Even allowing for that, once you factor in a dramatically shortened building season and the topography over which almost 1000 miles of railroad track must be laid, we're talking a project on a scale not seen in a very long time. It may take armies of labor if there's any hope of completing it in a reasonable time. Of course I'm one who believes it's not going to happen.Mechanisation and modern technology have vastly reduced the need for armies of labor in construction. Being a railway, solves most of the supply issues.
So, how would the route be built from Alaska and into Eastern Russia/Siberia? A railroad bridge across the water?
Even allowing for that, once you factor in a dramatically shortened building season....
And therein is the quandary. You're entirely correct, but that's also why many sections of the Alaska Highway were not paved until the '90's when paving technology caught up to the freeze and thaw cycles. Before then it was a simpler matter to regrade gravel when frost heaving occurred. Oil platforms require a supporting framework that descends below the frost line, but not in the continuous manner that hundreds miles of track would. The closest parallel I could find was the construction of some of the northern railway lines in the UK by George Stephenson. North American tundra is not dissimilar to the boggy terrain they had to cross, minus the total freezing component. It was still unstable and prone to seasonal heaving. The solution found was to sink timber pilings attached to bales of cotton many feet into the ground all the way along the right of way. It must have worked since some of those lines are still in use over a hundred years later. The document posted earlier from the NWT government states that capital investment is continually required by CN Rail to operate and maintain the portion already in place to Hay River, "especially over sections underlain by permafrost, making it one of the most costly subdivisions to operate in CN Rail’s system" in addition to speed and weight restrictions. Multiply that over the distance of the extension."Building season" for roadbed and oil drilling platforms is often winter -- when the ground is frozen hard enough to drive the dozers and heavy trucks across it without having them sink out of sight into the mud.
Things like paving still have to be done in summer.
It's been a while since anyone tried to build a railroad that far north, winter or summer, so I don't really know what approach they plan to take.
Two biggest problems with those kind of projects are ecology and NIMBY. The latter wouldn't seem to be the problem in Alaska and Alberta as it would be in L.A. so that would leave the ecology which could be a big issue.if we can't build a tunnel between Los Angeles and Bakersfield it's gonna be a long time before we build one in the middle of nowhere.)
Two biggest problems with those kind of projects are ecology and NIMBY. The latter wouldn't seem to be the problem in Alaska and Alberta as it would be in L.A. so that would leave the ecology which could be a big issue.
I am sure the Japanese would tend to disagree with your most learned position on thisWe won't be building a tunnel thru an earthquake fault zone -
Just the thought of building one would trigger the movement -
Can someone detail how they believe that the route might go from Canada and where the stops in Alaska also might be (provided we are talking about passenger services as well as freight)?
Certainly there might be (notice that key word again: might) a very profitable amount of money to be made in the summer months as that is when the Alaska tour season is.
Perhaps could compare it to the rail service from Winnipeg to Churchill - nothing touristy till at the destination (viewing Polar bears).Details on the proposal are at https://a2arail.com; maps at a2arail.com/resources/
New track is proposed to run Fairbanks - Delta Junction - Tok - Carmacks (YT) - Watson Lake - Fort Liard (NWT) and intersect the existing line to Hay River somewhere around High Level or Meander River (AB), about 450 miles NW of Edmonton, and then to continue across northern Alberta to a 2nd connection with existing track somewhere around Fort McMurray. IMO there must be some high value export that they think they are going to ship from the Lake Athabasca region to China. (And this suggests that, when financing falls through, they will build the part from their new mine to Fort McMurray, ship it to Prince Rupert or Vancouver via CN, and forget about the connection to Alaska.)
Compared to a coastal or through-northern-BC route the scenery will not have much to recommend it (yes, it's pretty, forested rolling hills, but its not what people "go to Alaska for."
Not even a casual mention of extending the White Pass and Yukon RR or a connection although not in the same league.
So, how would the route be built from Alaska and into Eastern Russia/Siberia? A railroad bridge across the water?
The right-of-way would be a helluva lot cheaper...building a railroad from Canada to Alaska would be equivalent of New York to northern Florida, only not as flat , just sayinn.
The closest parallel I could find was the construction of some of the northern railway lines in the UK by George Stephenson. North American tundra is not dissimilar to the boggy terrain they had to cross, minus the total freezing component. It was still unstable and prone to seasonal heaving. The solution found was to sink timber pilings attached to bales of cotton many feet into the ground all the way along the right of way. It must have worked since some of those lines are still in use over a hundred years later.
That design's called a "land bridge", and was also proposed for the railroad line from Madison, WI to Milwaukee which almost got built (dammit Scott Walker). Obviously we use somewhat more modern piling systems, but the idea is the same. It works.
Enter your email address to join: