[crs1026]

The crucial part of express trains is their ability to traverse long distances quickly, not the time it takes for them to exit out of the urban area that they serve.

This feels like discrediting air travel, because taxiing and waiting for takeoff clearance can sometimes take 5-10 minutes.

At Pearson, taxi times are often more like 15-20 minutes, with 25-30 minutes happening more often than one might think. Check a flight app like Flightaware or Flightrada24 if you want to verify this statement.

We may be down on ML at the moment, but I have confidence that Onxpress has a vision of doing better, and may actually have the competency to achieve that by the time HSR needs that. I would not be worried about GO-VIA conflicts in the future. So long as HSR trains can get out of the downtown at even 60-80 mph, they will perform well. Tight turns that require slowing to 25-45 mph are a different story.

The advantage to through service to Pearson is obvious for convenience not speed. UP is quite fast enough, and higher speeds Union-Pearson would not add value. I would think that the benefit would be greatest for regional travellers and especially for those stations west of the GTA.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

Why is this required?

Because you need to protect for up to 4 trains per hour, half of which might terminate in Montreal. So one platform track per direction and one platform track per terminating train per hour…

 

[micheal_can]

For Montreal, Alstom's 2022 VIA HFR presentation proposed Lucien L'allier as the city's main station. Considering ALTO's estimated trip times are virtually identical to Alstom's proposed times and factoring in how tied-in they are to the winning consortium...there's likely a non-zero chance they choose that station for Montreal.
Now whether that is the right or wrong call, that's another story.


View attachment 638846
https://www.transportaction.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/HFR-Presentation-Alstom-Nov-2022.pdf

So trains will back in and out of a station?
Well, if we are going to do that, then a downtown Ottawa station makes sense too...

I think once the engineering plans come out, a new tunnel connecting Central to the CPKC Parc sub will be on the plans.

 

[robmausser]

So trains will back in and out of a station?
Well, if we are going to do that, then a downtown Ottawa station makes sense too...

I think once the engineering plans come out, a new tunnel connecting Central to the CPKC Parc sub will be on the plans.

Depends what you mean by back in and out.

They will most likely be bi-directional trains.

 

[micheal_can]

Depends what you mean by back in and out.

They will most likely be bi-directional trains.

Pick a seat. To the Lucien L'allier or from it, you will face a different way. The trains are almost certainly going to be bi directional. I donot see why they wouldn't.

 

[Urban Sky]

Depends what you mean by back in and out.

They will most likely be bi-directional trains.

The Metropolitan (short-lived German premium Intercity service operating between Cologne, Essen and Hamburg) was the fastest locomotive-hauled train (operating speed: 220 km/h) I am aware of and even that one had cab cars. Everything beyond that speed are EMUs and trainsets, which are almost by definition bidirectional. Indeed, apart from tourist train operators, nobody bothers with unidirectional operation in the 21st century…

 

[Urban Sky]

Exactly this. Also its super refreshing to have someone who knows what they’re talking about on here. Cheers

I really hate to say this, but just because you two happen to agree so vehemently on something does not automatically make either of you particularly knowledgeable about the fundamentals of rail operations and infrastructure or the specifics of ALTO and its future relation/interplay with Metrolinx/ONxpress. The “mentally stable genius” and his clown on Ketamin get apparently off to listening to each other harping about tariffs solving every single economic and foreign policy problem in the United States, while you would struggle to find two more clueless-yet-strongly-opiniated people on this topic...

If they want to build a new tunnel, then the Alto platforms wouldn't be on the same level as the existing EXO platforms.

Please allow me to tell you a secret: exo (just like its predecessor, AMT) has already been stopping at high-level platforms since its inception, thanks to trains which look like this:

I really don't see how they are going to have HSR with all these 2 minutes here and 3 minutes there you keep adding. And even if the Ontario Line and East Harbour station don't steralize the route for HSR, Scarborough Junction is a big problem, and the capacity along the Stouffville line isn't as wide as along the Kingston Sub through Leslieville. Though if they throw enough money at it, they add a couple of spans over the Don, and tunnel up Carlaw

It's 580 km from Gare Centrale to Union Station via Ottawa. Even if you lose a full hour on the first 40 km out of Montreal and the final 40 km into Toronto (i.e., an average speed of 80 km/h), you still have to only achieve an average travel speed of 236 km/h to achieve the promissed end-to-end travel time of 3:07 hours, which is still slower than the 253 km/h TGVs achieve between Paris-Est and Strasbourg. They will cut travel times where they get the biggest bang-for-the-buck and chances are that that won't mean spending billions on the final approaches to Montreal or Toronto...

