• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

DB running on HS1

Status
Not open for further replies.

STEVIEBOY1

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
4,001
And create extra secure platforms at Brussels unless they want to reverse.

That may not be such a problem, if they take the wire mesh fence down on platform 2 in Brussels the trains could then use that platform face and keep the doors locked on the platform three side where it could then continue through.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
Must admit I havn't been keeping much of an eye on through-HS1 running to Germany, but am I right in reading from the above that DB have been given a (Provisional) green light for the London -> Koln services? 8-)

Following on from that, what are the chances of future running through Koln to Hamburg and Berlin? Also - Seeing that DB are ordering new stock for the STP->KLN runs - Is there any gen on what the stock can do, particularly in terms of top-end? The 180mph capability of the 373 was nice when it first came out, but with todays technology I'm really hoping that the DBAG runs'll be topping 250mph plus... <D
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
What is the top speed on HS1? Is it 186MPH or was that just the limit of the train?
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
What is the top speed on HS1? Is it 186MPH or was that just the limit of the train?
By my reckoning, a 370 should be perfectly capable of running 98% of HS1 at about 875mph in perfect safety. However, I believe the paranoid so and so's at the "Elf & Safety Executive" have slapped down an outright ban on anything doing over 175mph. :(

...And we wonder why it still takes us two whole hours to reach Paris? :roll:;)
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
Seriously though, what is the maximum speed - and even if there is a max speed based on current rolling stock; can the line be increased and still operate within the current confines of the in-cab signalling?

Mind you, if/when we get trains able to do well over 200mph - that will suddenly make the 395s a hindrance as they'll be far too slow.
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
Seriously though, what is the maximum speed?
I can't say for sure as I'm no HS1 driver and have no frontline route knowlege. However, I do seem to recall that the line was built as straight as could possibly be (The only "kink" that I'm aware of was put in to avoid a Norse burial site right on the original planned route) so there shouldn't be anything preventing 400-600mph running. :)

Mind you, if/when we get trains able to do well over 200mph - that will suddenly make the 395s a hindrance as they'll be far too slow.
They're already a hinderence as they're already far too Bloody slow! <(

Given that the Eurostars have always been capable of 186mph since they were first built, the 140mph maximum for a 395 can only be considered a major cock-up on Hitachi's part...If Id've been designing the things myself, Id've sat down, thought about the possible capabilities of future rolling stock that might use the line, and then specified a minimum operational limit of 200mph. This would at least mean that 395s could be dispatched immediately in front of 373s and gain enough ground for a safe stop at Ashford Intl. without getting in the E*s way...And would also reduce the tendancy of the 395 to choke up possible future TGV and ICE workings along the route! :idea:

That said, Hitachi also gave us the amazingly fragile and easy to break glass platter hard drive...So we'll only have to put up with 395-related delays for a few more years... ;)
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
17,796
Location
Epsom
I have never clocked a Eurostar at more than 135 on the London side of Ebbsfleet, and the 395s can accelerate much more rapidly than a Eurostar, so given that the loops at Stratford and ebbsfleet can come into play and that both are doing the same speed up to Ebbsfleet, where half the 395s leave the LGV Angleterre... oops, I mean HS1... anyway I don't think there will be a serious problem with paths tripping over each other until the line itself is close to maximum capacity.

But I do agree the 395s should have had a higher maximum speed as a means of future-proofing them.
 

EWS 58038

Member
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Messages
356
Location
Almere (Greater Amsterdam)
For the Amsterdam service you could use Amsterdam Zuid. This station will be completely redeveloped for international trains in the near future.


Sweet dreams boy...

Not going to happen in 20 years. (Thanks to the deep level underground Amsterdam is bust and Government doesn't want to spand a penny on it)

I'll put my money on Platform 15.
 
Joined
2 Jun 2009
Messages
1,135
Location
North London
That may not be such a problem, if they take the wire mesh fence down on platform 2 in Brussels the trains could then use that platform face and keep the doors locked on the platform three side where it could then continue through.

Why are these security fences needed at St Pancras, Paris Nord and Brussels Midi ? And what exactly would be the consequences if they were removed ?

All seems a bit Berlin Wall to me.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
Given the UK Border control is in France or Belgium, it's not as if St Pancras is regarded as being outside of the UK in terms of immigration. Yes, they have customs (rarely) but everyone on the train should be 'legal' so to speak.

Or perhaps it's to stop people leaving the country illegally. If you did jump the fence, you'd be able to get out without any checks at all in mainland Europe. Probably a good reason to keep the station protected, even if we are bad at doing exit checks.
 

Striker

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
503
Or perhaps it's to stop people leaving the country illegally. If you did jump the fence, you'd be able to get out without any checks at all in mainland Europe. Probably a good reason to keep the station protected, even if we are bad at doing exit checks.

The UK doesn't do exit checks. The fences are there to stop people a) trying to enter the UK illegally or b) planting a bomb on the Eurostar.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
The UK doesn't do exit checks. The fences are there to stop people a) trying to enter the UK illegally or b) planting a bomb on the Eurostar.

They CAN do exit checks, so it's not correct to say they don't do them.

I was checked on the 27th December at Heathrow (T3) and I was part of the pre-Eurostar testing that had full exit checks for training, and Eurostar has had them occasionally (but nowhere near enough) since.

Sadly, we seem to be rather reactive than proactive, so if they're doing exit checks it's probably only because there's a risk of someone leaving.

As for stopping people entering illegally, they've got by immigration in Paris, Lille or Brussels, so besides passing customs (if they turn up) there's no reason to jump the fence - you just walk out as normal! Who is there to stop you exactly?

To stop a bomb? Hmm, if they make it hard to get a bomb on a Eurostar train, why isn't a terrorist just putting it on an Intercity train instead? There's only so much damage a single bomb can do anyway - it's not going to take out an 18-car train. I doubt the fence is for that either, even if you say it as if it's an undeniable fact.
 

Railjet

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
408
To stop a bomb? Hmm, if they make it hard to get a bomb on a Eurostar train, why isn't a terrorist just putting it on an Intercity train instead? There's only so much damage a single bomb can do anyway - it's not going to take out an 18-car train. I doubt the fence is for that either, even if you say it as if it's an undeniable fact.

The Channel Tunnel is perceived as a high risk terrorist target. Whatever the size of a bomb, if it went off in the middle of the Tunnel the consequences could be catastrophic.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
How big a bomb would you need? (no exact specifics please, for those reading this in the future hoping to get precise measurements!)

It might be a symbolic place to attack, but I am doubtful it would really do that much damage.
 

Striker

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
503
They CAN do exit checks, so it's not correct to say they don't do them.

As for stopping people entering illegally, they've got by immigration in Paris, Lille or Brussels, so besides passing customs (if they turn up) there's no reason to jump the fence - you just walk out as normal! Who is there to stop you exactly?

To stop a bomb? I doubt the fence is for that either, even if you say it as if it's an undeniable fact.

You do realise, the fence which I am talking about is in Brussels Midi and not St Pancras?

As for fences at any of the Eurostar terminals being there to provide security against terrorists potentially planting a bomb on a train. Of course they're there for that! Otherwise, what is the point of x-raying everybody and their baggage before boarding the Eurostars if there isn't security surrounding the trains both at the terminals and the depots? You do say the strangest things.
 
Last edited:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,841
Location
UK
You do realise, the fence which I am talking about is in Brussels Midi and not St Pancras?

Yes of course. I naturally knew we'd changed country in the discussion.

Now onto more serious matters; Why exactly are you on this forum? I think in your 315 posts, you've probably added virtually nothing to it - except to wind everyone up. I'd love to know what your agenda is, but I'm sure we'll find out sooner or later.

Given you're the only person who has ever insulted me, I'm fairly sure that most people don't think I post strange things or that I'm a moron, or doubt what I do for a living or think I'm about 12.

You, on the other hand seem to having real problems making friends here. I really can't think why.
 

Striker

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
503
Yes of course. I naturally knew we'd changed country in the discussion.

Now onto more serious matters; Why exactly are you on this forum? I think in your 315 posts, you've probably added virtually nothing to it - except to wind everyone up. I'd love to know what your agenda is, but I'm sure we'll find out sooner or later.

Given you're the only person who has ever insulted me, I'm fairly sure that most people don't think I post strange things or that I'm a moron, or doubt what I do for a living or think I'm about 12.

