Find Out Why Canada Doesn’t Have High-Speed Rail in 20 Minutes

[@campfortune]

As a Chinese Canadian who immigrated to Canada in the early 90's........back then Chinese mostly biked and few buses. Now my home city has over 500 km of MODERN subway. ..meanwhile in Canada, things stay pretty much the same.

[@randomrazr]

a communist government helps get things done more quickly

[@robertab929]

Also Chinese government hides info about railway catastrophes, fallen tunnels, etc.

[@XassassinTV.]

Montreal to Toronto would be a really profitable line. I think those studies really under estimate the public opinion and the demand for transition to a cleaner mode of transportation. People would travel more frequently to YYZ for cheaper Air Plane trips across the pond. Great Video.

[@dertfert745]

Study was from 2011 (which btw still showed it being profitable), but I agree public opinion has greatly shifted in favour of rail since then

[@yaca_]

Quebec needs to be deserved for a political POV, and tourism POV. This is the city with most history in the full country, housing the parlement of the province of Quebec.

[@jonathanlanglois2742]

It isn't just high speed rail that is problematic in Canada. Public Transit also seriously needs to be improved, but thankfully, things have been moving in the right direction for the last few years.

[@abrararifify]

100% this. I'm from Ottawa and if you don't live near a LRT station, you're basically screwed. Public transit in our car dependent cities are woefully inadequate.

[@randomrazr]

cities were built around the street car. then the automobile came and suburbs.

[@jonathanlampier7754]

Actual viable proposals were put forth for both of these routs earlier this year. The Alberta route being built by a private company and the Quebec to Windsor route being a new service being built by Via Rail.

[@ce1834]

Via Rail isn’t really high speed though, still an improvement to be welcomed though

[@qjtvaddict]

Just sell all Canadian lines to private companies and build Quebec to Windsor and Edmonton to Calgary and to banaff with branches to Spokane Washington and Montana

[@Makoto778]

​@@ce1834 Depends on your definition, I suppose the max of 200km/h is marginal, but I'd consider it low grade HSR as trains traveling 220km/h are not that much faster and are generally considered HSR, also non-HSR trains generally travel much slower at 160km/h or slower, so I think its closer to being HSR than non-HSR. I really wished our gov't would've spent just a bit more to get a vastly better system.

[@Neville60001]

The Quebec-Windsor corridor is going to be the stupid and _semi_ fast HFR (Higher Frequency Rail) instead of full HSR.

[@aoilpe]

My commuter train line Basel/CH- Strasbourg/F , 140 Km , has trains going up to 200Km/h once or twice an hour. They fit the lines in the sector with “European Train Control System” ETCS to speed up the main line ,essentially for TGV’s - up to 250 Km/h,and allow shorter train distances. This line opened in 1841 and had no major changes until 1878 ( new approach and station in Strasbourg ) and1901 (new approach tunnels under Basel).

[@Hamsteak]

I'm glad you made a video about this. 🇨🇦 from a Canadian. You did a better job describing it then the media and the government does. 👍

[@RailwaysExplained]

Thank you ☺️

[@romang.8493]

100% true. Finally I got answers which doesn't sound as grounds for not building it. It should be built and not studied for decades.

[@ilyasovich]

The HSR are life changing mean of transportation, I use it regularly in Morocco linking the cities of Tangier and Casablanca, it takes 2h10min for the journey instead of 4 hours by car or 5h45min by regular railway... BTW here they're using Electric trains that peaks at 320 km/h

[@BIoknight000]

It really is remarkable how far behind North America is that high-speed rail is built in Africa before here

[@thecafcl8409]

North America is too large. It's not viable

[@hugoboyce9648]

24 studies and not a single km of high speed rail laid down. So depressing.

[@otanakugaming3357]

Because of many reasons

[@carkawalakhatulistiwa]

@@otanakugaming3357 in china you only have 2

[@seanthe100]

​@@carkawalakhatulistiwa china 1.4 Billon Canada 39 million

[@firefox39693]

I live in Toronto. I totally agree with what you said about diesel. It makes no sense to even consider using diesel. Currently, Canada isn't even on track to meet its existing carbon emissions reduction targets. Highspeed rail poses an opportunity for Canada to take an ax to our emissions, but diesel-powered trains make precisely no god damn sense.

[@Simon-nw9bf]

Future-proofing in Canadian infrastructure is a completely overlooked concept. Toronto is full of permanently congested condo clusters because future loads on the system were never properly considered. Like, why is East Liberty St the only road out of Liberty Village and why does it have only one lane in each direction? That said, any service is better than no service. I remember the amount of screeching that took place prior to and around the opening of the UP Express about it being diesel - did these people want to wait another 10 years for electrification to happen? I live near Bloor GO/UP station and used to work near Union - the UP was the only public transit route in memory that could rival the speed and convenience of a bicycle commute. A few years back there was similar screeching in the neighbourhood about the Davenport Diamond grade separation project. Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good. Or because this is Canadian infrastructure, the mediocre, over-budget, and late haha

[@spitfirenutspitfirenut4835]

What???? We produce hardly any carbon...You're a fool.

[@firefox39693]

@Sean Price Are you trolling with that profile pic of Che Gueverra? Or, are you a radical leftist so stupid, you're actually becoming right-wing? Just asking, because nothing you said is true.

[@firefox39693]

@@spitfirenutspitfirenut4835 Canada is a pig in terms of GHG emissions.

[@firefox39693]

@Sean Price Combustion engines are not all efficient. I know that's subjective. But, if you're comparing them to electric transport, like cars, buses, or trains, there is no comparison. I said you were stupid because what you said was baseless. I had it on good authority you're an idiot because you said all diesels are efficient.

[@ebolduc4150]

there were actually 2 Highspeed rail attempts that were implemented in the Toronto-Montreal route. These were the Turbotrains operated by VIA and CN during the end of 1969- October 1982 when they were replaced with the "other" high speed rail system. However the turbo trains simply lacked the infrastructure needed to support being "high speed" and because of this they were limited to 95mph (153kmph) They were also known to be massively inefficient and were apparently plagued with technical problems which was why the project kinda failed. The second high speed system that operated in Canada was ran by VIA Rail using the LRC trainsets. LRC Trainsets were designed for 150mph (201kmph) service. Entering service for the Quebec city - Windsor corridor in 1981-2001 they were known to suffer from the same issues as the Turbos... they were once again operating on freight mainlines which not only slowed them down in terms of track rights but also track speed limits. and of course they too sufferer from various technical issues and were also extremely inefficient. The latter being important due to VIA rail going through massive cut backs during the oil crisis meant that pretty much all the LRC units apart from the passenger cars were a loss. they were eventually scrapped and the only remaining aspect of high speed rail service still operating in Canada is the LRC cars.

[@FOLIPE]

It's criminal that this channel only has 30k subscribers!

[@RailwaysExplained]

We totally agree 😁

[@james.strong]

How does it not have as much as like…. a million……

[@kelvinkulola5330]

@@RailwaysExplained talk about High speed rail in Tanzania 🇹🇿 this will be the longest electrified railway in Africa

[@johnmcqueen4883]

I guess the 30k are the elite. I am happy to just get educated, not riled up.

[@torquetrain8963]

millions in North America have been so brainwashed by the endless car commercials and propaganda provided by the car centric auto and airline mafia and their insurance oil and airline cronies who lobby and threaten any alternatives, especially rail.

