roger1818
Senior Member
Just because Metrolinx does it doesn't mean it is a good idea. I never get the argument that just because someone else does something it must be the best decision.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Just because Metrolinx does it doesn't mean it is a good idea. I never get the argument that just because someone else does something it must be the best decision.
TerryJohnson
New Member
This article was written before Paul released the redacted JPO report, but nothing in that report changes our analysis that a DBFOM is deeply problematic. After all, they redacted the whole DBFM vs DBFOM analysis that could have made their case, and the whole section on the future of VIA.
www.transportaction.ca
The report keeps mentioning an "Option 2" route, giving hints that it is not the O&Q alignment originally proposed, allowing more 110 mph+ running, while suggesting that grade crossings are still more of a problem for 125 mph running than the Minister's announcement indicated. This section is particularly telling:
Without actually seeing Option 2, much less a comparison with other options, with there's no way for stakeholders to arrive at an informed opinion about it one way or another. "Desktop review" is often consultant speak for not having done very much at all.
Neither does the redacted report provide much clarity on the route to be taken on Island of Montreal, where the REM has left VIA (or rather Transport Canada now) with a lot of options, but no good ones. In the absence of transparency, we've conducted our own "desktop review" of the options (made some fantasy maps) based on what's been discussed here, on other forums, and in messages sent to Transport Action:
www.transportaction.ca
Terry Johnson
President, Transport Action Canada
High Frequency Rail has grown into a megaproject, can it succeed as one?
Transport Action is concerned that the recent scope changes put the entire High Frequency Rail project in jeopardy due to the significant cost escalation, and we are very disappointed that a final decision to proceed is unlikely to be made before the next federal election in 2025, despite the...
www.transportaction.ca
The report keeps mentioning an "Option 2" route, giving hints that it is not the O&Q alignment originally proposed, allowing more 110 mph+ running, while suggesting that grade crossings are still more of a problem for 125 mph running than the Minister's announcement indicated. This section is particularly telling:
Without actually seeing Option 2, much less a comparison with other options, with there's no way for stakeholders to arrive at an informed opinion about it one way or another. "Desktop review" is often consultant speak for not having done very much at all.
Neither does the redacted report provide much clarity on the route to be taken on Island of Montreal, where the REM has left VIA (or rather Transport Canada now) with a lot of options, but no good ones. In the absence of transparency, we've conducted our own "desktop review" of the options (made some fantasy maps) based on what's been discussed here, on other forums, and in messages sent to Transport Action:
Solving the Mount Royal Tunnel problem for High Frequency Rail
While the federal government has announced its intention to proceed with HFR, key questions remain unanswered. Untangling the route through Montreal is one of them. We examine some possible route options.
www.transportaction.ca
Terry Johnson
President, Transport Action Canada
Bordercollie
Senior Member
110MPH running on dedicated tracks is still better than what we have today. It can be upgraded later to remove crossings at a later date. Just get the thing built and worry about it later.This article was written before Paul released the redacted JPO report, but nothing in that report changes our analysis that a DBFOM is deeply problematic. After all, they redacted the whole DBFM vs DBFOM analysis that could have made their case, and the whole section on the future of VIA.
High Frequency Rail has grown into a megaproject, can it succeed as one?
Transport Action is concerned that the recent scope changes put the entire High Frequency Rail project in jeopardy due to the significant cost escalation, and we are very disappointed that a final decision to proceed is unlikely to be made before the next federal election in 2025, despite the...
The report keeps mentioning an "Option 2" route, giving hints that it is not the O&Q alignment originally proposed, allowing more 110 mph+ running, while suggesting that grade crossings are still more of a problem for 125 mph running than the Minister's announcement indicated. This section is particularly telling:
Without actually seeing Option 2, much less a comparison with other options, with there's no way for stakeholders to arrive at an informed opinion about it one way or another. "Desktop review" is often consultant speak for not having done very much at all.
Neither does the redacted report provide much clarity on the route to be taken on Island of Montreal, where the REM has left VIA (or rather Transport Canada now) with a lot of options, but no good ones. In the absence of transparency, we've conducted our own "desktop review" of the options (made some fantasy maps) based on what's been discussed here, on other forums, and in messages sent to Transport Action:
Solving the Mount Royal Tunnel problem for High Frequency Rail
While the federal government has announced its intention to proceed with HFR, key questions remain unanswered. Untangling the route through Montreal is one of them. We examine some possible route options.
Terry Johnson
President, Transport Action Canada
TerryJohnson
New Member
Pretty much what my line is... but the government seem to think that everything has to be perfect first time, while talking about leveraging private sector expertise.
That's not how the private sector does things. They ship the first version of a product as quickly as possible and then iterate. YDS talked about diesel first, electrification and alignment straightening later, but the government has waited so long that now it *is* later.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
the way private sector works is that they would figure out a way to get 125mph running on tracks with grade crossings, not find ways to entirely grade separate it.
Which is also arguably the route that should be taken.
The reality is that what will likely happen is that the government will focus investment on select sections of the corridor which can be fully separated to achieve 125mph running speeds, likely the areas on new alignments, with most of the corridor operating at 110mph outside of those areas.
Which is also arguably the route that should be taken.
