Rail between Calgary Banff & Calgary Edmonton has been talked about since we lost both in the 80's, but penny-pinching & low capacity for imagination for it has kept it from going anywhere. Heck the corridor to Calgary Edmonton corridor (roughly 3.5 million people along 179 miles) has a geometry that would make higher speeds (100-125 mph) incredibly easy & cost-effective, compared to other corridors. So yes it would be a nice start to, hopefully, something more...
It would be a dream for a Calgary -> Banff -> Vancouver train. There’s a train already going there but it’s a luxury tourist train what’s like $1000 a ride. Rip
When I was in Banff last spring, there were comments about how congested Banff has become during peak season. The Park Service already has challenges with handling traffic and this why a town of 8,000 already has an extensive internal transit system. After hearing this, it seemed that rail would become a long-term necessity in order to handle more people without destroying the natural environment in the national park.
I had no idea Banff had good internal transit. Given that, this project makes even more sense. Looking at the maps, it seems there's plenty of space by the station there to have a proper bus terminal etc too!
If you look on Google Maps, there's another building immediately southwest of the Train Station which is a multi-bay intercity bus station (it shows "Brewster Sightseeing" on google maps, who are the key tenant (and interestingly Brewster has serviced that area since the horse & buggy days))
It would totally take the stress out of the place which is basically just trying to find parking anywhere... Add in a town tram network and it would be paradise! Although a gondola system would still be cool too! As was proposed a few years back!
I'm super excited about the prospects of a rail link from YYC to downtown Calgary and service out to Banff. Calgary once had VaiRail passenger rail service out to Banff until 1990. Edmonton and Calgary also had daily ViaRail service until 1985 when cutbacks cut that service. Since then, Edmonton and Calgary (and Alberta as a whole) have doubled in population and yet we still haven't seen ViaRail return, despite federal tax dollars continuing to subsidize the service. It's concerning that there are towns less than one percent the size of Calgary served by daily passenger rail service in Ontario, while Calgary (metro 1.4 million) has no service. I feel the Infrastructure bank NEEDS to green light this project, we are the only large city in Canada without passenger rail service and it's time for the federal government to correct their shortsightedness of eliminating passenger service in and around Calgary. Thanks for this video; I'm a huge advocate for this project!
As a middle school kid, I had thought of establishing a railroad that ran from Calgary to Banff and Edmonton. I am so glad to see what mini-me had thought of materializing. I thought that Calgary's station could go at the intersection of 9th Ave and 5th St at the abandoned railyard, especially since the Green Line will have a stop right next door.
As I mentioned in reply on the previous video, VIA Rail need to expand it’s service to more population centres. They need to take what they have here in the Windsor-Quebec corridor and replicate that elsewhere in the country. As Reece said in the video, one of the biggest cases for this would be between Calgary and Edmonton.
@@Lafv Not since the 90's at least. They did the same thing as elsewhere, cut service, then complained about lack of ridership until the Federal government let them scrap them. Their argument was "Greyhound exists"... 30 years later and neither exists.
@@TheOwenMajor There's plenty of people wanting to travel the route. But you have to compete with cars. If the bus sucks then the only people who take it would be the people who have no other option. And Greyhound was definitely bottom of the barrel for service quality. If trains can be run frequently enough to be convenient and aren't overly expensive, people will absolutely take them over driving.
@@RMTransit On paper, unfortunately CN and CP piss and moan so much that the feds usually give in to whatever. The Feds have the power to fight, but they don't.
Working in a hotel close to YYC airport, we have a lot of guests from europe asking and wondering why theres no train from the airport to banff. This question is being asked every single time. Hope this project would move forward.
A great project! It would also be quite easy to extend the airport line to Airdrie to have commuter rail from there in the future, and it gets us a bit closer to Edmonton!
@@gmbrusselsprout I couldn't agree more, Lake Louise makes perfect sense for a) site-seers checking out Lake Louise and Lake Moraine and b) skiers for Lake Louise. The base of the mountain isn't far from the Lake Louise village. I would love to hop on a train with my skis to go skiing for the day.
Long term? Connect it to Golden and the great Rocky Mountain Trench aka the Valley of a Thousand Peaks... The existing line runs south to Cranbrook and is mostly empty but makes for a spectacular loop! But that's for BC to deal with! ;-)
I think the station should be linked to the airport terminal. Every world class city has a direct link between the terminal and downtown. I hope they make the station connect to the terminal even if they have to build it underground.