[@Alex_Plante]

I think that the Canadian government should begin acquiring the rights-of-way for high-speed rail now, even if high-speed rail does not become viable for another few decades. They should plan and acquire rights-of-way for the following routes: 1) Detroit to Quebec City (The main interest in going to Windsor is that Detroit is across the river). Eventually this line would connect to a future US high-speed rail network at Detroit. 2) Toronto to Buffalo, going through Niagara Falls. This would also eventually connect to a future US high-speed rail network, heading toward New York City on one side and Cleveland on the other side; 3) Montreal to at least as far south as Burlington Vermont, maybe all the way to Albany NY. This would eventually connect to a future US high-speed rail network, heading toward New York City and Boston; 4) Calgary to Edmonton. This line would probably always remain isolated from the rest of North America; 5) Vancouver down to Seattle, where it would form a future line connecting Portland, Seattle and Vancouver. Maybe one day the line could be extended South to connect to an eventual California High-speed rail network. So those 5 rights-of-ways should be quietly planned and acquired by the Canadian government over the next 20 years. In the mean time, the Canadian Government should build an actual 200 km/h high speed rail line between Montreal and Toronto, and build it in such a way that it could be eventually be upgraded to 300km/h or more, depending on future technology.

[@KRYMauL]

If Amtrak can actually get their funding in order and upgrade the main lines like they plan this wouldn't be a bad idea. Edit: The Northeast Corridor already exists, but is not owned by Amtrak.

[@johnstudd4245]

@@KRYMauL Amtrak has a pretty good service from Detroit to Chicago. And then to many other places. Granted, speed and reliability can be hit and miss.

[@KRYMauL]

@@johnstudd4245 My brother enjoys it, but I’ve never used it. Personally I’d rather they make HSR.

[@Hamsteak]

I used to drive on the 401 all the time. I'd say it has an average of 2 people per car. But during rush hour would have closer to 1 person per car. A lot of people do car hop to work with other employees tho. We have large parking lots by the exits off of highways just for that reason. But ya, Southern Ontario and Canada in general needs more passenger rail and high speed rail 🚈 🇨🇦

[@fernbedek6302]

Canada needs to stop studying and start building. 😔

[@kexek7975]

Ong

[@JollyOldCanuck]

Canada is the most educated country in the world, we don’t actually do anything creative with that education.

[@shauncameron8390]

@@JollyOldCanuck And those who do move out.

[@gailgrove]

Why do you say that? The volume of traffic isn't nearly as much as this video makes it out to be. Yes the 401 is an extremely busy highway for some of its length. However the traffic outside of the GTA isn't enough to justify high speed rail. It will just be another tax dollar wasting government project that won't be done for 20 years.

[@JollyOldCanuck]

​@@gailgrove Building a high speed rail route between Toronto and Montreal and Edmonton and Calgary are economically viable projects. The problem is that the province of Ontario is a major manufacturer of cars and auto parts which gives the automotive lobby a lot of influence in Queen's Park and cars and auto parts are our second biggest export which gives the automotive lobby a lot of influence in Ottawa.

[@GeeboatsCollects]

As a Canadian, I would ABSOLUTELY love HSR in the Windsor-Quebec Corridor! If I remember correctly there has also been a couple Hyperloop studies for between Toronto & Montreal.

[@ramzanninety-five3639]

An important point at add is that both potential lines have decent public transportation options on their way, unlike Texas Central which will dump its riders on some parking lot. Alberta's light rail systems are great by North American standards, while Toronto, Montreal and even Ottawa networks are some of the best on the continent, with many fully funded improvements on the way. Effectively, there is a good case to be made that the coming High Frequency Rail (as VIA calls it) is a long awaited option for many people in Eastern Canada who do not own a car but want to be able to to work/spend their free time in another city along the corridor.

[@capitalinventor4823]

Ottawa’s LRT is a piece of junk and the only reason it’s “working” is because COVID has ridership at around 1/3 of the normal levels. Though things have improved. Now when something brings down a train it doesn’t bring down the whole system. Yes, I’m serious. At the beginning someone would hold a door open too long and the system would go down. As soon as the city stopped the parallel bus service and forced people onto the LRT when it opened it was down almost every day of the work week. The system isn’t even two years old and the Transportation Safety Board of Canada has two cases open against the system. If you want to feel despondent about how our contracts get awarded and are managed then I welcome you to look into how the City of Ottawa has managed the LRT project and the second phase which is being built now. It’s depressing and definitely not great by any standards.

[@KRYMauL]

Well I mean Texas destroyed all their public transit lines and left a very bad bus service in the wake.

[@woltews]

if you want to get to the industrial parts of Edmonton or Calgary where most people work and the money is generated then the rail is not that great or even existing . The LRT systems are basically to take people to and from housing to the down town core. Most of the people on the road are going to some place of employment .

[@ramzanninety-five3639]

@@woltews it is way better than you average North American city of that size and age provides you with. But yes, more investments are needed, this is true. Also, this is decent bus service in both cities which covers more neighbourhoods than light rail.

[@woltews]

@@ramzanninety-five3639 I have taken that bus service, but I generally needed over an hour one way to get from the core to the periphery by bus or under 30 minutes by car. Upgrading their transit systems will nether be cheap in up front or maint costs and if you have to bring things with you it becomes even more infeasible to go by buss ( try hauling a laptop , projector , screen , hand outs and samples on the buss some time ) .

[@vincentng2392]

It's now election time in Canada, and I hope rail advocates may grill the parties about it. (It is criminal to take four hours to ride a train from Vancouver to Seattle just covering 250 km!)

[@RichardMigneron]

It's also criminal to take 3h to go from Montréal to Québec City by train, when it takes you a bit less by car from door to door, while you still have to reach the train station and then your final destination ...

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@RichardMigneron that is why "the last mile problem" is very important. Adding to the problem are the nutjobs who hate any push for better public transport for no reason at all.

[@nuarius]

@@ianhomerpura8937 "The real sign of a developed nation isn't Poor people driving cars. its rich people riding transit"

[@ouicertes9764]

@@ianhomerpura8937 Why is the "last mile" such a problem? It doesn't stop america from flying everywhere, and they don't fly with their cars do they?

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@ouicertes9764 in other countries besides the US, it is though, since the main railway stations tend to be built far away from the downtown areas.

[@he11ange1]

As a Canadian, I can always cite the inaction of the federal government for Canada's passenger railway decline. In recent years, Via Rail really pushes hard their HFR project. Basically, it is a dedicated track, with 200kmh material. The project seems to me to be very rational for Canada. Not too expansive (compare to HSR), but still being competitive with cars and planes. If I cite the Via ex-CEO's own words: "1/3 of the cost and 2/3 of the speed". However, the federal government is not very attracted by this proposition. Only a minimal funding is given to this project. Thus, the cost will increase over time as potential rail corridor might be taken by someone else.

[@Neville60001]

HFR is still too show compared to HSR; the need is for HSR so that people can get to where they want to quickly (also, it will actually make the stupid VIA Rail ad about spending a day in Montreal shopping and sightseeing if you're coming from Toronto actually work.)

[@he11ange1]

@@Neville60001 By far and with out any doubt HSR is the best, but when you analyze the return on investment, it might just not work in Canada. Canadians are still very pro Car. To be rational, a HFR is a safer investment and easier to be approve in the government budget. If Via plan, build and maintain it more carefully, the same track can even sustain 250kmh tilt train. No matter what, one thing is sure, I don't want to see a Canadian "California HSR", 2+ decades of construction and forget about the ROI. That will be a complete nightmare and taxpayer money wasting.

[@neutrino78x]

higher speed rail as opposed to high speed rail is definitely the way to go. make public transit as fast as possible but don't do spend an excessive amount on it because the private sector is better at long distance high speed transit.

[@Joesolo13]

@@neutrino78x Hardly.

[@neutrino78x]

@@Joesolo13 not hardly. Entirely. You can spend billions and billions making a train that averages 173 and gets beat by a plane handily or you can spend less than a billion ro upgrade existing public transit trains and get around 125 max, 100 average, and you saved a lot of money and still have something that can take traffic off roads. "Higher speed rail" is the way to go for public transit.

[@coastaku1954]

As a Canadian from Toronto, I would love some Electric High Speed Rail from Toronto to Montreal, that corridor makes the most sense and is most popular

[@BLBytes]

As someone living in Ottawa, that would make transport to the larger cities super easy for me!

