Eurostar possible expansion?

[DJ_K666]

I would prefer Dortmund for its ease of access to the North Rhine-Westphalia area including Düsseldorf, Bonn and Cologne.

Be direct from London or change at Brussels.

Fair do's. As long as there is an easy connection on to Hamburg.

 

[Will Mitchell]

Ok with Eurostar potential expansion I think this is a realistic future 'long term' timetable:

17tpd: London St Pancras International to Paris Gare du Nord
10tpd: London St Pancras International to Brussels
5tpd: London St Pancras International to Amsterdam Centraal (up from 3 now)
7tpd: London St Pancras International to Frankfurt via Cologne
4tpd: London St Pancras International to Dortmund
6tpd: London St Pancras International to Geneva
3tpd: London St Pancras International to Barcelona
3tpd: London St Pancras International to Lisbon
2tpd: London St Pancras International to Rome
4tpd: London St Pancras International to Bordeaux
2tpd: London St Pancras International to Milan
2tpd: London St Pancras International to Marseille

Many of these services are already operating on my purely imaginary integrated European high speed network. I also have Duplex TGV Sleepers running from StP to Vienna/Budapest, Warsaw/Berlin, Copenhagen/Malmo, Rome/Milan, Seville/Malaga, Vigo/LaCoruna.

Hopefully in my lifetime some of these pipe dreams can be realised.

 

[Meole]

Many of these services are already operating on my purely imaginary integrated European high speed network. I also have Duplex TGV Sleepers running from StP to Vienna/Budapest, Warsaw/Berlin, Copenhagen/Malmo, Rome/Milan, Seville/Malaga, Vigo/LaCoruna.

Hopefully in my lifetime some of these pipe dreams can be realised.

Flying remains quicker and cheaper.

 

[Gadget88]

Flying remains quicker and cheaper.

The train is much more comfortable

 

[paul1609]

I was thinking this. London - Barcelona today would be about 9 hours with limited stops (Lille, Lyon, Montpellier) and an extra hour needed at Lille on return journey. Marseille works because a return journey takes 15 hours (approximately 7am to 10pm). Even when the whole route is high speed it would be difficult to timetable a return journey in a day at times that would appeal to passengers. The possibility of running to Millan is similar. If the proposed lines are built then seasonal services are possible but would never be important.

I think there needs to be distinction made between regular Eurostar services and seasonal specials. Its one thing to launch summer services to somewhere like Bordeaux, Disneyland, Alps and another to try to run a service multiple times each day. The Amsterdam service is a big deal because its the only significant new service since launch. Seasonal services are of marginal importance to the business.

Ashford Int to Barcelona is about 2 hours faster going via Paris and changing across there than it is going on the Marseille train and changing at Lyon. Ive done both and via Lyon was okay but the earlier arrival in to Barcelona far outweighs the change in Paris for me. It's also usually a lot cheaper. When I've changed at Lyon I appear to be the only passenger going for the Barcelona train so I would say the market is currently near to zero.

 

[Gadget88]

Ashford Int to Barcelona is about 2 hours faster going via Paris and changing across there than it is going on the Marseille train and changing at Lyon. Ive done both and via Lyon was okay but the earlier arrival in to Barcelona far outweighs the change in Paris for me. It's also usually a lot cheaper. When I've changed at Lyon I appear to be the only passenger going for the Barcelona train so I would say the market is currently near to zero.

I would consider going from Lyon as it’s a shorter travel time. I am visiting Lyon this year as I hope to get to know the place to travel to Italy and maybe Spain.

 

[StephenHunter]

Ashford Int to Barcelona is about 2 hours faster going via Paris and changing across there than it is going on the Marseille train and changing at Lyon. Ive done both and via Lyon was okay but the earlier arrival in to Barcelona far outweighs the change in Paris for me. It's also usually a lot cheaper. When I've changed at Lyon I appear to be the only passenger going for the Barcelona train so I would say the market is currently near to zero.

Some of these could be better served by through carriages as part of a larger consist with multiple destinations.

 

[popeter45]

Some of these could be better served by through carriages as part of a larger consist with multiple destinations.

Through carriages would take substantially longer due to reconfiguration time and requirement to not use LGV lines as there is no conventional loco+carriages setup than can reach 300+km/h (TGV's are loco+carriages but fixed formation to enable such speeds)

 

[Gadget88]

Would any expansion of Eurostar be halted with HS2 going to Euston not Kings cross?

 

[si404]

no one is going to want to spend upwards of £300 on a sleeper when the flight is less than £30.

isn't this our current situation with sleepers in the UK? Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen have loads of flights from London (and Inverness has some), but there's also expensive sleepers...

 

[Bald Rick]

The train is much more comfortable

I’d argue that 2h on a plane is far more comfortable than 12h on a train (seated or sleeper).

 

[Chester1]

isn't this our current situation with sleepers in the UK? Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen have loads of flights from London (and Inverness has some), but there's also expensive sleepers...

The Caledonian sleeper holds about 2% of the London - Scotland journey market. The new fleet was a political bribe in the run up to the general election. The subsidy has been maintained for political reasons. Its one thing for governments to keep funding a long running service to avoid being responsible for cancelling it and its another to create such a situation in the first place.

 

[Bald Rick]

isn't this our current situation with sleepers in the UK? Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen have loads of flights from London (and Inverness has some), but there's also expensive sleepers...

Not really, as it’s more subtle. The sleepers here are very heavily subsidised for historical political reasons. Someone would have to do that for any sleeper to Europe, and there is zero appetite for that in the U.K. at least. To put this into context, the lowland sleeper (including the seats) has rather less than 1% of the London area - Central belt air/rail market. This market is more than double the size of the biggest international city pair for air travel in Europe, which is London - Amsterdam. There simply isn’t the market.

Any new international sleeper from the U.K. would also have to demonstrate that it would worthwhile capture market share from other modes, and not just transfer from day trains. Otherwise you would just be paying subsidy to move passengers from one train to another.

Finally, the sleepers here do actually run at times where they can capture market simll6 because of their timings. They notably either start or arrive (or both) at times when flying is not practical - if you are in central London after 1930 and want to be in central Glasgow or Edinburgh before 0830 the next morning the sleeper is your only choice. A U.K. sleeper to anywhere past 500 miles away (by rail) in Europe would be at least 12 hours, and at that time you are eating into the day considerably, and bumping up against flight times. For example, a Frankfurt sleeper would either have to leave too early (to make a breakfast arrival) or too late (to be later than the last flights and catch people from late meetings etc).

Oh and finally, finally, border control inbound. I’ll leave it there.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I say this as someone who massively wants to use trains to Europe but can't justify it against aircraft...

An hourly service to Paris and an hourly service to Brussels is fine; and managing the stops at Ebbsfleet, Ashford, Calais and Lille will be problematic at best to ensure clockface paths are available into Brussels and Paris.

As a business owner and former city worker it's fair to say any potential routes beyond Brussels (and Paris) must be completed in a way that makes immigration checks plausible (due to having enough passengers to warrant a separate platform and infrastructure) and that makes trains full or mostly full from origin or close to origin as they won't be able to carry Brussels > Lille passengers (etc).

Realistically, the only places I can see that therefore would fit that based on journey times and such will be Brussels, (Antwerp, possibly), Rotterdam and Amsterdam; and on the German side Cologne and Dusseldorf. I do not foresee a time when Frankfurt becomes viable (not least because it occupies capacity that would be much better used for Schengen traffic). As for France, beyond Paris it seems the best to expect (as some trains might need to avoid Paris entirely) would be Charles de Gaulle (if you can get BA and Air France to agree to seats on trains and not planes), Marne la Vallee (maybe) and Lyon. That's about it.

 

[AlbertBeale]

I say this as someone who massively wants to use trains to Europe but can't justify it against aircraft...

An hourly service to Paris and an hourly service to Brussels is fine; and managing the stops at Ebbsfleet, Ashford, Calais and Lille will be problematic at best to ensure clockface paths are available into Brussels and Paris.

As a business owner and former city worker it's fair to say any potential routes beyond Brussels (and Paris) must be completed in a way that makes immigration checks plausible (due to having enough passengers to warrant a separate platform and infrastructure) and that makes trains full or mostly full from origin or close to origin as they won't be able to carry Brussels > Lille passengers (etc).

