Canada is great at high-speed rail studies — but not at actually building high-speed rail. So why is it the only country in the developed world considering a new conventional-speed passenger network?
Created by Paige Saunders with special guest Reece Martin
It’s more complicated, and the Kitchener to London route is a good example with which I’m familiar.
I used to take this route a lot in the mid-Aughts and I think it was roughly 45-60 minutes. I moved back to the area ~5 years ago and was flabbergasted when I found out how long it takes now. I thought, “the government should fix this!” However, when you dig into it more, you find out CN owns that route and they’ve made the calculation that upkeep is more expensive to them than slow trains. Sure, “the government” could pay CN to fix the rails, but I don’t think we want CN getting tax dollars, and even then, back when it was reasonably fast, you’d often experience huge delays because of freight.
Rumours are, GO has been eyeing that section of track and if they buy, they’ll obviously fix it up. However, this whole thing demonstrates how important it is to have designated passenger train tracks. And if you’re building dedicated tracks between two of the biggest cities in North America, it’s probably worth investing the extra money in HSR.
I don’t see why we should go for HSR when we haven’t even gotten close to the top speeds of our existing rolling stock, let alone the cutoff for “low speed” rail at around 200 km/h.
If VIA trains actually maintained that across the whole Windsor-Quebec City corridor I think you could satisfy the majority of people without needing the huge investment that true HSR requires.
For ViaRail to maintain max speed across The Corridor, they would have to rebuild most of it, which outside of those 2 Class 5 sections, they don’t own. If you’re building new tracks anyways, it might be worth building HSR.