[@neutrino78x]

but that's 541 km/336 miles...flying still significantly faster given that the HSR craps out at 200 mph if that.

[@coastaku1954]

@@neutrino78x You know nothing of this topic… you easily spend so much time on the ground when you take the plane, probably an hour of waiting on either end. A high speed trip between Toronto and Montreal would be around 2.5hours, most plane passengers spend 2 hours not moving, then an hour in the air

[@neutrino78x]

@@coastaku1954 200 miles is your sweet spot for the train because of its shitty speed of only 200 mph. If its top speed is less than your sweet spot is smaller. San Francisco and Los Angeles are 380 miles apart and aviation definitely dominates the space. A "high speed" rail wouldn't change that. The people who would otherwise fly aren't going to turn a one hour trip into a five hour trip. At best it would take some congestion off ROAD travel...but that's not the majority of travel at that distance, at least if you're talking about people who start at city A and want to go all the way to city B, 380 miles away, and aren't going anywhere in between. I've arrived as late as 15 minutes before takeoff and still got on the plane with no problem. It's good to come early, just like with any other scheduled event, but you don't have to arrive an hour early. You definitely don't spend an hour waiting after you land, I have no idea what you're talking about there. You mean waiting to get off the plane, after the people ahead of you are off? That doesn't take an hour. Check it out, flying wins. flyvsdrive.com/toronto-canada-to-montreal-canada

[@coastaku1954]

@@neutrino78x But still, for that short of a distance, just build a fast train. Planes should only be used for Trans-Oceanic journeys. These Intercity hops on planes are not good for the environment, especially when High Speed Rail can easily cover that distance and does in other countries. Hell an airline in Italy went out of business because of the growing HSR network in Italy, many distances being greater than what we have here. For the sake of our planet, we need to invest in Electric High Speed Rail, especially since many air routes are subsidized to hell, that money should be going into clean trains

[@SuperTommox]

The not just bike channel is going to love this

[@paulochikuta330]

i feel like there is a large overlap in audience

[@khaldrago911]

Politics might also play a huge role here. If it’s Toronto-Ottawa, the government of Quebec will get pretty upset. Also keep in mind that Bombardier (based in Montreal) has VERY strong connections with government.

[@groundzero_-lm4md]

Bombardier sold their ground transportation division to Alstorm. Montreal is also a large city so a Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal line would be feasible.

[@khaldrago911]

@@groundzero_-lm4md it would make sense considering Montreal and Ottawa are pretty close by.

[@RealConstructor]

Corruption shouldn’t influence the decision process by the government.

[@groundzero_-lm4md]

@@khaldrago911 I would love HSR as I attend university in Ottawa but my family live in Toronto. I would love to take a day or weekend trip to Montreal too.

[@TheTroyc1982]

@@groundzero_-lm4md why not do that with the current trains?

Good to have this video. I’d have a hard time supporting any non-electric solution, especially after watching the story of the initial French TGV based on a helicopter turbine. The general feeling is there is a lot of talk around the Windsor-Quebec corridor, without any real ground work such as acquiring land to ready for the future. From my perspective, while electric might have a higher initial investment it would be more flexible, since electrical generation can take in any number of forms, but the question is whether there would need to be new sources of generation to support the line? I am most interested in the Montreal- Toronto corridor as the primary high speed line, with the extensions being developed afterwards.

[@seanrodgers1839]

Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto would be best. More passengers to make the same distance pay better. I believe that they were looking at little used tracks going from Toronto to Ottawa in order to get away from the busy freight corridor. This way direct Toronto to Montreal trains could pass just south of Ottawa.

[@neutrino78x]

future is vtol, fully autonomous electric cars, supersonic flight over land (with the new Low Boom technology invented by NASA and Lockheed, makes the sonic boom barely audible), zero emission airliners for short haul, etc. 200 MPH is in the past and should stay there. :)

One other thing to mention is while these costs are high, Montreal is currently building out their new urban train line called the REM with a revised cost of $6.5 billion. One thing I’d be against is the reuse of any existing line. Already commuter trains take second place to freight trains and the rail lines would unlikely be optimised for high speed, creating a false economy. I have read in other places that high speeds trains work better if they don’t have to share lines with slower trains.

[@cyrusol]

Yes, high speed rail has to be separated from existing system to even function correctly. It's the bane of high speed rail in Germany that those are partially mixed, even with freight trains. It's the main reason for ludicrous delays and unsatisfactory service. Also traditional rail connections should be kept in service because high speed rail might be too expensive for many people.

[@vezdesuchiy]

It's like in Russia. In between large cities it's too low density, so we converted a 1850s rail line to HSL.

[@KRYMauL]

This is what all the Americas have to do, but lobbying power is too strong.

[@vezdesuchiy]

@@KRYMauL North American railroads are private ones. Latin American railroads are privatized ones. Passenger intercity trains ain't profitable so they are only semiweekly (VIA Rail or Amtrak out of NEC) or ceased fully (Mexico or Brazil). Thank Lord we didn't privatized ours so we can build our own HSLs. And no Chinese companies will own them.

[@kody1654]

@@KRYMauL And the public eats it up. The number of people who thinks it's impossible to build trains in Canada is mind boggling.

[@amo_res9266]

Train between Edmonton and Calgary should be a must. There’s thousands of cars going in the Queen Elizabeth road everyday, and that’s really bad for environment. I just hope they make the train relatively cheap (about $20 ticket) because people would just chose to drive if it’s any more expensive

[@johnmcqueen4883]

Very interesting explanation of why it is “non-existent”, and also timely. Less than a week ago Alex Praglowski Aviation, on the KZbin channel which is aviation-centric, published a video on the Calgary-Edmonton air route, but spent the last half of it talking about alternatives, existent and non-existent but studied. Apparently there is some interest in a private HST development à la Brightline, but I’ll believe it when I see it.

[@neutrino78x]

it's more for the private sector because they are better at long distance high speed transportation. For the most part, here in North America, that is best accomplished by flying through the air, but if any can make HSR work here, it's the private sector. They will chose routes and stops with economic motivation, not political.

[@Joesolo13]

@@neutrino78x Exactly why it's so harmful and short sighted to have them do it. Private sector is why "precision railroading" has taken off and massively decreased usage of freight rail in the states.

[@cooltwittertag]

@@neutrino78x explain every other country then

[@neutrino78x]

@@cooltwittertag "explain every other country then" Easy. Europe and Asia consist of much smaller countries with MUCH HIGHER POPULATION DENSITY. Exception is China, which doesn't count because they are a communist dictatorship, and the people of China get no say in what their government does. The two countries that are comparable to us in this regard are Canada and Australia. Neither of them has a nationwide public transit HSR as found in France or Japan. The same solution is not going to work everywhere in the world, ok. We need the speed of jet aircraft to cover the vast distances in this country. The equivalent of HSR in North America and Australia is our jet aircraft system. HSR is simply TOO SLOW.

[@cooltwittertag]

@@neutrino78x your illiteracy is not my problem to fix, you are in serious need of learning to read so you can read the hundreds of statistics that show just how wrong you are.

[@ZontarDow]

MY grandfather was an engineer who worked on the construction of Mirabel Airport. He and his colleagues where of the professional opinion that instead of building Mirabel Airport and an eventual second super airport for Toronto, that instead one single super airport should have been built north of Kingston with a high speed express connecting it to downtown Montreal and Toronto, with room left to add an Ottawa branch.

[@Sacto1654]

I think a big problem with building high-speed rail in Canada is the need to factor in the potentially harsh Canadian winters east of the Rocky Mountains. As the Japanese found out when they built the Shinkansen lines north of Tokyo, you need specialized equipment to allow high-speed operation in snowy regions, and that could make either line mentioned in this video very expensive to build.

It probably would, but it’s probably an opportunity to borrow and improve on the technology?

[@MrJimheeren]

The Scandinavians have some fantastic trains that work in all weather

[@Sacto1654]

@@MrJimheeren True, but not going 200-plus km/h.