Realistically, the only places I can see that therefore would fit that based on journey times and such will be Brussels, (Antwerp, possibly), Rotterdam and Amsterdam; and on the German side Cologne and Dusseldorf. I do not foresee a time when Frankfurt becomes viable (not least because it occupies capacity that would be much better used for Schengen traffic). As for France, beyond Paris it seems the best to expect (as some trains might need to avoid Paris entirely) would be Charles de Gaulle (if you can get BA and Air France to agree to seats on trains and not planes), Marne la Vallee (maybe) and Lyon. That's about it.

Trains going no further than Brussels wouldn't be too bad if there were more through destinations from there (rather than having to change again at Cologne or wherever), since at least it's the same station in Brussels. But the main problem is fairly seamless rail connections from Britain (well, London anyway) to the southern half of Europe; the change of stations in Paris is off-putting for many people, and there isn't an obvious major hub as a jumping-off point for further afield which is not too much further away than Paris. (At least some stations just inside Germany, only a few hours beyond Brussels - Cologne and so on - would, if connected to London by through trains, give lots of one-change-from-London journey options in lieu of the lack of through-train variety from Brussels; and even Amsterdam has the direct Berlin run.) But where is a likely place you could get to on a direct train from London, in 4 or 5 hours, which would then give access to lots of direct services to the rest of France, Italy, Spain, and so on, in the absence of a mythical new Paris Hbf?

 

[Peter Kelford]

To be honest, it's quite unlikely to happen. I have difficulties believing who would want to take a 12hr train to Barcelona with a 13hr-long return. And, frankly, if there aren't multiple trains a day, it'll be very inconvenient.

Geneva would saturate the PSE line, so once POCL is built, perhaps.

Through carriages would take substantially longer due to reconfiguration time and requirement to not use LGV lines as there is no conventional loco+carriages setup than can reach 300+km/h (TGV's are loco+carriages but fixed formation to enable such speeds)

A sort of through carriage is running a double TGV then splitting it, but this would (without modification) break Channel Tunnel rules.

As a business owner and former city worker it's fair to say any potential routes beyond Brussels (and Paris) must be completed in a way that makes immigration checks plausible (due to having enough passengers to warrant a separate platform and infrastructure) and that makes trains full or mostly full from origin or close to origin as they won't be able to carry Brussels > Lille passengers (etc).

What I know for a fact is that the South of France leisure service is unusable as it makes the whole train do customs at Lille. Designed for 50 passengers, a problem occurs when there are 500 passengers.

I might also point out that Eurostar staff were talking about Amsterdam in 2013.

 

[popeter45]

.A sort of through carriage is running a double TGV then splitting it, but this would (without modification) break Channel Tunnel rules.

The rules allow non thru trains if a mitigation plan is in place and pretty sure DB have one ready for ICE 3's from when they where planning on running dual 8 cars to Frankfurt

 

[Bald Rick]

What I know for a fact is that the South of France leisure service is unusable as it makes the whole train do customs at Lille. Designed for 50 passengers, a problem occurs when there are 500 passengers.

Unusable for you perhaps, but not for the several hundred passengers who use it each weekend. Seats for this summer are selling fast!

 

[Peter Kelford]

Unusable for you perhaps, but not for the several hundred passengers who use it each weekend. Seats for this summer are selling fast!

Perhaps, but I wonder how many are deliberately and willingly returning customers, or people otherwise in the know.

 

[si404]

But where is a likely place you could get to on a direct train from London, in 4 or 5 hours, which would then give access to lots of direct services to the rest of France, Italy, Spain, and so on, in the absence of a mythical new Paris Hbf?

Lille, which seems to function as an interchange station at the north end of LGV Interconnexion? Marne-le-Vallee would also function well as an interchange half-way along. Lyon at the other end of Interconnexion?

Brussels' services from Germany are really rather poor - it's surely the ideal location for interchange that direction, however, even on the continent, international trains are often unprofitable and low frequency. Maybe further EU integration would mean more trains running that way.

Especially given border issues, a logical thing would be to have a narrow selection of stations served well rather than trying to serve everywhere with direct daily trains.

1tph St Pancras - Paris GdN
1tph St Pancras - Ebbsfleet/Ashford - Lille, of which 10tpd goes to Brussels (5tpd extending to Amsterdam, perhaps some extensions east), 5tpd Marne-le-Vallee (of which some holiday services head south to Bordeaux/Marseille/the Alps) perhaps extending to Lyon, and 1tpd Paris GdN.