You, on the other hand seem to having real problems making friends here. I really can't think why.

Blah, blah, blah. Do you actually want to explain why you think the Eurostar is secure and passengers have to be checked by security if its not to be protected from terrorists?

And the subject of fencing was brought up about Lille and Brussels too, not just St Pancras.
 

brianthegiant

Member
Joined
12 May 2010
Messages
588
The Channel Tunnel is perceived as a high risk terrorist target. Whatever the size of a bomb, if it went off in the middle of the Tunnel the consequences could be catastrophic.

Whilst terrorism obviously has to be part of the risk assessment, I think there are possibly good reasons why the channel tunnel is currently unnattractive to terrorists:
A) why go to all the hassle of buying tickets, passports, security checks when they could plant a bomb on the tube
B) They would need a very large bomb to impact more than a limited section of the train, even more to have much of an impact on the tunnel lining
B) a bomb on a plane would have more impact due to high risk of depressurisation
C) trains are unattractive for hijacking, their route being at the mercy of signallers

theres an interesting insight into the terrorist mindset & obsession with aviation targets in "A Big Boy did it and Ran Away" by Christopher Brookmyre.
 

brianthegiant

Member
Joined
12 May 2010
Messages
588
and another thing...
99% of posts on railforums are civil and polite, even when we ardently disagree.
If it were 100% that would be even better..
 
Last edited:

LexyBoy

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
4,478
Location
North of the rivers
As for fences at any of the Eurostar terminals being there to provide security against terrorists potentially planting a bomb on a train. Of course they're there for that! Otherwise, what is the point of x-raying everybody and their baggage before boarding the Eurostars if there isn't security surrounding the trains both at the terminals and the depots?

Why would they bother when it would be a piece of cake to load up a car boot with semtex and drive onto the Shuttle?
 

Railjet

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
408
no more catastophic than the tunnels under the alps

Of course, from a purely physical point of view.

I said perceived for a reason - the political perception is that the Channel Tunnel is high risk - borne out, maybe, by the number of terrorist attacks there have been in the UK compared with Switzerland .....
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
17,796
Location
Epsom
The channel tunnel is at much greater risk from burning lorries

And if you remember, the first fire involved a lorry containing fats and one of the adjacent vehicles was full of potatoes; someone described it to me as the world's biggest chip pan fire...
 

STEVIEBOY1

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
4,001
I think the whole illegal migrants and passports issue could be solved by not using poncey plue shirted UK Border Agency and instead use Northern Rail's Crack Revenue / Armed Assault Team :)

Or him.. http://node1.bbcimg.co.uk/iplayer/images/episode/b00x0zt9_640_360.jpg

Are the Northern Rail's Crack Revenue / Armed Assault Team quite harsh on people travelling with no tickets or being on railway land where they should not be then? that reminds me when I was at secondary school in the 1960/70s. Some of our lads were skiving off at our local railway station, the headmaster was informed and said lads later had short, but rather painful meeting with headmaster! Rgds.
 

Striker

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
503
A) why go to all the hassle of buying tickets, passports, security checks when they could plant a bomb on the tube

By that logic, why do terrorists still go to all the trouble of getting bombs on planes, despite all the security, when they could just walk into any shopping centre or the tube, as you say? Because they like "postcard" targets, and the Channel Tunnel is most definitely that.


Why would they bother when it would be a piece of cake to load up a car boot with semtex and drive onto the Shuttle?

Do you seriously think they are not checking cars driving onto the Shuttle for even the smallest amounts of semtex never mind a "boot full of semtex"? There are visible ways and not so visible ways. Good grief. :roll:
 

blackfive460

Member
Joined
23 Jun 2010
Messages
869
From Eurotunnel's latest shareholder letter...
You are aware that tests carried out last October showed that there
were no technical difficulties in allowing access to German
ICEs, but that a debate on the alleged safety of distributed power
(common to all underground systems in the world) following
Eurostar’s choice of new trains has resulted in some confusion.
Against this background, we did not see fit to request changes to
safety rules and we await a coordinated common approach on
the part of the Concession authorities. There is no doubt that
a rational approach will eventually prevail. So as not to waste time,
we continue to work with Deutsche Bahn on specific issues such as
the timeslots they may use when the time comes.

The full text is in this pdf here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top