[crs1026]

They have increased the speed on some highways to 110km/hr. Trucks are still governed at 105 km/hr. Not seeing how that matters.

You haven't driven the 401 west of Milton. Or QEW over the skyway. Or 401 east of Toronto over certain river valleys. Gravity is the real governor there..

- Pul

 

[micheal_can]

You haven't driven the 401 west of Milton. Or QEW over the skyway. Or 401 east of Toronto over certain river valleys. Gravity is the real governor there..

- Pul

I have towed many trailers. My cruise is set for 100km/hr as any fast and it is a waste of gas. However, unloaded, traffic speed is what I do. If you want to compare trains to road vehicles, then ALTO is more like a highway bus than a transport truck.

 

[urbanclient]

This person did not even author the Citizen Research report claiming $142/143 billion Alto vs. $28 billion HPR (HFR-like alternative), the $142 billion number is plausible, the $28 billion is not. Citizen Research made a reference-class forecasting model that depends on subjective, internally developed index scoring. It's not a validated cost model, it's not academically rigorous, it's not peer-reviewed (and won't be in the future), but it should not be wholly dismissed.

Link to report: https://citizenresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/ALTO-ECI-CFI-Multivariate-Report-2.pdf

As for @AJhyett , please ignore them. Citizen Research makes none of these Dunning Kruger claims below:

The design constraints between 200 and 300km/h may seem incremental but they are not. I have been working with a well published railway engineer who worked for 35 tears at barbardier in eastern Ontario. He suggests that in winter reliable speeds above 200km/h will be impossible without intensive maintenance. Raising a railway solves many problems in terms of cold weather engineering and this has been the Chinese approach. I talked at length with David Cook (VP systems and Integartion} at Alto and although he was vague he conformed this was not an option for ALTO. Therefore the ground engineering becomes more challenging and the ground remediation and stiffness requirements required for tolerance control which dictate comfort and safety. Each overpass will need to be specifically engineered for stiffness matching, be it a ballastless or ballasted track. Hence the engineering complexity around differential settlements will be extreme. As I had experience working with SNCF in France, troublesome sections of track will have severe long term maintenance implications. Maintenace backlogs will compound.

The most fundamantal piece of physics is F is proportion to v2. To say the energy of a moving object is irrelevent and inconsequential is a difficult claim to make.

View attachment 733762


This energy has to be absorbed by the structure without it deforming either instantantaneously or over time/mutliple cycles (creep). In other words, the stiffness must be higher.The important point is this is a dynamic problem, quite differnt from if the weight of the train were sitting stationary on the structure. Basically the same scaling laws that affect RoC in the horizontal direction affect the subgrade behaviour in the vertical direction and they are at least an exponent of 2. Interestingly the forces in the system scale with energy but for a consistent comfort/safety level the vertical tolerances/offsets also become tighter (more energy combined with tighter tolerances). These are extremely difficult and complex geo-engineering problems, which is why extracting the complexity from the ground as a raised railway is the prefered solution.

I will do a deep dive on the Chinese cost structure and how it has evolved over time with experience.

On cold weather engineering:

Having spent time working on projects in Mongolia, that climatic regime is quite different from the eastern Ontario. Our detailed research suggests that NE china is the best climate analog. See attached. The key point is the combination of cold and wet. Refering to the previous paragraph even a frozen wet subgrade can have a different stiffness compared to frozen dry subgrade, let alone the volumetric heave. The closet Chinese analog is Mudanjiang–Jiamusi which again is 60% raised or in tunnels. Scandianavia is a much better analog or even Moscow -st Petersburg running at 250km/h.

So if ALTO, based on the CAD$60M RFP process had outlined these considerations and proposed a realistic cost analysis we would have been comforted. Instead at the consultaion in Storrington, S. Frontenac, where many of us had similar questions, they were seriously confused. They suggest that the railway would be run at grade and that it would be a "materials handling excercize" viz-a-viz European HSR. The informtion vacuum is what we were forced to fill. The P3 structure depends on a capable public body with expertise. The progressive P3 for ALTO pretty much does away with strict specification enforcement since the designer engineers (specs) are the engineer of record during the construction. Our aim to to understand the cost drivers so that the politicians can make an informed decision on behalf of the country. ALTO have not gained our trust.

Our research suggests that the Moscow St Petersburg corridor is an excellent cold climate analog and actually has much experience to offer for ALTO. The lessons are interestingly parallel. The cost is about CAD$135M(PPP)/km and has dramatically risen during the design stage (see attached). (see attached). We can realistically expect ALTO to be somewhat higher.

On expropriation.

Over the past 3mos have talked to many people whose land could be expropriated. Some are already facing "property value blight". Their core tenant is that expropriation is acceptable if there are no other alternatives. Adjacent to the 401 severance was conducted 50 years ago. It was a gradual approach whereby some farmers could cross the highway as it was being constructed and even in the early years of operation ( not likely with ALTO). The benefits that offset the disruptions were shared along the corridor at each interchange. The even older CN kingston sub is obviously not grade seperated and has a great many agricultural crossings (2-3 times more than level crossings). Hence the farms are not severed, even now. Expropriation is not a large line item in terms of the amount of land required for the railway-however it is the incidental land/business severance that is expensive. As residential or agricultural land the buffer zone adjacent to the 401 is not particularly lucrative - it is ecologically disturbed, aesthetically poor, noisey and salty. It is already a severe ecological barrier. Please go to Google earth and follow the trace of the 401 and notice that the Northern side remains mainly open between Belleville and the PQ border, even in Kingston. This is what we have spent time doing. Michael Schabas has also become convinced of this. The 50m expropriation on the North side for 8-lane widening is ongoing with little fuss.

Oh yes, and finally, in response to another member, I fully understand that the earth's curvature makes the route through Ottawa shorter and would add that Ottawa is closer to the magnetic north pole which is going to save considerably on energy use.

 

[guavadelic]

Going back to Toronto's second urban station - I overlaid the CPKC alignment onto Toronto's Future Rapid Transit map to see what an Agincourt station might look like.
If we are judging by intersecting lines alone, it seems Sheppard-McCowan and even Don Mills might be equal contenders. East Harbour doesn't seem feasible being opposite the Don River.

Based on this route it seems a station at Sheppard and Brimley would the closest to an existing or planned mass transit station outside the core.

 

[asher__jo]

Although, too ambitious, complex, and expensive for Toronto, we could only dream one day municipal, provincial and federal leaders can have a vision for the city that goes beyond functionality, convenience and the status quo.

I get the sarcasm, but isn’t it just perpetuating the status quo. Change is always possible with enough support mobilized

 

[micheal_can]

Slower speeds make sense in winter Extended timetables for the winter make sense too.

 

[ssiguy2]

I don't care if it costs $200 billion. Build it

It's that kind of mentality that explains why things DON'T get built.

Any infrastructure project should be done on on cost-benefit analysis. Are you getting enough benefits out of the money spent should be the mantra not just build it at any price. Such an attitude is why you get large opposition and huge cost overruns.

As far as you not caring, you should. It will be your taxes going up to pay for it. It will be your fares that soar making it unaffordable for the masses. It is that many fewer hospital, schools, transit lines, libraries, community centres, and highways that can not be built because all the money is flowing to just one project yet will serve a mere fraction of the number of people daily. A perfect example of your kind of thinking is the tiny little 4km streetcar that will cost a numbing $3 billion which is more than triple what it should cost. Those extra 2 billion would build hundreds of km of BRT, buy a whole fleet of electric GO trains, or renew the bus fleet.

I strongly support the HSR proposal and don't even think it is extensive enough as it should continue to London and eventually Windsor but that doesn't mean it should not be built at a reasonable price with strong oversight so that the cost estimates don't end up being nothing more than numbers written on the back of a napkin but don't take my word for it, just go ask California.

