Canada's Getting High-Speed Rail, But...

[@RMTransit]

How does everyone like my new *minimal* background?

[@AMPProf]

what if you were Talking behind a desk...

[@timor64]

I like the whole look Reece. Minimal background, minimal dress. It's basically you saying "I don't need props, you know who I am anyway"

[@Nabee_H]

@@RMTransit No, where's the subway map 😤

[@markvogel5872]

It looks a bit too much like you are moving and have everything packed up.

[@yeethappymeta]

where is the UC San diego blue line :(

[@bananenmusli2769]

Come on Canada, get it done already. I know our HSR in Germany is far from perfect but at least we have it and you have to do it too.

[@riseofazrael]

Yes we do, and you are being modest. The German system is very good, and a model for us Canadians to aspire to.

[@issedoesit279]

I was in Germany this summer and was impressed with the rail system and also the intermodal connectivity with Airports. The locals complain but to a Canadian it was like a trip to a futuristic Alien land.

[@bananenmusli2769]

@@issedoesit279 Yes, I agree. The trains are clean and mostly new and are easy to use but sometimes there are delays because conservatives let the infrastructure rot in the last few decades.

[@Dakta96]

@@riseofazrael The German high speed train system is one of the worst in Western Europe

[@agilemind6241]

@@Dakta96 And yet it is unbelievable better than anything in Canada, and most Canadian urbanists would die to have it here.

[@adiba9734]

If your government claims that it is short of money and is worried that its projects will fail, you don't need to look at France, Japan or Germany. Just look at Indonesia which has a GDP per capita 10 times smaller than Canada. we were able to make a high speed rail which in just 1 year already had 6 million passengers and 90% of the train capacity was filled

[@St0rrrm]

Indonesia seems to be OP with infrastructures in general

[@Toningly]

Did you get help from China? We're not allowed to get help from China.

[@Adrenaline_chaser]

​@@Toninglydaddy USA doesn't want that? How surprising. You're supposed to be a Sovreign indipendent nation

[@adiba9734]

@@Toningly i dont realy understant what people really think that we get help from china or whatever. we pay them with our own money same as south korea got help from france or spain got help from germany on first phase etc

[@adiba9734]

@@susan56566 what are you trying to say here😅 south korea using tgv technology from france, taiwan using japanese shinkansen, both russia and spain using germany tech. Its okay to receive help from other (other than china😅). China only pay 30% of the project and the rest was pay by indonesian goverment using b2b scheme.

[@RailMan102_Productions]

All I’m saying, is that it better be running its own dedicated rail line and not interfere with freight trains

[@kwlkid85]

You can run some freight services at night on high speed lines but yes passenger services need to be the priority.

[@Samuussman]

@@kwlkid85 you can, but it's a bad idea and is extremely rarely done the world over. Freight is particularly demanding on infrastructure (heavy axle load) and using high speed lines at night for freight will make it impossible for the necessary maintenance to be done

[@My-nl6sg]

mixing HSR and freight is doomed, hell even mixing them with high capacity commuter lines is not ideal

[@ianweniger6620]

I bet CP and CN will either try to obstruct any HSR effort or boycott the new line once built.

[@predarek]

Equally bad, I hope they don’t do Via Rail style boarding with bag weighing and other airport style practices…

[@issedoesit279]

The transformative effect this will have in this part of Canada can't be underestimated. Being able to travel between Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal and back within a day would tremendously boost commerce, productivity and tourism. Provided fares are reasonable, of course.

[@ADobbin1]

it'll be 40 years from now before that transformative effect happens. You'll be dead or so old you wont care.

[@RMTransit]

Absolutely, and only when we consider this full potential can we get a full sense of the benefits!

[@markvogel5872]

No tourists EVER visit......shudders......Québec mon ami!😅

[@pmycro]

High speed between Ottawa and Montreal is the transformative part. It will make Ottawa effectively a Montreal exurb and make the Ottawa airport an option to Montrealers.

[@geordi-gabrielrenauddumoul449]

​@@markvogel5872Are you kidding? Most of Canada's stereotypical culture comes from Quebec.

[@arjunyg4655]

I’m sure there’s some ironic joke to be made with the fact that the Québécois pension plan is a 19% shareholder in Eurostar.

[@Ruka-f7k]

I am pretty sure that the french-speaking, almost socialist, Quebec is pushing for HSR. The fact that the US, Australia, Canada are so backwards when it comes to public transportation has deep cultural roots.

[@issedoesit279]

...and the Quebec pension plan being part of the consortium that is the leading contender to win the bid 😂

[@wyldhowl2821]

That's not really ironic. QPP's directors tend to be big on such investments.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Canadian pension plans are one of the largest investors in the world markets. No surprise they are diversified. Alberta pension plan invests quite heavily in Vancouver rental market, for example.

[@simplygregsterev]

Im 39 now. If this gets built, it will open in time for my first pension cheque.

[@RMTransit]

I hope it’s sooner than that

[@__Dude_]

Quite probably. But France did not do better with their first 'Ligne a Grande Vitesse'. As you may know, first time is always the hardest. But the benefits are tremendous. Think about a possible extension to Hamilton.

[@kevinouellette4443]

I'm in the same boat as you, and I dread we'll see the 401 tunneled before we see HSR in Ontario.

[@TheHothead101]

@@__Dude_ Extension to Hamilton would only make sense if there were a plan to go to New York. If they were going to Detroit they'd probably go via Kitchener instead. That being said, Hamilton's Bayview Junction is a massive bottleneck (on top of the existing road bottlenecks) that should have a passenger flyover.

[@Truthasvictim]

Totally!

[@msmoniz]

The problem these days is government is behaving and planning like private corporations; basing their decisions on the next election cycle(or next quarter in private business) instead of on long term generational impacts for the future. And that's why the "government would be better if run like a business" folks are dead wrong!

[@ricequackers]

Government should not be run like a business, but there does need to be a penalty for failure. In the private sector the penalty for screwing up is losing your job, or the company losing money and going out of business. In the public sector, incompetent screw-ups don't get fired, they get shuttled sideways, promoted or re-elected. Invariably it's always the public that winds up paying for it, there's never any consequences for the people responsible.

[@roadtoplatbutimbad4738]

​@@ricequackersYou see politics is the worst of both worlds by being run like a business, but the politicians get away unpunished.

[@jebeda]

@@ricequackers I think you overestimate the feedback mechanisms in any large business. Maybe the twenty person operation manages to run itself in that idealized perfect manner, but there are plenty of incompetent screw-ups who don' get fired, and entire divisions and untold projects that are complete wastes of money and resources in the private sector. Screwups take time, and many companies are "too big to fail" so "going out of business" is often not as much of a cautionary idea as it should be. I'm not saying the public sector is "better" than the private sector (or the other way around), but just that each has their fair share of issues.

[@victorchen9170]

Uh the problem is that government hasn't been behaving and planning like a private corporation. And they never have.

[@msmoniz]

@ be thankful for that. Corporations are about generating a profit. Offering a product or service is a by-product and the only reason they do or improve anything they do is keep generating that profit. If what they offer stops becoming profitable no matter how good it is or how required it may be they just stopped doing it. Now imagine if governments stopped, offering Police Service, EMS, fire, garbage collection, public transportation. None of those things generate profit and yet people still seem to want and many cases require them. Thanks for stopping by. The grown-ups now will continue the conversation.

[@arnabrahman9893]

Thank you so much for producing this. We can always rely on you to provide meaningful commentary and help push public sentiment towards implementing better transit.

[@RMTransit]

Thank you! 🎉

[@rodchallis8031]

Ah, the old Liberal pre-election High Speed Rail Bait and Switch.

[@Nightshiftzombie]

They spent 30 years campaigning on daycare before getting arm twisted into actually doing it. So HSR for 2150?

[@TheRandCrews]

yes not like this was going along for two years already and due to for results after RFP biddings months ago, nope political manoeuvring

[@ianweniger6620]

Reece is right: this could very well be a stunt, given the route. The HSR lobby in Canada isn't big enough to rally support; one organizer interviewed on CBC was even more cynical than Reece. And I didn't notice any premier or mayor jumping behind HSR.