From what I've seen of the plan. The main train station will be on the other side of deerfoot along the already existing train tracks. There will be a people mover that will connect the airport not only to the train station, but to the blue line and eventually the green line as well
As per my last comment on one of your videos . . . The first thing I thought when I saw this plan was . . . "Hmmm, seems like a good foundation/ springboard for a Calgary - Edmonton line in the future"
Read about this on Railway Gazette, not being familiar with Banff… and Alberta to be honest, I looked around on wikipedia. And boy does this link make a lot of sense on paper at least! 4M visitors to Banff National Park every year. If the rail line can capture just a fraction, it'll be worth the trouble. And if you add in the commuter side, and the airport side, it looks like a really strong project, with a lot of potential. As for DMUs, there are a lot of dual mode options now, especially in Europe. In France alone (my home country), we have 2 different series coming from 2 manufacturers (Bombardier in the 2000s, Alstom more recently). Other manufacturers come to mind: Siemens, Stadler, Talgo, CAF, Hitachi… So really, partial electrification could be considered as well, perhaps in a later phase. Anyhow, thanks for a great video!
@@RMTransit Not really. Government Centre at 109 Street and 97 Avenue. Perfect location to tie into the existing LRT... The other potential location would be the old CN Tower station but to access it you'd need to build a spur line under some well used space thanks to the cities lack of planning to keep at least a corridor open for trains in the future... Same problem on the old CN ROW loop that Via used to use... It could be re-connected but the area near the Ice District really gunked it up with helter-skelter planning and visions that left the area a mess... I.e. Oilers fans and any other Rogers Place users are told NOT to use the LRT attached to the arena for events... REAL helpful...
@@RMTransit Rocky Mountaineer, which also goes to Banff with their tourist trains, has a route through Whistler, although I don't think they stop there anymore. When I was at University of Alberta, I was writing a paper regarding Banff Nat'l Park, and I agree that passenger rail would ease vehicular congestion in the Park. The station is near downtown, plus once people arrive in the townsite, shuttle buses could move people around instead of individual cars. These trains may also nead to consider baggage requirements such as ski or camping gear from travellers. I also like this as a possible prelude for Calgary to Edmonton passenger rail. Lastly, Banff Nat'l Park was created because of the CPR, and the railway still connects with the Park today!
I'd have gone for complete electrification, but BMU (as long as they are battery and not diesel outside of the electrified section) could sound like a good compromise to begin with.
What a fantastic and drastically necessary project! Rail connections like this can help stregthen the smaller communities in Alberta that they will connect to like Cranmore and Morely by linking them directly to the big city, not to mention the massive ammounts of tourism $$$ This will bring! I am however curious: You don't mention it in the video, but what if any connections will the downtown stop of this new line have to Calrgary's LRT? It looks like the downtown station goes near a line but I don't see a station next to it...
IIRC there isn't a station directly connected, but there is a station just two city blocks over which is about a 10 minute walk at worst. Definitely not as good as having a centralized hub, but better than nothing!
Once upon a time there was a plan to put a high speed/intercity station just south of City Hall along the CP rail lines. The Red Line will be moved underground beneath 8th Ave S with the station under City Hall and tunnel already constructed. City Hall would become a walk through with the Blue Line staying on 7th Ave S, Red Line in the basement and intercity/commuter on 9th Ave S.
As a retired signalman in the U.K. in Canada they called dispatcher and yes I travelled on this CP route just before the Canadian was rerouted a big mistake, yes Calgary Airport to Downtown Calgary and extended to Banff should be good for tourism Leisure travel meeting family and friends and commuters this would be a brilliant venture hope it goes ahead. Once talk of a high speed rail to Edmonton didn’t happen.
Thoughts on rolling stock... My impression from quick bits I've seen is they are looking to add track to the existing corridor, not to build a completely new private corridor beside the current one. If it's mixed, I wouldn't count on seeing anything like the O-Trains on this line. Can't use that class of train in mixed patterns with heavy rail. Something more along the lines of the UP Express trains could be possible - those are classed as heavy rail DMUs.
So they'd be spending enough money to add an additional track all the way to Banff but not actually own and have exclusive use of that track? Seems kind of bizarre given the planned frequency which shouldn't require the new train and existing traffic to share tracks.
