High speed rail in Newfoundland- could it work?

[I've also posted this in the Canadian Railfan forum]

Having been intrigued for some time about the history and operations of the Newfoundland Railway and the contributing factors to its demise I've been wondering lately about what if rail transport returned to the island. I should point out that I've neither visited nor researched much about Newfoundland so I can't say that I know enough about its economy, centers of commerce, traffic/travel/commuting patterns, theoretical ridership numbers/demographics, etc. to know if re-establishing rail service could work. However, I have noticed a few things that I believe could work in it's favor:

1) The drive from Port aux Basques to St. John's (according to Google Maps) is roughly 560 miles long and takes just about 12 hours to complete.
2) The weather there (especially in the winter), and correct me if I'm wrong about it's climate, can make travel for cars, trucks, and buses difficult if not dangerous.
3) The Trans Canada Highway, as did the railway, connects several towns and cities with significant population numbers (some even with air force bases and airports).
4) Having a faster mode of transport would better connect the island as a whole in much less time.

My (hypothetical, of course) proposal for restoring rail service would consist of the following:

1) A brand new 125-150 mph single track non-electrified main line with stations at Port aux Basques, Stephenville Crossing, Corner Brook, Deer Lake, Hampden and/or South Brook, Badger, Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander, Clarenville, Placentia, Downtown St. John's (with a stop by the harbor instead of the old station), St. John's Int'l Airport (via a tunnel under Fort William) and Torbay. More stations could be added later if demand is strong enough. In addition, the new line would be built with standard gauge trackage and could be accommodated for electrification if determined to be more cost effective.

2) Branch lines between Port aux Basques-Burgeo/The South Coast, Deer Lake/Hampden-St, Anthony, and Grand Bank-Clarenville-Bonavista could be added at a later date if need be.

3) Passenger trains operating every hour to every 2 hours consisting of rebuilt British Rail HST 125 train sets (or JetTrain-type high speed locomotives bracketing coaches) which would become available (and potentially for a discounted price) once delivery of new trains in the UK takes place. These would be used unless ridership demand or other factors warrants the purchase of new rolling stock (diesel or electric powered). Given the proposed speed they could actually be officially dubbed "The Newfie Bullet" this time!

4) Should there be a strong demand for freight service, rebuilt and/or new North American locomotives and rolling stock could be used. Furthermore, facilities at Port aux Basques, St. John's and other locales can be built to accommodate ferries, tankers, container ships, etc.

Keep in mind this is only just a rough idea of what could be built if the government (or someone else) were to pursue the restoration of rail service on the island.

In general though could a high speed rail line (or something similar) conceivably work in Newfoundland, even if it's decades down the road before anything is officially proposed?

Remind us of the population of Newfoundland.

The answer is "no".

Don't they use float planes to get around in Canada?

HSR in Newfoundland? You just spent the last 30 years "studying" the most sensible HSR proposal in human history - (the one between Montreal and Toronto)

by george matthews » Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:14 pm

Remind us of the population of Newfoundland.

The answer is "no".

Well yes it's nowhere near as densely populated as, say, the Quebec-Windsor corridor, but the population of the island has been steadily rising over the years and even the island's larger population centers are linked only by the highway without any alternatives. The primary purpose of building a rail line (even if it's only for 90mph max) would be simply to provide a much faster alternative that would directly link all of the island's most populated areas together. Certainly the economy of the island would benefit. Whether or not Newfoundlanders would want it built is of course another story.

by RickRackstop » Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:35 pm

Don't they use float planes to get around in Canada?

Only if one has one of em

by Smart » Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:50 am

HSR in Newfoundland? You just spent the last 30 years "studying" the most sensible HSR proposal in human history - (the one between Montreal and Toronto)

Hey why not? It'd be easier to build since there'd be very little to no taking of private property (which has always raised construction costs in the past) so they can lay the track wherever the topography allows. Toronto-Montreal isn't as sparsely populated, therefore not as simple to just build wherever. The new proposed Amtrak NEC line is projected to take decades to just build (and mind you they haven't dug one shovel into the ground yet on that one); all the land acquisitions, etc. will certainly tie that project up for quite some time..

