babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » High Speed Rail Step Closer?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: High Speed Rail Step Closer?
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 07 July 2003 12:30 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Collinette was in town, here's his pipe dream:

The problem with this "High Speed" rail line is that by the time it is done, it will already be obsolete.

Mag Lev is the way to go, particularly when the air line industry has proven to be too fragile for the needs of the nation.

Mag Lev has supersonic capabilities, think of that.


Anyway, the other reason this so called high speed rail line won't be much of an improvment is because of the location of train stations. It would still require Via to utilize CN right of ways in yards and this is where the delays are.

A dedicated Via line is the way to go, if we go with this "trailing edge technology", but if isn't 100% dedicated, you can forget dependable, on time service.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 07 July 2003 12:43 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Many of the delays also occur because there are still a number of level crossings which prevent the current trains from going at top speed much of the way. If these can be eliminated (along with the use of CN right of ways) things would be much improved.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 07 July 2003 12:53 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Government of Canada just doesn't want to spend the money to do high speed rail the way it needs to be done: completely separate system. The problem with all forms of rapid transit is that everyone wants his neighbors to take it.
From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 July 2003 12:56 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You think so, Cougyr? I want rapid transit so I can take it. I'd give anything for amazing rail systems that were affordable to the general public and people with lower incomes. I'd take them all the time. I'd never buy a car, no matter how much money I had, if there were a great transportation system in the cities and between cities.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
majorvictory
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2878

posted 07 July 2003 01:32 PM      Profile for majorvictory     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The big problem with Maglev right now is cost. All projected lines have been scrapped due to the multi-billions needed. Only China is going ahead with a small political showpiece line.

It says something quite negative about the practicality of a whizbang new technology if even the technocracies of the west don't think it is financially or politically feasible.

China first to run maglev train

quote:
China first to run maglev train
On 31 December, China inaugurated the world’s first commercial magnetic-levitation (maglev) rail system, links Shanghai’s Pudong business district with the Pudong International Airport. Aboard the train for the test run along the 30 km route–during which the train reached speeds of 425 km/h–were Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji and German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. Schröder was there to extol the technology’s virtues and push for its use in new high-speed train projects in China and elsewhere. After the 14-minute trip, Schröder announced that China had already agreed to extend the existing route south to Hangzhou and north to Nanjing–a route that would cover 290 km and cost more than $5 billion to build. But an executive at the company that operates the train said a final decision has not been made on whether German companies would win the contract.

The Germans have strong competition. As part of their winning bid to build the Pudong maglev line, the German companies agreed to transfer technology related to the trains, the track, and automation controls to the Shanghai Maglev Transportation Development Co., which has begun developing its own version of the maglev. Though the first Chinese-made maglev train has yet to exceed 100 km/h, the government says it will put the train in commercial service and watch as technical improvements make it faster. The Chinese government is also being lobbied by Japanese companies and the Tokyo government to use Japan’s bullet train technology for long-distance rail connections such as the Hangzhou—Nanjing line and a 1250-km route connecting Beijing and Shanghai that is being proposed.

These projects are part of a Chinese government plan for a five-year, $31 billion upgrade of its national railway network. Germany’s Schröder would like to see maglev adopted on a wide scale. German engineering and industrial giants such as Siemens and ThyssenKrupp–who built the train cars and the signaling equipment along the Pudong route–would recoup the billions of dollars they have spent developing the technology.

Schröder’s visit was to pitch maglev propulsion to a world of skeptics turned off by the technology’s high cost. Critics note that although Germany has led the world in development of the technology, no maglev trains are running there because of squabbling over financing. In 1992, a 250-km high-speed line, which would have connected Berlin and the northern port city of Hamburg, was projected to cost DM3.6 billion. By February 2000, when the project was scrapped, the project’s cost was estimated at DM8 billion. China, say the critics, was willing to foot the US $1.3 billion bill for the Pudong project just to show how advanced it is becoming. But in Germany, another domestic project, a 60-km line between Dortmund and Duesseldorf now on the drawing board, is being threatened by arguments between private firms and public agencies over financing.



From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 07 July 2003 05:34 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
well, it's not just the high cost. in 2000,

quote:
German officials canceled plans to build and operate a maglev train on a 185-mile route between Hamburg and Berlin. They cited its nearly $5 billion cost -- when current train service is regular and reliable -- as well as environmental concerns that the maglev might produce deafening sound waves or potentially harmful electromagnetic radiation.

or, if you prefer,

quote:
powerful environmental lobbies in Germany say the magnetically powered trains pose health hazards for people and animals because of their electromagnetic fields; they fanned passions last summer that threatened to bring down the entire program

From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 07 July 2003 06:16 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Existing German high-speed trains are very efficient. Not sure if it is worth such a huge investment to chop half an hour of such a trip.

I'm no expert on trains, but I think it would be wiser to go for tested high-speed rail technology and eliminate the right of way and crossing problems. We do have our winters to worry about too. If it can make Montréal -Toronto in three hours, that is much faster than the plane with security and check in times and travel between airports and the city centres where both railway stations are located.

I wish there was some way the Ottawa railway station could be brought back into the city centre. It was ideally located opposite the Château Laurier and very close to Parliament.

The Québec City railway station in the Lower Town has been re-opened and carefully restored. Before, the train stopped in suburban Ste-Foy.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 07 July 2003 06:21 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
german trains even look fast:


From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 July 2003 02:15 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's deja vu all over again...
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 08 July 2003 03:00 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There's no point shaving half an hour off the trip if the train runs only every two hours. The first step is hourly trains. We need fast cheap frequent service now, not expensive maglev lines. I'd love to ride the Pudong showpiece sometime, but we can't afford to build one from Toronto to Montreal.
From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 July 2003 03:18 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And who says we can't afford it? Paul Martin? Puh-LEEZE! He's too busy giving $100 million tax cuts to his buddies over in the Desmarais Corp.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 08 July 2003 05:07 AM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
China was able to do it? Well I'd like to hear more on the science side of it, because so far I have not heard of any existing technology that would be practical enough to actually construct such a train.

I'd also like to know how the technology works because as far as I know, EM fields should not be a problem if properly shielded. Unless superconductors (used as electromagnets) generate some really weird fields, but I don't see why they would.

If this means that mag-lev trains will be here soo, then cool

Maybe that might make Edmonton city council consider making out LRT system go somewhere


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 08 July 2003 08:27 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I take a sceptical view of mag lev systems causing health problems. The only part of the track that is electrified is the section the train is currently traveling on, so it's not a constant.

The last word I heard on health concerns due to electricity comes from studies that show a higher cancer rate amoung people who have high power lines running through their back yards. Because there are many other factors that could explain the higher incidence of cancer, I don't think the studies can be termed as anything but inconclusive. But, my info is a bit old, maybe there's been more research.

Because mag lev is increadibly fast, incentives for compact nations in Europe to replace damn fine existing rail are not that powerful.

But Canada is a tad larger, with widely dispersed population centers, and open areas where supersonic speed wouldn't be such a bother.

Considering we in Canada are living with a system that is, I kid you not, slower and less efficient than steam locomotive technology, the jump to mag lev would put us back where we should be, a technology leader.

The first hurdle in any rail system, however, is to rid ourselves of the myopic idea that rail has to pay for itself like it was a private concern.

We subsidize every other mode of travel, VIA should be no exception.

Ticket prices are too high, and serve the interests of the auto and air line sector instead of the public good.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 08 July 2003 08:40 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
We subsidize every other mode of travel, VIA should be no exception.

Ticket prices are too high, and serve the interests of the auto and air line sector instead of the public good.


