Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[zwk500]

Jon Worth says (video) that Strasbourg could work without any reconstruction (except for building a fence).

Jon Worth (@[email protected])

Today‘s summary. This is important. To my genuine surprise Strasbourg can work for #CrossChannelRail https://peertube.netzbegruenung.de/w/3oWXj87MybJz8RWhoEuLi2

gruene.social

You might need a bit more than one blogger saying its fine.

maybe there should be a mainline station for the Thameslink trains as well.

Isn't this exactly what's happening with Wixams?

It’s like Eurostar stopped the direct Disneyland train presumably because people went to Paris and got the RER so it isn’t worth the hassle.

Or because they could make more money from their resources by concentrating on a simplified service offering?

 

[NCT]

Faster Luxembourg-Brussels train on track for 2029

Transport ministers of both countries met on Thursday to discuss railway, road and cycling links between Luxembourg and Belgium

www.luxtimes.lu

Modernisation of the Brussels-Luxembourg line (axis 3)

De spoorweginfrastructuur van de as 3 wordt al enkele jaren grondig gemoderniseerd. Deze werken zijn nodig om de treinen sneller te laten rijden en de reisduur tussen Brussel en Luxemburg in te korten.

infrabel.be

This is the extent of the planned Brussels - Luxembourg improvements - resignalling and curve easing in the slowest parts to increase ruling line speed from 130km/h to 160km/h. Brussels - Ottignies is currently being modernised and quadrupled.

Brussels - Luxemburg is really just Birmingham - Swansea with nothing but tricky terrain in between. Any talk of Brussels - Luxemberg becoming a HSL with London trains going through is for the birds.

 

[TheGrew]

I don't see universal getting direct European trains for the reasons already mentioned. A quick platform change at St Pancras should cover the use cases with Thameslink and ideally EMR connect stopping at Wixhams

 

[MatthewHutton]

Isn't this exactly what's happening with Wixams?

Yes. I thought it was the east west rail new station.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Yes. I thought it was the east west rail new station.

No, Winslow is the new station on EWR between Bicester and Bletchley, Wixams will be a new station on the Midland Main Line.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Faster Luxembourg-Brussels train on track for 2029

Transport ministers of both countries met on Thursday to discuss railway, road and cycling links between Luxembourg and Belgium

www.luxtimes.lu

Modernisation of the Brussels-Luxembourg line (axis 3)

De spoorweginfrastructuur van de as 3 wordt al enkele jaren grondig gemoderniseerd. Deze werken zijn nodig om de treinen sneller te laten rijden en de reisduur tussen Brussel en Luxemburg in te korten.

infrabel.be

This is the extent of the planned Brussels - Luxembourg improvements - resignalling and curve easing in the slowest parts to increase ruling line speed from 130km/h to 160km/h. Brussels - Ottignies is currently being modernised and quadrupled.

Brussels - Luxemburg is really just Birmingham - Swansea with nothing but tricky terrain in between. Any talk of Brussels - Luxemberg becoming a HSL with London trains going through is for the birds.

I think the entire length becoming a HSL is unlikely, but I think Luxembourg with their strong interest in public transport investment may well push for sections to be built (perhaps express lines towards Arlon, Liege and Thionville would be good ideas).

 

[Trainbike46]

It’s like Eurostar stopped the direct Disneyland train presumably because people went to Paris and got the RER so it isn’t worth the hassle.

Part of the reason for stopping the London disney service was to reduce the need for space to enable on-arrival checks in St P, and that space was used for the second departure lounge instead.

Or because they could make more money from their resources by concentrating on a simplified service offering?

and this is likely a big part of the reason as well.

 

[NCT]

I think the entire length becoming a HSL is unlikely, but I think Luxembourg with their strong interest in public transport investment may well push for sections to be built (perhaps express lines towards Arlon, Liege and Thionville would be good ideas).

Luxemberg is a provincial town half the size of Swansea. Yes it's high income and high trip rate, but even then 2tph to Brussels at 160km/h is at the top end of what it can realistically generate.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Luxemberg is a provincial town half the size of Swansea. Yes it's high income and high trip rate, but even then 2tph to Brussels at 160km/h is at the top end of what it can realistically generate.

It is also a business and political destination though, and faster links to Liege especially would make a whole host of connections quicker. HSL from Lux City to the northern border would make a lot of sense.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

If there really was a market (there isn't) for London to Luxembourg or Strasbourg you would run via the Paris Interconnexion and LGV Est. Paris to Lux via Metz is currently 2h 11m. Basel and Zuerich are more promising destinations but they would run via Dijon.

 

[MatthewHutton]

If there really was a market (there isn't) for London to Luxembourg or Strasbourg you would run via the Paris Interconnexion and LGV Est. Paris to Lux via Metz is currently 2h 11m. Basel and Zuerich are more promising destinations but they would run via Dijon.

Basel (and Zürich) are just as quick from Paris via Strasbourg and there is less traffic on LGV Est so makes sense really to go that way.

This afternoon it is 3h4 direct from Gare de Lyon to Basel and 3h13 with a 10 minute change in Strasbourg - so a wash if it was direct.

 

[SHD]

The next step would be to introduce an equivalent LENNON/ORCATS/TSA system as a basis for commercial decisions and subsidy calculations. This way SNCF can't hold regions over a barrel for demanding reimbursements for services they would commercially run anyway.

The system you’re looking for used to be FC12K and was replaced by Thémis in 2021.

 

[MatthewHutton]

The system you’re looking for used to be FC12K and was replaced by Thémis in 2021.

So how come there isn’t shared ticketing between the TGV and other services?

 

[SHD]

A poster wrote that SNCF should introduce a revenue analysis and sharing system for commercial decisions and subsidy calculations, and I provided the information that a system to that effect exists (and has existed for quite some time).

Shared ticketing between TGV/Intercités and TER used to be the norm, and it was FC12K’s job to distribute revenue. Shared ticketing unfortunately fell apart and the culprits are *both* SNCF Voyageurs and the Régions. I don’t have the time right know to dwell over the details, but this bulletin of the FNAUT - French national public transport users’ association (think of it as a passenger representation group and quasi-watchdog) - has good info on the matter : https://www.fnaut.fr/uploads/2022/06/FNAUT-INFOS-N°-296-V3.pdf

 

[NCT]

It is also a business and political destination though, and faster links to Liege especially would make a whole host of connections quicker. HSL from Lux City to the northern border would make a lot of sense.

We are into Swansea - Chester HSL territory now ...

Whatever business and political destination it might be it still has only the trip generation ability of 150k people. The existence of almost a complete ring of HSL of Paris - Strasbourg - Frankfurt - Cologne - Brussels makes any HSL through Luxembourg almost completely redundant.

For what is a relatively small market, modest straightenings of Namur to Arlon gives you the most bang for the buck. As for Luxembourg - Liege, there's something called topography - it'd be a base tunnel all the way.

For Luxemburg - Brussels itself, the journey time that matters is to the Brussels-Luxemburg station (first 'Zone 1 station' if you like), especially for the European parliament. Going via Liege to Brussels Midi going in from the north is an inefficient routing.

Basel (and Zürich) are just as quick from Paris via Strasbourg and there is less traffic on LGV Est so makes sense really to go that way.

This afternoon it is 3h4 direct from Gare de Lyon to Basel and 3h13 with a 10 minute change in Strasbourg - so a wash if it was direct.

If the Deutschlandtakt manages to twist SNCF's arms then the Paris to Frankfurt/Munich trains would arrive at Strasbourg at xx43. Assuming the Strasbourg - Basel fast TERs are timed for the Basel node then their xx21/51 departures at Strasbourg are most likely fixed. A 2tph all-day timetable is already pretty generous for the Strasbourg - Basel market and represents ample capacity for longer-distance interchange passengers. If Paris - Frankfurt/Munich does standardise to combined hourly, then you have an hourly Paris Est - Strasbourg - Basel opportunity with a journey time of 3h10, which is already a pretty decent frequency.

Don't forget there's the path requirement for Luxembourg / Germany - Lyon trains which in-line with the Deutchlandtakt would depart Strasbourg at xx19 towards Mulhouse (just in front of the xx21 TER path) and I would guestimate a 2-hourly interval.

The Deutschlandtakt (if implemented) would gift the Grand Est region of France a fantastic takt structure around Strasbourg symmetrical about xx15/45. If the French railway ecosystem take note, then Illisto's hourly Paris - Strasbourg would be timed to arrive at Strasbourg around xx13. If they are feeling ambitious they could extend some of these paths to Basel leaving Strasbourg at xx19 in the hours the Strasbourg - Lyon TGVs don't operate. This is assuming the timetable would work between Mulhouse and Basel and there's a regulatory route to operating Open Access into Switzerland.

Of course SNCF (or somebody else) could elect to run Paris Est - Strasbourg - Basel services in the hours the Paris - Frankfurt service runs via Saarbrucken, which would be every 4 hours (which implies Lyon - Frankfurt would be every 4 hours too).

A poster wrote that SNCF should introduce a revenue analysis and sharing system for commercial decisions and subsidy calculations, and I provided the information that a system to that effect exists (and has existed for quite some time).

Shared ticketing between TGV/Intercités and TER used to be the norm, and it was FC12K’s job to distribute revenue. Shared ticketing unfortunately fell apart and the culprits are *both* SNCF Voyageurs and the Régions. I don’t have the time right know to dwell over the details, but this bulletin of the FNAUT - French national public transport users’ association (think of it as a passenger representation group and quasi-watchdog) - has good info on the matter : https://www.fnaut.fr/uploads/2022/06/FNAUT-INFOS-N°-296-V3.pdf

Thanks for the info. I need to brush up on my French...

Quite extraordinary that between various levels of government bodies and a government owned company France has managed to go backwards ...

 

[MatthewHutton]

I don’t think the TER service with 0-2 extra stops over a TGV is a dealbreaker in terms of when in the hour you can run.

Also it’s France. The stations have tonnes of platforms for passing. Mulhouse has 8, Colmar has 5 for example.

 

[NCT]

The Swiss and (soon) the Germans provide a sound basis for timetable structure. Work against it at your peril.

On a two-track railway with a half-hourly rhythm, it makes sense for services of similar speed profiles to hug each other as close as possible, so non-stop departing one headway before the limited stop TER makes sense. The Strasbourg - Selestat and Mulhouse - Colmar stoppers (both half-hourly in the peaks) and any freight need the full white space between the half hourly flights.

I can already see that today some of the Strasbourg - Mulhouse TGVs occupy the wrong paths in the hour which are forcing gaps in the stopping services.

 

[AlastairFraser]

We are into Swansea - Chester HSL territory now ...

Whatever business and political destination it might be it still has only the trip generation ability of 150k people. The existence of almost a complete ring of HSL of Paris - Strasbourg - Frankfurt - Cologne - Brussels makes any HSL through Luxembourg almost completely redundant.

For what is a relatively small market, modest straightenings of Namur to Arlon gives you the most bang for the buck. As for Luxembourg - Liege, there's something called topography - it'd be a base tunnel all the way.

For Luxemburg - Brussels itself, the journey time that matters is to the Brussels-Luxemburg station (first 'Zone 1 station' if you like), especially for the European parliament. Going via Liege to Brussels Midi going in from the north is an inefficient routing.

The problem with any further upgrades on the Belgian side of the border is that they involve the Belgian/Walloon government having to pay (apparently the Belgian federal government has a budget deficit at the moment), and the Luxembourg government has a significant surplus.

I am aware that the topography of a route from Lux City to the Belgian border isn't great for a HSL line, but the responsible government has more ability to pay for it at the end of the day.
Also, you could make use of the unused underground station box at Lux Airport for part of the first section of the route; with the wide range of destinations it offers in comparison to most other nearby airports, it has the potential to attract some additional passengers looking for a decent hub.

(Liege Airport has basically nothing for passengers - apart from a few TUI routes, only a few routes operate year round from Maastricht, Charleroi is a decent low-cost hub, but mostly European flights etc)

 

[MatthewHutton]

The Swiss and (soon) the Germans provide a sound basis for timetable structure. Work against it at your peril.

On a two-track railway with a half-hourly rhythm, it makes sense for services of similar speed profiles to hug each other as close as possible, so non-stop departing one headway before the limited stop TER makes sense. The Strasbourg - Selestat and Mulhouse - Colmar stoppers (both half-hourly in the peaks) and any freight need the full white space between the half hourly flights.

I can already see that today some of the Strasbourg - Mulhouse TGVs occupy the wrong paths in the hour which are forcing gaps in the stopping services.

yeah but you do have a fair amount of flexibility as to where a x - Basel train is scheduled on the LGV Est to fit the gaps it needs to hit south of Strasbourg.

 

[Snow1964]

The biggest one - being outside of Schengen. The issues are two fold. If Amsterdam - London services could freely pick up and drop off passengers at Antwerp, Brussels and Lille we'd probably be looking at an hourly service already. Secondly we are at the mercy of border control capacity and staffing level consistency at London, Rotterdam and Amsterdam - if that constraint is removed a two-hourly service may be viable

Of course the UK might one day join Schengen.

It now has more migrants crossing in boats than ever present themselves via Europe at stations or airports. So usual argument for keeping border with mainland Europe is rather weak, and when they do arrive we don't go in for Trump style deportations.

There are already 4 non-EU countries which have joined, Liechtenstein, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland. Only 2 EU countries have not joined, Ireland which is happy to, but wants to maintain open borders with Northern Ireland, and Cyprus (which is applying). Checks at land borders of two recent joiners (Bulgaria and Romania) were dropped from 1st Jan 2025

Schengen isn't only the mainland Europe, it includes many of UKs common holiday destinations, Canary Islands, Malta, Madeira, Greek Islands, Corsica, Azores.

The new entry-exit system effectively is e-gate booths which take on average 20 seconds per passenger. Thus a 700 seat train every 30 minutes needs 6-7 e-gates (actually bit more as passengers won't arrive evenly spaced, and could be failed gate awaiting repair). If trains are less frequent and passengers joining at multiple locations then many of these secure platforms might just have 3 or 4 e-gates, and just 2 border staff members on duty ahead of departure. It is not clear to me who would pay for these.

 

[MatthewHutton]

and when they do arrive we don't go in for Trump style deportations.

We do deport people - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home-office-smashes-targets-with-mass-surge-in-migrant-removals

Nearly 19,000 foreign criminals and people with no right to be in the UK have now been removed since the government took office.

These figures represent the highest rate of returns seen in the UK since 2018 and include the 4 biggest returns charter flights in the UK’s history, with a total of more than 850 people on board.

 

[JamesT]

Of course the UK might one day join Schengen.

It now has more migrants crossing in boats than ever present themselves via Europe at stations or airports. So usual argument for keeping border with mainland Europe is rather weak, and when they do arrive we don't go in for Trump style deportations.

I think you have cause and effect the wrong way round there. Very few migrants come through the tunnel because the security was beefed up. Cast your mind back a decade or two to the days of the Sangatte ‘Jungle’. There were thousands of attempts per day to get onto lorries or break into the tunnel itself.

I don’t see the public mood changing to accept weaker border controls any time soon.

 

[RT4038]

I don’t see the public mood changing to accept weaker border controls any time soon.

More likely to go the other way, I would suggest.

 

[NCT]

yeah but you do have a fair amount of flexibility as to where a x - Basel train is scheduled on the LGV Est to fit the gaps it needs to hit south of Strasbourg.

You need to look at the full complement of departures. Amazingly Strasbourg has a pretty damn good regional takt in readiness for the Deutschlandtakt. Selected departures from Strasbourg are as follows:

24/54 - stopping to Brumath
22/52 - TER to Offenburg
21/51 - fast TER to Basel
19/49 - regional TER to Brumath and Saverne (Nancy and or Metz)

A Paris - Strasbourg train would have half the train getting off and on at Strasbourg so you need more than the standard 3-minute (TGV standard) dwell. Strasbourg is a big station so you want to give passengers more than 5 minutes to change onto the first departure in the pattern. The Deutschlandtakt suggests a xx43 (and 13) arrival from Paris Est, which would allow a 6-minute interchange onto the xx19/49 path to Brumath. I don't see any good reason to deviate from that.

Remember any Paris - Strasbourg train will be for Paris - Strasbourg and surrounding communities first and foremost and an additional Paris - Basel train as a bonus on top of the core service via Dijon. It should serve the takt first and raw journey time second.

By my estimation the Paris - Basel journey time could be 3h02m:
xx28 Paris Est depart
xx13/19 Strasbourg
xx30 Basel SBB

If it's an Ilisto service being extended, then the Paris departure would be earlier because Ilisto plans to call at all 3 of the TGV-Parkway stations.

Of course the UK might one day join Schengen.

It now has more migrants crossing in boats than ever present themselves via Europe at stations or airports. So usual argument for keeping border with mainland Europe is rather weak, and when they do arrive we don't go in for Trump style deportations.

There are already 4 non-EU countries which have joined, Liechtenstein, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland. Only 2 EU countries have not joined, Ireland which is happy to, but wants to maintain open borders with Northern Ireland, and Cyprus (which is applying). Checks at land borders of two recent joiners (Bulgaria and Romania) were dropped from 1st Jan 2025

Schengen isn't only the mainland Europe, it includes many of UKs common holiday destinations, Canary Islands, Malta, Madeira, Greek Islands, Corsica, Azores.

The new entry-exit system effectively is e-gate booths which take on average 20 seconds per passenger. Thus a 700 seat train every 30 minutes needs 6-7 e-gates (actually bit more as passengers won't arrive evenly spaced, and could be failed gate awaiting repair). If trains are less frequent and passengers joining at multiple locations then many of these secure platforms might just have 3 or 4 e-gates, and just 2 border staff members on duty ahead of departure. It is not clear to me who would pay for these.

Oh I think the UK's current attitude towards Europe is completely retarded. All these unnecessary trade barriers across the channel is having a real depressing effect on our productivity and tax revenue just when our economy is in the doldrums. But I'm not going to hold out for any political miracle, at least not in the short term ...

Hopefully e-gates will reduce the space requirement at St Pancras and the staffing levels in the Dutch stations and make these logistical and funding constraints easier to manage.

The problem with any further upgrades on the Belgian side of the border is that they involve the Belgian/Walloon government having to pay (apparently the Belgian federal government has a budget deficit at the moment), and the Luxembourg government has a significant surplus.

I am aware that the topography of a route from Lux City to the Belgian border isn't great for a HSL line, but the responsible government has more ability to pay for it at the end of the day.
Also, you could make use of the unused underground station box at Lux Airport for part of the first section of the route; with the wide range of destinations it offers in comparison to most other nearby airports, it has the potential to attract some additional passengers looking for a decent hub.

(Liege Airport has basically nothing for passengers - apart from a few TUI routes, only a few routes operate year round from Maastricht, Charleroi is a decent low-cost hub, but mostly European flights etc)

And yet all that Luxemburg is prepared to sign up to is the jointly fund the modest Arlon - Namur upgrade, and is wanting EU funding. The kind of generosity you envisage from Luxemburg is simply not forthcoming.

At the end of the day what you are advocating is akin to a Swansea - Chester high-speed tunnel that would carry fresh air year round.

 

[AlastairFraser]

And yet all that Luxemburg is prepared to sign up to is the jointly fund the modest Arlon - Namur upgrade, and is wanting EU funding. The kind of generosity you envisage from Luxemburg is simply not forthcoming.

At the end of the day what you are advocating is akin to a Swansea - Chester high-speed tunnel that would carry fresh air year round.

Perhaps it's because they fear that the Belgian rail network wouldn't have the capacity or funding for any improvements at their end. We'll wait and see

 

[MatthewHutton]

Perhaps it's because they fear that the Belgian rail network wouldn't have the capacity or funding for any improvements at their end. We'll wait and see

The Belgian high speed sections between Brussels and Cologne have pretty low levels of traffic currently - currently 1 8 car train an hour?

At Belgian construction costs a high speed line towards Luxembourg might well be affordable - especially as Luxembourg is so rich.

Plus don’t forget the Cologne-Frankfurt high speed line has 4% grades so I doubt much tunnelling is required in south Belgium if you build to a similar standard.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The Belgian high speed sections between Brussels and Cologne have pretty low levels of traffic currently - currently 1 8 car train an hour?

At Belgian construction costs a high speed line towards Luxembourg might well be affordable - especially as Luxembourg is so rich.

Plus don’t forget the Cologne-Frankfurt high speed line has 4% grades so I doubt much tunnelling is required in south Belgium if you build to a similar standard.

Wallonia is the poorer part of Belgium though. I suspect the remaining sections that isn't HSL from Brussels to Antwerp will be prioritised, because of traffic volumes on that line.

The Ardennes are a bit more difficult to build in than most of Germany too.

 

[rvdborgt]

The Belgian high speed sections between Brussels and Cologne have pretty low levels of traffic currently - currently 1 8 car train an hour?

That's between Liège and Aachen. Between Leuven and Liège, there are also 2 hourly ICs (1 during weekends).

 

[MatthewHutton]

Wallonia is the poorer part of Belgium though. I suspect the remaining sections that isn't HSL from Brussels to Antwerp will be prioritised, because of traffic volumes on that line.

The Ardennes are a bit more difficult to build in than most of Germany too.

I am not sure. Brussels-Antwerp is almost certainly more expensive to build - if it wasn’t they would have already done it.

 

[rvdborgt]

I am not sure. Brussels-Antwerp is almost certainly more expensive to build - if it wasn’t they would have already done it.

Brussels-Mechelen is already there. It's just 160 km/h, but it's there mainly for capacity reasons. Next, some flyovers would be needed north of Mechelen (plans exist, but no money yet) and maybe the missing extra tracks from there to Antwerp, but that would need a long tunnel on the approach to Antwerp.