Only 50 years? That's already the timeframe we are dealing with. It's almost 50 years since VIA started looking at HSR, and near another 20 years before we expect it top open - if things go well.

Friendly reminder that it was you who took the long-term view to potentially justify the Ottawa Bypass:

At least that's one that VIA or whatever it was called then, put on a map. Who's to say what might make sense in 2050, one it is operational. Or how many freight railways might survive in Canada by then.

I was just saying that building a Ottawa Bypass will remain as economically and commercially unviable in 50 years as would be now.

Line 5? The forecast demand for Line 3 is about 4 times that of Line 5. And approaching that of Line 2.

The original Pape to Queen relief subway line concept is long since gone. They are a lot closer now to the original concept for the Queen subway line from the 1960s (and in some ways similar to the concept that was approved in the 1940s city referendum). If they build the eastbound extension to Pearson and Kipling - then it will be a more extensive line than any other subway line.

You know, this is one of the comments where your lack of understanding of the topic we are discussing becomes obvious: The objective of intercity rail is not to link with the transit lines with the highest ridership, but to link with nodes which maximize the capture area, i.e., the population which can access your intercity train from their homes or offices with zero (i.e., from locations within walking distance of the intercity rail station), 1 or 2 transfers. If you take a look at a map of the Ontario Line, all the major stations of the Ontario lines already have (or will have) convenient and frequent rail transit to either Union Station or Kennedy:

The Ontario Line will provide a massive capacity increase to Toronto's downtown transit networks, but apart from the 3 stations between Pape and Science Centre, passengers will also have other convenient rail transit services to connect from any of its stations.

It’s cute that you think Canada and more specifically Doug Fords Ontario has the capability to sequence GO with HSR. LOL. While this IS a possibility in places like Europe it won’t ever happen here in our lifetime, but I digress bc your point is that it IS possible even tho it’ll never happen here. Vive le Canada

It's cute that you think that the Prime Minister of Ontario occupies himself with the technical details which determine the interoperability between ONxpress and ALTO. I worked closely with the current VP at ML responsible for the transformation of the GO network (when we both worked at VIA) and Deutsche Bahn (which advised VIA through the negotiations about preserving access to the Mont-Royal tunnel before preparing their successful bid for operating RER through ONxpress) and I can assure you that both were as incensed as everyone else at VIA was when the REM was given the green line without ensuring interoperability with future intercity rail uses. I'd also like to point towards the selection of ETCS Level 2 as train control system and 25 kV AC for electrification by Metrolinx, both of which are highly suitable choices for ALTO…

 

[guavadelic]

The advantage to through service to Pearson is obvious for convenience not speed. UP is quite fast enough, and higher speeds Union-Pearson would not add value. I would think that the benefit would be greatest for regional travellers and especially for those stations west of the GTA.

- Paul

Agreed. Would also increase the direct catchment area of HSR when you add another station in the western GTA. Would be much easier for lotta folks to catch the train at Pearson than schlep downtown.

 

[416InTrouble]

I really hate to say this, but just because you two happen to agree so vehemently on something does not automatically make either of you particularly knowledgeable about the fundamentals of rail operations and infrastructure or the specifics of ALTO and its future relation/interplay with Metrolinx/ONxpress. The “mentally stable genius” and his clown on Ketamin get apparently off to listening to each other harping about tariffs solving every single economic and foreign policy problem in the United States, while you would struggle to find two more clueless-yet-strongly-opiniated people on this topic...

Please allow me to tell you a secret: exo (just like its predecessor, AMT) has already been stopping at high-level platforms since its inception, thanks to trains which look like this:

It's 580 km from Gare Centrale to Union Station via Ottawa. Even if it takes you a full hour on the first 40 km out of Montreal and the final 40 km into Toronto (i.e., an average speed of 80 km/h), you still have to only achieve an average travel speed of 250 km/h to achieve an end-to-end travel time of 3 hours. They will cut travel times where they get the biggest bang-for-the-buck and chances are that that won't mean spending billions on the final approaches to Montreal or Toronto...

Friendly reminder that it was you who took the long-term view to potentially justify the Ottawa Bypass:

I was just saying that building a Ottawa Bypass will remain as economically and commercially unviable in 50 years as would be now.

You know, this is one of the comments where your lack of understanding of the topic we are discussing becomes obvious: The objective of intercity rail is not to link with the transit lines with the highest ridership, but to link with nodes which maximize the capture area, i.e., the population which can access your intercity train from their homes or offices with zero (i.e., from locations within walking distance of the intercity rail station), 1 or 2 transfers. If you take a look at a map of the Ontario Line, all the major stations of the Ontario lines already have (or will have) convenient and frequent rail transit to either Union Station or Kennedy:
View attachment 638950
The Ontario Line will provide a massive capacity increase to Toronto's downtown transit networks, but apart from the 3 stations between Pape and Science Centre, passengers will also have other convenient rail transit services to connect from any of its stations.

It's cute that you think that the Prime Minister of Ontario occupies himself with the technical details which determine the interoperability between ONxpress and ALTO. I worked closely with the current VP at ML responsible for the transformation of the GO network (when we both worked at VIA) and Deutsche Bahn (which advised VIA through the negotiations about preserving access to the Mont-Royal tunnel before preparing their successful bid for operating RER through ONxpress) and I can assure you that both were as incensed as everyone else at VIA was when the REM was given the green line without ensuring interoperability with future intercity rail uses. I'd also like to point towards the selection of ETCS Level 2 as train control system and 25 kV AC for electrification by Metrolinx, both of which are highly suitable choices for ALTO…

Hey angry bird…. I hope you’re right except that all the organizations you’ve referenced are pretty USELESS organizations who have delivered or executed on near ZERO in the last 30 years. You’re missing the point - specifically that MX and ViA have a major challenge with “execution”… or delivery….Nobody said these things aren’t technically possible - they’re just unlikely to be delivered here because of the ineptitude and bureaucracy of each of these firms who have demonstrated their inability to deliver anything on time or on schedule or on budget

 

[zang]

It’s also cute that you think the province has a Prime. Minister.

People have also called him the Mayor of Toronto. The dude has had eyes on the PM job since mommy told him he could have the seat after Rob. I took it as a slag against Ford, as I'm sure it was intended.

 

[Urban Sky]

Hey angry bird…. I hope you’re right except that all the organizations you’ve referenced are pretty USELESS organizations who have delivered or executed on near ZERO in the last 30 years. You’re missing the point - specifically that MX and ViA have a major challenge with “execution”… or delivery….Nobody said these things aren’t technically possible - they’re just unlikely to be delivered here because of the ineptitude and bureaucracy of each of these firms who have demonstrated their inability to deliver anything on time or on schedule or on budget

I’m not sure it’s worth my time and mental health to discuss with people who test the limits between nohilist pedantry and outright trolling, while being so clueless that they still believe that Metrolinx and VIA Rail (rather than ONxpress and Cadence) are in charge of executing and delivering the GO expansion and ALTO projects…

 

[nfitz]

If they want to build a new tunnel, then the Alto platforms wouldn't be on the same level as the existing EXO platforms.

Please allow me to tell you a secret: exo (just like its predecessor, AMT) has already been stopping at high-level platforms since its inception ...

I don't think there's need to be pedantic here. We've discussed deep-level platforms at Lucien L'Allier, possibly underneath De la Gauchtierre. This has nothing to do with the boarding height.

I really don't see how they are going to have HSR with all these 2 minutes here and 3 minutes there you keep adding. And even if the Ontario Line and East Harbour station don't steralize the route for HSR, Scarborough Junction is a big problem, and the capacity along the Stouffville line isn't as wide as along the Kingston Sub through Leslieville. Though if they throw enough money at it, they add a couple of spans over the Don, and tunnel up Carlaw

It's 580 km from Gare Centrale to Union Station via Ottawa. Even if it takes you a full hour on the first 40 km out of Montreal and the final 40 km into Toronto (i.e., an average speed of 80 km/h), you still have to only achieve an average travel speed of 236 km/h to achieve the promissed end-to-end travel time of 3:07 hours, which is still slower than the 253 km/h TGVs achieve between Paris-Est and Strasbourg. They will cut travel times where they get the biggest bang-for-the-buck and chances are that that won't mean spending billions on the final approaches to Montreal or Toronto.

Did you see the smiley when I mentioned tunelling under Carlaw - obviously that's not going to happen. It was an obvious joke about the Ontario Line.

It's not going to take $billions to rehab (and possibly twin the viaduct) the Don Spur, now that Metrolinx has trashed their plans to obstruct the spur with a new yard. Yes, they'll need a grade seperation to let Alto trains cross to the Havelock Subdivision without obstructing the CP mainline. Metrolinx has already been doing this elsewhere.

(also, the Ontario Line is mostly a Relief line and much less interesting as a connector line than, say, TTC lines 2 and 5)

Line 5? The forecast demand for Line 3 is about 4 times that of Line 5. And approaching that of Line 2.

The original Pape to Queen relief subway line concept is long since gone. They are a lot closer now to the original concept for the Queen subway line from the 1960s (and in some ways similar to the concept that was approved in the 1940s city referendum). If they build the eastbound extension to Pearson and Kipling - then it will be a more extensive line than any other subway line.

You know, this is one of the comments where your lack of understanding of the topic we are discussing becomes obvious: The objective of intercity rail is not to link with the transit lines with the highest ridership, but to link with nodes which maximize the capture area, i.e., the population which can access your intercity train from their homes or offices with zero (i.e., from locations within walking distance of the intercity rail station), 1 or 2 transfers.

I was merely replying to your comment that Line 5 was more interesting than Line 3. If Alto was to be running through East Harbour station (which I've noted as very unlikely), stopping might make sense. But as they are going up the Don Spur, there's really no viable transfer location to Line 3 (though perhaps at the old Leaside station - which was recently demolished and is now under the Line 3 yard)

 

[crs1026]

I was merely replying to your comment that Line 5 was more interesting than Line 3. If Alto was to be running through East Harbour station (which I've noted as very unlikely), stopping might make sense. But as they are going up the Don Spur, there's really no viable transfer location to Line 3 (though perhaps at the old Leaside station - which was recently demolished and is now under the Line 3 yard)
[/QUOTE]

An even more promising location for the singular suburban stop (it should be singular, not multiple) would be in Agincourt, where there is potential for a station that connects to the extended Line 2 and (hopefully, by the same timeframe) Line 5....and has a catchment up into Markham and possibly east into Pickering.
Too many suburban stations would harm, not help, so we need to put them in place very judiciously.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

It's not going to take $billions to rehab (and possibly twin the viaduct) the Don Spur, now that Metrolinx has trashed their plans to obstruct the spur with a new yard.

The plans for the storage yard on the bottom end of the Belleville Sub has long since been moved to a piece of Metrolinx-owned land on the Bala Sub just south of York Mills.

Dan

 

[Urban Sky]

I don't think there's need to be pedantic here. We've discussed deep-level platforms at Lucien L'Allier, possibly underneath De la Gauchtierre. This has nothing to do with the boarding height.

I wasn’t trying to be pedantic, I just misread and thus misunderstood the point you were making. My apologies (and, yeah, maybe I shouldn’t post that late in the evening)…

Did you see the smiley when I mentioned tunelling under Carlaw - obviously that's not going to happen. It was an obvious joke about the Ontario Line.

I was mainly responding to the first sentence of your quote. The speeds achieved in the final approach into Toronto Union are only marginally relevant for the question whether Montreal-to-Toronto will take 3:07 or 4 hours…

It's not going to take $billions to rehab (and possibly twin the viaduct) the Don Spur, now that Metrolinx has trashed their plans to obstruct the spur with a new yard. Yes, they'll need a grade seperation to let Alto trains cross to the Havelock Subdivision without obstructing the CP mainline. Metrolinx has already been doing this elsewhere.

You are right that the Don Branch is the most obvious route from the Havelock Sub into Union Station, but it has clear operational disadvantages, such as that intercity trains would now occupy two distinct parts of Union Station, which is undesirable given the capacity constraints faced with the platform tracks.

I was merely replying to your comment that Line 5 was more interesting than Line 3. If Alto was to be running through East Harbour station (which I've noted as very unlikely), stopping might make sense. But as they are going up the Don Spur, there's really no viable transfer location to Line 3 (though perhaps at the old Leaside station - which was recently demolished and is now under the Line 3 yard)

We were discussing the question for what kind of rail transit lines it would be worth to make stops to allow connections. The Ontario Line will indeed become one of the backbones of Toronto’s transit system, but that does not automatically make connecting intercity rail with it as much of a priority as you seem(ed) to believe…