Worth repeating.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 10 July 2003 03:48 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"You think so, Cougyr? I want rapid transit so I can take it. I'd give anything for amazing rail systems that were affordable to the general public and people with lower incomes. I'd take them all the time. I'd never buy a car, no matter how much money I had, if there were a great transportation system in the cities and between cities."
______________________________
Yes I do, Michelle. You and I are unusual in that respect. Most people are emotionally glued to their cars. Just watch people drive to the gym so they can exercise.

Many years ago, the Italians gave free rides for commuters into Rome in order to reduce congestion on the streets. It made no difference whatsoever.

People will take public transit when the congestion on the streets is so bad that they are forced out of their cars.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2003 06:10 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If you gave me a choice - take the Crown Vic to Ontario in 4 days or take a maglev train in 24 hours, it wouldn't even be a contest. Maglev all the way, baby.

One way to make a maglev train work is to actually strengthen the electromagnetic field at the rear of the train if repulsive, or at the front of the train if attractive, and this would propel it forward.

The other way to do it is to maintain a constant electromagnetic field to suspend the train, and use a propeller of some sort to push the train forward. Since there's no friction against the rails, it'd be a piece of cake to move the thing.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 10 July 2003 07:53 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Seems to me that the energy required for mag-lev would far out weigh any advantages.
From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2003 08:11 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And energy to run electric trains is such a bargain, right? By the way if you bothered to read the link to the older thread that I made you would see two links to webpages devoted to maglev which discuss the energy considerations.

[ 10 July 2003: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 10 July 2003 10:32 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Here is the other side of the story.

quote:
The majority of cars on Highway 401 travel 125-kilometres or less. In other words, only a fraction of vehicles go all the way from Toronto to Montreal (and even fewer travel from Windsor to Quebec City). In fact, if you could magically remove all of the cars making the Toronto to Montreal trip on Highway 401, you'd only diminish traffic by one car, per lane, every three minutes. . . . smaller communities will likely start losing rail service even before the fast train is built. Once it does start running, we can expect passenger train service will be lost altogether in small Ontario towns such as Alexandria, Smiths Falls, Cobourg and Belleville.

This article is by a strategic planning guy for the Air Transport Association of Canada, so one should be sceptical. Still, I have a feeling his facts may be correct.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 10 July 2003 10:42 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There are some concerns about the health effects of electro-magnetic fields.

As for energy, electricity can be better for the environment than jet fuel depending on how the province generates the electricity. If powerlines are supplied by coal or oil burning facilities - not so good, if hydro, wind, solar (and nuclear depending on your views) then better.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 11 July 2003 07:42 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That Globe column was a laughable piece of self serving crap.

The question I'd like to ask Mr. Air Transport spin doctor is when was the last time someone highjacked a high speed train and crashed it into an office tower?

Face it, for many reasons the air line industry is too precarious a business for the nation to find it reliable.

And, there was no mention whatsoever of the traffic volumes on the 401 from Windsor to Toronto. I wonder why?

Federal and provincial governments will be spending billions over the next decade or so widening the 401 in this section.

How is it we don't have a problem subsidizing this mode of transport, but somehow subsidizing rail is wrong?

This guy is so full of self serving dogma, it's not even funny.

Since the time of the Romans, it has been recognized that a subsidized transportation system is key to economic stability and success.

The only air carriers that are able to make a go of it privately are small ones that poach profitable routes. The experience of Air Canada should tell us that private enterprise cannot serve the national interest when it comes to transportation.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 11 July 2003 08:40 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Besides, who says that the only users of the high speed rail would be people going from Windsor to Quebec City, or Toronto to Montreal? I would use it to get back and forth between Kingston and Toronto, a trip that would otherwise have me in a bus on the highway. Why shouldn't the train service people who are travelling for 125 km?

