Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[Cloud Strife]

How many passengers did that involve though? Obviously with Eurostar you're talking 900 passengers, you're never going to process all of those in a few minutes before boarding. Though 10 minutes for Premier passengers should eventually be achievable.

Yes, of course, you have to scale it accordingly. The real issue is that there's no provision right now for 'delays at passport control' that are outwith the control of the operator. My suggestion is that if a passenger has a valid ETIAS and complies with the rules surrounding the EES, then the operator should transport the passenger if they're subject to extra checks by the PAF.

I think realistically, the best option to deal with such a huge amount of passengers is to get them through the departure lounge and into the train without delay. There simply isn't the space in St Pancras to have thousands of passengers standing around, nor should there be.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Yes, of course, you have to scale it accordingly. The real issue is that there's no provision right now for 'delays at passport control' that are outwith the control of the operator. My suggestion is that if a passenger has a valid ETIAS and complies with the rules surrounding the EES, then the operator should transport the passenger if they're subject to extra checks by the PAF.

I think realistically, the best option to deal with such a huge amount of passengers is to get them through the departure lounge and into the train without delay. There simply isn't the space in St Pancras to have thousands of passengers standing around, nor should there be.

If Eurostar isn't going to allow standing passengers they should run with a certain amount of spare capacity in case of delays with connecting services as well as passport delays.

 

[signed]

SNCF may well not have the financial resource to take such risks Open access is coming - lets see if anyone takes on this route as a competitive operation. I won't hold my breath.

SNCF has plenty of cash, so much that they would rather compete with themselves in Italy than buy enough rolling stock to finally retire (superior in my opinion) 30-year old TGV Atlantique sets.

But the SNCF group will get cold-feet when the illegal track access scheme gets challenged in court, as we see currently in Spain.

You've got the silly situation where Bordeaux - Toulouse is combined hourly at near identical journey times but IC, TGV and Ouigo services all have separate ticket policies so passengers don't get the full benefit of the timetable.

This is not the fault of SNCF, it's different purse strings

TER/Transilien services are managed, and paid by the region, IC services are managed and paid directly from the government, and TGV*/Ouigo... are paid by the profits of SNCF Voyageurs, a state-owned private company, itself.

If a region wants to allow their tickets to be valid on TGV, they can, but they have to pay a sizeable amount of the ticket price to SNCF Voyageurs (and SNCF does like to ripoff regions).

It works with seasons because the traveller is ponying up a part of the difference, but would never work on regular tickets. Regions are stupidly cheap.

Or tender SNCF Voyageurs to run some TGV services fully on behalf of the region, which is even more expensive, which the Hauts-de-France region has done around Lille.

In a ideal world, all would work together, but that's not the ideal world we live in, and it has never been in France.

 

[NCT]

There have been plenty of suggestions in this thread of things that would 'improve the situations', but I have been commenting on why I think these will not happen, or not happen quickly, mostly for logistical and/or [ultimately] economic reasons. Much as these reasons annoy UK (and other foreign) contributors but, unless the basic laws, rules and practices of economics are suspended, they are likely to remain.

I have no idea why the 6h16 from London does not call at Lille - every other Brussels/Amsterdam train in both directions appear to. Maybe there is a good reason (platform occupancy at that very time it passes possibly?) Perhaps write to E* and ask them? However, it seems that this would only offer one additional connection over the following 7h04 London-Brussels train. I have just had a look at the E* website, and the SNCF Voyageurs website, and see that seamless through booking appears to be offered between London and Lyon or Strasbourg (for instance - various other provincial French stations seem to be available) changing at Lille.

All the countries in Europe would benefit passengers by having a unified ticket booking system, however the financial implications of that in regard to missed connections etc and the sheer cost of development mean that this is unlikely in the short to medium term.

However much train enthusiasts might like to believe, France does not have the same demographics, geography, economy and politics as Germany or the Netherlands or Austria. The demand profile is just not the same, with the presence of an all encompassing mega city of Paris (the likes of which are in none of those countries) and such a huge area of thinly populated countryside. To the people outside, a German style timetable system is just obvious, but I don't think it is at all as simple as that from an economic point of view. As for blaming the current service on some sort of conspiracy of the French political class, just laughable even if there is a grain of truth in that all political systems favour the status quo.

So far, the main solutions proposed have been to force the French Government to: find billions to end cross subsidisation between Intercity/International services and other activities; run services at unlikely marginal rates, requiring additional trains and staff, which are to mainly benefit long distance foreign passengers; introduce more frequent long distance regional services requiring extra trains and staff with uncertain financial result; introduce clock face timetables on main lines flattening peaks of travel to and from the mega-city (presumably with resultant overcrowding) or requiring additional trains and staff to cope with the peak, again with uncertain financial result. All in a country which has well known financial issues facing it funding social care/pensions.

This French exceptionalism is getting to parody levels. France has genuinely excellent LGV infrastructure it's non-rural lines are in good nick. This means France has effectively the same time diameter as Switzerland (i.e. the time it takes to get to one side of the country to the other). Two countries of the same time diameter - the one with a 65 million population is the far more easier market to serve than the one with 9 million. That public transport's value is enhanced by network effect is basic common sense and no exceptionalist argument is going to cut it.

As an advocate of European integration France has form for being the odd one out. It should put its money where its mouth is and converge to European norms where it makes sense. It's not conspiracy to point out inertia, exceptionalism and incompetence. It's not just British train enthusiasts who suggest things that would 'improve the situation', it's the European Commission authors of the 4th Railway Package writing things into law that have led to actual improved situations in Italy and Spain that we are about to see in France.

Put it this way, if Ilisto, Proxima and Trenitalia all succeed in entering and expanding the high-speed market this side of 2030 (and all signs point to they will succeed) then SNCF commercial arm can kiss goodbye to its 15% profit margin and the French government had better get used to going without.

This is not the fault of SNCF, it's different purse strings

TER/Transilien services are managed, and paid by the region, IC services are managed and paid directly from the government, and TGV*/Ouigo... are paid by the profits of SNCF Voyageurs, a state-owned private company, itself.

If a region wants to allow their tickets to be valid on TGV, they can, but they have to pay a sizeable amount of the ticket price to SNCF Voyageurs (and SNCF does like to ripoff regions).

It works with seasons because the traveller is ponying up a part of the difference, but would never work on regular tickets. Regions are stupidly cheap.

Or tender SNCF Voyageurs to run some TGV services fully on behalf of the region, which is even more expensive, which the Hauts-de-France region has done around Lille.

In a ideal world, all would work together, but that's not the ideal world we live in, and it has never been in France.

As the vertically integrated monopoly organisation for decades and the dominating group company post reform, where is SNCF in shaping the industry narrative?

When BR was undergoing sectorisation and privatisation, BR and its successor organisations implemented things like LENNON, ORCATS and the TSA so despite outward appearances National Rail remains a highly integrated system (the default fare structure is flexible and TOC agnostic - a train is a train is a train) despite its flaws. Where were SNCF's equivalent efforts?

Prorail has published its 2030 possible timetable, OBB Infrastructure its detailed 2040 vision, DB InfraGO its detailed Deutschland Takt, even the Polish have published their horizontal timetable. There's clear evidence of the InfraCo, government authorities and successor national OpsCo working together towards the same vision (even if disagreement over details exist). Again, where are SNCF's equivalent efforts?

In places like Britain and Netherlands there are legitimate reasons for wanting the old vertically integrated systems back (even though on balance I disagree with those reasons), SNCF just doesn't give anyone reasons to love it.

 

[RT4038]

Has this happened in Spain, where an open-access battle has broken out? As far as I can tell service frequency has increased on some routes, and stayed the same on others, but hasn't decreased significantly anywhere. The one exception being services between France and Spain, which reduced after what appears to be a conflict between RENFE and the SNCF.

While France and Spain clearly are different countries, they have some similarities; namely a massive capital city in the centre surrounded by relatively empty countryside, with some key cities that mostly connect to the capital. Both also have a very well-developed high-speed railway network.

There are similarities, but I think Madrid (7m) is quite a bit smaller than the mega city of Paris (12.36m), and Barcelona (5.7m) the second city much larger than the second city of France - Marseilles (1.9m). Therefore demand will be weaker to the capital, and the pull of the second city on the regions that much greater, which will balance up demand on the network much more than in France. It remains to be seen what effect, if any, the open access competition has on the parts of the network that are not being competed on. Early days yet. However, Spain has no similarity with the situation at Lille and the operation of any High Speed, or indeed regional services, that do not pass through the centre of the main city [Madrid] (or in the case of Spain, the other largest city [Barcelona]) , as both large cities have 'run through' main stations. The diffusing of traffic flow just does not happen there.

As an advocate of European integration France has form for being the odd one out. It should put its money where its mouth is and converge to European norms where it makes sense. It's not conspiracy to point out inertia, exceptionalism and incompetence. It's not just British train enthusiasts who suggest things that would 'improve the situation', it's the European Commission authors of the 4th Railway Package writing things into law that have led to actual improved situations in Italy and Spain that we are about to see in France.

Put it this way, if Ilisto, Proxima and Trenitalia all succeed in entering and expanding the high-speed market this side of 2030 (and all signs point to they will succeed) then SNCF commercial arm can kiss goodbye to its 15% profit margin and the French government had better get used to going without.

And good luck to them too. It remains to be seen how this pans out - I'm sure there will be plenty of competition on the main routes to and from Paris. Not so sure about much changing on the regional lines, or connecting the (relatively) small provincial places, except where the competitive Paris based services provide them as a by product. Could even be worse due to the loss of cross-subsidy funding. I don't think Italian or Spanish regional services have benefitted much if any from OA competition. Returning to the OP, it will quite possibly result in competitive (and more) service through the Channel Tunnel, but I suspect that this will be on the existing Origin and Destination pairs rather than anything new, and more Lille to anywhere else connecting service probably not. Remains to be seen of course.

If Eurostar isn't going to allow standing passengers they should run with a certain amount of spare capacity in case of delays with connecting services as well as passport delays.

In my experience, E* have always been very helpful in rebooking on subsequent trains in these circumstances (happened to me on various occasions and never had any problem), although presumably as with the airlines this could be a problem for large volumes at peak times. The capacity is the capacity, and the airlines generally cope in a similar situation.

But the SNCF group will get cold-feet when the illegal track access scheme gets challenged in court, as we see currently in Spain.

Assuming the challenge is successful, and if so, to what extent and what the ramifications are?

 

[Krokodil]

I don't suppose that there's any chance of Brussels going hourly? I've checked my arrival time from Berlin on Friday (European Sleeper, for some reason Nightjet weren't running) and found that I'll have 3.5 hours to kill. Getting the previous train two hours earlier feels a little risky when arriving on a sleeper through Germany. I couldn't even rebook now anyway because demand is apparently high enough that all remaining tickets for the day are £165+. I'd have travelled on the Thursday if it wasn't for the fact that the sleeper is only on alternate days.

 

[RT4038]

I don't suppose that there's any chance of Brussels going hourly? I've checked my arrival time from Berlin on Friday (European Sleeper, for some reason Nightjet weren't running) and found that I'll have 3.5 hours to kill. Getting the previous train two hours earlier feels a little risky when arriving on a sleeper through Germany. I couldn't even rebook now anyway because demand is apparently high enough that all remaining tickets for the day are £165+. I'd have travelled on the Thursday if it wasn't for the fact that the sleeper is only on alternate days.

Quite possibly when Open Access comes along, and also if the Amsterdam market can build up? Have a nice early dinner in Brussels before getting on the Sleeper!

 

[Trainbike46]

I don't suppose that there's any chance of Brussels going hourly? I've checked my arrival time from Berlin on Friday (European Sleeper, for some reason Nightjet weren't running) and found that I'll have 3.5 hours to kill. Getting the previous train two hours earlier feels a little risky when arriving on a sleeper through Germany. I couldn't even rebook now anyway because demand is apparently high enough that all remaining tickets for the day are £165+. I'd have travelled on the Thursday if it wasn't for the fact that the sleeper is only on alternate days.

I don't think an hourly Brussels is likely soon, but there has been talk of increasing the Amsterdam service from 3 tpd (currently) to 5 tpd, and with the rather limited capacity available to/from Brussels on those trains*, that likely will mean some extra Brussels trains.

*Amsterdam-London trains can now take up to 600 passengers from Amsterdam, up to 175 from Rotterdam, which leaves 125 seats from Brussels/Lille if the latter is served.

Quite possibly when Open Access comes along, and also if the Amsterdam market can build up? Have a nice early dinner in Brussels before getting on the Sleeper!

I don't think any open-access operator has suggested serving Brussels or Amsterdam? They've all been talking about Paris and occasionally new destinations.

The Amsterdam-London service has had by far the largest growth of any Eurostar route, and with the recently expanded customs/security/passport area in Amsterdam, there is potential for a lot more growth. Amsterdam-London is a very large air market, so lots of potential passengers to switch over.

 

[RT4038]

The Amsterdam-London service has had by far the largest growth of any Eurostar route, and with the recently expanded customs/security/passport area in Amsterdam, there is potential for a lot more growth. Amsterdam-London is a very large air market, so lots of potential passengers to switch over.

London-Amsterdam also has a much longer journey time (upwards of 4 and a quarter hours) which will make getting potential passengers to switch over that much more difficult.

 

[zwk500]

I don't think any open-access operator has suggested serving Brussels or Amsterdam? They've all been talking about Paris and occasionally new destinations.

DB have talked about operating to London, and would presumably be via Cologne and Brussels if they did so.

 

[stuu]

London-Amsterdam also has a much longer journey time (upwards of 4 and a quarter hours) which will make getting potential passengers to switch over that much more difficult.

The time between walking into an airport terminal and walking out of Amsterdam Centraal will be at least 3.5 hours though, so not very much difference. Most leisure travellers will allow more time at the airport too

 

[MatthewHutton]

There are similarities, but I think Madrid (7m) is quite a bit smaller than the mega city of Paris (12.36m), and Barcelona (5.7m) the second city much larger than the second city of France - Marseilles (1.9m). Therefore demand will be weaker to the capital, and the pull of the second city on the regions that much greater, which will balance up demand on the network much more than in France. It remains to be seen what effect, if any, the open access competition has on the parts of the network that are not being competed on. Early days yet. However, Spain has no similarity with the situation at Lille and the operation of any High Speed, or indeed regional services, that do not pass through the centre of the main city [Madrid] (or in the case of Spain, the other largest city [Barcelona]) , as both large cities have 'run through' main stations. The diffusing of traffic flow just does not happen there.

London is pretty similar to Paris though, and yes France is bigger, but in terms of journey times it is similar and the capacity is much greater given the TGV investment.

don't suppose that there's any chance of Brussels going hourly? I've checked my arrival time from Berlin on Friday (European Sleeper, for some reason Nightjet weren't running) and found that I'll have 3.5 hours to kill. Getting the previous train two hours earlier feels a little risky when arriving on a sleeper through Germany. I couldn't even rebook now anyway because demand is apparently high enough that all remaining tickets for the day are £165+. I'd have travelled on the Thursday if it wasn't for the fact that the sleeper is only on alternate days

On the basis the French/Eurostar should double service levels, yes London-Brussels should be hourly

 

[Trainbike46]

London-Amsterdam also has a much longer journey time (upwards of 4 and a quarter hours) which will make getting potential passengers to switch over that much more difficult.

London to Amsterdam can be as fast as 4hours and 4 minutes on the direct services, which is about twice as long as London-Paris. This means eurostar is unlikely to dominate as completely as they do on London-Paris (where they have around 2/3 of the air/rail combined market share), but there is very significant potential for further growth.

London to Amsterdam at 38% passenger growth in 2023, against an average growth across eurostar of 22%

On the basis the French/Eurostar should double service levels, yes London-Brussels should be hourly

Ideally yes, maybe 2-hourly to Amsterdam with a Brussels terminator in the alternating hours?

 

[Krokodil]

Quite possibly when Open Access comes along, and also if the Amsterdam market can build up? Have a nice early dinner in Brussels before getting on the Sleeper!

Dinner will be in Berlin. The Eurostar from Brussels will be the 12:56. I'm booking on at 04:20 on Saturday morning so any earlier I can arrive home the better.

Ideally yes, maybe 2-hourly to Amsterdam with a Brussels terminator in the alternating hours?

Ideally the alternate trains would continue to Cologne and probably Frankfurt. Not going to happen soon though.

If HSL2/HSL3 can't manage a double ICE, would that also bar a 400m 374?

 

[zwk500]

Ideally yes, maybe 2-hourly to Amsterdam with a Brussels terminator in the alternating hours?

Ideal situation would be 2-hourly Amsterdam alternating with 2-hourly Cologne, IMO. However atm Brussels-Cologne Axis has, AIUI, a 2-hourly DB ICE and 2-hourly Thalys so not sure whether the London-Cologne could replace the DB service or would need an additional slot.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Ideally yes, maybe 2-hourly to Amsterdam with a Brussels terminator in the alternating hours?

Sure, unless you can find somewhere in Germany that you could terminate at where there is sufficient capacity.

 

[RT4038]

The time between walking into an airport terminal and walking out of Amsterdam Centraal will be at least 3.5 hours though, so not very much difference. Most leisure travellers will allow more time at the airport too

Without again going over all the arguments which have been discussed many times in this forum, yes it will depend on where you are starting from, where you are going to, your mode of transport at each end, the perception of moving time in the transport etc etc etc, but that does not change that Paris is about 2 and a half hours, whereas Amsterdam is 4 and a quarter. Especially as the flight time London-Paris is slower than that of London-Amsterdam. Therefore rail will be more competitive in the former than the latter.

 

[zwk500]

If HSL2/HSL3 can't manage a double ICE, would that also bar a 400m 374?

Liege, Aachen and Cologne all have 400m long platforms, Leuven didn't return platform lengths in a 60-second google so I don't see with a double-length set couldn't work HSL2/HSL3 if it skipped Leuven (which any London service is likely to do, and quite possibly Liege and Aachen as well).

 

[RT4038]

Sure, unless you can find somewhere in Germany that you could terminate at where there is sufficient capacity.

without substantive loss of connectional availability.

 

[MatthewHutton]

without substantive loss of connectional availability.

What does this mean? None of the lines in question are running 12-15tph or whatever “at capacity” is for a high speed line.

 

[RT4038]

What does this mean? None of the lines in question are running 12-15tph or whatever “at capacity” is for a high speed line.

Finding somewhere in Germany with sufficient capacity to terminate service (bearing in mind the immigration/security constraints), whilst retaining connectional capability to other useful services.

 

[BahrainLad]

Without again going over all the arguments which have been discussed many times in this forum, yes it will depend on where you are starting from, where you are going to, your mode of transport at each end, the perception of moving time in the transport etc etc etc, but that does not change that Paris is about 2 and a half hours, whereas Amsterdam is 4 and a quarter. Especially as the flight time London-Paris is slower than that of London-Amsterdam. Therefore rail will be more competitive in the former than the latter.

also worth considering that you can fly from London City to Amsterdam, whereas you can't to Paris. From walking into the LCY terminal and arriving in Centraal it would be more like 2 hours, if that.

 

[rvdborgt]

If HSL2/HSL3 can't manage a double ICE, would that also bar a 400m 374?

Yes, train length on HSL3 is currently limited to 200 m. That should be resolved by the end of next year.

Liege, Aachen and Cologne all have 400m long platforms, Leuven didn't return platform lengths in a 60-second google

Platform lengths are in annex D4 of Infrabel's network statement. Platforms 1 (628 m), 2 and 3 (both 425 m) are long enough. Platforms 2 and 3 are for the HSL.

 

[signed]

Assuming the challenge is successful, and if so, to what extent and what the ramifications are?

These are mostly rumors but they are from plausible sources

A successful French challenge, would lead to roughly dividing by 6x the track access charge accross the board.

In Spain, if the current challenge is successful, ADIF will be required to halve the current access chages from what I read.

The implications will be massive, OA will become much less expensive and, if we disregard the stock certification process, a lot cheaper.
Making the upandcoming OAs much more sustainable even after the 3 years of initial track access subvention.

SNCF Réseau (the infrastructure owner) will likely need to be bailed out, if not wholly nationalized as there will likely not be enough revenue to continue maintenance (SNCF Réseau is legally required to have different accounts and be isolated from operators, so their main profits will come from track access)

 

[Krokodil]

Liege, Aachen and Cologne all have 400m long platforms, Leuven didn't return platform lengths in a 60-second google so I don't see with a double-length set couldn't work HSL2/HSL3 if it skipped Leuven (which any London service is likely to do, and quite possibly Liege and Aachen as well).

I'm sure that power restrictions were mentioned upthread too. Hence why double ICEs don't run, even though the route is very busy.

The implications will be massive, OA will become much less expensive and, if we disregard the stock certification process, a lot cheaper.

Could that make a difference for Eurostar too? I don't mean merely the pressure from OAO competition, but could lower fees for them be passed onto passengers or aid the business case for more services?

 

[signed]

Could that make a difference for Eurostar too? I don't mean merely the pressure from OAO competition, but could lower fees for them be passed onto passengers or aid the business case for more services?

Technically yes, Eurostar is legally an Open Access operator.

Now to guess what they will do is hard, since any challenge of that would take years and at that point there will be at least one of the London OA operating.

 

[NCT]

These are mostly rumors but they are from plausible sources

A successful French challenge, would lead to roughly dividing by 6x the track access charge accross the board.

In Spain, if the current challenge is successful, ADIF will be required to halve the current access chages from what I read.

The implications will be massive, OA will become much less expensive and, if we disregard the stock certification process, a lot cheaper.
Making the upandcoming OAs much more sustainable even after the 3 years of initial track access subvention.

SNCF Réseau (the infrastructure owner) will likely need to be bailed out, if not wholly nationalized as there will likely not be enough revenue to continue maintenance (SNCF Réseau is legally required to have different accounts and be isolated from operators, so their main profits will come from track access)

For the uninitiated, is there a current challenge against SNCF Réseau and who is that by? (as much or as little as you feel comfortable divulging)

 

[signed]

For the uninitiated, is there a current challenge against SNCF Réseau and who is that by? (as much or as little as you feel comfortable divulging)

Not yet, there is nothing. Not that I expect anything to move until either Proxima, Kevin Speed or any of the London OAOs get in service. Nor Trenitalia nor renfe have said publically anything about that situation.

However, 8 regions have complained about the last increase at the latest regulatory meeting in 2022, where the increases were approved.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Finding somewhere in Germany with sufficient capacity to terminate service (bearing in mind the immigration/security constraints), whilst retaining connectional capability to other useful services.

Fair enough. I would hope Frankfurt certainly could spare a platform (and you might increase reliability if you did by running fewer domestic services in the throat)

Köln Messe or the single platform at Koln Hbf is another option I would have thought - perhaps with some service shuffling.

 

[sprunt]

who goes to Frankfurt or Suttgart or their environs for their holiday

Me! My holiday a few years ago was two weeks doing Frankfurt-Heidelberg-Stuttgart and it was great, all interesting places with good stuff to do. Heidelberg's even a tourist destination for normal people, so there is definite tourism demand in the environs.