Well as most of you have guessed I am talking about the AGV for my last post of the day. The AGV in my view is going to change Europe on the long term and I hope that the change will even spread to North America. It could go from Vancouver to Halifax in less than 24 hours. This would shock the most Canadians and they would have no idea what to make of it. I am sure it would also collapse some industries in Canada as well. If you are still wondering what AGV then you should read the BBC News more. Or just look it up on wikipedia (joke wikipedia does not have much about it). So you are still wondering what it is?? Well it is a new train that is going to go 360 km/h along the high speed tracks in Europe. I decided to start my blog in a different way this evening, I will not do it again.
Well I was looking at the how this will change the rail travel around Europe, and as usual I hope it will come to Canada. I will not really look into the specs of the train, because honestly I do not know them, or understand, so I can not have an opinion on an issue I do not understand. So I will be looking at how the trains can speed up the system in Europe, what would new rail routes go and what they would mean (just my thoughts). In Canada routes would look like (my opinion), what it would mean for travel times.
European travel would change with this new train, it will start to challenge the plane for the fastest times in travel. The AGV when in service will travel 1000 km in 3 hours, which is fairly impressive. I know that planes travel at much greater speeds but in Europe the travel distances are not that great. Lets consider if you are traveling from Paris to Berlin and compare the travel time, I cannot compare costs because I do not want to spend the time (do not know the true costs of the travel). The plane will take an hour and 45 mins to travel between the two cities. The train will take 3 hours I know that is not the best example, but security at the airport could extend the travel time. It is fairly close to the time of the plane but if you are pressed for time the plane would win.
The next flight am looking into is from Paris to Amsterdam, which I am using as a rough estimate of the distance to cities like the Rhineland of Germany, Brussels, Frankfurt and Bern. They are all around the same distance, I am leaving out London because of the channel tunnel, I do not want to make generalization when there is a body of water in the way. The plane time along this route would be 1 hour and 15 mins, the train on the other hand would be 1 hour and 30 mins. This makes the train very competitive, fifteen mins is not that large of a difference.
For an example of a place in England that could have highspeed rail lets compare flying and taking the train to Manchester from London. Well you can not fly between them so this will not be an example. And I was totally looking forward to it, the train would have taken less than an hour to get there. To drive it would have taken over 3 hours, I think the train would win over driving any day.
I have thought about new routes that could be put into place to increase ridership every now and then. The areas that I feel need to have improved highspeed trains are not the core countries. France, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Italy have good systems in place. Spain on the other hand has a wonderful system being put in that would have almost everybody with in a short trip of highspeed rail, which would be amazing. I think the new areas for highspeed rail are in the new EU countries, such as Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. These countries can form important links with in the European rail chain.
In the atlases that I have looked at recently there are no major rail links between Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia which do not go through a non EU country. I am not saying these countries are going to destroy trains that go through their lands, but travelers will have to go through some sort of customs. If a highspeed link when from Warsaw to Tallinn, stopping at Riga and Kaunas. This would open the Baltic nations to the rail system of the rest of Europe (I use Baltic roughly because Estonia is Scandinavian). The route would take 3 hours to travel along compared to the 13 hours and 30 mins it currently takes by car. A plane along that route would take 2 hours, which is shorter, and Warsaw would most likely not be the final destination for these travelers.
The other route that I was thinking about would be a connection between Vienna and Athens, also connecting with Budapest, Bucharest and Sofia. This route could be used by many tourist who travel to Greece, as well as help development in Romania and Bulgaria. This route would be fairly long and would not compete with air travel unless incentives were introduced. To drive the route it would take 30 hours to drive, taking a train would be 7 hours, short in comparison. Planes on the other hand would make the trip in only 2 hours and 15 mins, so unless you want to take the train for a specific reason flying is much faster.
These comparisons are not done looking at possible train routes, I am assuming that the trains would travel along the same route as the roads. These have just been rough estimates. The highspeed rail network in Europe is becoming more integrated by creating Railteam, which is like airline alliances. The only issue with them is that the European Commission still what them to compete on prices. I think the trains are competing the airlines and do not have to compete amongst themselves. But I bias to trains...