[@lego501stTrigger]

@@rodchallis8031 It's always so blatant. "Voting reform" "Jobs program" "Fixing the army" "More transport infra". Suddenly after years of ignoring major issues and funneling money to corporate backers, all of the sudden the government is concerned about them and vowes to fix them (right after they're re-elected of course!). Beware of any non-binding decisions made by a party on the brink of electoral disaster.

[@agilemind6241]

@@ianweniger6620 I doubt it is a stunt, but the route is obviously politically motivated to appease Toronto suburbanites rather than motivated by sound design and overall benefit to society. Cities already vote left wing, so few if any voters will change their vote due to this announcement. But I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre Poilievre cancels it even if that cancellation costs them millions and millions of dollars because he is campaigning on ideologically extremist rhetoric which means it would be expected for him to flush a few billion dollars down the toilet just to "own the libs".

[@AbstractEntityJ]

VIA Rail needs to get rid of its ridiculous baggage requirements first and foremost.

[@Nightshiftzombie]

Via seems determined to eliminate any of the positives of rail vs Air.

[@dbolt6543]

@@Nightshiftzombie It's run by airline types, what do you expect.

[@unimpressedcat2140]

Ok, but don't expect help lifting your bags onto the train and put the bags where you're told to put them so employees don't have to break their backs rearranging the baggage rack to make space.

[@AbstractEntityJ]

@@unimpressedcat2140 I mean, I think it's reasonable for them to be expected to help seniors and disabled people with their bags. But as a guy in my 30s, I'm fine.

[@Ragnar_Oock]

@@unimpressedcat2140 a solution for that would be setting up equipment to board the train and store the baggage so you don't have to lift it at any point. But that means investing in stuff and that costs money, but making it a fee looks like it will make money (even though it will just deter people and you are more likely to lose money in the end)

[@Ragnar_Oock]

The big things that mad france and japan's highspeed train networks possible was view them as public services. That means that they don't have to generate money, they don't have to be cheap. Infrastructure projects help to boost the economy and you get infrastructure out of it. And once it's in place you can still use it like a service not like a company. SNCF was referenced a lot in the video and as a french person I would like to point out that it did great before 2015-ish but it's now struggling because both the french state and the EU want it to work like a company providing a public service (i.e. providing the service at an affordable price while still generating profit) which is something that have yet to occur anywhere.

[@stephendoherty8291]

In fairness, the gov did help. By now the HSR network should be more than capable to moving the vast majority of traffic on those longer routes with the shorter ones being subsidised by the longer routes. You can then "discourage" all internal flights not connected by hSr. Airlines like short trips and they generate volume but they are not very profitable and the main selling point tends to be lowest cost and frequency. Allowing airlines to go longer haul can drive better airline profits and its got a captive market not as influenced by cost as by service and frequency and reliabilty as well as modern planes. These are all "easier" to fullfill than lowest cost even if passengers expect/presume a similar experience to longer haul. Once the line is built you can add allot of competing operators (within reason) and different operators (overnight/cargo/scenic/ultra low cost/luxury)

[@dmitripogosian5084]

French seems on track to slowly dismantling their public services.

[@limjaheybobandy]

My worry is that IF this project is actually green-lit (and you've brought up some really good points about that), that VIA manages it as they're doing currently. If VIA doesn't reform and scrap their current administration/business model, this project is guaranteed to fail.

[@themanyouwanttobe]

They need to scrap the airplane style check-in and boarding!

[@issedoesit279]

VIA wont be involved. The project involves the government awarding the operation of the line to an international consortium. Deutsch Bahn, SNCF, and Renfe are the three rail operators competing for the contract.

[@ADobbin1]

Unless they are idiots this will actually not be an issue. Current VIA service runs on the same rails as freight. A proper HS rail line would have to be above grade either on towers or raised earth mound so the lines would not have to go through crossings and you could keep people off the rails, and conveniently, completely separate from the freight lines. This means building entirely new rail corridors through already developed land. That alone is going to be a nightmare and blow costs through the roof. I'd be willing to bet this project is never going to happen. Its the sort of project you only do if your countries infrastructure and real estate has been completely obliterated in a war and you have to rebuild everything from scratch anyway.

[@RMTransit]

For better or for worse VIA isn’t really involved

[@agilemind6241]

@@issedoesit279 That's not really a solution though. It just reveals that they know Via Rail has a problem and are unwilling to fix it. Canada should have a federal department or crown corporation that actually has expertise in rail - not only to build out passenger rail, but also to ensure freight rail is appropriately regulated & monitored (see deadly crash in Quebec not that long ago). They can't just hire out temporary expertise from other countries and expect good performance. Those people have no investment in the project other than the money they can extract from it. We need in house experts that have travelled the world to ride Swiss trains, Japanese trains, French trains, German trains, etc... and actually understand what makes good train systems good and bad train systems bad from the perspective of the government that pays for them not from the perspective of consultants and companies who want to make a profit from them.

[@calvinmills4069]

Nothing frustrates me more as a teacher than realizing we teach about how "Canada was built on rail! Trans-Canada Railway was the key to our success!" and yet we just... abandoned rail entirely.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Well freight rail is at the core of Western Canada economy

[@quoniam426]

Those major cities being essentially aligned in a corridor, the Japanese model seems the more appropriate to follow, rationally speaking. Also about Eurostar, there is a clause that one cannot put so many trains per hour into the tunnel because... there is competition: Shuttle services (freight and coaches) from Calais to Folkstone also taking the tunnel and Eurostars to Brussels and Amsterdam... Not to mention potential commetition to Berlin in the future. If anything, Eurostars are not that infrequent. Remember that those trains are very long, equivalant to a multiple unit TGV in one trainset, they have tremendous capacity. But as you currently don't have international traffic to worry about (except with the US potentially in the future), the Japanase model of building both hight speed and high frequency train line is the good move. No more planes between those cities. The Spanish highspeed network (geographically ideal because Madrid is in the center of the country) has syphonned most of the domestic air traffic in just a few years.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

In the unlikely event the project does proceed, we'll likely get the worst of both worlds between private and public sector, similar to how they have executed GO Expansion. If you had proper private-sector leadership we could at least adopt global standard systems and experience, but instead we end up with a private consortium that can't even do that because the government refuses to update the archaic regulations and operating procedures to enable globally standard practices that have been proven to be safe. So if we do get HSR it will probably still be a train that has to ring its bell to enter a platform, have two locomotive engineers, passengers will still need to weigh their bags, etc. And the project will be far more expensive than it would have been if we had just updated our policies and procedures to procure an off-the-shelf HSR system from the global market that has plenty of experience building new HSR in countries that didn't have prior HSR exprience, like Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan and Indonesia

[@issedoesit279]

I suspect part of the discussions/bids included an agreement to update Canada's archaic regulations. I cant see SNCF and Deutsch Bahn agreeing to sully their reputations by running a sub-standard Canadian-style rail service.

[@wllywaliy]

I hope this gets done, but knowing Canada, I feel like this will end up being a not-so-high-speed rail line on existing CN/CP tracks.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Neither CN nor CP will let much more traffic onto their tracks

[@barryrobbins7694]

“What a country would build to maximally benefit the country is different from what a private company would build to try to sell a country on high-speed rail or any other infrastructure project.” Truer words have never been spoken. People often get it backwards.

[@agilemind6241]

Yes, too many politicians want rail service to be self-sustaining financially not realizing the main point of rail service is to reduce costs on the rest of the transportation network. When doing cost-benefit for these projects you really need to account for all of the network not just one line/service at a time.

[@papyrussemi2848]

Canada, where every public transport project has an asterisk. Except GO Transit. For some reason.

[@ADobbin1]

GO is private and localized unlike VIA which has to spend most of its income supporting service in the rest of the country where its losing money. The only place VIA actually makes money is the windsor to montreal corridor and it make a lot there. If there was no government mandate to service the whole of canada then VIA would not be operating anywhere but windsor to montreal.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

@@ADobbin1 GO is not private. GO literally stands for Government of Ontario"

[@RMTransit]

GO has asterisks too unfortunately

[@ADobbin1]

@@OntarioTrafficMan I did not know that. I thought it was private because it wasn't VIA. Yes I know via is privately operated but Its heavily mandated by the government which is VIA's biggest problem.