The most populated areas of Newfoundland is on an island. The Trans Canadian Highway ferry to the island is 105 miles in length, from Port aus Basques to Sydney Mines. You would have to build the longest and probably the most expensive bridge in the world, why not build one for automobiles and trucks instead?

Newfoundland's population is 480k, but its largest metropolitan areas are another story:

St. John's, east end, 180k
Corner Brook, west end, 27k

Gander, the famous airport town, is only 10k

That's nearly half the total population of that island.

Newfoundland could merit a tourist train, but that's about it.

In another thread, I considered the possibility of a transatlantic railroad route going through Newfoundland, but I decided that it would be better to follow the north bank of the St. Lawrence River -- less tunneling necessary.

NH2060 wrote:

by george matthews » Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:14 pm

Remind us of the population of Newfoundland.

The answer is "no".

Well yes it's nowhere near as densely populated as, say, the Quebec-Windsor corridor, but the population of the island has been steadily rising over the years and even the island's larger population centers are linked only by the highway without any alternatives. The primary purpose of building a rail line (even if it's only for 90mph max) would be simply to provide a much faster alternative that would directly link all of the island's most populated areas together. Certainly the economy of the island would benefit. Whether or not Newfoundlanders would want it built is of course another story.

If you are talking about 90 mph you are in the wrong section. That is not high speed.
Population density is important. Newfies are too thin on the ground and could not support a railway, especially if it could not carry freight.

Now, I hear there are rumours of oil, but even if they strike oil I cannot see the money coming to build a railway, and rail ferry to connect it with the mainland.

It's a pipe dream (opium, that is).

electricron wrote:The most populated areas of Newfoundland is on an island. The Trans Canadian Highway ferry to the island is 105 miles in length, from Port aus Basques to Sydney Mines. You would have to build the longest and probably the most expensive bridge in the world, why not build one for automobiles and trucks instead?

A fixed link between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland would be good only for pride and world record breaking. A cheaper option would be a tunnel between Labrador and Newfoundland (17 km). The problem would be that the Newfoundland portal would be 1000 km from St. John and it's still 2000 km to the nearest sizable city (Québec City) on the mainland (Labrador is not connected to the North American rail network). In fact the fastest route (by Google's reckoning) between Red Bay (the Labrador portal) and Québec involves taking the ferry to Newfoundland, driving to Port aux Basques, taking the ferry to Sydney and then driving through Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. In short a fixed link makes no sense.

NH2060 wrote:Given the proposed speed they could actually be officially dubbed "The Newfie Bullet" this time!

How about we dub this proposal the "Goofy Newfie"?

All of that infrastructure needs maintained in order to keep the speeds up. It is a lot easier to maintain a couple miles of runway than hundreds of miles of rail for what would end up being an underused passenger service.

electricron wrote:The most populated areas of Newfoundland is on an island.

All the population of Newfoundland is on an island. The cities listed in the initial post describe the crossing of the island of Newfoundland, not the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

justalurker66 wrote:How about we dub this proposal the "Goofy Newfie"?

Somehow, Mr. Lurker, my two most blessed and precious frineds I have had in this life, Lucky - a "mostly" Newfie (92-03) - and Coalie (56-67) - a "quite documented" Lab; both Black, are looking down from their now "better life" and saying "we don't need this in our native land".

I seem to recall the term "Newfie Bullet" from a couple of long-ago Trains articles/features. so "chust for fun" as my Pennsy Dutch neighbors say, I Googled it; here's the lead link from what turned up.

http://www.search-results.com/web?l=dis ... 2520Bullet

As one who actually rode the CN Newfoundland narrow gauge in its later years, I can say that while the island is a thoroughly beautiful place, once you leave metropolitan St. John's the inland portion is almost entirely unpopulated wilderness and the coast is simply a string of tiny villages. Aside from the fact that the rail lines have been completely gone for roughly 25 years (and were built to 42" gauge anyway), the concept of a rail restoration for anything other than (maybe, someday) commuter service into St. John's is economically absurd. That's why there are jets.