HSR be established in Canada, and Canada had a lot of opportunities to get it done. HSR could be Trudeau's boon or his folly!
I believe the main factor on why it hadn't been established much sooner maybe because Canada is a physically bigger country, which means that air travel is a huge priority, especially since you have a lot of smaller towns spread out in the northern portions of Canada, which would've made rail service practically obsolete in many parts of Canada. At least in America, you have viable rail corridors such as the NE Corridor, the Chicago hub, and the Pacific NW connecting the cities of Portland, Seattle, all the way to Vancouver.
In a perfect world, Canada would've already had HSR already, but it's going to get harder especially due to inflation, the costs of materials, and political infighting between the major parties. And Trudeau isn't really a popular guy in Canada the way Biden is in America, as a matter of fact, a good majority of people in North America are getting tired of politicians, myself included, mainly because the economy is very sluggish and there's too much mudslinging that the regular folk are turned off of politics to the point where nobody really watches the news unless a major important event happens, in which I'm one of those apathetic viewers because nothing is really of interest except more propaganda and less progress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend
I think that an absolute failure of the project will be tragic and this will get worse as more money continues to be invested. The hope is get private investors. Only time will tell, but there are indications that they want to spend more to go more towards HSR. This does not mean that the entire route will reach HSR standards.
We just wait as each milestone passes on the project. We are now asking for qualifying vendors. The next step will be Requests for Proposals.
|
Last I checked, CN is a public company. And I know I've asked this question and you answered, hence the reason why I'm not a big believer in this HSR project getting through, but my biggest gripe isn't the alignment nor the placement of the high-speed tracks, but the speed, and anything below 150 mph (241 kph), will not cut it as HSR, especially when countries such as France, Spain, Italy, Japan, and China are building new HSR routes that are faster.
North America doesn't need ultra-high speed rail like those countries, but it needs HSR rail which can connect major and mid-sized cities. I'm fine with trains going up to 150 mph+ for true HSR service, and 120 mph+ if the corridor has a lot of major or mid-sized cities within a shorter distance, but we all know that if the entire line has a top speed of no more than 120 mph, meaning that the speed may be around 100 mph on average, there'd be very little interest in investing in a line like that, and if I were a businessman, I'd rather take the plane if I wanted faster service from Montreal to Toronto and back.
The country might as well fix the current alignment along the lakeshore than create a new alignment where trains average 100 mph considering the high number of stops on the ON segment. This isn't me opposing the HSR plans, as I have very little sway on what goes on in Canada since I'm not Canadian and only imparting my opinion since the Avella Liberty is replacing the Acela trains with faster train sets, but it's just saying that I don't want to see Canada have the worst HSR service in North America, let alone, the world, and people complaining that Canada dumped a lot of taxpayer money on a HSR line that isn't truly HSR.