The reality is that what will likely happen is that the government will focus investment on select sections of the corridor which can be fully separated to achieve 125mph running speeds, likely the areas on new alignments, with most of the corridor operating at 110mph outside of those areas.
crs1026
Superstar
The problem with VIA’s Cinderella status as an agency that has no legal status: it is vulnerable to piling-on by just about everyone in government who has a program agenda or ambition.
The private sector does not attempt to “boil the ocean”…. a project may have to recognize and accommodate some key stakeholder interests, but at some point expediency prevails. Whereas HFR seems to have attracted all sorts of bells and whistles once it crossed over from an investment prospectus to an opportunity for government action.
Like it or not, VIA’s original HFR package was eminently actionable as a simple investor-backed scheme, albeit with some basic financial guarantees from Ottawa and some basic public policy enablers.
The reality that, by pursuing HFR, VIA creates a situation where it has to withdraw from the venture, is downright Shakespearean.
- Paul
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Apparently the new HFR service will be 90% electric from the get go.
Quebec City/Toronto high-frequency rail link will be 90% electric: Via CEO
The High-Frequency Rail project is one that Via has been championing for several years, and aims to build dedicated tracks within the Quebec City-Toronto corridor.
montrealgazette.com
Darwinkgo
Active Member
With income for the proponent dependent on operating revenue, not having the proponent operate misaligns incentives needed to ensure success.
With O in there with revenue risk exposure, we have the opportunity for the proponent to invest in additional frequencies, additional classes, potentially even shorter travel time.
What would the optimal implementation model be in your mind?
Bordercollie
Senior Member
So for example if the capital cost is 10 billon and only 5 billon is allocated for capital investment, the other 5 billion will be leased to VIA or Government by the builder for 99 years? Which is about 50 Millon per year plus interest? Is that how this would work?
Darwinkgo
Active Member
Not exactly. The builder is holding the lease—they're leasing a government asset. This can sometimes be called 'own-transfer' but the result is the same.
Then set the term, likely in the 30 to 50 year range - 50 years is the max end of amortizing rail assets besides limited earth works iirc.
Then math time:
Project Capital Requirement including interest = $X
Project Operational Requirement including working capital = $Y
Government Investment = $Q
Fare and other revenue =$R
Then you 30-50 years Net Present Value the above and try to optimize for
$NPVX+$NPVY=$NPVQ+$NPVXR
The government can adjust the upfront cash cost of $NPVQ, but whether the money flows at the start, or over the term, the liability (and asset) is reflected on the government's books similarly as the project is meant to cover its operational costs with revenue. Of course the government should hold back some to enforce performance standards.
The contract with the partner is typically an 'availability'. The partner is making the asset available and providing service on it.
Then set the term, likely in the 30 to 50 year range - 50 years is the max end of amortizing rail assets besides limited earth works iirc.
Then math time:
Project Capital Requirement including interest = $X
Project Operational Requirement including working capital = $Y
Government Investment = $Q
Fare and other revenue =$R
Then you 30-50 years Net Present Value the above and try to optimize for
$NPVX+$NPVY=$NPVQ+$NPVXR
The government can adjust the upfront cash cost of $NPVQ, but whether the money flows at the start, or over the term, the liability (and asset) is reflected on the government's books similarly as the project is meant to cover its operational costs with revenue. Of course the government should hold back some to enforce performance standards.
The contract with the partner is typically an 'availability'. The partner is making the asset available and providing service on it.
Going from 110mph to 125mph is great, but I'm really hoping there's a concrete plan to address the super slow sections of the corridors, particularly in urban areas. Imagine if the speed on sections of track between say Ottawa and Fallowfield could be doubled. The crawl out of Ottawa station is painfully slow. I'd imagine some improvements there would make a pretty big difference on the overall running time, especially if every HFR train is routed through Ottawa.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Once the O-train is separated from the level crossing with VIA, I see no reason why that stretch can't be much, much faster than today. It's very low hanging fruit, so to speak.
The bigger question to me is how they plan to approach Toronto - they seem to be thinking the Stouffville Line right now south of Agincourt, but that requires a new flyover and the Stouffville line is limited to a relatively slow 50mph, and GO is planning extremely high frequencies on the 2-track line, leaving questions of capacity for VIA to slot into. Approaching down the CP line and the half-mile bridge would likely be faster, but is going to have issues with the planned Don Valley Layover yard, would also likely require a flyover/under from CP, and possibly even would require a reconstruction of the half-mile bridge.
Northern Light
Superstar
1/2 mile bridge needs to be reconstructed regardless, or at least redecked, its in poor shape.
Northern Light
Superstar
Apparently the new HFR service will be 90% electric from the get go.
Quebec City/Toronto high-frequency rail link will be 90% electric: Via CEO
The High-Frequency Rail project is one that Via has been championing for several years, and aims to build dedicated tracks within the Quebec City-Toronto corridor.
From this article, I note the following:
"The project is expected to cost up to $12 billion in public funds and be ready at the beginning of the next decade."
Also, in relation to current schedules:
“We feel confident that by June all the frequencies will come back.”
robmausser
Senior Member
The government realizes the more they say things have to be perfect the first time, the longer they can kick the can down the road... until election time!