Split trains in the Channel Tunnel: NoL now viable?

[33Hz]

As Deutsche Bahn have set the precedent with getting permission to run shorter, multiple units through the Channel Tunnel, how about the same for British operators? After all, if the model for splitting trains at Brussels to continue on 4.5 hour journeys has merit, then about about the same at London?

What about a build of 300+ km/h UK gauge tilt-capable trains that could form the basis for the HS2 "classic compatible" units? Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield and Cardiff will all be wired and 4.5 hours from Paris or Brussels by the end of the decade. They may not individually generate enough traffic for an 18 coach train, but 2 (or even 3) short trains operating in multiple might well be viable.



Yes, I'm aware of the immigration issues - let's assume they can be dealt with if the commercial need is there.

 

[ModernRailways]

Isn't this kind of what Eurostar are doing with the new e320s only they aren't going further in the UK, however in Europe they are, with services branching off and one of those will be Amsterdam.

Immigration is kind of a moot point, Eurostar would run 'fast', and so it could be argued that special platforms could either be segregated or new platforms built with immigration checks. Leaving the country, you could always get passengers to be checked upon arrival in Europe instead of on departure in the UK. I believe this happens currently with Brussels trains, although you also get checked over here still.

Personally, I think Eurostar running any sort of service from anywhere other than London would be silly. Maybe Birmingham, but somewhere like Manchester or Leeds would, in my opinion, be daft! I doubt there would be enough demand, plus current services are already from those cities are quick enough and Eurostar wouldn't do it any quicker, current services can also allow for a little break before heading off which to some people is a god send since it means they aren't sitting around on a train for hours on end.

Didn't Eurostar originally plan for this which is why they have the shorter sets which are currently with SNCF? The chaps in the 'International Transport' forum would probably be best to answer this!

 

[Chris125]

I'm afraid immigration and security concerns are as much a political issue as a commercial one and are not going to go away anytime soon, while such trains would be far harder to path today and difficult to justify given the demand for domestic travel. As for rolling stock there are no 300km/h+ conventional tilting designs built or planned I believe due to the inherent weight penalty.

Given the capacity constraints on the network, the immigration/security issues and the relatively limited demand, concentrating such traffic on St Pancras is likely for the forseeable future.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

The only one that even tilts slightly that I know of are the N700 Shinkansen, which are only able to tilt ~1.5 degrees.
Far less than even the Voyagers, let alone the Pendolinos.

 

[Monty]

You may be able to make additonal international services viable from cities that will be directly connected to High Speed 2, but even then I'm only really considering Birmingham and Manchester. You may also be able to find a market for A European sleeper service, but imagine any such service would utilise existing European gauged rolling stock rather than something bespoke like the abortive Nightstar enterprise.

Other than that I really don't see a demand from cities such as Sheffield, Cardiff or Leeds to be honest.

 

[jopsuk]

alternatively, with a loco to haul a load through the tunnel, Nightstar to everywhere!

 

[Monty]

Haha that is brilliant!

 

[33Hz]

Isn't this kind of what Eurostar are doing with the new e320s only they aren't going further in the UK, however in Europe they are, with services branching off and one of those will be Amsterdam.

No. e320s are 400 metre trains that cannot be split. Deutsche Bahn are proposing to split their trains, which are 200 metres and due to run in pairs.

Immigration is kind of a moot point, Eurostar would run 'fast', and so it could be argued that special platforms could either be segregated or new platforms built with immigration checks. Leaving the country, you could always get passengers to be checked upon arrival in Europe instead of on departure in the UK. I believe this happens currently with Brussels trains, although you also get checked over here still.

No. There are no checks in Brussels.

As it stands, the Schengen area requires operators to check passports of all passengers boarding a vehicle which is due to enter the external border, meaning that all pax would have to be checked on the UK side.

Personally, I think Eurostar running any sort of service from anywhere other than London would be silly. Maybe Birmingham, but somewhere like Manchester or Leeds would, in my opinion, be daft! I doubt there would be enough demand, plus current services are already from those cities are quick enough and Eurostar wouldn't do it any quicker, current services can also allow for a little break before heading off which to some people is a god send since it means they aren't sitting around on a train for hours on end.

Conversely, there are plenty more people who will not change trains, yet alone stations.

Didn't Eurostar originally plan for this which is why they have the shorter sets which are currently with SNCF? The chaps in the 'International Transport' forum would probably be best to answer this!

They did - or more to the point BR did - which is why they were built. But they were still very long by domestic standards, at 14 coaches. Interestingly they were not long enough to span the 375 metres between Eurotunnel exit doors, which was the common wisdom as to why DB had to jump through hoops to get their trains allowed.

 

[nathanclass323]

While we are sort of on about DB and their trains, will they have to paint the fronts of their stock yellow like ours?

 

[edwin_m]

While we are sort of on about DB and their trains, will they have to paint the fronts of their stock yellow like ours?

Almost certainly not. There is no such rule in the European TSIs and no reason to require it for high speed lines since there wouldn't be any track workers out when trains are running. Anyone imposing such a rule without a good reason is at risk of being in trouble for impeding the single market!

 

[Rhydgaled]

Personally, I think international services (to Paris and Brussels) from Bristol (using the NOL Eurostars if we can get them back from SNCF) would be a good idea following GWML electrification. With HS2, if only they weren't intending to use Euston and make Curzon Street a terminus, you could have Paris and Brussels trains from Manchester and Liverpool, calling at Birmingham. As it is, the lack of through travel capability at Curzon Street splits the market up and would require three paths on HS2 to serve the three places rather than two paths if Birmingham could be an intermediate calling point.

 

[Kentish Paul]

Almost certainly not. There is no such rule in the European TSIs and no reason to require it for high speed lines since there wouldn't be any track workers out when trains are running. Anyone imposing such a rule without a good reason is at risk of being in trouble for impeding the single market!

Not true. Have seen people out with strimmers cutting grass etc on HS1 in the past week. This was trackside and not behind the fences.

 

[edwin_m]

Not true. Have seen people out with strimmers cutting grass etc on HS1 in the past week. This was trackside and not behind the fences.

But was it "on or about the line" where they would be in danger from passing trains? If there was no lookout protection in place (and 186mph would need a lot of lookouts) then there was no perceived risk from train operation.

 

[HSTEd]

Presumably the signalling control room could just check trains passing through the work area down to 160kph or something or lower to allow trackside work to carry on.

 

[underbank]

Personally, I think Eurostar running any sort of service from anywhere other than London would be silly. Maybe Birmingham, but somewhere like Manchester or Leeds would, in my opinion, be daft! I doubt there would be enough demand, plus current services are already from those cities are quick enough and Eurostar wouldn't do it any quicker, current services can also allow for a little break before heading off which to some people is a god send since it means they aren't sitting around on a train for hours on end.

At the moment, many of those of us "up north" simply don't bother travelling by train/ferry to Europe because of the time and cost. Yes, we could have a stop off on the way, but that means you either lose time at your end destination or have to extend your entire journey (eating into already short annual holiday entitlements), not to mention extra accommodation cost.

Just because people don't do it today doesn't mean that they wouldn't do it if there was a suitable service. At the moment it would be a tortuous journey. Don't forget that people don't just live in Manchester and Leeds. What about all those living in, say, Cumbria, who'd have an hour or two to travel to Manchester first, then another train to London, then cross London for onward journey to Europe - too many connections, journey too long, too much risk of missed connections due to delays on earlier legs of the journey.

If there was any prospect of direct trains from Manchester and Leeds, then it really does open up the options for those not currently able to travel to Europe and could grow into popular routes.

 

[Chris125]

Just because people don't do it today doesn't mean that they wouldn't do it if there was a suitable service. At the moment it would be a tortuous journey.

That's the view many had about Eurostar when the Channel Tunnel opened - that it wouldn't just dominate the cross-channel market but grow it substantially, but as we all know those predictions turned out to be rather optimistic.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

That's the view many had about Eurostar when the Channel Tunnel opened - that it wouldn't just dominate the cross-channel market but grow it substantially, but as we all know those predictions turned out to be rather optimistic.

Chris

Yes, we didn't predict low cost airlines crushing everything else.

 

[CalderRail]

A Leeds-Paris Sleeper (or Leeds-Brussels, or Manchester-Paris, etc) would get custom.

 

[HSTEd]

It would get custom, but it would just cost too much to run.
These things always do.

Running night trains composed of day-time stock would be better....

 

[eps200]

HS2 not having through stations messes this up, the only way a lot of this is viable is if you join a HS2 service to a Euro service via London.

 

[Rhydgaled]

HS2 not having through stations messes this up

So somebody out there agrees with me If trains from Liverpool, Manchester and Chester/Holyhead (the last only for trains to London, not international services) could pick up additional passengers at Birmingham it'd make through services alot more viable. As it is, Birmingham being on a spur of HS2 messes alot of things up. It messes up the environmental credentials of HS2 also (seriously, sucking enough electricity to do 200mph on a London - Birmingham service which only has 70mph cars to compete with).

Having a 'Euston Cross' through station in London would be useful too, providing more through capacity to HS1. It might also give a chance for additional HS lines to feed into it in future, whereas using a surface station like Euston there would be no room for extra platforms and new HS lines would need their own London stations (assuming they will go to London)

 

[Chris125]

Having a 'Euston Cross' through station in London would be useful too, providing more through capacity to HS1. It might also give a chance for additional HS lines to feed into it in future, whereas using a surface station like Euston there would be no room for extra platforms and new HS lines would need their own London stations (assuming they will go to London)

A lot of people, myself included, would equally argue that Euston Cross would not work operationally and be prohibitively expensive but that's a discussion for another thread.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

I do note that a TGV Duplex consumes as much energy per seat.km as the Class 390, so environmental benefits are still huge.

 

[Rhydgaled]

A lot of people, myself included, would equally argue that Euston Cross would not work operationally and be prohibitively expensive but that's a discussion for another thread.

Chris

Can't see why it wouldn't work operationally, but prohibitively expensive maybe. Then again, rebuilding Euston won't be easy or cheap either and if you ever want to build a new HS line to relieve the GWML or ECML you'll have to build another route into London and another new station.

 

[Class83]

Could running 2 services one Liverpool>Manchester>Birmingham and another Leeds*>Sheffield>Derby which could have UKBA people on board, stop at Ashford to join the 2 trains and evict anyone who doesn't have valid travel documents. Stop at Lille for connections to Brussels and Amsterdam then continue to Paris. It would have to sell on convenience rather than speed, but if you included a full evening meal service a 4-5 hour journey departing around 5-6pm would be attractive to business travellers who otherwise would need to catch either an early morning flight or not eat properly if flying the evening before. On the return leg there are UKBA outposts in Paris and Lille to stop anyone not permitted to board.

*This would require electrification from Sheffield to where the line joins the ECML spur to Leeds which isn't scheduled as far as I'm aware.

 

[johnnychips]

Could running 2 services one Liverpool>Manchester>Birmingham and another Leeds*>Sheffield>Derby which could have UKBA people on board, stop at Ashford to join the 2 trains and evict anyone who doesn't have valid travel documents. Stop at Lille for connections to Brussels and Amsterdam then continue to Paris. It would have to sell on convenience rather than speed, but if you included a full evening meal service a 4-5 hour journey departing around 5-6pm would be attractive to business travellers who otherwise would need to catch either an early morning flight or not eat properly if flying the evening before. On the return leg there are UKBA outposts in Paris and Lille to stop anyone not permitted to board.

*This would require electrification from Sheffield to where the line joins the ECML spur to Leeds which isn't scheduled as far as I'm aware.

Lot of hassle for not much return. St Pancras is currently very convenient for those travelling from the North and Midlands by conventional services.

 

[edwin_m]

Lot of hassle for not much return. St Pancras is currently very convenient for those travelling from the North and Midlands by conventional services.

Yes indeed, with Kings Cross nearly as good and Euston not far behind. Suggesting perhaps that Bristol might be the best target for any through service?

 

[DownSouth]

I do note that a TGV Duplex consumes as much energy per seat.km as the Class 390, so environmental benefits are still huge.

That's quite an impressive performance by the TGV there, considering the additional energy consumption of going at a higher speed is quite significant.

 

[HSTEd]

That's quite an impressive performance by the TGV there, considering the additional energy consumption of going at a higher speed is quite significant.

The TGV has a major weight advantage thanks to no tilt gear. The AGV does even better. The New doubledeck will likely be even more impressive.

 

[47802]

Ive used the eurostar quite a few times, and I live in leeds ok it is partially because I dont particularly like flying, a through service would be better but for East Coast and Midlands passengers its reasonably convienent, I think through services to heathrow airport might be more useful.