Another thing to consider reese is that i drove for the brewster airporter serves to banff and we had a ridership of maybe 20 on a 56 seat coach, even after the alberta gov subsidies a bus serve that made tickets as cheap as $10 the best case was that they would maybe fill one bus a day, so while a train service would be cool, i doubt the ridership would be there until they allow the communities of banff and canmore to expand the actual residence base... keep in mind i lived in the area for 8 years and calgary for 8 years
you should do LIRR (largest commuter rail in the USA) service about to go crazy in a couple years with the completion of 20 year project east side access and Metro North Corridor a whole different line
I don't think that LIRRs East Side Access is as big as often suggested and as the budget would suggest but it will be positive! I certainly have my criticisms as a whole though!
RMTransit its big because it connects the entire lirr to the metro north and amatrack out of grand central so now any long island customer has two options in the city with long term routes and its going to nearly double capacity. Any home within a 5 min walk of the extensive LIRR will have access to LGA JFK and newark with airtrain in couple years all right from grand central including separate subway lines the to ease the extreme overcrowding pressure on the subway lines out of penn station
RMTransit herald interlock is the busiest in the US which is going to going to be upgraded due to east side access and due to the capacity upgrades they are making a penn station access on an unused line that amtrack uses for its new haven line for poorer communities in the bronx that had 100 minute bus times
A major step forward. Will this line be electrified? Or use DMUs / Diesel locomotives hauling push-pull carriages? EDIT: Sorry forgot to watch at 12:30
Once upon a time, the North Central LRT (now Green Line) was planned to run along the CP mainline from downtown Calgary to the airport. There was to be an interchange station just south of Airport Trail where passengers to the airport would connect to a people mover system. I've heard that the airport owns the land this would be built on. There's currently a study that is recommending an automated people mover system to link the Green and Blue lines together via the airport and the hypothetical intercity/commuter rail station. The study goes before council this summer. www.calgary.ca/transportation/ti/transit-projects/green-line-to-blue-line-connector.html
@@RMTransit Absolutely. It was a giant community fight for years to get it moved to run along Centre Street. Plus it would have shared trackage with the Blue Line making it near incapable of even serving current demand on Blue and Green lines.
IF this train goes into being, I would expect the Green-Blue connector (Turquoise line?) would _be_ the airport station, and the theoretical Rocky Express train would stop in the corridor with a transfer between the people mover and the Express train. Having two train stations at the airport would be somewhat confusing, take up a fair bit of space and frankly be duplicative of the service. As Calgary found with planning of the Blue Line, if you take the train to the airport, you're not taking it to where people actually live. If the train service goes to the airport, nobody in their right mind will want to ride it out to Airdrie as a commuter because of the additional time spent diverting to the airport and then back out again to head north again. It would be best to have both in mind and a simple connection between the people mover from the airport and the train line.
still not a bad option once the new Montreal lines open up! I'd take em here in the Edmonton metro too! Even just a temporary downtown Airport-Leduc express would be good to start!
Good overview - if this gets built it could be an exciting project! I think it would be quite difficult to get 15 minute service without a lot more money. Calgary airport to downtown is about 18 km, let's say 20 for simplicity. At 20 min frequency the train would need to do the route in 15 min to allow boarding & alighting at each end. The average speed would need to be a hair over 70 km/h. That seems achievable on a straight shot with a DMU, grade separation, and few or no switches to cross. You could do that with three trains (two in service, one in the shed) and the operational units would be running all day, with five minutes for operator breaks / turning the train at each end. To turn the trains every 15 minutes you would either need to make the run in 10 minutes or buy more trains. To do the run in 10 min you're looking at an average of ~110 km/h which I find hard to imagine, that's close to the top speed of the basic FLIRT, and there are curves and whatnot to worry about. If you can do each run in 15 minutes and have 15 minute frequency you now have each train doing two runs in each direction per hour, meaning four trains in operation and 1-2 spares. Each operational train will be idled for half of the day. You've now more than doubled the operating cost (twice as many trains + more diesel to go faster + more wear and tear on everything). For an airport run is anyone going to notice? These are all back-of-the-napkin estimates, would love to see a video diving deeper into the operational issues.