[@Absolute_Zero7]

@@ADobbin1 You seem to forget that Canada is a federated state with a strong separation of power between the Federal and Provincial governments. GO is simply operated by the Provincial Government unlike VIA which is run by the federal government.

[@taichiwinchester1102]

Not a single time China or Spain is mentioned in the video even though they have the #1 and #2 longest networks in the world. I mean why would you, they are not France or the UK or Japan, not sophisticated and developed enough to be compared with Canada.

[@RMTransit]

I talk about both of them loads.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

0:28 yes high-speed trains can be frequent. Just look at Oslo, the high-speed trains running from downtown to the airport run every 10 minutes

[@laurids796]

How exactly are they high speed between the two stations? I don’t think that’s what we’re talking about here

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

@@laurids796 as they have a top speed of 210 kph / 130 mph, and anything at or above 200 kph is concidered as high speed here

[@forkast]

Thank you for mentioning the lakeshore cities! It makes no sense that the line isn't going to run through Oshawa, Belleville and Kingston... Especially when having high speed rail there could also help local services and infrastructure as well.

[@annoyed707]

Skipping Ottawa makes no sense either.

[@cameron.s.9368]

There's just way to many level Crossings on Lakeshore it would be so dangerous

[@forkast]

@@cameron.s.9368 there's also a bunch of level crossings on the Peterborough alignment! You'd have to get rid of level crossings regardless, at least on the lakeshore, that infrastructure would help far more communities and the existing mainline with ridership.

[@Blastnet_DanHarris]

While I favour a Lakeshore alignment (or both, go big or go home) remember that high speed rail won't be stopping in all those locations (maybe some Oshawa stops) but to truly be high speed the stops have to be far apart. Lakeshore is more challenging in a sense though as it's more urbanely built up. Can't just run them on the existing corridor. But high frequency on the current tracks (which VIA having its own track) would allow it to feed into the higher speed. Coburg to Montreal ends up being 2 hours of travel with a switch at Kingston as an example.

[@issedoesit279]

The Lakeshore alignment is owned by CN and they dont want any more passenger rail in their corridor. That was the whole point of building through Peterborough.

[@lassepeterson2740]

The real reason that London to Paris is a special setup is because the Chunnel is VERY expensive to use . There is also the shuttle trains and freight trains so capacity is not so endless and priority has to be shared .

[@RMTransit]

It’s not the *real* reason, the Chunnel being expensive to use is a decision, a decision which does not prioritize making it highly used. There are not THAT many shuttle trains.

[@kristijanradovac]

it’s a special setup because Eurostar was lobbying for monopoly since it’s existed. german DB has tried on multiple occasions to send trains to london, but Euro Tunnel and Eurostar were against it citing “technological incompatibility” all while the same trains running in germany as ICE (Siemens) are used by Eurostar as well…

[@lassepeterson2740]

@@RMTransit The thing is the tunnel portion is a railway more than transit . I think 4 passenger shuttles an hour is alot but ... that is subjective . Try to dovetail Eurostars at busy times plus other trains into the tube . The tunnel has a max capacity and must be operated bellow that capacity due to backlog potentials , inspections and maintanance under 24/7 train operation . There is no parrallel legacy railway to run traffic around like the Paris to Lyon does which runs only passenger transit .The best way to keep the Chunnel from running too close to capacity is to charge more for the use plus the overhead of the tunnel itself . Add some UK / France politics into it and the railroad has it's hands full . Not a normal situation .

[@harveybrant3352]

@@lassepeterson2740 I agree that the Channel Tunnel is not a good example to use when talking about high speed rail. There are dedicated high speed lines on both sides of it nowadays, but as you point out, the tunnel itself is used by freight as well as passenger trains. Capacity is very much a limiting factor. There are domestic trains on the UK side that use the high speed line, but there are no major cities between there and the tunnel, and it's a fairly short stretch of line anyway, so it doesn't really compare with the proposed Canadian example. Whenever I've used Eurostar trains they've usually been pretty full, as has the terminal in London.

[@johnholland1308]

You are correct about ppp procurement. In the end there are too many cooks in the kitchen and the contractors have too much control over the final product.

[@EdPMur]

3:47 This is probably one of the main reasons Air Canada joined one of the HSR proposing teams

[@TysonIke]

Probably because Air Canada also does not make very much on those routes. Short haul flights between very large cities often prove challenging for full service mainline airlines

[@TheMl145]

​@@TysonIke A friend of mine works as a flight attendant on the short haul Air Canada flights. She told me that a lot of the short haul planes are not even owned by Air Canada. It's another airline that they contract out to.

[@TysonIke]

@ that’s part of the problem. Another issues is that low cost carriers often flood those types of routes with excess capacity and low fares due to slot retention and other factors. The reason why US carriers on the other hand have a fear of HSR is because some of them have monopolized specific routes in the northeast.

[@wyldhowl2821]

If companies like Air Canada, Westjet, Via, CP, and CN feel butt-hurt about it, by all means they should change what they are doing. Better than using lobbying/sabotage to deflect society away from changing for the better.

[@giovannigarcia9972]

Spot on about Eurostar, the fact that the HSR line exists yet London-Paris and London-Amsterdam are some of the busiest air routes tells you everything you need to know

[@Desi365]

It's not true. Very few people fly London/Amsterdam/Paris. The thing happening is the monopoly of Eurostar on these routes, prices have hit insane highs, it's in desperate need of competition instead of the SNCF cash cow it is today.

[@lws7394]

8:11 Eurostar is an anomalie in high spped rail. It is not a good example for the Windsor Quebec corridor , or Alberta . 1) it serves international lines , which will have less pessengers than domestic in given circomztances. 2) UK is not a Schengen country , which requires passport checks ! 3) The Channel tunnel has a safety requirement than in cas of emergence , all passengers can use safety exits directly from the teain . These are 300m apart . This means that trains using the Tunnel should be 300m long, uninterupted ! Normally train sets are half the length and SNCF or other operators will combine 2 of those sets. This is a barrier to use the Tunnel . DB had a license to ride the tunnel , but did not yse the service ! One criterium Canada should remain is the 3hr rule ! A 3hr jouney is competitive with planes. France makes this decision and Sweden too. Even though Swe uses 200kmh trains they mage to do the 470km journey Stockholm Gothenburg , in 3hr, by going in a straight line and bypassing 'midsized' cities like Örebro. And this journey beats plane journeys. In germany the ICE stops in most city centres along corridors . >>relative longer journey which don't beat air travel , unlike in Italy, France and Sweden .. ( This means sorry for Kingston and a straight line Toronto to Ottawa and to Montreal .. ,

[@samirgillespie9135]

I was coming to say this haha! And Eurostar is very well used, the trains are normally very busy and the trains leave normally once every 1 or 2 hours especially the Paris route.

[@AL5520]

First, a small correction about the length of the trains - it's 400m and regular high speed train sets are 200m. As for the rest, That specific requirement won't prevent some operator as they will be willing to buy adapted rolling stock so they can use it. In any case, Eurostar plans to buy more train sets to increase frequency. As for journey time. People are willing to spend far more than 3h on a train. People are happy to take the almost 6h direct train from Barcelona to Seville or the 4h35 train between Marseilles and Lille or the almost 7h train between Barcelona and Paris and there are more. In any case you can do both direct trains and trains that stop in a some or all stations along the way. The Madrid Barcelona line, for example, has plenty of direct trains but also others that stop in Zaragoza, and some that stop in Tarragona, Lleida and Guadelajara-Yebes when Tarragona and Guadelajara-Yebes are on the direct path, with side platforms and the main line that bypass them and in Zaragoza and Lleida the line bypasses the cities and a small sideline branches into the city and back. High speed rail should not be a luxury service but the standard long distant service that connects larger cities with stops in smaller ones along the way when smaller places and regular medium distance, regional trains for shorter journeys and connection to the long distance/high speed train station in the area.