Now to talk about if the AGV was put into Canada what kind of impacts would it have on Canadians and where it would go. I am sure that this will not happen, not after the wonderful Turbo experiment of the 1970s have destroyed any attempts of high speed rail for many years to come. The future could be changed if the price of oil continues to increase to record levels that cause drive to become to expensive for us to drive to other cities.
Canadian routes would not span all across Canada, but just in certain areas that have high density of urban centers. By this I mean that there would be no reason to create a cross Canada rail system, even though that is what is needed in the long term. The areas where I think this train would be beneficial would be between Windsor and Quebec, Edmonton and Calgary. There could be future expansion from Calgary to Vancouver and from Quebec out east to Halifax. Those expansion would only occur after a long time and a large increase in the price of oil.
Looking at the Quebec-Windsor Corridor it would be the best place currently for a highspeed rail. The major urban centers that are located in this route would be: Quebec , Trois-Rivieres, Sherbrooke, Montreal, Ottawa, Kingston, Oshawa, Peterborough, Toronto, Kitchener, Hamilton, St. Catharines, London, Sarina and Windsor (just to name a few). These cities would not be on one line but a few lines that have spurs going to other urban areas. I am sure I left a few from my list, it is not complete by any means and I am sorry if you feel offended because I left you out. Over 1 million people travel between Toronto and Montreal which could all be transfered to rail if the service was developed enough (don't know the actual number, could be over 4 million). The length of time on a plane would be 1 hour and 30 mins of travel, while a train would take around 1 hour and 30 mins of travel. When you consider how connected both of the airports are to public transportation the rail option becomes better and better.
The other route is the Alberta corridor, Edmonton to Lethbridge, same with the other corridor most of the travel would be going between two cities. These cities are Edmonton and Calgary, which would take less than an hour by the new trains in Europe which would be the same as the travel time between them on the train. I do not know as much about this corridor but it is experiencing unprecedented growth, and the Albertan government has money. This could be the right mix for creating a highspeed link.
For interest sake it would take a while by train to travel across Canada would still take too long. It would take 7 hours to travel across Canada by plane, while train it would take 18 hours. If you where able to take a night train and sleeping on it for 8 hours I guess you could manage it, currently it is around 5 days I think.
I am sorry how long it is, I should put this effort into writing papers and I would be done them all already. I also have too many topics to blog about, maybe I should just blog all day (I will talk about the primaries tomorrow).
Well I was looking at the how this will change the rail travel around Europe, and as usual I hope it will come to Canada. I will not really look into the specs of the train, because honestly I do not know them, or understand, so I can not have an opinion on an issue I do not understand. So I will be looking at how the trains can speed up the system in Europe, what would new rail routes go and what they would mean (just my thoughts). In Canada routes would look like (my opinion), what it would mean for travel times.
European travel would change with this new train, it will start to challenge the plane for the fastest times in travel. The AGV when in service will travel 1000 km in 3 hours, which is fairly impressive. I know that planes travel at much greater speeds but in Europe the travel distances are not that great. Lets consider if you are traveling from Paris to Berlin and compare the travel time, I cannot compare costs because I do not want to spend the time (do not know the true costs of the travel). The plane will take an hour and 45 mins to travel between the two cities. The train will take 3 hours I know that is not the best example, but security at the airport could extend the travel time. It is fairly close to the time of the plane but if you are pressed for time the plane would win.
The next flight am looking into is from Paris to Amsterdam, which I am using as a rough estimate of the distance to cities like the Rhineland of Germany, Brussels, Frankfurt and Bern. They are all around the same distance, I am leaving out London because of the channel tunnel, I do not want to make generalization when there is a body of water in the way. The plane time along this route would be 1 hour and 15 mins, the train on the other hand would be 1 hour and 30 mins. This makes the train very competitive, fifteen mins is not that large of a difference.
For an example of a place in England that could have highspeed rail lets compare flying and taking the train to Manchester from London. Well you can not fly between them so this will not be an example. And I was totally looking forward to it, the train would have taken less than an hour to get there. To drive it would have taken over 3 hours, I think the train would win over driving any day.
I have thought about new routes that could be put into place to increase ridership every now and then. The areas that I feel need to have improved highspeed trains are not the core countries. France, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Italy have good systems in place. Spain on the other hand has a wonderful system being put in that would have almost everybody with in a short trip of highspeed rail, which would be amazing. I think the new areas for highspeed rail are in the new EU countries, such as Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. These countries can form important links with in the European rail chain.
In the atlases that I have looked at recently there are no major rail links between Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia which do not go through a non EU country. I am not saying these countries are going to destroy trains that go through their lands, but travelers will have to go through some sort of customs. If a highspeed link when from Warsaw to Tallinn, stopping at Riga and Kaunas. This would open the Baltic nations to the rail system of the rest of Europe (I use Baltic roughly because Estonia is Scandinavian). The route would take 3 hours to travel along compared to the 13 hours and 30 mins it currently takes by car. A plane along that route would take 2 hours, which is shorter, and Warsaw would most likely not be the final destination for these travelers.
The other route that I was thinking about would be a connection between Vienna and Athens, also connecting with Budapest, Bucharest and Sofia. This route could be used by many tourist who travel to Greece, as well as help development in Romania and Bulgaria. This route would be fairly long and would not compete with air travel unless incentives were introduced. To drive the route it would take 30 hours to drive, taking a train would be 7 hours, short in comparison. Planes on the other hand would make the trip in only 2 hours and 15 mins, so unless you want to take the train for a specific reason flying is much faster.
These comparisons are not done looking at possible train routes, I am assuming that the trains would travel along the same route as the roads. These have just been rough estimates. The highspeed rail network in Europe is becoming more integrated by creating Railteam, which is like airline alliances. The only issue with them is that the European Commission still what them to compete on prices. I think the trains are competing the airlines and do not have to compete amongst themselves. But I bias to trains...
Now to talk about if the AGV was put into Canada what kind of impacts would it have on Canadians and where it would go. I am sure that this will not happen, not after the wonderful Turbo experiment of the 1970s have destroyed any attempts of high speed rail for many years to come. The future could be changed if the price of oil continues to increase to record levels that cause drive to become to expensive for us to drive to other cities.
Canadian routes would not span all across Canada, but just in certain areas that have high density of urban centers. By this I mean that there would be no reason to create a cross Canada rail system, even though that is what is needed in the long term. The areas where I think this train would be beneficial would be between Windsor and Quebec, Edmonton and Calgary. There could be future expansion from Calgary to Vancouver and from Quebec out east to Halifax. Those expansion would only occur after a long time and a large increase in the price of oil.
Looking at the Quebec-Windsor Corridor it would be the best place currently for a highspeed rail. The major urban centers that are located in this route would be: Quebec , Trois-Rivieres, Sherbrooke, Montreal, Ottawa, Kingston, Oshawa, Peterborough, Toronto, Kitchener, Hamilton, St. Catharines, London, Sarina and Windsor (just to name a few). These cities would not be on one line but a few lines that have spurs going to other urban areas. I am sure I left a few from my list, it is not complete by any means and I am sorry if you feel offended because I left you out. Over 1 million people travel between Toronto and Montreal which could all be transfered to rail if the service was developed enough (don't know the actual number, could be over 4 million). The length of time on a plane would be 1 hour and 30 mins of travel, while a train would take around 1 hour and 30 mins of travel. When you consider how connected both of the airports are to public transportation the rail option becomes better and better.
The other route is the Alberta corridor, Edmonton to Lethbridge, same with the other corridor most of the travel would be going between two cities. These cities are Edmonton and Calgary, which would take less than an hour by the new trains in Europe which would be the same as the travel time between them on the train. I do not know as much about this corridor but it is experiencing unprecedented growth, and the Albertan government has money. This could be the right mix for creating a highspeed link.
For interest sake it would take a while by train to travel across Canada would still take too long. It would take 7 hours to travel across Canada by plane, while train it would take 18 hours. If you where able to take a night train and sleeping on it for 8 hours I guess you could manage it, currently it is around 5 days I think.
I am sorry how long it is, I should put this effort into writing papers and I would be done them all already. I also have too many topics to blog about, maybe I should just blog all day (I will talk about the primaries tomorrow).
No comments:
Post a Comment