A new 'passage to the peaks' train will connect 6 stunning destinations
These are just some of the stunning snapshots you might spot from a brand-new train that's set to connect six bucket list destinations in North America.
Journeying through the heart of the Canadian Rockies, the Passage to the Peaks route is launching in summer 2026 – and there's a choice between two and 10-day-long experiences, depending on how much time you've got on your hands.
The starting point can either be Banff, Alberta – famous for Mounts Rundle and Cascade, which can be spotted looming over the horizon – or Jasper, another mountain town centred around the Jasper National Park. Expect hot springs and lodges galore.
Next on the route, from railway tour company Rocky Mountaineer, is Lake Louise, a glacier-fed body of water which, in the summer, is a popular canoeing spot.
Amid temperatures as low as -14.9°C, it freezes over in the winter, and skiers flock to the Lake Louise resort, boasting 4,200 acres of slopes spread across an impressive four mountains.
Fuel your wanderlust with our curated newsletter of travel deals, guides and inspiration. Sign up here.
Right at the confluence of the North and South Thompson rivers, the next stop, Kamloops, crosses the border into British Columbia.
During the summer, it's popular with hikers and bikers alike – and if you're into archaeology, the reconstructed Secwepemc village is 2,000 years old, spanning roughly one kilometre.
Along the way, you'll also be able to spot the likes of Rogers Pass, Shuswap Lake, Castle Mountain, the Spiral Tunnels, and Pyramid Falls – all through the train's glass-topped ceiling, allowing for panoramic views even when you're chugging along.
Worried the train won't fully capture the route's beauty? Fear not: you'll be able to get off to explore along the way. Each package features many of the same spots, but the longer it is, the more time you'll have.
The two-day rail options tick off Lake Louise, Jasper and Kamloops, while the 10-day 'Grand Adventure' spans Kamloops, Calgary, Banff, Lake Louise, Jasper, and the Columbia Icefield (AKA, the largest in the Rockies at 125 square miles).
The latter includes nine nights in total (you'll stay overnight at each stop rather than sleeping in a carriage en route), with two days on board the train itself.
Wondering how much it'll set you back? You'll need to get your piggy bank ready, as prices range from £1,670 for the two-day option right up to £7,201 for the full shebang.
You'll need to snap up your tickets quickly, though, as the routes will only be running in summer 2026 as a special edition.
Looking for a train adventure slightly closer to home? Plans for a direct train between Berlin and London have been announced – and it could significantly chop journey times. More Trending
This month, Keir Starmer signed a 'first of its kind' treaty with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, which, as well as strengthening the relationship between the UK and Germany, also plans to establish a direct route between the capital and three German cities.
At the moment, those looking to travel between the two cities need to take a Eurostar train from St Pancras to Bruxelles-Midi, changing for a service to Cologne and, finally, to Berlin Hauptbahnhof.
While we don't have any specifics right now, the plans have the potential to change how millions of people travel between the UK and Germany, with an estimated 3,200,000 Brits having visited in 2023.
Do you have a story to share?
Get in touch by emailing MetroLifestyleTeam@Metro.co.uk.
MORE: I spent a weekend in Ireland's best-kept secret — the rain didn't matter at all
MORE: I stayed in one of the world's biggest Four Seasons resorts — it was the ultimate reset
MORE: I spent five days in the less-crowded Canaries alternative that's closer to the UK
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
16 hours ago
- The Independent
Heathrow's third runway plan is wrong – and not just because of noise and pollution
Here we go again. To say there is a deja vu aspect to the latest proposal to build Heathrow's third runway is an understatement. For reasons that are not clear, Sir Keir Starmer has determined the airport's expansion to be a key plank in the government's economic growth strategy. Seemingly, he did not take into account the issues that grounded the plans in the past, as far back as 1968 – namely, Heathrow's unfortunate and unavoidable proximity to the M25, the rivers and their valleys that cross that part of west London, the additional noise pollution, and the need for improved and costly transport links to and from the centre of the capital that will result from the vast uplift in passengers. On the constant sound from the increased number of planes landing and taking off, the prime minister will insist that great technological strides have been made in curbing the din. It is true that new aircraft are less noisy. However, they are still extremely audible, there will be more of them, and they will be flying over a heavily residential area. As for the rest, nothing has altered fundamentally, environmentally and logistically, since Heathrow last submitted a scheme, pre-Covid. Inflation means the bill is now an eye-watering £49bn. The bill, ultimately, will be borne by the air passenger, and Heathrow is already the most expensive airport in the world. Will the airlines and their customers stomach at least a doubling in charges? There is the thorny problem, too, of public transport to and from London. The London mayor will be expected to find a way to enable an extra 60 million people a year to use Heathrow. Transport for London is strapped for cash, struggling to upgrade the Tube network. How the additional demand will be met is not clear. What has shifted as well is the nature of air travel. Post-pandemic, business travel is down and looks unlikely to recover – that, certainly, is what the industry is saying. During the outbreak, holding meetings remotely came into its own and employers took a hard look at their budgets – Zoom or Teams often represent a better alternative in executive time and expense. That therefore raises a major doubt about one of the main claims made for Heathrow's extension. It is said to be necessary to enhance London and the UK's standing in the business world, but how, if the commercial users are not there? There has been movement too, and not of the positive kind, in attitude towards Heathrow the operator. The power outage that shut down the plum in Starmer's vision for resurgence and global acclaim was a shocking episode; it not only highlighted a neglected infrastructure but also a failure of management. Thomas Woldbye, who is seeking permission to build this national project, is the same boss who slept through the night as Britain's busiest airport ceased to function. Heathrow's reputation in the sector was already poor, but this took it to a new low. Woldbye has an idea that is different from the one previously suggested, which is to build the third runway over the M25, taking the motorway underneath – and all without any disruption to road users. This is fanciful even without a track record that hardly inspires confidence. Which raises another question. Why? Why should Heathrow as a company get to preside over the airport's improvement and reap the benefits? If we're all agreed that it is a vital national asset, holding a pivotal place in the economy, then why should the incumbent be in charge, not to mention entrusted, with its development? Those who wax lyrical about Heathrow's importance like to reminisce about how Britain led the transformation of international aviation. Boosting the airport is seen as completing that journey. It is the case that we once did. That was in the Margaret Thatcher era, when British Airways was freed from the shackles of state ownership. Thatcher did more than that, though. She enabled and encouraged competition, giving a steer to the challengers and disruptors, notably to Richard Branson at Virgin and Michael Bishop at British Midland. The newly privatised BA was forced to raise its game, and together, these three set new standards. There appears to be an assumption that Woldbye's company must be given the job. But there is another option. Surinder Arora, the self-made billionaire who has masterminded the building of leading hotels at Heathrow and other airports and is a substantial Heathrow landowner, has his own remedy. His is much cheaper, envisaging a shorter runway that does not affect the M25. It is easy to dismiss Arora. But he is popular with the airlines, he rails rightly against Heathrow's pricing, and he knows a thing or two about customer service. He also possesses heavyweight advisers in the shape of Bechtel, the US engineering, construction and project management giant. He deserves to be taken seriously. Heathrow needs a competitor. Likewise, if neither the airport operator nor Arora is selected and the third runway is again kiboshed, then surely serious thought must be given to expanding rival airports. Heathrow has been resting on its laurels for too long. As for Starmer, he perhaps should ask himself how it is that someone who professes to be forensic legally is so capable of displaying rushes of blood to the head politically. Giving Heathrow such prominence smacks of impetuousness. He's done it and has been left with an almighty headache.
ITV News
a day ago
- ITV News
The 'Greta of tourism': Meet the 17-year-old behind anti-tourism protests in Spain
ITV News Assistant Producer Sasha Kay spoke to the teenager behind some of Europe's most divisive protests If you've gone on holiday to Spain in the past few years, you have likely seen more than one 'tourist go home' graffiti tag. Some may even have been doused by a water pistol. On June 15 crowds across Spanish tourist hotspots protested against mass tourism. There was shouting, flares, and the water pistols that have become a symbol of 'tourismphobia'. As protests in Spain have ramped up, the number of tourists visiting has dropped. New figures from May show a 1.6% decrease in tourists to what has traditionally been a British favourite holiday destination. Good news for Jaume Pujol, the 17-year-old activist behind the Mallorca protests. Jaume started protesting at just 13 years old and earned the title 'the Greta Thunberg of tourism". He says mass tourism in Spain is something "young people feel more". Since his school exams finished this summer, he's been busy organising and promoting huge protests across Mallorca. He was first inspired to organise anti-tourism protests by "thinking about the future". "Thinking about the future on our island, about thinking that we can't live here, that we won't be able to work here, or afford a house in the place where we grew up and where our grandparents grew up." "It's not that I'm against tourism, but rather against the monoculture of tourism or the reliance on one industry because it makes us economically weak as an island. "When there was a problem like Covid, we couldn't have tourists, and there was a serious crisis." However, if tourism were to decrease significantly in the way that Jaume suggests, some business owners say they would take a financial bruising and lose their income. When asked about these claims, Jaume said simply: "It's a complete lie". "It's super simple to debunk. It is true that tourism generates wealth, but not for everyone in the way it is sold to us. It doesn't generate wealth for me, my mother, or my grandmother. "Tourism generates wealth for a small portion of the population, which are the business owners and the upper class of Mallorca. Therefore, I would say it's a lie." The Mallorca Hotel Business Federation has responded to the recent anti-tourism protests by paying for around twenty billboards with welcome messages in English and German. One reads "Tourist, go home happy" - a play on the "tourist go home" signs around Spanish cities. The federation claims the anti-tourism movement is a radical minority. "We're not the minority, they're the minority," responds Jaume. "They're far fewer than us, and they're a selfish minority that's getting rich off our misery, off the exploitation of the working class, and the destruction of our island." "The campaign has gone down very badly with people here in Mallorca. At least two billboards have been egged." As school holidays start in the UK, and Brits head abroad, Jaume says tourists need to make an effort to see the issues from the protesters' point of view. "There are some who complain because we've ruined their vacation, or whatever you want to say. "I would tell them to put themselves in our shoes and understand the problem we have on our island. Understand that we're not against individual tourists, we're against an entire economy, but that at the end of the day but ultimately they represent that economy." Despite anti-tourism protests often targeting British tourist favourites like Barcelona, Alcúdia or Palma, Jaume insists his group has nothing against British tourists personally. "I don't like to differentiate between tourists, not by nationality or by type. Not differentiating between German tourists, English tourists, between poorer tourists and richer tourists. "We don't even want elite tourism, we don't want sustainable tourism because we believe it doesn't exist. We want a decrease in tourism and we don't differentiate between whether the British behave worse than the Germans." His message to British tourists in Spain this summer is simple: "A little empathy and a little understanding of the problem we have here and why we fight the way we do. "Not to think so much about the fact that there's a graffiti or a water pistol, because the attack will never be directed at the individual tourist, but rather the attack will be against an entire economic sector that generates problems on our island." Jaume, for one, won't be travelling abroad. He says he's not gone away on holiday for a while now, feeling that he needs to be "consistent" with his group's message. "But," Jaume adds, "just because we have a problem and we complain about it doesn't mean we can't leave Mallorca and that if we do, we're hypocrites."
Daily Mirror
a day ago
- Daily Mirror
Airline bans snack as cases of deadliest form of turbulence soar
A Delta Air Lines flight from Salt Lake City to Amsterdam was hit by severe turbulence on Wednesday, with 25 people on board injured and the flight diverted to Minnesota An airline has banned a hot inflight snack as cases of a deadly form of turbulence soar. A Delta Air Lines flight from Salt Lake City to Amsterdam was hit by severe turbulence on Wednesday, resulting in 25 passengers being hospitalised and the flight being diverted to Minnesota, underscoring the perils of flying through unstable air. That was not the only case of bone shaking turbulence this year. Although fatalities due to turbulence are relatively rare, the number of injuries has been increasing over time. Some weather experts and aviation analysts note that reports of turbulence encounters are also on the rise, suggesting a potential link to changing climate conditions affecting flight conditions. This comes as Heathrow has announced a controversial expansion plan. While most turbulence experienced by planes is minor, airlines have been making efforts to enhance safety. Experts urge passengers to remain alert and emphasise the importance of wearing a seat belt whenever possible. Turbulence is essentially unpredictable movement of unstable air. It's often associated with severe storms. However, the most dangerous type is clear-air turbulence, which often occurs without any visible warning. Clear-air turbulence typically occurs in or near the high-altitude air currents known as jet streams. The main cause is wind shear, which happens when two large air masses moving at different speeds come into close proximity. If the speed difference is significant enough, the atmosphere can't cope with the strain, leading to turbulent patterns similar to eddies in water. In June, five individuals were rushed to a North Carolina hospital for assessment after an American Airlines flight from Miami encountered turbulence en route to Raleigh-Durham International Airport. The aircraft landed safely. Earlier in the same month, violent storms in southern Germany forced a Ryanair flight to execute an emergency landing after severe turbulence injured nine people, according to German police. The flight, carrying 179 passengers and six crew members, was travelling from Berlin to Milan. Eight passengers and one crew member sustained injuries. In March, a United Airlines flight from San Francisco to Singapore experienced intense turbulence over the Philippines. The plane, with 174 passengers and 14 crew members on board, had five people injured but managed to land safely in Singapore. Several flights were rerouted to Waco, Texas, on 3rd March due to turbulence. Five people were injured on a United Express plane flying from Springfield, Missouri, to Houston. Last year, Italian authorities initiated an investigation after two easyJet flight attendants were injured when their flight from Corfu to London's Gatwick Airport was hit by turbulence. The pilot made an unplanned landing in Rome. In May 2024, a 73-year-old British man tragically died and dozens of others were injured on a Singapore Airlines flight that encountered severe turbulence. His death was under investigation, with authorities suggesting he may have suffered a heart attack. Monitoring turbulence-related injuries across the globe proves challenging. However, some nations do release official statistics. The majority of in-flight turbulence incidents between 2009 and 2018 led to one or more serious injuries whilst leaving aircraft undamaged, the National Transportation Safety Board revealed. From 2009 to 2024, 207 individuals sustained injuries severe enough during turbulence to warrant hospital stays of at least two days, the NTSB found. Cabin crew made up most casualties, as they're more prone to being unbuckled during flights. Pilots attempt to dodge turbulence partly through weather radar systems. Sometimes they can spot and navigate around thunderstorms visually. However, clear-air turbulence "is altogether another animal," explained Doug Moss, a former airline pilot and safety expert. It can prove catastrophic, he warned, "because the time before the incident can be very calm, and people are caught off-guard." Air traffic controllers alert pilots once another aircraft encounters clear-air turbulence, Moss noted. Many pilots also watch for wind shear indicators, then devise routes to steer clear of such zones, he added. Contemporary aircraft possess sufficient strength to withstand virtually any turbulence. Cabin sections like overhead compartments might sustain superficial harm, "but these don't impact the structural integrity of the planes," Moss explained. Reports of turbulence encounters are escalating, according to some scientists. A number of researchers have suggested that climate impacts could be one of the potential reasons. Professor Thomas Guinn from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University suggests that climate change could modify the jet stream and increase wind shear, which would in turn escalate turbulence. Paul Williams, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Reading, stated there was "strong evidence that turbulence is increasing because of climate change." Last year, Williams revealed that his research team found that severe clear-air turbulence in the North Atlantic has surged by 55% since 1979. He warned that if global conditions persist as anticipated, severe turbulence in the jet streams could double or even triple in the forthcoming decades. Larry Cornman, a project scientist at the National Science Foundation's National Center for Atmospheric Research, suggested that an overall increase in air traffic could also contribute to more turbulence encounters as the number of flight paths rise. In essence, fasten your seat belts. Turbulence can be unpredictable, but experts emphasise that the primary defence is to keep your seat belt secured whenever feasible. Airlines are also taking safety measures. For instance, Southwest Airlines announced last November that it would conclude cabin service earlier to ensure passengers return to their seats and fasten their seat belts sooner. The alteration was designed to "reduce the risk of in-flight turbulence injuries," the carrier explained. Additionally last year, Korean Air chose to cease serving a popular instant noodle, Shin Ramyun. "This decision is part of proactive safety measures in response to increased turbulence, aimed at preventing burn accidents," the Seoul-based airline said in a statement.