[@MrJimheeren]

@@Sacto1654 true but I’m pretty sure you could develop one. Besides the Japanese already are way ahead (as always)

[@seanrodgers1839]

Canadians are pretty good at dealing with snow. The main issue is switches. The tracks are 6 inches above the ground. There are only a few times a year when we get more than 6 inches of snow here, so it shouldn't be much of a problem. It's not a mountainous area where you get really deep snow.

[@adamspencer3702]

Are you guys considering a video on Canada's High Frequency Rail project? I'd love to hear your take on it.

[@rebbiakiva]

The HFR/TGF is such a short-sighted mediocre plan. Unless travel times are significantly reduced by using high-speed rail (300 km/h+) the service won't be convenient enough to get people out of their cars and stop taking the plane. If the goal is fast, convenient, carbon free travel for the 20 million people living in the Windsor-Québec corridor then high-speed rail is the only option. By the time the project could be completed there would likely be 30 million people living in the corridor plus millions of tourists annually.

[@RichardMigneron]

There's also a big lobby by Air Canada NOT to build such lines and I didn't even say ***corruption*** !

[@groundzero_-lm4md]

Yeah, a modern HSR line with 300+km/h would make flying from Toronto-Ottawa or any other trip on the line completely obsolete.

[@seanrodgers1839]

I figured that this would have something to do with it. It's not corruption to not do something, corruption is pocketing money or giving contracts to friends. Weighing options and picking the wrong one is not corruption.

[@RichardMigneron]

@@seanrodgers1839 Corruption is also paying politician for NOT doing something - like the move of the Dorval Airport (Montréal) to Mirabel ...

[@seanrodgers1839]

@@RichardMigneron I remember going to Mirabel, the white elephant. What happened with that? I am skeptical of accusations without evidence. I hold hearsay as a possibility and take in evidence on the issue as time goes by. I am more in the camp of "Never attribute to malice what can best be explained by incompetence." Even actual corruption is sometimes just incompetence because it's the least effort action. Image a politician pledging to build a high speed rail. There would be unending negative press, an army of NIMBYs fighting every single action. People don't protest for good things, just against them. There will be delays, and an unending barrage of bad press. A politician can only lose by doing the right thing. A future politician, who had nothing to do with it, or even once opposed it, will claim a victory when it opens. Politicians have no backbone, they sway with the wind from bellicose fools because the best people are taking care of their own affairs and purposefully keeping out of the spotlight. The most heard voices are the rantings of fools, yet politicians are driven by these fools. Reason and logic are long forgotten ideals as is taking a stand for what is right. Modern politicians never do anything grand, they go from crisis to crisis, trying to do as little as possible that could generate negative press and taking credit for anything good, even though it's unlikely that they had anything to do with it. They do nothing more.

[@tomkelly8827]

As a Canadian who is now paying a carbon tax to a government that just spent 12 billion on a pipeline to export oil to the Pacific from Alberta, yes I can say that if I thought our governing parties were not fully corrupt, these projects would certainly be happening. If I knew my carbon tax money was supporting high speed electric rail lines rather then oil exporting pipelines, I would certainly support them.

[@gotherecom]

Such "studies" seldom take into consideration, with an average 40-year life span of rolling stock, rails and stations, the cost/funding for replacement. Also these are universally funded with bond sales instead of pay-as-you-go, resulting in interest payments. One only has to follow the money to see why bonds are preferred by decision makers, bond lawyers, bond sales entities and insider trading. Oh, and being tax-free, these bonds add no revenue to the government.

[@avollant]

High speed rail/train in Canada will NEVER happen! Every time attempt were made , the airplane industries along with the CN/CP intensively lobby to "derail" the project. reasons? such an endeavour is a direct jeopardy to their monopole. Those studies that always come up as unfavorable are mostly provided by consultant from CN and CP. Money and politic... that's what it's all about. sadly.

[@lindavainomae3489]

I find it interesting that it is the English-speaking countries that just don't seem able to bite the bullet on high speed rail.....defer, defer, defer and then too bad, way too expensive now. 😢

[@seanrodgers1839]

They generally don't believe in government being in large effective projects. They leave government to do ineffective projects.

[@d1234as]

They are too much capitalist and they have fear to invest money to build new infrastructure. Lobbying activities is also a huge problems...

[@dwc1964]

@@seanrodgers1839 they're perfectly fine with spending endless amounts of taxpayer money on highways and continue to believe that one more lane will solve the ever-increasing congestion - but if a rail project doesn't "pay for itself" it's a "boondoggle". It's only considered a public good if you have to have a car to use it.

[@nuarius]

The primary issue here is the car-centric development policies over the last century. If passenger cars were to vanish overnight. many European countries would be just fine. North America would likely have fallen completely apart by the end of the month.

[@seanrodgers1839]

@@dwc1964 Highways benefit everyone, it's easy political points. Intercity rail benefits a minority, so is difficult politically. It's needs to mostly pay for itself. On the other hand, there is a huge amount of commuter rail being built right now. More than ever before. That, along with population growth should see high speed rail eventually. There is a plan for it 200 km/h rail on a dedicated corridor now. It supposedly will be built. If successful for years, faster will be the next logical step.

[@twilliams8041]

How could Canada not have any high speed rail line? We went from London to Paris by high speed train in about 2.5 hours. That was so awesome. There was a discussion about private funding in Canada. That wouldn't work. If the expectation that transit can be a for profit undertaking, think again. Besides money, which Canada doesn't seem to have, there needs to be an understanding by elected officials as to why an efficient high speed rail network can benefit growth in the long term. Short sighted officials cannot grasp the total concept of return on investment through growth, as most forward thinking governments have.

[@danieljrea]

Really enjoyed this video. As a Canadian, I'm also curious how they judge economic viability. I know Canada has a lower population and very long distances, but having traveled in EU and asian on HSR, I think it would very much promote me to travel more domestically, as it is my favourite way to travel by far (and I own a cool motorcycle)

[@weatheranddarkness]

I also really wonder how they established their models about how many people would take such and such line at such and such speed.

[@x999uuu1]

You don't need it to go cross country at first. Try the Windsor-quebec city corridor first.

[@timaitken2277]

Do these studies mention the offset in costs from highways that don't need to be built? Highways are built by the government and have no rider-fees to offset construction costs.

[@eriklakeland3857]

Where I’m from, highway construction costs are a given but pearls are clutched when someone wants a street running brt.

[@ryanelliott71698]

@@eriklakeland3857 yeah it seem pretty hypocritical to continue to build highways that lose the government money but not HSR or at least HFR. That can offset the initial costs with revenue from ridership and other income such as rail owned shops and buildings near the station. Cough Japan cough.

[@yannickpahl6558]

At 17:14, the closeup at Montreal: the new private-owned light rail project (the REM) just cannibalized any potential scenario which would have allowed trains to run from Toronto to Quebec City via both downtown Montreal and Trois-Rivières. They now own the tunnel under the mountain and will be passing trains every 2.5 minutes in it. A monumental error.

[@eriklakeland3857]

Yeah that’s incredibly short sighted.

[@FlorianHWave]

HSR from Toronto to Montréal via Ottawa could work.

[@wavesnbikes]

Go all the way to Windsor!

[@FlorianHWave]

@@wavesnbikes I think Québec City would make more sense first, because it has more residents. But overall, I think Québec City and Windsor are too small to make HSR a viable option. At least for the beginning.

[@RealConstructor]

It will work, even for North American car loving people. For starters this is an excellent track for electric double track high speed train. Later extended to London and Windsor in the South and Trois-Rivières and Quebec in the North. And maybe a further international extension to Detroit USA and a eastern extension from Toronto to Hamilton, Niagara Falls and Buffalo USA, and who knows later to New York. Climate change forces governments to nudge people out of combustion engined cars into public transport or electric vehicles. It will also take the pressure of the existing highway system between these cities. So expensive solutions for expending or a better flow of traffic on highways isn’t necessary again. Good public transport may well be one of the answers to slow down climate change.