[@lws7394]

@@AL5520 Paris Marseille is 3h20 but Hamburg to Munich (690km apart, a bit further than Bar-Mdrd) takes 5h30 with 8 stops at cities with 70k or 120k pop. Not a surprise that Ham-Mun and other german corridors are still in the top25 of busiest passenger air routes in Europe. In France and Italy a hst connection means few flights in between. In Sweden train vs air is 9:1 , most use the train. Imo not making choices i Germany has its side effects on that aspect. ( counter argument is that Germany metro areas are more dispersed ..) Btw I watched the Bar-Madrid route. .. 2 stations are outside villages that don't affect the cruise speed . The line takes a detour along Tarragona and Lleida , but thats on practical geograhic reasons , to bypass mountain ranges .zaragoza is of course a major city , that needs a stop. Furtjermorr Renfe offers 'direct' 1 stops . DB will stop like an intercity in all the 8 cities along the line ...

[@lars7935]

@@lws7394Germany really does need some proper super express ICE trains that truly only serve the largest metro areas. DB tried to do that with the ICE Sprinter but they still serve many smaller cities

[@lws7394]

@@samirgillespie9135 ofcourse Eurostar is full. That's what sncf/Eurostar plan for. All seats occupied so they charge higher fare prices. It's a cash cow. For London there is no competition of the car ! For Brussels-Amsterdam the belgian nmbs ( minor shareholder eurostar) demanded that the Benelux train (NS/nmbs) would have to stop at many small station , which was positive for Eurostar . competitiveness ..

[@rudivandoornegat2371]

A statement caught my attention that is worth of a video topic. How you set up a train service for maximizing profit vs maximizing travel

[@__Dude_]

By competition, I would say. The Madrid Barcelona line, for example, is being served by three high speed train operators And fares are LOW!

[@1jamesgraham]

I don't know how I found your channel, and I've never really been interested in transit issues before. But I've watched several of your videos now (subscribed!), and I find them are really interesting and informative - far more so than the "news". The issues are explained really well for the general viewer, and really well thought-out. Nice work!

[@torink8229]

i’m glad Peterborough is finally getting a connection

[@RMTransit]

It already has buses

[@alistairlogie1815]

We've all been waiting for Reece's HSR video since the feds made that announcement.

[@issedoesit279]

Whats funny is that the Feds havent even announced it, its just leaks so far 😂. They'll likely announce it in a couple weeks as part of the Fall Economic Statement.

[@barvdw]

While I am just as doubtful about the future of this project, I'm not totally agreeing. Via Peterborough has a few advantages, there's probably a route with less people who would be disturbed but the noise, which would also make the expropriations cheaper. It would be shorter, and thus faster to Ottawa and give the Peterborough area a much needed connection it lacks today, precisely because Via Rail goes along the shore. When the French built their first LGV to alleviate their Imperial line through Dijon, thry cut a large chunk of that off to speed up the connection. And as with HS2, the capacity freed up by moving the express services to Montreal and Quebec could benefit regional rail through the Shore cities. It's because those cities are already served, that I think it wouldn't hurt to expand the network and the cities served. I do agree with you that those Shore cities can't be ignored in the plan and with your criticism on the rather vague nature of many aspects and risks, but i would give the route through Peterborough a chance.

[@RMTransit]

I don’t think the arguments here are great, HSR isn’t going to be louder than the 401, and Peterborough is just one community. As discussed in Paige Saunders videos if we really want to connect it then we can do a GO line (or honestly just better bus service).

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

There are definitely reasons to consider passing through Peterborough, but it's a bad idea to _require_ passing through Peterborough. Most notably the terrain between Peterborough and Ottawa is far more difficult to overcome than the terrain further south, so passing through Peterborough could make that segment unnecessarily expensive. If we do analysis and it turns out to be a similar cost, then sure, let's go through peterborough, but that's not what has happened.

[@barvdw]

Okay, I'll readily admit that I'm less aware of the specific geological situation, I would have thought that more inland could avoid a whole bunch of high density (and thus protest), and therefore be cheaper to build. Getting a HST station could give Peterborough an enormous boost you can't get with just buses. It's just that both axes deserve consideration.

[@Absolute_Zero7]

@@RMTransit Its not just noise, its also speed. The Belleville Sub is a very developed corridor that makes it challenging to build HSR up to full speeds. With the Havelock Sub, you basically leave any form of development 20 or so km out of Downtown Toronto at Locust Hill, leaving it a line that runs solely through farm/greenfield for 100km. This in turn means that it can easily be built to handle trains running at top speeds for most of the route - vastly increasing travel times between Toronto and Ottawa.

[@JamesPhieffer]

There are already two railways with large rights of way running through the lakeshore urban areas - CN and CPKC. Utilizing these rights of way where possible, while working with CN and CPKC to improve their line infrastructure at the same time could benefit a new HSR, municipalities where the lines pass through, and the companies all at the same time. Plus there's a massive CN rail yard at Belleville that's been underutilized for decades. The land is there, with easy road access for a maintenance yard right by the brand new VIA station. A line with stops at Toronto, Oshawa, Belleville, Kingston, Ottawa, and Montréal would make loads of sense, and put 90% or more of the population within a half hour or less of a station, with transit connecting all of them into their respective urban areas.

[@kurzzug160]

More people live in Quebec City than in Rennes and they have quite a good amount of TGVs. It obviously shouldn't be the priority, but an extension makes sense

[@RMTransit]

Which is all I said!

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Extensions make sense when some kind of core network is functional. You do not start with extensions, you may never complete anything

[@kurzzug160]

@@dmitripogosian5084 I mean the first AVE line in Spain was from Madrid to Sevilla, not Madrid Barcelona, due to regional politics. In Austria Graz-Klagenfurt will be finished sooner than Wien-Graz because the tunneling is easier on the former. Extensions sometimes are built first because they are easier (political hurdles are hurdles too!) and they create an even stronger argument to build out the core network. I agree, ideally you wouldn't start with them but sometimes it is a good way to get started. For this specific case also consider that a high-speed line Quebec City - Montreal makes sense on its own too. Nevertheless, Montreal - Toronto makes much more sense.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

@@kurzzug160 As somebody correctly noticed, starting with Montreal - Quebec City makes it one province project. Money do not flow from province to province easily in Canada.

[@nuarius]

The "government is ready to build the high speed rail" is southern Ontario for "Elections are coming soon" Rail will be dropped about 30 seconds after the votes are counted, just like the electoral reform was. as for the Peterborough stop. I suspect the reason is because a Peterborough - GTA connect makes a ton of sense with how many people here travel to Toronto daily but they dont want to justify 2 new rail infrastructure projects (considering they cant even manage 1) even if it makes more seance as something like a GO train extension. adding context, Peterborough in the last 10 years has essentially become a less convenient Toronto Suburb. Something im painfully too aware of as someone that's trying to live here on Peterborough job wages, While having to compete with Toronto wage rent/home prices. and it has been growing rapidly as a result.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

Not even just high-speed rail. Even regular rail. The Ontario Conservatives promised to spend $160 million to upgrade the railway between London and Kitchener if they were elected, then after they were elected with a majority of the seats in Legislature, they "forgot" about that promise

[@issedoesit279]

I get the cynicism but this project has been in the works since at least 2021. RFEOI went out Oct 2022 and RFP issued July 2023, much earlier than election season.

[@wyldhowl2821]

I agree, sad to say. Electoral reform was right there, the moment of political opportunity meeting the public desire to actually see something improve, for once. Having participated in the process as much as I could, it annoys me to no end even now, considering how they had all the power needed to get it done, but squandered the opportunity with their "same old same old" mentality - studying it and then dropping it the moment it required a bit of courage and real effort. The first and worst mistake of their mandate.

[@M-impstrclub]

11:04 I really hope that Canada gets good High Speed Rail, but in my opinion politics and ( partial ) privatisation are two of hardest restraints. In Germany ( I know that a one to one comparison isn't possible, but still), a power held for 16 years by the Conservative Party was not good for the Deutsche Bahn. It got well underfunded and that is visible in the rough shape of the rail, lack of actual high speed rail and the scheduling issues there are. So I think that this could truly be the point shattering the whole project or bring it to the point described by Reece.

[@Trainviking]

Canada should at first stop acting like trains are planes, unrealistic luggage restrictions, check-in, it’s all nog needed. Also urban planing ja a thing in North America. You arrive at the station, fine…, what’s next? How to get around. I really think people in North America do deserve better.

[@rileybaker8294]

CN should be re-nationalized, VIA should be completely dismantled and replaced with a functional organization, the HSR route should be $20 a trip.

[@Coccinelf]

I would vote for you if I could.

[@digginggopher]

If I could get from Orillia to Toronto for around $20 and then take HSR to Montreal for $20, I would spend $80 there and back to go get some poutine 😊

[@danielm6739]

get real lol

[@benoithudson7235]

My fear is that if we don’t plan the Montreal-Quebec line from the start, we’ll never have it connect to the rest of the network. The expensive part is the right of way across Montreal; delay, and we’ll get a terminus in Montreal that a traveler would need to switch to another train line elsewhere to continue. We already failed to get the REM to go eastwards.

[@agilemind6241]

It should to be part of the plan, but if we make it a make-it/break-it portion then it becomes even less likely the project actually happens. Montreal-Quebec should happen as well, but it doesn't NEED to be fully planned out before we start working on Montreal-Toronto. Even if there is a train switch, it's not the end of the world as long as the connection is at the same station. Just look at the Swiss system, there are plenty of connections needed to get around but it's not an issue because the schedule is designed around that fact so you are rarely waiting more than 5 minutes at a connection.

[@benoithudson7235]

@@agilemind6241 : crossing Montreal is not going to be an easy task. Skip half the planning of it and you'll end up with the terminus on one side not connecting to the terminus for the other side.

[@pmycro]

Ontario & Quebec should pay for VIA the way that New York state pays for its Amtrak service. It doesn't make much such sense for people in British Columbia to pay for hourly train service in another province when there isn't even a daily train between Abbotsford and Vancouver.

[@SevenandForty]

@2:00 people often forget, but CAHSR (oractually the IOS) is actually under construction, and further along (so far) in terms of construction than Brightline West

[@poltergoose_]

@SevenandForty Yeah, it seems like a big oversight to forget about CAHSR, while mentioning Brightline West. CAHSR is a more expensive project in terms of it's scale and amount of cities it will connect.

[@walawala-fo7ds]

this channel has been critical of cahsr in the past. surprise

[@walawala-fo7ds]

this channel has been critical of cahsr in the past. surprise

[@lexburen5932]

It could have been done already if not for corruption, and mismanagement

[@PolarisC8]

We've also been pining for high speed trains here in Alberta. The Calgary-Edmonton corridor would be awesome.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Come on, just drive, you probably need a car on either end anyway :)

[@Joeljdwatts]

Im happy to see the Peterborough routing myself. The lakeshore route is going to run into too many nimbys and freight alignments. Not to mention the much higher amount of level crossings that will have to be overcome. Peterborough/Kawartha Lakes is growing. Good college town too. The Ptbo alignment is also more direct when connecting Toronto to Montreal thru Ottawa, so shorter distance, less stops, lower costs, faster service.

[@corsacs3879]

you cannot have level crossings on high speed trains, i’m unsure why so many people are bringing them up. they would all have to be removed regardless

[@Joeljdwatts]

@ we bring them up because we just can’t trust N. American HSR projects to try to build a line without them.

[@rotatorcuffs8140]

@@corsacs3879 I agree, I don't see what freight alignments have to do with HSR at all. HSR almost by definition should be entirely grade separated from everything else. Otherwise it's not true HSR. Just some glorified HFR crap.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

@@corsacs3879 People are bringing them up because the peterborough-Ottawa alignment has almost no roads crossing it, so it avoids the need to build grade separations. The problem with that argument is that the terrain up there is very rocky and hilly, so you'd need tons of bridges and tunnels anyway just to go through the rugged terrain, which you wouldn't need if you built the line on the flat terrain further south.

[@__Dude_]

@Joeljdwatts The very idea of HSR is, you guessed it, high speed. This does not allow for a stop every 50 km. For a travel time of 2.5 hours (or less), the connection Torornto-Ottawa-Montreal must be exactly that. No mor stops. You should be aware that it takes at least 15 minutes at every station arrival and departure (with speed restrictions anywhere from 60 to 100 km/h) to get onto the dedicated high speed line. Meaning, you cannot just divide 250 km/h by 500 km to get your travel time.

[@Bchan]

The problem with VIA rail is, they treat their long distance trains like air travel with senseless luggage restrictions

[@roger1818]

If you draw a straight line between Toronto and Ottawa, it goes almost straight through Peterborough, so that’s the most direct route. That route also has the advantage of being mostly undeveloped, making the right of way (TOW) significantly cheaper to acquire than it would along the lakeshore, since the existing ROW is far from straight enough for HSR. I just don’t understand the attraction of having trains fly through towns it will never stop in. Better to keep the lakeshore for stopping trains and have a dedicated ROW for HSR.

[@dmtree]

theres a good 800k people in those towns that would make good use if hsr. also, its not the 80s. the path does not need to be fully straight for hsr. the path following the lakeshore would be fine. as for having to buy properties for the rail, this would only matter in cities. random farmland which is 99% of that cooreidor is easily sold or expropriated if theres an idiot that doesnt wanna sell.

[@jonathandpg6115]

because each stop takes time....and slows the train down. I say keep it between the major cities FIRST as that is where the demand is.

[@arrghhscott]

Thanks for a great video! Well done and thought provoking.

[@lucaspublictransport995]

7:00 that's why consultancy is a bubble...

[@BigBlueMan118]

As an Australian it seems we are somehow finally further along towards work actually starting on our first HSR line (Newcastle-Sydney) than Canada, and that is absolutely wild because our terrain is WAY more difficult to build in than yours is, and none of our corridors are anywhere NEAR as strong as Toronto-Montreal with an Ottawa spur. Looks like Trudeau will lose next election though and then where does that leave you?

[@froyocrew]

Trudy will be gone and we'll hopefully start getting our country back on track

[@BigBlueMan118]

@froyocrew with the conservatives, are you for real?

[@issedoesit279]

Will depend on how the contract is structured. They could make it difficult for a new government to cancel the project.

[@BigBlueMan118]

@issedoesit279 they could indeed, hoping the Labor Government in Australia does the same as they are currently getting smashed in the polling as well and a Change or Government looking on the cards in the medium-term as well. Difference is the Australian Project has a congestion aspect namely that the existing rail Line and freeway are approaching congestion and both alignments are right next to one another and susceptible to disruption so they are looking at enormous tunnels (possibly 50-60km) and will need to do something in this corridor. I believe the rail ridership is significantly higher in the Aussie HSR corridors (already 15m per year) than the Canadian one too.

[@asdkotable]

​@@BigBlueMan118 can't wait to see the Conservatives being brought in and then the project immediately axed because their O&G overlords said no

[@pmycro]

Thank you for mentioning price. I now ignore VIA as a transportation option and take the bus instead. VIA now costs > $100 to go from London to Toronto on a Friday night, a 2 hour trip. This is frankly bad for the Canadian economy. A weekend trip shouldn't cost about the same as a vacation to Miami (airfare ~$180) because otherwise people will stop doing weekend trips or will drive.

[@victorchen9170]

It definitely does not cost that much, unless you're buying last minute. Plenty of Toronto-Ottawa tickets for $50. *Just looked up London tickets and they are $42.

[@planefan082]

I wonder when austerity governments will learn what the word 'investment' means

[@andrewwoodgate3769]

The new UK Labour government seems to be getting it ...

[@walawala-fo7ds]

means you need money before you can invest 😂

[@planefan082]

@@walawala-fo7ds Or even a secondary school knowledge of productive VS unproductive debt, and how you tend to need to make money to pay debt off and avoid spiralling through interest payments.

[@Ragnar_Oock]

It means losing money before the next election and getting it back after when you're not in office anymore because you've used too much money (that is only there to be used). So it's unlikely to happen without external intervention.

[@treepazr4270]

The ability to build a HSR is an indicator of the viability of Canada as a modern country.

[@avroarchitect1793]

We don't want it, why would we build it? I can't find anyone who wants this outside of the government offices pushing for it.

[@CLechleitner42]

Eurostar's main problem isn't the ticket prices, advance tickets are quite affordable and start below 50 bucks per direction, sometimes even including onward travel. My main concern is the amount of time lost to repeated ticket controls, queueing, aviation-like security checks, 2 border controls (often with slow unreliable machines), sitting or standing in heavily overcrowded waiting areas, more ticket controls, waiting for stupid people to find their well-signposted seats (after entering at wrong car), and waiting for late business class customers (and, in case of Brussels, for a free track between station and start of dedicated high speed section).

[@mdhazeldine]

I recently went from London to Amsterdam. I really wanted to go Eurostar because I like trains, want to help the environment and the journey time is roughly the same. Unfortunately I booked a bit too late and the Eurostar prices had shot up, so I ended up going with Easyjet. Therefore, I think you are too easily dismissing the price issue. It IS and issue, because not everybody books well in advance. That said, the issues you point out are also still issues, but when I compared the travel times including all the queuing, Eurostar still wins (just about).

[@timor64]

Same issues here in Australia. It's so obvious to build it along one of the busiest air corridor in the world, The federal government however is caputred by QANTAS and it just won't happen.

[@rogerramjetox142pa]

We need Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney - Brisbane as a minimum for HSR. I will be shocked if we can even build HSR to Canberra.

[@fjeoijweiojfweio8212]

QANTAS isn't the only factor as to why HSR doesn't exist, the 750km Melbourne to Sydney corridor just hasn't ever been feasible. It's just to sparse, and there just aren't enough cities in-between Sydney and Melbourne, plus the 750-ish km distance means HSR wouldn't really have a competitive advantage in terms of speed over air travel. The good news is that HSR might actually happen. Not Sydney to Melbourne but Sydney to Newcastle, the previous liberal state government voiced their support of HSR between Sydney and Newcastle and created their own thing, but didn't have federal support or money so it was canned. The current labor state government and federal government have created the HSR authority, and so far, it's pretty promising as the federal government has allocated 500 million to corridor protection and a business plan. Additionally, early geotechnical drilling works have started as well. As for what the future holds... Who knows? But this has been the closest to actually getting high speed rail.

[@jdillon8360]

@@fjeoijweiojfweio8212 Fellow Aussie here. I think Melbourne to Sydney absolutely is feasible. There are more people living along the route than many realise, and HSR would help stimulate development. A lot of people would be happy to live in a regional city if they could get to one of the state capitals in just an hour or two. Plus city-centre to city-centre service, eliminating cbd to airport transfers at each end, totally makes sense.

[@timor64]

@@rogerramjetox142pa And yet it is the lowest hanging fruit of all. A shortish distance between two cities, which would obsolete flying between them.

[@timor64]

@@fjeoijweiojfweio8212 I can see the drilling rig from my window, but I am less optimistic than you. I see the choice of these two cities and the fact that it poses no threat to the airlines (read mostly QANTAS) as telling. As for 750km distance - I agree it is at the outer limit of a viable competitive HSR distance but ... Hambug-Munich is about 610km and people do take the train that distance in Germany. Canberra also lies between them, not to mention smaller regional centres which might become a lot bigger with the availabiliy of a 2 hour ride into a capital city.

[@HrHaakon]

You're talking about the conservative government, but you also praised Bergen's light rail in an earlier video. That system was built by a conservative government. It's not impossible to get conservatives on board, but you have to appeal to conservative values, not liberal ones. Saving money in the long run, making things cheaper, making it easier to do business, allowing people to cut costs so they can get back on their feet, etc... There is this great annoyance in me whenever I hear pro urbanists talk about things because even when they try to remain neutral, they're never arguing from any other viewpoint than approximately a US liberal one. We talk about how nice biking is, but never about how it allows more personal choice, or how it costs less money. We talk about rail as a really cool thing, but never about the truly disgusting amount of money it costs people to keep the highway open for trucks, and how the private railway companies have to pay taxes to subsidize their competitors. If we really want great urban places, they have to be great from more than one point of view. If you build it but it isn't for THOSE people, then those people will fight you tooth and nail to stop it.

[@RMTransit]

I’m of course aware of that, Ontario is building all of its subways under a conservative government. But it’s an exception to the rule!

[@jens_le_benz]

You neglected the fact that most Ontario conservatives dgaf about transportation access unless it directly facilitates their drive to the legislature or parliament.

[@jonathangot]

I have flown 106 times this year, many of the flights under 400km to connect to another airport. While trains can replace some short-haul trips, many of those travelers are connecting at a larger airport. To effectively replace all these trips, the HSR will need to be integrated into YYZ/YOW/YUL like FRA and SHA with baggage service checked through to the final destination. It has been done and it can be done.

[@issedoesit279]

Agreed. Connections with TOR, OTT and MTL airports need to be a part of Phase 1 of this project.

[@Nabee_H]

Doubtful, they'll probably have you transfer from Union and use the already existing UP Express. Toronto will need a new airport soon so if Pickering airport does end up getting built (which I find likely since land is already owned) then there should be a planned station for it.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

Air Canada is part of one of the HSR teams. Hopefully they can get codesharing and automatic trip rebooking logistics figured out even if that team doesn't win

[@__Dude_]

@jonathangot In my hunble opinion, this request misses the point. Your final travel destination is never the airport. You would not board a train in Toronto maon station to go to YUL, would you? That's not to say that Montreal would not benefit from a fast connection from airport to downtown...

[@issedoesit279]

@@__Dude_ that connection would be more useful for people arriving at the airport looking to travel to cities that are close enough by train. Air Canada already has agreements in France with the rail operator where you can land in Paris and take a train from the airport to other French cities, all on the same Air Canada ticket. Similar agreements in Germany/switzerland/Austria.

[@actually404]

Seoul-Busan KTX (~400km) in Korea costs about 60 CAD. If Toronto-Montreal (~550km incl Ottawa-detour) can be within 2x of that, that would be excellent. Tokyo-Kyouo Shinkansen (~470km) in Japan costs about 120 CAD, though, so maybe 150-200 CAD range is more realistic. Comparatively, Toronto-Montreal (one-way) currently costs ~100 CAD for flight + the transportation from-and-to downtown (let's say 30 dollars?) so I wouldn't mind paying something like 20 more dollars (assuming 150 CAD) for not having to deal with airports at all.

[@deanwinchester6654]

Took the KTX recently, it was fast and easy to use. No charge for luggage either and train left right on time.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Korea is overall cheaper than Canada, especially labor-wise

[@kuyans3889]

7:53 YES shade Australia. no HSR here is pitiful, and I need shade from the sun.

[@jdillon8360]

Fellow Aussie here. I approve this comment!

[@Francois_L_7933]

Being a former city planner and a bit older than you are, all I can say is that I doubt I'll see a working high speed train in my lifetime. Heck, they were talking about high speed rail all the way back in the 90's... and in the early 80's with the turbotrain project. Nothing new there, just some more vaporware.

[@mariannerichard1321]

For Quebec City and Peterborough (and Trois-Rivières), I believe it's because the project started with existing right of way for high frequency rail. They probably don't have ROW that don't pass through Peterborough and Trois-Rivières, and since the project included Quebec City at the beginning, it may be hard to just take that branch off completely. Or at least, the proposal for the train makers were made for Toronto to Quebec City, the high speed rail came later as an extra feature on the project under study. Earlier version of the high speed rail project were linking Windsor, but I guess they don't have the existing right of way to go all the way there yet. Future connections with St Catharines/Buffalo and Windsor/Detroit would be interesting in a continental high speed network, though.

[@KyrilPG]

I just hope they'll build the line following the "parallel" model used in France and Spain. And not the "serial", or "string of pearls" model used in Germany that simply is applying conventional rail structure to HSR which has many drawback, and lacks reliability and resilience. If they are serious about replacing most flights and removing thousands of cars from roads, they'll have to choose the fastest, most efficient, reliable, and resilient structure, which is the parallel model. If they want to run Toronto - Montréal in under 2 hours, they'll have to build the line following the parallel model, which means bypassing every single intermediate city along the way, and build branches to serve them, including Ottawa.

[@imsbvs]

Yes, you are right - High Speed Railways in the UK is a flawed product - the service to Fance/Belgium is run by a French operator that nearly went bust in COVID, the UK government refused any financial help (because it is not a UK rail operator) and now Eurostar are repaying us with high prices and a less than desirable service. The intermediate stops are still closed, I live near one (Ashford) and have used the service from this station many times but am not minded to travel to London to catch a train that will soon be passing through the local station. There are competitive operators out there with new services planned, including to Germany, we need them to start running right now. Eurostar runs at 183mph / about 300kph, HS1 also offers a domestic service at 140mph / 225kph, I use this often to travel to London. Note the tunnel itself also serves road traffic between English and France which is run by a different company "Le Shuttle" which offers a frequent and competitively priced service. I have used this rail service many times too, in preference to the ferry service which is at the mercy of the weather. As for HS2, half is being built to a fast high-speed standard which is OK but for less money a slightly slower service could have been offered which would fine for the relatively short distance involved. (Under 100 miles / 160 kilometres). The rest that will be built will be on this slightly slower speed and no-one will notice the extra few minutes travel time. Note that HS2 is being built because the existing 4 track pathway north of London is at saturation point with the aim to offer more services and not with the sole aim of speeding up journey times. In places the older track has many curves, the existing trains tilt to cope with these, the latest news is that the HS2 trains will not tilt and will have to run slower when on the older tracks... the talk is suggesting down from 125mph/200kph to 110mph/175kph!!

[@thelastdefenderofcamelot5623]

For destinations to Ottawa from Toronto, the Via Rail line splits up into two. Via has to disconnect their cars at Brockville while the other half goes to Montreal, Quebec, etc. High speed rail has to eliminate this and go Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal. It can go through some lake cities but if the line can be built as straight as possible then that should be prioritized.

[@vijayakrishnan3131]

It needs to be a separate dedicated line and run at 300km/hr or more. We just need to build it. The majority of Canada lives in this corridor. I couldn't think of a better way to connect French Canada with English Canada, connecting two huge economic centers, Toronto and Montreal, and two capitals, Ottawa and Quebec city. Where are my carbon taxes going? I want to see some projects.

[@pin65371]

Convince a liberal insider to be an investor in a HSR company and it will get built. That is where the carbon tax money is going already. Hundreds of millions of dollars going to members of the board of the federally funded corporation. That is why nothing is being done right now. The liberals think its a breach of peoples charter rights to hand over documents to the RCMP.

[@keenan4389]

Looking good Reese! I see those arm veins 💪

[@hinche1977]

I was surprised to see how Reese has lost a few pounds. His face is more muscular !!

[@XrsN]

thanks again for your insights

[@lordeisschrank]

people who never really used HSR just dont understand what HSR is and should be... most people just really have to experience it to really get it. When I was living in the middle of nowhere Japan, I had to take a spontaneous trip to hold a presentation the next day close to Hiroshima, I left work at 5, went home, biked to my local station, got on the first Shinkansen going that direction and checked into my hotel at 10. Hiroshima is over 1000km from my apartment, it took me less than 5 hours to get there, door to door. There is just no comparison.

[@INWAQuebecNC]

Je pense que le lien avec la ville de Québec est plus qu’important. Une bonne partie de la population du Québec on plus besoin d’un lien rapide entre les deux grandes villes de la province. Que ce soit pour la travail, la famille,les études ou le plaisir, les liens culturels et économiques sont importants entre les 4 villes choisies pour le TGV. C’est oublier un facteur important à considérer et qui permet sûrement l’appuie de la population du Québec. Un TGV pour aller à Toronto et Ottawa seulement n’aura pas de succès ici.

[@rishabgaba8586]

Specifically for emergency travellers it will be really cost effective

[@Blastnet_DanHarris]

I have WAY Too Much to say about HSR. The High Speed rail connection through Peteborough is something that was long lobbied for by former Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro (yeah, the guy who broke election laws and went to jail for it) But, it might help keep Conservatives on board. I think we need WAY more details about the project before any contracts get signed. I have big issue with how everything has been overtly secretive. Governments are less likely to sign bad contracts when they have to justify them to the public. The O'Train debacle in Ottawa is a good recent example of why secret is bad. P3 or no P3 is a whole other discussion worthy of its own space. I'm not against Peteborough as a destination and getting ahead of a future need rather than playing catchup is a laudable goal, the current proposed alignment take a Toronto to Montreal trip from 2hrs with a stop in Kingston to 3+ hours which I really think impacts its competitiveness to flying. Toronto - Montreal direct is the sustainable route that helps to justify the expansions outward. From Toronto you'd only be 1 hour to Kingston, then another hour to Montreal. If phase 1 includes Quebec city then to the west it should run to London Ontario. Otherwise yes they should probably be phase 2. I don't see Quebec City as optional, we need to do more to bridge the divides between English and French Canada. The reason I think London should be included is because it's the fast growing city that would be 1 hour west of Toronto on High Speed rail. While I'd love to say lets do the entire Windsor to Quebec corridor at once I think for Windsor we should be working out a deal with the US to link it to Detroit and Chicago. Even make an offer to run the whole thing contiguous with Amtrak as a partner. To me though, the more glaring thing missing from this plan is what should be obvious, a missing High Speed linkage between Calgary and Edmonton. It's kinda the perfect distance. It also makes the overall plan much harder for Conservatives to kill. I am very annoyed that this feels 100% like a Liberal Hail Mary pass. One of those magical good things Liberals promise before elections when they think they're gonna lose. Kathleen Wynne in 2018 is a good example of that. I have more to say, but for now will leave it there.

[@ianweniger6620]

Thanks for your words. PTB, LDN and BAR all need direct express service to TOR. Lookit all the new GTA rail frequency and electrification. The feds oughta offer GO Transit enough money to build more capacity at those frontiers and run it for a bit. Put HSR tracks on the rights-of-way and use'em with regional trainsets. If, for some crazy reason, GO can't make it work, then the tracks go to VIA for branch lines and/or HSR. Also, the Windsor-Québec corridor needs a new name to get Amtrak's attention. We oughta be calling it the Detroit-Quebec corridor. That way, maybe Montréal will attract the Acela from Boston or send our HSR to New York. And THEN...maybe Toronto-Hamilton-Buffalo-NYC?

[@RMTransit]

Calgary Edmonton is so obvious, it’s really ridiculous that nobody realizes how much that would help reframe the convo in eastern Canada

[@philipyu1611]

Oh, right...I had forgotten DDM was all for it. I do remember Stockwell Day promising or touting it while in the Harper ministry, though.

[@KyleXSki]

China has awesome high speed rail too. Very affordable like Japan and sooooooo convenient

[@erich623]

I think he was throwing some shade Australia.

[@Nicholas-ks8xp]

I can settle for a Toronto to Montreal line as a comprimise to the original aspired Windsor to Quebec City corridor with the clear goal for it to be extended at some point in the future and that this proposed HSR is it's own dedicated right way not for freight traffic usage. At this point start getting funding and shovels in the ground already!

[@SmilingNinja]

Well, it's not like they can't expand the high-speed rail network to KW, London, Windsor, and Quebec City in the future.

[@issedoesit279]

A Toronto-Windsor line will likely need to be championed and pushed by an Ontario provincial government. Unfortunately the Ford government doesnt even know this project exists.

[@praxagora3618]

The problem with this line of thought is, no Québec govetnment, probably not even liberals, would agree to a Montreal-Toronto line with Québec city as an expanssion that might as well never happen.

[@microproductions6]

1:19 Cries in American

[@Dili832]

your shirt is the one im wearing as a PJ right now

[@Souslapizzadelarotte]

yay more trains!

[@AdventuresonTour]

Peterborough is on the route as its one of the fastest growning suburbs of the GTA.. the amount of daily traffic coming down highway 115 has more than doubled over the last 10years and only getting heavier.

[@AirShark95]

We'll end up paying double per km of track of what EU/Japanese projects paid for their networks, speeds will be reduced to 220-250km/h, delays of over a decade, cut backs to planning and route extensions, and the end result will be about as expensive and inconvenient as air travel. This is the Canadian Way. We pay more for less.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

Only double? I think we'll pay at least 3x what they pay in democratic western European countries

[@ArcticuKitsu]

We genuinely need this. I know Liberals like sabotaging everything because it offends their feelings, but we genuinely need this. I admired trams in Bratislava, something Liberals shamed while hyping up Ottawa transit in the media years back. They shamed a Bratislava bus station, one cooler than Ottawa's bus station. Almost every city I went to in Japan had proper trains, trams, or anything railway making it far more connected. You could actually be human, independent, and self-reliant all thanks Japanese rail. Traveling between cities via bullet train was awesome. Visiting Maizuru & Tango-Yura was awesome on slightly slower, if still specialized trains between Kyoto and Maizuru, or inter-connected trains via Maizuru, Tango-Yura, and Ananohashidate. Heck, even from Fukuoka to Himeji, back to Hiroshima, taking a train to Kure. I screwed up on that one, but easy fix. Or taking a train from Kure, to Hiroshima, to Tokyo. Or Hakodate to Sapporo..... Trains should have stayed Canada's pride and joy, but we'll always be stupid. We'll always do what we need to do as a last resort, or not at all. We'll do anything but what we need to do.... If we get a train route from Toronto to Ottawa, Montreal, and Quebec it'll speed things along, the Japanese way. If it can be extended to Halifax, or even the other direction to Winnipeg it would make things far, far, far more worthwhile.

[@davidlaurin7009]

This is Canada, we are absolutely going to build a bad train.

[@DeanSabbah]

If it happens, I really hope that they move the train station in Ottawa back downtown. Having the old train station be recommissioned would so nice

[@MultigrainKevinOs]

It feels like I will go my entire working life and still not see housing, cycle networks, railways, etc.. ever happen just keep seeing it dangled just out of reach. :(

[@chesterfieldjones1055]

Thoughtful. Thanks.

[@lego501stTrigger]

0:34 "In 2024, a **developing country** building highspeed rail" unconscious slip of the tongue 😅

[@henfreetravel]

Yup, sounds like UK, where it fails at everything the public wants it to be.

[@benoithudson7235]

Is it though?

[@lego501stTrigger]

@benoithudson7235 Of course it's unconscious. He's seen the super secret classified economic documents BOC has been publishing on their news page, he's not supposed to know yet! 😬

[@RMTransit]

Developing is what I meant to say?

[@pauly5418]

@@benoithudson7235 It's not quite there yet, so it's still a developing country.

[@patrakowiatrako3014]

8:35 Have you ever heard about how that used to work in Poland? We by law forced national rail operator into cutting costs and closing lines. They even invented an entire system to close lines with public support

[@TheJoshuacheng]

Reece send this video to a cabinet member they would need the advice

[@saltima]

if its not lining the pockets of their buddies, they wont be interested

[@fjkelley4774]

All good points, Reece.

[@ccudmore]

Sadly it’s looking like political posturing rather than anything serious. But I hope not.

[@siaa9992]

yeah... but trying to be hopeful is important, youre doin good

[@pudd66]

I'm sure the conservatives would kill it as soon as they took power, anyway. You know, can't have progress with them, no matter how much sense it makes.

[@Nightshiftzombie]

There is slightly less chance of this getting built than there is of the Liberals getting re-elected. So about zero.

[@slendii366]

Well the project has been going on and being planned for years now

[@predarek]

I’m not going to say I know a guy… but really I know that they seriously have people working on this day long so it’s serious at least to the extent that they are trying to get this going… now will this get to the end is something else!

[@arghan234]

If it doesn't link Quebec City's metropolitan area (about 800k inhabitants in 2023) then it may as well be a project funded by Ontario and Montreal. Linking to Montreal does not at all "link Quebec (province) to Ontario". Montreal is at the far south west corner of the province, and it's already a hassle to take a plane anywhere because of it. Quebec City has a decent airport, but it's not a hub, and many flights layover in Montreal. A Toronto-Montreal line is an infrastructure for Ontario and Montreal. This isn't a bad thing in itself, but it doesn't at all fit the bill of a project to truly modernize transportation in both provinces. More than half the pop of Quebec would still have to drive 100s of km, or take a coach or a short-haul flight to even access the high speed rail.

[@TheNmecod]

realitiscally, even if quebec is a smaller city, montreal - quebec city travel is probably just as important as toronto montreal

[@caribbb]

I agree. Perhaps in a phase 2 like he suggested. It should also go all the way to Windsor/Detroit. Combined it’s the most heavily populated region in Canada.

[@nickywheels]

I would even venture to say that Windsor -Toronto be phase 2 and Montreal-Quebec phase 3, or phase 2A. The Windsor-Toronto stretch is pretty busy and would be busier with better service. It's been quite a few years since I rode that corridor but I remember a ton of Michiganders getting on in Windsor, especially on weekends.

[@ianweniger6620]

1. MTL-QCY is the political equivalent of TOR-OTT. 2. QCY's tram project will benefit from HSR.

[@XandateOfHeaven]

@@TheNmecod It's probably not as important as Montreal to Toronto, but probably at least as important as Ottawa to Toronto.

[@OntarioTrafficMan]

Well the government has studied HSR countless times already and literally every study found that the HSR demand between Toronto and Montreal would be far more than the demand between Monteral and Quebec.

[@andresammy26]

I like that Laval is a projected stop on the line. It would be at the De La Concorde intermodal station that is presently a stop for the montreal metro, EXO regional rail, and STL busses. There is also planning in progress for a future BRT along the corridor that intersects with the station. This could be a game changer for a city whose population could exceed 500,000 within the next decade.

[@jimlawton4184]

I believe No-Shade Australia was actually its original name 😂

[@AndreVandal]

My dad worked at CN (Canadian National Rail), and I remember him mentioning high speed rail was coming soon back in the late 60s. So there's that.

[@issedoesit279]

Reece, what happened to "Think Positive" 😂. I dont blame you tbh...

[@RMTransit]

I still do, mostly 😅

[@stevenarthurjoubert7191]

Loads of people would travel MTL QCcity, the transcanadian highway between the cities there is always congested

[@Nabee_H]

I feel like if they plan on a Pickering airport then Pickering NEEDS a stop to service the airport.

[@ianweniger6620]

Maybe HSR will eliminate the need for another airport!

[@Nabee_H]

​@@ianweniger6620 It will definitely help for relief, though I'm not sure about outright eliminating the airport. Current studies show a need for a new airport by 2027-2037. Perhaps this gets completed by 2037 when they've already decided on a new airport so we end up with both. If completed before they start on a pickering airport I could see it delaying the need for one but either way a 3rd airport is needed one day and the land is already there.

[@apacheglider]

Thanks for this really good video. Maybe it would be a good Idea to buy the most suitable technology (or use rights) to make a country able to embarque more easily in extensions or new projects, and decide from a position of knowledge and power what should be in it.

[@dozenthdragon]

I've been waiting all week for this video!

[@ffc1a28c7]

As someone who lives in the Windsor Montreal corridor, I honestly am really excited to be able to finally go to Toronto without needing to get on a bus for 2 hours.

[@cameron.s.9368]

I live in Peterborough, the rail line still runs here and is still operated by CPKC for freight trains. Ive seem from some of the cpkc guys that this project wont be touching their tracks. We have Also been so neglected by the government for a good rail option. We don't have GO or VIA here , why does Barrie get it but not us? Im glad to finally be part of a rail plan

[@TheRandCrews]

I mean the whole Subdivision is bought out by Metrolinx Union to Barrie, unless CPKC wants to play ball somehow and play along who knows; we are step getting ther e

[@alex2143]

Hey Reece, I don't know if you like people commenting on your appearance, but I can see you lost a lot of weight and you look a lot healthier. Good job man!

[@jmpht854]

Dude, politically Quebec City HAS to be part of the equation, and I know tons of people (myself first among them!) would LOVE to take advantage of a high speed line to visit Quebec City (and anywhere else along the way/nearby) more often...

[@RMTransit]

People say this, but I don’t believe it.

[@ianweniger6620]

I wonder if part of the pitch is a nod to Québec City's efforts to approve their tram project once and for all...

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Politically Quebec City is part of the equation, because that is where government of Quebec is :)