 

[Mihairokov]

Based on this route it seems a station at Sheppard and Brimley would the closest to an existing or planned mass transit station outside the core.

The people yearn for a Toronto East Station.

 

[McGillicuddy]

The people yearn for a Toronto East Station.

I think you mean SCARBOROUGH WEST.

 

[nfitz]

The people yearn for a Toronto East Station.

Surprisingly, the old GTR station in Toronto East was called York, before it was renamed as Danforth.

Works for me though.

 

[AJhyett]

Interesting response. There's a significant body of peer reviewed literature. On variable ground or on soft media like the LEDA Clay that doesn't really have a meaningful mechanical stiffness, the costs can become extreme. I am pointing out that an at grade railway is geotechnically challenging and expensive.

This paper suggests the critical speed is 260km/h. This is an area of ongoing research. It's an interesting paper. This kind of engineering reserach in frozen ground adds another dimension.

How do you think Ottawa being closer to magnetic North will affect things?

 

[StreetcarRider]

As many of you will have seen in the news, various groups are urging farmers to refuse Alto access to their land to conduct studies over the next three years or so, despite compensation of around $1500 being offered. One such group is the union of agricultural producers in Quebec.

If you would like to hear competent questioning of a union leader about non-cooperation, check out this nine-minute audio interview by Radio-Canada last Friday:

L'UPA ne veut pas collaborer avec ALTO : Entrevue avec le président Stéphane Alary | OHdio | Radio-Canada

Écoutez l’extrait de l’émission Tout un matin : L'UPA ne veut pas collaborer avec ALTO : Entrevue avec le président Stéphane Alary

ici.radio-canada.ca

In case you'd rather read or translate, the transcript is available at the following link, and the relevant interview starts around the 2:28 mark:

Vendredi 1 mai 2026 : La statue de Mafalda à Montréal, et le début des séries de la LPHF | OHdio | Radio-Canada

Écoutez l’épisode de l’émission Tout un matin : Vendredi 1 mai 2026 : La statue de Mafalda à Montréal, et le début des séries de la LPHF

ici.radio-canada.ca

All the recent chatter on this site about costs also shows up in the interview, as a talking point.

 

[lenaitch]

We don't accept speed reduction when designing highways? We sure do.
Ask any trucker about some of the grades on the 400 series highways.
It may seem that they are built for consistent uniform speed, but in fact there are places where it's just too expensive to flatten out the route.
For highways, curves are cheaper and easy but gradient not so much. For HSR, curves are more difficult but gradient is more tolerant.

- Paul

Not a civil engineer but I suspect highway design has an element of art to its science. I suspect safety margins and speed considerations are designed to a percentile of some theoretical vehicle (with a fair margin of error in the favour of the MTO's legal department). Highways carry everything from passenger vehicles to special permit tractor-trailer units, operated by very novice to very experienced drivers. Speed differentials are handled by multiple lanes (on freeways) that are used in an essentially uncontrolled manner by the drivers. Even without limiters, most heavy transports couldn't maintain 110kph consistently.

Railways don't have to engineer for such a wide range of parameters and, besides, they get to control everything that goes on in their properties. and everybody who does it. I have seen it mentioned on here that freight railways carefully manage speed because of fuel cost considerations. I suspect a dedicated passenger service, using standardized equipment, will have fewer design variables to factor in, and that speed changes will be less of a cost issue and more of an efficiency issue.

 

[hw621]

Interestingly enough, the Aussie also has a $90B price tag on their HSR project...

 

[generalcanada]

Interestingly enough, the Aussie also has a $90B price tag on their HSR project...

115/190km are in tunnels? 40 in viaducts? yea no never going to happen. 90 billion is lowballing that.
Nevermind the fact this is just a phase 1. the rest of the network between cities is like 5x the distance
also 200kph in tunnels lol.
stations 50m below ground HOLY

This is a shitshow waiting to happen. cant believe i hadnt heard of this before.

Only thing noteworthy is like 6 stations in 200km.Whats the point lol. it will never touch 300kph lol