@@RMTransit with those curves I'm not convinced. The CP ROW is not especially straight even on the straight section. The Acela does a similar run in Boston from Back Bay to Route 128 on a rather straight track, with high speed electric trains, in 10 minutes. The diesel FLIRTs would be running with the pedal to the metal the whole run to make this work, hence my scepticism. UP Express averages about 70 km/h on similarly curvy track and minimal switches to worry about.
@@RMTransit Based on what I know of the lay of the land (and I've walked the length of it so I know what it looks like), I share the skepticism that 15 minute service would be cost effective. However, once the initial build is done, especially if they plan for dual tracking that portion of the line, it becomes a lot easier to sell an expansion to the service that increases frequency based on ridership numbers. Perhaps it becomes more practical if the line extends up to Airdrie since there would be less idle time for the rolling stock, in which case it would probably also pick up a nontrivial amount of commuter traffic from Airdrie.
Is there any updates on this project two years on? I am hearing Hydrogen trains are proposed but Parks Canada seems strangely uninterested which is weird. Why does a national park prefer polluting buses and cars over hydrogen trains? Also, will this train has any connection with the proposed Prairie Link HSR in Calgary?
Guys, I'm sorry to write this but "THIS IS ONLY A STUDY". Everyone who is in Canadian Politics have people they wish to pander to, like us who want more passenger rail, but do absolutely nothing to actually fulfill those wishes. This is one of those situations. The results of the study are predetermined: The project will cost "OMG" money, be declared too expensive, and the study then goes on the shelf, with life as we know it carrying on as status quo. I'm willing to bet $500 that's exactly what will happen. I'm serious here...Anyone stupid enough to think otherwise and bet that I'm wrong? Canada has enough studies into passenger rail that we don't need another freaking study. What we need are implementation plans.
To be honest, I don't think that many people would use this train if it ever does get built. Sure Banff and Canmore is where most tourists would be staying, but they're still going to need a car to tour throughout the mountains. So why not just rent a car right from the airport? Yes, there are tour buses that take people to some of the most popular tourist sites, but that only appeals to a very small percentage of the tourists (mostly seniors). Most people are going to want to explore the Canadian Rockies on their own.
Very interesting video and project! ⭐️ This is perhaps a prejudice on my part, so please clarify it, or better yet make a video on it: do CN and CP want passenger rail cars to use their tracks? I’ve had the impression because of VIA’s and exo’s inability to get more services going that it was CN and CP being elephants, either blocking them, taking forever to give permissions, or asking unreasonable fees. The caricature is a VIA train in the Corridor having to wait in on a siding forever so a freight train can get through. I’ve experienced it. For some reason GO doesn’t seem to have this problem. But exo’s forerunner never could get more “windows” to have more trains take Victoria Bridge for example. Or is this the passenger companies blaming the railroads because they don’t have enough rolling stock? Please correct this impression if possible. Signaling issues also. Anyhow, I definitely hope they can get the “Rocky Express” going. Past the opportunity study, the feasibility study, the impact studies... 😜 Please not another sleek impressionist brochure! Let people through and digging!
Professr Frank it could be the freight companies... apparently the main reason Halifax couldn’t set up a commuter rail line was because CN was reluctant to let the city use their tracks.
@Lafv : you’re confirming my suspicions. Signaling was the excuse for a rejected line on CP tracks to Mascouche. They had to use the more roundabout CN route. I have the suspicion that freight-only tracks aren’t kept to the same standards of maintenance that tracks that also have passengers trains must keep... Lac-Mégantic was a cruel example of this. Again I would love to be proven wrong.
It will most likely be a parallel system built next to the CP Rail system by leasing the right of way. The Red Line runs parallel to CP mainline using the CP right of way for 14 km with the land leased to the City of Calgary. The tracks don't cross each other at all except for a siding used to deliver LRV's.
@RMTransit: indeed! This is going to sound very Lefty, so forgive me as I ascend my soapbox... 🙄 It’s too bad we don’t have the Brit or French model, where the tracks and land belong to the state and National Rail leases usage to whoever wants to run a concession on them. (That model has flaws too.) It’s just a shame that the government will be paying money to CP to lease land that the government gave them after having taken that land from the First Nations. Curse you Sir John A.! 😜 (Descends the soapbox...)
I think, today every new railline absolutely should be planned electrified from the beginning (Diesel must not be an option anymore) It also should have a twin-track layout to allow for more capacity and expansion. Everything else is just short-sighted.
I can't understand how can the Canadian government think about a huge mass project like a 130 km new railway, with only five stations and 8 trains/day (at least every 120' I hope)
It's in the cards but nobody can really agree whether to link it via the existing Northeast line, the upcoming/unbuilt North extension of the Green line or build a separate commuter/HSR line... Hence why paralysis wins again...
Hey, with your diagram of the red and black tracks, are they planning to build an additional track next to the freight line? Why fon't they just work with CP to just double track the line if they're building a second one anyway. It could reduce the cost and allow for increased freight movements and well as not having to worry about passing loops.
@@RMTransit ffs, they need a good agreement with them. Guarantee priority for passenger trains in exchange for building the new track. While segregation is important in cities, its seems useless in low traffic rural corridors.
I wouldn't count out tacking a few sets onto the VIA corridor order if this happens quickly. Not as optimized for this service as DMUs, but they don't have regulatory issues and would be completely off the shelf. Also lines of with doing Calgary Edmonton as a clone of VIA's HFR plans, which always seems like the kind of plan that can get western support for funding HFR.
That's certainly true, though I do think that whatever flyovers are needed at the airport would likely be a lot easier to build for DMUs? As long as the UPX Toronto approach isn't taken of course . . . Also I'm out West and HFR has our support! You just need the middle of the country to support it haha
You should try to promote double track all the way. No level crossings. Electrified. Those big freight trains take 5 to 10 minutes to pass. People won't want to sit on a siding that long. Think longer term, like 30 to 50 years. And use seamless tracks. What i am saying is to get with the times. This is really a small project, and should not take long to build. BUT, it may turn into the California boon doggle, where money is spent, and not much accomplished. You know, study after study, time after time. I wish i could be more positive.
Your pretty accurate however at the Airport while post the major parking lots will remain, PCL was contracted recently to build highway interchanges on airport ave that are due to be complete in 2021/22. www.calgary.ca/transportation/ti/road-projects/airport-trail/airport-trail-ne-phase-2.html?redirect=/airporttrail. Also the Rocky Montaneer is already in existence as a tourist train from banff to vancouver
About the Rocky Mountaneer's service to Banff, I guess that only makes a Banff-Calgary train easier, since there is already a train station in Banff. Calgary just needs some more platforms and a few DMUs.
RMTransit true, however, if they used this technology, connecting Vancouver and Calgary by an hour and a half ride would be a reality! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-LnNicqlWaAI.html
Bombardier Talent 3 Battery Electric... This is the train for this project if you ask me. Why? The cleanest option and you'd only need to "electrify" a very short stretch if at all since their trains are now claiming up to 100 km of wire-free power...
insideevs.com/news/339847/bombardier-introduces-talent-3-battery-operated-train/ www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/12/03/1660785/0/en/Bombardier-s-TALENT-3-battery-electric-multiple-unit-wins-Berlin-Brandenburg-innovation-award.html The commercial version for some German railway operators will start service this year I believe... Or next...
The other thing to note in favor for the using long-distance trains to the airport as opposed to the Blue line would be space for luggage. Long-distance trains would more likely have luggage space/racks dedicated for airport users and other long-distance travellers. The lack of this, and the hassle in having to mix with commuters (with the extra money spent just accessing the Airport stations) is why I hate using the Airport Line in Sydney, Australia. Which is where I currently live. *NOT Sydney, Canada,* ladies and gents!!!
The Canada Line in Vancouver has the same issues you describe - the airport travellers mixing with the day-to-day commuters. It can get pretty congested with all the patrons + all the luggage!
Hayden Chun Hei Poon how about just a good old DMU instead of another snake oil hyperloop style scheme? Let’s get the basics right and then go from there ok?
@@guldukat2453 I've looked it up, and yep, those hyperloops seem to have plenty of issues! At least hydrogen trains run on actual rails! For the snake oil: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop#Criticism_and_human_factor_considerations Not to be confused with this more functional mode of transport: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrail
Hello RMTransit, I am amazed with this idea as I live in the Calgary area and have firsthand seen the impacts of tourism on Banff myself. If it's alright with you, me and my peers would like to contact you by email for further inquiries as we are doing a school project focused on this idea.