I also find it really hard to believe that one train - which holds how many people, and replaces how many cars? - would have a worse environmental impact than if that same number of commuters took their cars. I also have a hard time believing that one high-speed train causes as much pollution as it would if all those passengers went by plane to their destination.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 11 July 2003 10:04 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The question I'd like to ask Mr. Air Transport spin doctor is when was the last time someone highjacked a high speed train and crashed it into an office tower?

right, but as a megaproject of any kind, it would be a target for terrorists. the CN tower now has air sampling to check for chem/biological weapons.

actually, i'm pleasantly surprised that terrorism against trains (amtrak in the US, the UK, germany's system and german troops in afghanistan) hasn't occured.

but sadly, it wouldn't take a bunch of skill to rev up the speed on four-five co-ordinated trains bound for new york's grand central station (or five ICE trains within the same hour in germany) and crash them.

or, just copy real life, the potters bar accident recently in the UK is being blamed on faulty maintance of the points (the adjustable stretcher bars which keep the moveable section of track at the correct width for the train's wheels). 20% were loosened in a given stretch of track, privatisation of the rail network, , and it led to this:

[ 11 July 2003: Message edited by: Willowdale Wizard ]


From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 11 July 2003 11:06 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh, and just another thought. If Mr. Free Enterprise Air Transport sock puppet who wrote the Globe piece thinks Rail must pay it's own way, then he and his buddies in the air line industry should pony up all the past, present and future dough for building airports.

Arg.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 11 July 2003 02:51 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oh, and just another thought. If Mr. Free Enterprise Air Transport sock puppet who wrote the Globe piece thinks Rail must pay it's own way, then he and his buddies in the air line industry should pony up all the past, present and future dough for building airports.

Yup. The big subsidies are roads and air travel. In eastern Canada, some of the rail subsidies were removed. Coincidently, one of Chretien's cronies owns a bus company.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 11 July 2003 03:11 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
who says that the only users of the high speed rail would be people going from Windsor to Quebec City, or Toronto to Montreal? I would use it to get back and forth between Kingston and Toronto, a trip that would otherwise have me in a bus on the highway. Why shouldn't the train service people who are travelling for 125 km?

Right. That's precisely the point.

In Europe (especially Germany) you would see an hourly fast train from Toronto to Montreal stopping at Kingston, fed by an hourly local train stopping everywhere from Toronto to Kingston, and feeding one or more trains continuing from Kingston to Ottawa or a local to Montreal.

Too often, no one says that. We train fans from outside the GTA get nervous.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 11 July 2003 03:39 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wilfred, why don't you email a letter to the editor to the Globe making that point?

In any case, I think the lobbyists' point is that most trips on the 401 are short haul (150 km or less) and a high speed train from Windsor to Montreal stopping in Toronto (and presumably London and Kingston) would do nothing to remove short haul travellers from the highway.

EG Someone driving from Toronto to Coburg would have no incentive to take a high speed train from Toronto to Kingston (even if s/he transfers at Kingston to a local train going west to Coburg it would still take longer and be more expensive than the 90 min drive from Toronto to Coburg). Of course, what this is is an argument for extending GO service east from Oshawa to Coburg, Belleville or even Kingston rather than an argument against high speed express service.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 11 July 2003 05:23 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I want a flying saucer.
From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
kuba walda
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3134

posted 11 July 2003 05:56 PM      Profile for kuba walda        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I want light rapid transit or at least bus service out to the airport.
From: the garden | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 11 July 2003 07:11 PM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why not a skycar?

edited to add: I'm not being serious, of course.

[ 11 July 2003: Message edited by: Jacob Two-Two ]


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 11 July 2003 08:23 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One of those jetpacks you wear on your back would be cool.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 11 July 2003 11:54 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
what this is is an argument for extending GO service east from Oshawa to Cobourg, Belleville or even Kingston

Well, no. Granted there's only 6 Via trains a day from Cobourg to Toronto, but at least they only take around 68 minutes (once only 61 minutes) to get there, most often stopping only at Oshawa and Guildwood. The GO train would take forever. Good train service has three levels: commuter, inter-city local, and inter-city express.

[ 11 July 2003: Message edited by: Wilfred Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 12 July 2003 12:40 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hell, give me a transporter beam.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca