News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 676     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 601     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 741     2 

Rail: Ontario-Quebec High Speed Rail Study

reaperexpress said:
Does the 11B figure assume that GO and AMT have already electrified their segments?

If it doesn't, then the cost of HSR could be knocked down by a fair margin, based on the costs of the GO and AMT projects that are going ahead regardless.

The GO and AMT segments don't make up a very large portion of the T-M route, but they would probably have a significant impact on the overall costs of electrification. GO will be taking responsibility for electrifying the USRC - a massive undertaking, as well as the electrifying route from there to the VIA TMC, which is also helpful. Urban electrification is also much more expensive than rural electrification, presumably because construction needs more impact mitigation and there are generally more nearby objects needing grounding.

As a side note: It's interesting that GO chose to only electrify the lines are also shared with VIA services.
Click to expand...

The trouble is that a VIA train in rush hour spends a lot of time waiting in Union Station, so if high speed VIA trains are added, this limits the number of GO trains that can operate out of Union. This I think will force the construction of a downtown tunnel to operate more GO services, which is needed anyway because Union Station is near its maximum capacity in rush hour.

For comparison, my understanding is that a large percentage of the cost of HS2 in the UK is expanding Euston Station, to accommodate high speed rail as well as the existing commuter rail services.
 
I have not read the full report, only the executive summary, but from what I gleaned, the report has taken into consideration all of the construction costs and does indeed quote the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal line at just over 11B with 300KM speeds and 9B for 200KM. This is a professional transit consulting team with members from Germany and all over the world with real experience.

I haven't seen the study but the Post article linked above does not say the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal leg would be profitable. It says it would be lucrative.
Click to expand...

What else can "lucrative" mean other than profitable? The report says that the capital costs of a Windsor to Quebec line could not be recouped, but the operating costs could be covered. Thus, a To-Ott-Mon line would, over time, recoup not only operating costs, but the capital costs as well. This is what the report states, but I don't have the exact figures as to how long capital expenses would take to be recovered.

I severely doubt that a 300km/h Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal high speed rail could be built for 11 billion dollars. The UK High Speed 2 from London to Birmingham is projected to cost 15.8 to 17.4 billion pounds for a much shorter distance.
Click to expand...

Don't compare London and southern UK land costs with Ontario costs. Thankfully, we are much less expensive. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the cost leapt a few Billion once we started the line.

For a copy of the report, and other high speed rail news, go to:

http://highspeedrail.ca/
 
agoraflaneur said:
The report says that the capital costs of a Windsor to Quebec line could not be recouped, but the operating costs could be covered. Thus, a To-Ott-Mon line would, over time, recoup not only operating costs, but the capital costs as well. This is what the report states, but I don't have the exact figures as to how long capital expenses would take to be recovered.
Click to expand...

I think the way this gets built, if at all, is to find a private partner (a pension or infrastructure fund) that will agree on a set of revenue projections......then figure out how much capital that would represent a 20% return on.....let's say that s $7B......government kicks in the rest but gets no return. Their $4B (in this hypothetical example) pays for the environmental and societal benefits....the $7B from the financial partner pays for the financial returns.
 
$11 billion is a steal to get a less than three hour travel time between the centres of Canada's two largest cities. The modelling in the study indicates that the benefits of a Montreal-Toronto segment substantially outweigh its costs -- something the Federal government conveniently avoids mentioning in its news release.

The report has a figure of $825m annual revenues for just the Montreal - Toronto segment, and $290m annual operating costs. So by the government's own estimates of purely monetary considerations, an electric high-speed rail line between Toronto and Montreal would bring in over $0.5 billion in profit a year.
 
mpd618 said:
$11 billion is a steal to get a less than three hour travel time between the centres of Canada's two largest cities. The modelling in the study indicates that the benefits of a Montreal-Toronto segment substantially outweigh its costs -- something the Federal government conveniently avoids mentioning in its news release.

The report has a figure of $825m annual revenues for just the Montreal - Toronto segment, and $290m annual operating costs. So by the government's own estimates of purely monetary considerations, an electric high-speed rail line between Toronto and Montreal would bring in over $0.5 billion in profit a year.
Click to expand...

Assuming an interest rate of 3% (Government bond rates are lower than that today but that would not likely be the case over the long haul), then, if those numbers are right they could borrow the $11B and, once the thing got operational, cover the operating costs and the interest costs and still have a bit left over....seems like a good plan if those are the numbers.
 
TOareaFan said:
Assuming an interest rate of 3% (Government bond rates are lower than that today but that would not likely be the case over the long haul), then, if those numbers are right they could borrow the $11B and, once the thing got operational, cover the operating costs and the interest costs and still have a bit left over....seems like a good plan if those are the numbers.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I was hoping it might be feasible to fund via semi-government backed bonds similar to Pearson; but your math indicates it won't be.

$11B with half of the funds required midway through the 10 year construction period; so about $12.5B on opening day. Assume 2 to 3 years to ramp up ridership and that there will be delays or issues after opening and we get $14B.

Pearson seems to get about a 4% interest rate these days. Ontario Savings Bonds are 3.80% for a 10 year term at the moment.

With a 30 year amortization, we get annual payments of about $800M. I assume that $500M is inflation adjusted. 30 years is important because new rolling stock and major track maintenance will be required in that time period (the company will need borrowing room regardless of economic climate at that time).


The government would need to gift 1/3rd to 1/2 of the capital to make a go of it.
 
The United Aircraft Turbo Train...Also served the NYC-Boston NE Corridor...

CN: That was a good article on the CN version of the United Aircraft Turbo Train...

Beginning in 1969-70 these trains also began service between NYC and Boston operated
by the Penn Central Railroad under sponsorship by the US Department of Transportation
and then Amtrak after they took over PC's intercity passenger rail service beginning in May
1971...I found it interesting that the Author did not mention this service which began in
the same era as the CN Turbo Train service between Toronto and Montreal...
The NYC-Boston route was only partially electrified at that point (NYC-New Haven,CT)
and was a prime route to operate these experimental trains...

There were two main drawbacks concerning these trains: First being that they were fuel
guzzlers-not a problem at first but when fuel prices started their sharp rise these trains
gradually became uneconomical...

Second-these trains were built for just a 10-15 year maximum lifespan which is quite short
for passenger rail cars in which many are built for a median of 30 years and more...

By the end of the 70s Amtrak had retired their UA Turbo trains and at one point bought
at least one former CN Turbo train which was destroyed in a test run before being shipped south
to Amtrak for NE Corridor service...The thought was to enhance further NYC-Boston service
but after that accident Amtrak decided against further use of the
UA Turbo trains...

In closing they were interesting trains from that era...and none were preserved...
I believe all the UA Turbo Trains ended up being scrapped...

Memories from LI MIKE
 
Last edited:
Long Island Mike said:
Second-these trains were built for just a 10-15 year maximum lifespan which is quite short
for passenger rail cars in which many are built for a median of 30 years and more...
Click to expand...

Proof? I have gone through almost all of what is left of the CN files, and some of Alan Cripe's own papers as well, and nothing at all that I have seen has indicated that the trains were designed for such a short lifespan. In fact, CN was looking at signing a 30 year lease of the equipment after the Canadian trainsets were rebuilt in 1971.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
More information about the United Aircraft Turbo Trains...

Dan: I recall reading someplace that the UA Turbo trains were designed for a short lifespan and I remember being surprised myself...
They were designed to be comparable with the passenger aircraft amenities of the day...
Both CN/VIA and Penn Central/Amtrak only got about a decade's worth of service with these trains...

For more on these trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAC_TurboTrain
or just Google "UAC Turbo Train" in which more information is available...

LI MIKE
 
Last edited:
Long Island Mike said:
Dan: I recall reading someplace that the UA Turbo trains were designed for a short lifespan and I remember being surprised myself...
They were designed to be comparable with the passenger aircraft amenities of the day...
Both CN/VIA and Penn Central/Amtrak only got about a decade's worth of service with these trains...

For more on these trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAC_TurboTrain
or just Google "UAC Turbo Train" in which more information is available...

LI MIKE
Click to expand...

Interested parties could also read a book that was written on the Turbo: http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/Turbotrain-A-Journey-Jason-Shron/9780978361105-item.html . I have a feeling Dan is familiar with this one already...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top