[@FlorianHWave]

@@RealConstructor All it needs is ONE real HSR line to complete to show the people that it works in North America too. I think Texas will be the first one and I hope that it will work. To Detroit wouldn’t work because you’d need a border check first. The thing is, that there is already an existing line from Toronto and Montréal and as long as passenger trains don’t run at full capacity there, the government will have no reason to create a new line.

[@juliansmith4295]

@@RealConstructor If the Yanks want to build rail in their country, let them do it.

[@eottoe2001]

At least in North America and one is only talking 186 miles between Edmonton and Calgary 160 to 200Km per hour is fast enough. Getting tracks up to that level isn't big of a deal. You need over passes, underpasses and welded rail. Look at Bright-Line. That would be 1.5 to 1.75 hours which is better than three. (If all of Amtrak ran at 160Km per hour, that would be game changer and that isn't that fast and the tech isn't that spectacular. I believe all the new Amtrak carriages are rated for 195Km per hour.) Faster is more expensive and Japan original high speed weren't all that fast to start with. One of the problems with North America is that we are very shy about big public investment unlike we were from the 1930 to 1970s. This comes from the economics that was pushed by Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economic that didn't see much point in public infrastructure. It is always short term because the market generally can only work that way. The way that we need to look at it is that an investment for high speed train from Quebec to Detroit as something that is a 50 year or long term investment. It's a difference between buying a washer and drier or buying a house.

[@groundzero_-lm4md]

I would suggest upgrading existing track on the Windsor-Quebec City route to allow for higher speeds along the whole track. Current VIA trains have a max speed of 160km/h. Operating at that speed for the entire line would cut more than 1 hour off a Toronto-Ottawa trip. That would make it very competitive with air travel when factoring getting to the airport and checking in. Also, VIA needs to speed up the check-in process for trips. This has the benefit of not requiring new rolling stock or a fully grade-separated right-of-way.

[@seanrodgers1839]

@@groundzero_-lm4md You cannot use that track because there is too much freight traffic already. VIA cannot even go at 160 km/h because of the delays from freight trains. I believe that they are looking at the much less used corridor that goes from Toronto to Ottawa, away from the lake, now. Only a dedicated corridor can give on time operation with electric power. Freight trains are also too high for overhead wires.

[@RealConstructor]

@@groundzero_-lm4md You don’t need a seat reservation system or a check-in system if the train only get 160km/h. In my country all intercity trains go at 120-160km/hr and there is no seat reservation necessary. If you miss your train, the next one will be there in 6-15minutes (peak hours) or 30-60minutes (valley hours like we call it or off peak hours like you call it). The ‘check-in’ (if you can call it that) is no more than keeping a card (size bank card) for a scanner to enter the station or platform and doing the same when you leave the train. I do it for my daily commute. It could mean that I won’t have a regular seat and have to stand for almost an hour or sit on a jump seat, but I could always take the next train if I want a seat.

[@Pensyfan19]

Great video! There's a privately owned company called Prarie Link, similar to Brightline in Florida, which plans to provide service between Edmontol and Calgary. Can you please review that proposed railroad next?

[@marc21091]

Excellent report. As with Australia Canada has a long history of discussing high-speed rail and a very short (in fact no) history of implementing high speed rail. The large number of studies has kept economic consultancies in business for decades. Unlike Australia (between Brisbane and Sydney, and between Sydney and Melbourne) the physical geography of both Canadian corridors should make building new lines and straightening/remodelling existing lines into h-s line relatively simple, and not expensive per mile. Rather cheaper and easier than in Europe, even than in France. Yet, even when a positive cost-benefit return can be calculated, nothing happens. It doesn't sound likely even in 2021. Will any of the political parties propose to build a high-speed line in the Quebec-Windsor corridor, even just Montreal to Toronto, as an election promise at the suddenly-announced September 2021 Canadian General Election? No sign of it.

[@woltews]

Via Rail really pushes hard their HFR project. Basically, it is a dedicated track, with 200kmh material. The main reason this did not happen is that simple straitening and remodelling to existing lines was not simple or inexpensive at all ( vary high density area in terms of existing buildings and infrastructure ) along with the problem of what do you do after the train station as most public transit in Canada is in fact very bad compared to the average in say Europe. And while waiting 30 minutes for a buss at -10c in England might be unpleasant, waiting at -25c with a 45kph wind in Canada is a lot more than unpleasant .

[@bryceschug486]

Ive been stuck behind an accident on the QE2 multiple times. That 3 hours is accurate otherwise. Every few years there is a whisper of trying to get that Edmonton/Calgary link going again and then it just whimpers out again. It would be really nice to hop a 2 hour train to go to a concert or stuff.

[@counterfit5]

Montréal to Boston would certainly be interesting during the NHL playoffs 😆

[@blam1328]

Nobody reading this thread will be able to see HSR in Canada. It took Toronto, the centre of Canada, over 20 years to build 3 additional subway stations, repeat, stations, not lines. So, if God love Canada, someone might see HSR in Canada probably in 2121.

[@campfortune]

Guangzhou city's 500km subway also took about 20 years to build and very modern.

[@samzhang001]

Cries in Canadian

[@wuhanbiruSux]

How does a Canadien cry?

[@samzhang001]

@@wuhanbiruSux If you'd like to hear it first hand, simply find a strength highway 401 just outside of Toronto, and listen to the agonizing moan of the average commuter.

[@theolich4384]

@@wuhanbiruSux I'm so sorry!

[@james.strong]

At least there won’t be rats on the Alberta route!

[@lukemwp]

No one stops and asks if roads will be profitable. It's a public service. What a stupid concern

[@KingUnKaged]

Canada has a pretty poor track record on public procurement in general, and major infrastructure projects in particular. Even after the recent announcement that this is once again on the table, I would be shocked to see it operational in my life time.

[@cortanatheai6103]

For the QC-windsor corridor high speed rail, it would also be convenient for students and companies. Let's say I live in Montreal but wanna go to school in Ottawa or Quebec city, and I don't have a car. Instead of moving away from home, I can simply take a one hour trip in the morning to school in another city, then be home by dinner

[@cooltwittertag]

If its cheap enough yes

[@alexandrest-amour8751]

As someone who is from Montreal but now lives in Toronto you are describing my dream

[@fabulousoffroaddesigns5080]

An electric high speed rail line with "drive-on/drive-off vehicle capability" should be made from Salisbury NB to Cornwall ON. A straight line through northern Maine would allow for a 5 hour trip from the maritimes to Ontario allowing for 1 day service from anywhere in NB, NS, or PEI to Montreal, the National Capital of Ottawa, or realistically even Toronto with your vehicle. This would facilitate easy travel with electric or I.C.E. vehicles while having no use of fossil fuels. A western option would be like Kindersley, SK to Sudbury ON. This would allow for a person to leave say Edmonton Thursday morning and be in Charlottetown on Friday night with their car and their stuff. This would also allow for easy clean travel for work and recreation, reducing air plane emissions and taking strain off the infrastructure that is already stressed in current hub cities like Moncton, Halifax, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, and Regina; while giving them all easy access to each other.

[@dali9160]

from the day when the offer is higher than the demand and for the time being low numbers are not allowed to be frightening, the clientele will increase. because, if i see the offer at 13:07, i wouldn't feel like using the train either. when the local-train-network was introduced in our region around 1995, everyone said: "we don't need something like that, it's overkill!" today, the trains are longer than ever and at rush hours, passengers are still standing. the same with the interval timetable: supply generates demand!

[@stevenrnewlin]

Canada has long been a leader in high speed rail studies.

[@alfredocoelho8088]

Great vídeo! Please do someone about Argentina's HS project.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Also the ongoing modernization program. Glad to see FA rebuilding/restoring many stations and building new lines to accomodate surging demand.

