3 ms·
It's a common myth that Canada is not a good fit for train, yes it is large and low density at a country level but it has pockets of very high density. Almost
by jeromegv 4y ago
It's a common myth that Canada is not a good fit for train, yes it is large and low density at a country level but it has pockets of very high density.
Almost half of Canadian population is within the Windsor-Quebec City corridor (which includes Toronto and Montreal), which is just about 1100 km. You can definitely have a viable train considering the millions of people that live there and the many dozens of daily short flights that happen in that corridor.
- theluketaylor 4y agoThe current GO Expansion to turn the greater Toronto area commuter rail into a true regional rail is a great project, and is using knowledge and expertise from the German rail network. It will electrify the trains and provide all day frequent service throughout the network that will mean not really needing to bother checking the schedule. It also flies in the face of statements that say european style rail isn't possible in north america, since the basic plan is modelled on German S-Bahn. Just this weekend I drove 1 hr to the edge of Toronto, then got on the subway to downtown for a Blue Jays game. Once GO expansion is done I'll be able to make that same trip on a single train in less time then it takes to drive. High speed rail from Quebec City to Windsor is a project we should absolutely be funding as the population and travel patterns of the corridor would easily support it. Start with Toronto->Montreal with a spur to Ottawa, then as phase 2 extend to Windsor and Quebec City.
- master_crab 4y agoYup. Both US and Canada are good fits for mass transit. The Bos-NYC-Phil-Was-(Rich-Raleigh-Atlanta?) corridor represents around 30% of the US population (well over 100 million for those counting). The distance between those US cities represents maybe less than half the high speed rail network in France but easily almost double the French population.