 

[paul1609]

Unusable for you perhaps, but not for the several hundred passengers who use it each weekend. Seats for this summer are selling fast!

It would be interesting to know what percentage of the passengers are starting their journey in France and the UK respectively. Ive used the South of France train southbound three times but never northbound. I'm not put off by the Lille customs check just by the fact that if you get the train its morning whereas if you fly you get most of an extra day in the South of France, Barcelona etc and then an evening flight home.
I've never used the Amsterdam train because it doesn't stop at Ashford. Its just silly getting a train to St Pancras queuing round the shopping centre there only to go past your car in Ashford Station Car Park 2 1/2 hours after you parked it there. Especially when it only takes 6 hours to drive to Amsterdam door to door.

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps, but I wonder how many are deliberately and willingly returning customers, or people otherwise in the know.

Lots returning (including me!)

 

[Chester1]

Perhaps one option would be diverting ski services via Lyon. The Ski services end of December to mid April (17 weekends). Marseille runs late May to early September (16 weekends). 19 Saturday services each way (starting and terminating at Lyon), would fill the gap and provide a usable direct service for tourists throughout the year.

If the new line is built then Millan would be a really good option for weekend services. 9/10 hours would be reduced to 6/7.

 

[StephenHunter]

Through carriages would take substantially longer due to reconfiguration time and requirement to not use LGV lines as there is no conventional loco+carriages setup than can reach 300+km/h (TGV's are loco+carriages but fixed formation to enable such speeds)

You don't need 300km/h - you can do 230km/h with the coaches used on Railjet. That's a viable speed for a LGV line.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Perhaps one option would be diverting ski services via Lyon. The Ski services end of December to mid April (17 weekends). Marseille runs late May to early September (16 weekends). 19 Saturday services each way (starting and terminating at Lyon), would fill the gap and provide a usable direct service for tourists throughout the year.

If the new line is built then Millan would be a really good option for weekend services. 9/10 hours would be reduced to 6/7.

I'm not sure if there's capacity on the PSE. Going by classic line would be possible though.

You don't need 300km/h - you can do 230km/h with the coaches used on Railjet. That's a viable speed for a LGV line

Not all LGVs have the capacity. For instance, BPL does, already taking 200km/h regional services, as does Nîmes Montpellier. A lot of new lines are being built as mixed 250km/h lines. However, the main bottleneck is the Interconnexion Est and PSE. These lines are so busy that the full range of 200 to 300 km/h is needed in order to flexibly operate trains.

 

[Aictos]

You don't need 300km/h - you can do 230km/h with the coaches used on Railjet. That's a viable speed for a LGV line.

Indeed 143mph is a lot faster then existing UK InterCity routes proving you don’t need 186mph trains.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Indeed 143mph is a lot faster then existing UK InterCity routes proving you don’t need 186mph trains.

You don't, but you do if you want to run HS services. French HS lines are very heavily loaded already, especially PSE and to a lesser extent LGV Atlantique.

 

[kevin_roche]

You don't need 300km/h - you can do 230km/h with the coaches used on Railjet. That's a viable speed for a LGV line.

They don't intend to buy enough trains to run them more slowly. If the trains were slower they would have to have more available to run the level of service they plan otherwise there would not be a train at the destination in time to come back.

 

[Bald Rick]

You don't, but you do if you want to run HS services. French HS lines are very heavily loaded already, especially PSE and to a lesser extent LGV Atlantique.

According to the Oakervee report into HS2, the standard service on LGV SE is 10tph, and on LGV Atlantique it is 11tph (as far as the junction at Courtalain). I suspect these are both standard hours though, I’m reasonably sure the SE has 12tph on peak Saturdays.

 

[Peter Kelford]

According to the Oakervee report into HS2, the standard service on LGV SE is 10tph, and on LGV Atlantique it is 11tph (as far as the junction at Courtalain). I suspect these are both standard hours though, I’m reasonably sure the SE has 12tph on peak Saturdays.

Not much leftover capacity. Any capacity is likely to be on an as-available basis and might well be inconvenient- fancy a slot at 6:20 in the morning, thus leaving the UK at 2:45 am?, or a late-evening 21:30 departure from Lyon getting back to the UK in the small hours of the morning?