[@KMCA779]

I'm going to call it out. 02:53 That's a GO train running along the 401 in Toronto. most of that vintage footage looks like Toronto but I can't be sure. I also saw Union-Pearson. That train route took way too long to get built too. One of these days I want to get a private cabin and ride VIA from Toronto to Vancouver but alas I don't have the money to do that... one day.

[@henryramsden9758]

Via rail has actually ordered several Siemens train sets as part of a high frequency rail project. they have plans to build dedicated passenger lines. trains could be running at as 200km/h. High speed rail in my mind

[@TheHothead101]

It's criminal that by the time we get trains that can operate at that speed they won't even be classified as "high speed" anymore

[@weatheranddarkness]

@@TheHothead101 they already aren't. Trains in the north east corridor in the US were doing 160mph/260kmh back in like 1900. That was the high water mark.

[@ablam8]

Building HSR is like putting sewer lines into your house. It won't make money, but will sure be convenient. I rode that 2 car Jet train between Calgary and Edmonton. An extra reason for it's demise was a deadly crash at an level crossing. It looks like the longer it is delayed, the more expensive it becomes. So it will never be built. Now someone is collecting funds for a vacuum type piping. He will probably put a few millions in his pocket.

[@ethanmac639]

they took away our greyhound buses and we don't have high speed rail, let alone a rail system to make up for the buses being taken away

[@mert739]

On top of that via rail is just insanely expensive. How can a train ticket cost the same as a bus ticket? Total theft and makes no logical sense

[@DouglasLippi]

Train buffs always seem to inflate plane travel times. This guy adds a full 2 hours and 12 minutes to the 48 minute flight time. But they never add any time to the train travel time. You'd think the train station is in your house and also at your final destination.

[@josephinepura525]

That probably includes the hours wating at the departures lobby. Railway stations usually do not have that, except Via Rail of course.

[@seanrodgers1839]

200 km/h service would be a ridiculous service to spend so much money on. I travelled on 160 km/h service in the 90s. I think that the only reason that it did not continue was because of the shared freight tracks. However, I don't really know much detail on this, so I could be mistaken.

[@Makoto778]

The upcoming HFR proposal still retains 200km/h service, but something like 90% or more of the tracks are dedicated to passenger service which should reduce delays and increase reliability. corpo.viarail.ca/en/projects-infrastructure/high-frequency-rail

[@Neville60001]

@@Makoto778, it's still too slow compared to standard Shinkansen, TGV, or ICE

[@Makoto778]

@@Neville60001 and it's hence why I consider it low grade borderline HSR. It's much better than the existing crappy VIA service, but just about the most our government is willing to support. Hopefully the engineers would quietly overengineer the line in a way that would allow for a better HSR service in the future.

[@waw4428]

Can you make another video comparing HSR (High Speed Rail) and HFR (High Frequency Rail)? Not only capabilities but also influence on development and travel. Currently on the Quebec-Windsor path, there are plans to build an HFR istead of an HSR, but there is criticism that it won't change anything since the travel time would be similar to current train and not much faster than cars. To me, in a fantasy world, if a 400km/h HSR was build there, the time to travel from Montreal to Toronto (for example) would be around 2 hours (inctead of 4h with HFR, 5h with current trains and 5h with cars), which would make it a communte and change our definition of travel for the cities on that corridor. Thanks and awesome video :D

[@weatheranddarkness]

I think 2hrs would have to be an express due to dwell times at all the stops along the way. But the difference in travel time could be huge anyway.

[@LegosheepIsAwesome]

One thing to note, "Bombardier" is pronounced "Bomb-Bar-D-A".

[@PG-3462]

It's pronounced Bombar-dee-hey in french (hey without the h, it's hard to explain how the letter é or er sounds in french 😂)

[@juliansmith4295]

@@PG-3462 Here you go: en français: /bəʊmbɑ:rdjeɪ/ (bohm BAR dyay) in English: /bɑ:mbɑrdi:eɪ/ (bahm BAR dee yay)

[@alexanderphilip1809]

Railways can be quite useful in crafting social/political/economic connections.

[@Go_for_it652]

The ice from the freight trains falls in large pieces in the winter and smashes the hose bags and also the snow at public crossing at grade which the engine strikes at high speed which smashed the Turbo train . More bridges are also required .

[@A_Canadian_In_Poland]

One positive news: the current goverment made the decision NOT to build Toronto Pickering Airport (an idea conceived back in the late 1960s), largely because of cost, estimated at twice what HFR would cost.

[@khaldrago911]

I believe the proper way to pronounce VIA Rail is “Vee-ah” Rail

[@pieter1102]

And Quebec is pronounced Kebec, not Kwebec. But who cares?

[@khaldrago911]

@@pieter1102 direz en Francais, SVP Monsieur.

[@Henchman1977]

The problem with the "High Speed" rail discussion in Canada is we barely have regular passenger rail now. I live along the Quebec-Windsor line (litteraly). If I want to travel from Brockville-Toronto (about 300km) a return ticket will be hundreds of dollars return unless I book weeks in advance. For that price you get old rolling stock on shared freight lines where passenger rail doesn't have priority and because of all the at grade crossings, rail service is frequently disrupted by vehicle collisions, derailments, protests.... So you end up in a coach bus anyways. I'd be more than satisfied with a proper passenger rail service (dedicated line, elevated crossings, modern stock) at existing speeds (closing in on 200kph). That would get you from Montreal to Toronto in 3 hour range.

[@dvdso]

make a video about the non-existent Rio - São Paulo High-speed railway

[@Anonymous-zu7dh]

Don’t think 250km/h on a dedicated newly built rail line would even technically count as high speed rail.

[@ryanelliott71698]

I always find it hilarious when people say about rail, “but who we gonna pay for ittttttt????” Yet they’re totally fine with building new roads and highways, that unless there’s a toll on every… single… road, will generate the government $0 once installed. Which is only gonna get worse (if Alan Fish is correct) when we move to electric cars as the added weight will only deteriorate our roads faster than we can build them.

[@woltews]

"road, will generate the government $0 once installed." Government of Canada collects about $5 billion per year in excise taxes on gasoline

[@ryanelliott71698]

@@woltews watch Not Just Bikes on how expensive these roads are. And it’s not just the ash fault. It’s how we spend more money on building roads, sewer systems and electrical wire over a larger area that serves less people. And this adds up over time. It’s apart of a larger problem we have with car centric suburbia. Almost every town and city is highly car centric. And I’d know that from experience. Just to get to my work that’s in the middle of the city, I can either walk an hour to it. Ride a couple of busses that go all over the damn place but the city centre due to it being shity. Bike for “technically” 17 min. Bust since there’s barely any bike infrastructure and there’s no bike lock area at my work that doesn’t make me comfortable. Or take a car for 10 min. We need better public transit to actually give us options. What we have now doesn’t. I don’t want to pay thousands of dollars on a car, insurance and gas just to drive to a place that’s a couple of kilometres away. That’s a failure of city design and it ends when we realize there’s a problem.

[@woltews]

@@ryanelliott71698 better public transit would be great but it is not something high speed rail can give us , just for the sake of thinking about how other people live imagine you do not work in the centre of the city but the opposite edge of the city and have to bring 120lb of tools with you to work and ask yourself how a public transit system could help you ? ( I have been in this position myself and if you want lots of money then you have to have solutions for people who are not office workers also )

[@Lankpants]

@@woltews Excise taxes on gas are going to go away fast as electric car usership rises. This is a simple and obvious fact. Also roads are only a small part of the problem with car centric city design, they're not even the largest waste of money. That would be parking. The amount of space North American cities waste for people to house their cars is insane. If fewer people drive most of those multilevel parking lots and giant parking fields can be converted into more usable space, often in highly desirable spots which can reduce the severity of the housing crisis and allow for prime business area to be created. If you need to move 55kg of tools several km then congratulations, you're in one of the few niche cases where a car is probably actually needed for this trip, although depending on the distance and camber a Dutch bakfiet might also be a viable option with the right infrastructure. This isn't the norm and having it be excluded from a specific mode of transport is fine, because the vast majority of trips aren't this. What if you don't have 55kg of tools but can't drive because, let's say you're blind? How's America's car centric city layout going to work for that person? And unlike the blind person, you may actually have trips where you're not encumbered by 55kg of tools. If you just want to see a friend across the city the train will probably do the trick. Also, HSR isn't something to get you from one edge of a city to the other. HSR gets you city to city. The things that moves people around cities are commuter rail and metros, normally much lower speed solutions since HSR needs longer stretches of track to get up to speed. So no, HSR won't get you from one edge of the city to the other. That's not its job. A well designed metro will though. HSR competes with domestic air travel and highways. Commuter rail and metros compete with the local road network. Canada needs a heavy investment in all of these honestly. The solution for people who work in the suburbs is to have a highly decentralised metro system that can move people around the suburbs as well as to the core. It's not usually the first thing a city will build since it's notably less efficient than suburb>core lines, but there are plenty of cities that have suburban rail lines. And just to stress here, rail is not a catch all solution. Not everyone can use rail, and that's fine. If you're a house to house repair person the rail ain't gonna work for you. It still benefits you however by aiding in easing road congestion. It's not like roads work for everyone either, they notably exclude the blind, the young, the elderly and often the inept at driving (in many cases by no fault of their own, but they shouldn't be forced to learn by poor city design anyway).

[@woltews]

@@Lankpants a simpler solution for those that go to work to sit in front o fa computer is to move the data to the people and not the people to the data . If the people that sit in front of a computer all day work from home, then no mass must be moved at all . This saves not only the energy of moving them bt need for many of their fancy work clothing , going out for lunch , dry cleaning, building lots of office space to house them and cleaning that office space .In regard to the ed of gas excise tax, I think it will be supplemented by a road usage tax . SO the government will still get their money be it electric or gas vehicle of road usage.

[@jonowack]

Ontario's power grid is already nearly zero-carbon. The only thing left to decarbonize is transportation and buildings. High speed rail and electric cars are essential.

[@Xenomorph-hb4zf]

How will electric car charging work in Condo and apartment buildings? Can't force people to buy electric cars without solving this issue.

[@jonowack]

@@Xenomorph-hb4zf good question. It’ll take some electrical infrastructure redesign.

[@acchaladka]

The 2011 report sort of missed that the greater Montréal area is about 4m people while Quebec City is less than a million. Meaning that Montréal - Toronto is a lot more interesting than QCity - Toronto. Paige Saunders has an excellent video on this topic advocating intelligently for a rail corporation (which I don’t love). Thanks for this video.

[@ph11p3540]

Edmonton and Calgary became a lot more autocentric starting in the early 1980s after both city transit systems made drastic service cuts and CP Rail scrapped the Edmonton to Calgary Dayliner service. Every person and their dog can afford to drive in a nice vehicle at that time due to the post 1970s oil boom when good jobs grew on trees. Also at this time there was a growing hostile divide between the rural conservative population, big oil, big auto industry and the so called liberal city folk. The oil industry and rural folk had a particularly powerful lobby that consistently wanted to make deep cuts to city funding and deeper cuts to public transit funding. Edmonton Transit in particular, went from a decent bus only service to the bottom of the barrel public transit service and that was with LRT expanding into service. They really made the two Alberta cities (especially Edmonton) the ultimate autocentric cities of Canada if not North America.

[@VITORB82]

As a Train afficionado thanks for this channel!

[@ronmcmahon7466]

I was born in Edmonton, I now live in Calgary and I went to university in Ottawa. I've travelled across Canada six times by train and am a rail fan. It is clear that there is no desire in Canadian political leadership to invest in high speed rail systems in the Edmonton-Calgary corridor. The political interest is so low that basic, slow-speed Via Rail service to Calgary was permanently ended over 32 years ago and there has never been any attempt to reintroduce it despite all of the hand-wringing and smiling promises of our need to reduce our transportation carbon footprint. The ugly, unfortunate truth is that Alberta is not seen as a long-term place that is worth sustaining and developing for the centuries to come, but rather the province is treated as not much more than an economic oil resource to be exploited and drained dry and a convenient spot in which to house wrong-thinking malcontents far away from the real centre of the nation that is truly worth our focus and investment - the Quebec-Windsor Corridor. (So say the Laurentian elite - the economic and political power base of the nation.) Until or unless this attitude changes, Canadians won't see any substantial development beyond our infrequent lip-service-only pursuit of high speed rail.

[@TheIdleCrow]

I 100% agree with your closing comments. High Speed rail at the very least from Ontario to Quebec regards should be invested in to ensure easier, greener travel for the future! It's an investment to help counter climate change & these studies talking about 2041.... By then if things stay on track gas cars will be basically a thing of the past.... But replaced with electric cars powered by lithium ion batteries... Something I consider to be problematic because the limit of how much lithium there is in the world and the waste created by those batteries once they are dead. Hydrogen cars are a more friendly future alternative but that also requires great infrastructure to start up! High Speed rail is an even better alterative then even that since it can drastically scale back the need for personnel vehicles of any kind! It should be done now & further expanded upon in the future... Like honestly... I like my car & the freedom it gives me... But if you look how much in more urban areas the desire to own a car just isn't a thing & how younger new generations will gladly accept these means if made properly available. I'll give up my car (Freedom how I view it) kicking & screaming basically once I come to terms in the future that it's a rich person's luxury & I am not a rich person... So yeah Canada needs to start expanding this infrastructure decades ago let alone now!

[@hadesapocalypse]

Just took the RTC course now im getting rail videos in my feed, lol

[@bathyprobe]

It's probably cause you were already a foamer.

[@philipanderegg5973]

The thing is with these studies, people in North America choose cars because there aren't any decent alternatives. Most people only choose public transit in Canada when they don't have enough money to get a car, so no surprise that more people got cars over the years they did studies. Canadian cities aren't designed to have good public transit (Ottawa has the LRT but if you have to use a bus, seriously sucks, and Toronto is similar) More people would switch to the train given the opportunity, especially if it's faster.

[@marvwatkins7029]

Don't hold your breath on any improvement of any kind in long distance (200km+) passenger rail in Canada any time soon.

[@Simon-nw9bf]

"Good urban transit service" Shows the Scarborough RT lmao

[@weatheranddarkness]

I think the study referenced probably didn't take into account the potential induced demand from potentially linking through to Chicago.

[@henrythef1guy768]

The Quebec-Windsor route, which is getting High-Speed rolling stock and infrastructure upgrades next year: Am I a joke to you?

[@weatheranddarkness]

Lol, i’ll believe “high speed” when i see it. In other words, yes, a total joke at the expense of everyone.

[@DotADBX]

the problem really with rail in Canada is our cities are too far apart from each other outside of the GTA (Greater Toronto Area) and the GVA (Greater Vancouver Area) so unless we create an extensive system that connects provinces together and create fast travel between cities on par or faster then cars or flight rail will never work in Canada. I have always dreamed of high speed rail system in the GVA which would connect all the cities in the lower mainland from Vancouver to Hope and even considering a high speed system from whistler to Vancouver as well then have slower tourism trains to bring you further north but in reality there isn't enough people who will use this service unless its cross province and a cross province rail system would need to travel excess of 600KM/hr to make it practical for every day use. ideally what we need is a cross Canada extremely fast rail system from Vancouver to Toronto at minimum then build additional standard high speed rail options from there connecting to that main system that way there's larger access to different parts of the country for everyone which will drive more people to use rail in general. Really its a multi Trillion $ infrastructure project.

[@marvwatkins7029]

The bus from Calgary to Edmonton (with a stop it Red Deer) is the best bet. Except for congestion and winter blizzards. Perhaps a dedicated busy (BRT) with some sort of (hopefully not too expensive), energy efficient heated pavement MIGHT do the job. But don't expect anything soon in any case.

[@weatheranddarkness]

busses are so unpleasant, and they get stuck in traffic.

[@jackdough8164]

We had a train back in the day that did 250km/hr but it had to pass like 900+ road crossings between Toronto and Montreal lol. Not very safe

[@rdgk1se3019]

What you explained in this video is basically the same thing that happens here in the USA, everything gets politicized and ruined.

[@CylonAndrew]

Thank you very much! I wanted to push for better rail transport to politicians as we are in an election right now, so there is a possibility that an MP might knock on my door, or at least their volunteers. I can use this information to push the issue for better rail in the context of reducing congestion on the 401, economic benefits, and environmental considerations

[@dannyboy8850]

High speed rail in Canada is a joke. The Eglinton subway in Toronto less than 20km has taken almost 10 years is still not in operation...

[@eriklakeland3857]

Plus the design of that line is plagued with issues. It’ll be a massive disappointment to the public when it opens.

[@denelson83]

The Calgary airport is in the northeastern part of the city, not to the southwest as you depicted.

[@nicholasyoung9758]

This is an historic point, but look up Turbo Train. It was fisrt run by CN.

[@michaelkeeping8040]

Being that canada is so huge in area it would make sense to have high speed rail for passengers and cargo but yes it would be very very expensive and one major downfall is our small population

[@jimmylam9846]

Congratulation to my great grand son's great grand son for the Canadian HSR.

[@mitsuyamaeda-railfan]

If the speed of the British Class 802, which can run even on non-overhead sections, can be increased, in addition to saving initial construction costs and maintenance costs, there is a possibility that the worry of electric shock due to snowfall can be reduced, and the railway line can be expanded while observing the usage situation. I think you can. And I think that convenience can be further improved by connecting the railway network in each area with an airport or a next-generation high-speed transportation system (for example, Japan's Linear Shinkansen). Moreover, there is a possibility that material costs can be reduced by coordinating the production of Class 802 with the United Kingdom.

[@ianjackson4721]

As a Canadian, I agree with this video as it is very accurate.

[@3yexQSx]

Forget High Speed Rail in Canada, it will take 100 years to get it done, look the new bridge project on Detroit river, 20 years already take it still not done yet.

[@Leonard_Wilson]

There’s a lot of rough terrain in Canada. Plus, it has a relatively low population for a country of its size. A transcontinental high speed line wouldn’t work. However, a regional high speed line along the Toronto to Montreal corridor would work.

[@tezpokemonmaster]

BC would benefit greatly from it as well, the metro vancouver area is huge, extending out farther and farther as people move out of the city core, skytrain is the current commuter rail of the area but it only has a top speed of 80km/h and is not suitable for connecting farther cities like abbotsford

[@tezpokemonmaster]

also, the rough terrain is really only in the north (lakes) and west (rocky mountains), a lot of canada is super flat and easy to build rail on.

[@seanrodgers1839]

@@tezpokemonmaster That "north" is 95% of the 2 biggest provinces.

[@NeSeeger]

Rough terrain is a poor excuse look at the geography and climate of Japan. That said unless HSR is cheaper and just as fast as flying, as well as safer and more reliable, it wont replace planes as a way of med long range travel.

[@danieldonaldson8634]

What Canada needs is workable rail, not HSR. The Calgary-Edmonton route has been a non-starter from day one: who wants HSR that takes twice as long as the plane? and city-centre to airport trains eliminate the argument around airport time. You're going to the same place, and catching a train. The United Aircraft Turbotrain in the late 1970's, and the Bombardier LRC fast diesels with shared bogies and tilting suspension in the 80's are basically the JetTrain, and those precursors showed that unless you have dedicated track and 100% grade separation, you can't make even 130km trains work. They ran on the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, but the real economic logic was Montreal Toronto. That was an era of very expensive domestic flying, and the 401 had only started to operate fully. The road approach to Montreal was still the 2-20 which could absorb two hours on its own once you were 100kms out. But once you have separate lines and the cost of line maintenance has to be covered by passenger fares, well, forget it. By the way, my father was a senior propulsion engineer who helped design both the Turbotrain, and the LRC, and had worked on the Napier Deltic powered Flying Scotsman, and knew a lot about this. He wanted it to work, but concluded that unless those conditions were met, it was futile. What might make sense are HSR routes between Canadian destinations and the the US. There were very popular routes between Washington DC and Montreal in the 70's using conventional rolling stock and locomotives, which from what I know were basically incompatible with the mandates of both Amtrak and Via Rail. A route that would eventually cover Vancouver BC to LA, or at least San Francisco sounds good, but right of way is effectively impossible at this point, as the débacle around SOCal HSR shows. This suggests that what is needed is an independent, publicly owned company, heavily subsidized, to run such a service. I wish it would happen, but I don't see how. Environmental tariffs on long-journey highway trips might push people towards rail, but to do that you need the capacity in place to handle the business, and that is the chicken-and-egg problem. It suggests massive investment and a coherent plan. The first part is something that Canada has an easier time doing than the latter, but the lack of readiness to make infrastructure investments is not.

[@YourCanadianGuide]

Excellent video about a non existent train! For the Alberta train, the problem with a train that takes 2 hours and 10 min is that once you factor in the time to get to the departing train station from your house and then from the arrival station to your final destination it really isn't faster than taking a car. For this to work the trip needs to be 60 min tops so that no matter where you start or end, you will save at least 1 hour each way. That's what it will take to convince a lot of people to take the train instead of driving. Just a small tip 2:30 the airport in Calgary is in the north end of the city not the south. Great vid though!

[@paxromana1]

Not sure if RE delved into the problem of either a HFL or HSR between Mtl-Toroto or the other route that one of the studies indicated as "viable"; for example, MTL-TOR have stops in between like Kingston, Bellwood etc, would either add those destinations or would those trains be express trains with no stops in between. My understanding is because those stops are too close in between the two points, it'd slow the service down and add to the overall costs for maintenance/service etc... The other point, which RE did touch on, having the dedicated track for either is half the battle. The other part is the public transportation infrastructure. Outside of Montreal and Toronto, most of these cities are designed with the car in mind. This means cities like London ON have virtually no downtown core with great public transportation so even if you arrive early, getting home is still a problem. Realistically, given how Toronto, Montreal (with more robust public transportation) and other Canadian cities are designed, it would be very difficult to design and execute the intermodal success of HSR examples like Japan, South Korea, China, France etc... It'd be nice to see either service in Canada but the way the country has been built makes those options an uphill battle.

[@Lodai974]

Quebec / Windsor (Detroit) seems the most viable. The route is fairly straight, little or no relief, large population centers, cities with efficient public transport. a 320 kph(350kph) electric HSL would be best with branch lines. One for an interconnection track for London and another for kingston. (Like the interconnection in Paris or Lyon) This will allow direct trains to avoid the slowdown zone in these cities .... Integration in urban areas will be the most difficult even if the current tracks, quite rectilinear, allow to build tracks suitable for 250 kph. Viaduct lines may be necessary in town or even tunnels. As for the fact that 1000km long seems too much for an HSL, not really. Look at the lines abroad: -A Tokyo-Fukuoka (about 990km) is possible .... in reality, you have to change tain in Osaka, except in rush hour or at least 2 Shinkansen make the entire trip in 3h50 there is an existing Lille-Marseille (950km) several trains / day via Roissy CDG and Lyon Intl airport. Not to mention Strsbourg / Bordeaux (950km 3h40) or a Marseille (Montpellier) / Rennes (more than 1000km long) in 3h50 (south interconnection section is slow for 110 kph) an endurance test around 2001 allowed a Calais Marseille (full HSL) in 3 hours and over 1100km long. The line from Windsor Quebec can be built in one go, but the operation must superimpose direct trains and omnibus (semi direct) with the possibility of avoiding less busy medium-sized cities (3 rivers, London, Kingston)