Correct, it isn’t. The whole market from the North West and West Midlands to Paris (as opposed to CDG) would suppoort 2-3 trains per day.
-
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!
Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion
- Thread starter TheWierdOne
- Start date
Correct, it isn’t. The whole market from the North West and West Midlands to Paris (as opposed to CDG) would suppoort 2-3 trains per day.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
this is why i suggested it may be easier to get a single WCML path a few posts back, market is way smaller so can get away with replacing 1-2 Avanti paths a day at off peak
Indeed. On a random weekday in early December, there are 8 flights Manchester - Paris and 6 flights Birmingham Paris. That's 1 train a day from each of those origins. The timing of that one train a day will be pretty useless for the majority of passengers. People using Manchester airport live in anywhere from North Wales to Leeds - instead of taking a train to Manchester for the London avoider they are better off taking a train directly to London.
It's a niche market to start with. Then you have things like car vs train comfort and break of journey which are matters of preference. If you are carrying a lot of luggage - well you wouldn't be carrying that luggage if you flew - so a bit of having cake and eating it there. So we have
- Cross London
- Cross London and don't like break of journey
- Cross London, don't like break of journey, and carrying a lot of luggage
That's a subset of a subset of a niche market. It's not a commercially attractive market segment. It's not good use of public money to chase this market segment.
On the Euston - St Pancras connection itself. The Phoenix Road routing has been mentioned multiple times. To then continue moaning about Euston Road suggests more than a degree of stubbornness.
For a multitude of reasons London-avoiding direct Channel Tunnel services from the north just aren't happening. So instead of expecting the environment to adapt to you, it's probably more fruitful to think how you can adapt to the environment.
It's a niche market to start with. Then you have things like car vs train comfort and break of journey which are matters of preference. If you are carrying a lot of luggage - well you wouldn't be carrying that luggage if you flew - so a bit of having cake and eating it there. So we have
- Cross London
- Cross London and don't like break of journey
- Cross London, don't like break of journey, and carrying a lot of luggage
That's a subset of a subset of a niche market. It's not a commercially attractive market segment. It's not good use of public money to chase this market segment.
On the Euston - St Pancras connection itself. The Phoenix Road routing has been mentioned multiple times. To then continue moaning about Euston Road suggests more than a degree of stubbornness.
For a multitude of reasons London-avoiding direct Channel Tunnel services from the north just aren't happening. So instead of expecting the environment to adapt to you, it's probably more fruitful to think how you can adapt to the environment.
Being able to see Euston doesn't get you into it though. Unlike St Pancras which has access at both ends, you're forced to go almost all of the way back to Euston Road in order to access the entrance. Walking along Eversholt Street is also a reminder that one would like to see as little of Euston as possible, it's an eyesore. Then you've got to walk all the way from Euston's infamous concourse to your carriage which could be 250m back in the direction from which you came.
If you could just disembark from your carriage, go up onto a bridge (and I mean a Reading-sized bridge with individual gatelines for all platform pairs, possibly on both sides) and walk straight off onto Phoenix Road, it would save half a mile of doubling back and might relieve the pressure on the concourse at Euston by giving people more places to wait for their trains to be called, places that might be closer to the end of the train they wish to board.
A bit of daylight might cheer the place up too.
Wouldn't they need
And that's only applicable to Euston. Any of the other terminals will definitely mean a tube (or taxi) ride. (Personally I prefer the bus when it's available, but I'm not normal).
You've got to know about it. Some will, but I suspect most non Londoners who aren't familiar with the layout of the city and available walking routes will end up on the Northern line.
And that's only applicable to Euston. Any of the other terminals will definitely mean a tube (or taxi) ride. (Personally I prefer the bus when it's available, but I'm not normal).
The most expensive wayfinding project for Euston - St Pancras via Phoenix Road will cost less than 1% of a North of England - Channel Tunnel train.
It's only the north that's even in contention of a cross-London Channel Tunnel service, so it's only Euston that's the problem. Other London terminals aren't even in contention.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes. Some architectural intervention at Euston feels far more realistic than any cross-London direct Channel Tunnel trains.
Last edited:
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,370
Euston really needs a complete rebuilt with everything above the platforms removed and then replaced with a full train length concourse with multiple escalators for every platform.
But thats a thread of its own!
We could probably put an urban ropeway from Euston to St Pancras, jumping over Somers Town, and it would still cost way less than any rail infrastructure based proposal.
But thats a thread of its own!
We could probably put an urban ropeway from Euston to St Pancras, jumping over Somers Town, and it would still cost way less than any rail infrastructure based proposal.
Shame Boris isn't mayor any more! Are you thinking Go Ape style, or a zipline? I'm good with either!
You could pay for a taxi for several years worth of passengers before you made a dent in the cost of a link to HS2.
There's no rail infrastructure (construction) reason why a train from Birmingham to Paris via the WCML couldn't start tomorrow.
There's no rail infrastructure (construction) reason why a train from Birmingham to Paris via the WCML couldn't start tomorrow.
Apart from the signalling…
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,370
Has the passenger rated signalling been removed at Dollands Moor?
If you had an original condition 373 you could get from Manchester to Paris, couldn't you?
Good point
Probably not. I’d bet that there is somewhere on the WCML where 373s are not now gauged. Also there arent any in orginal NOL condition!
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,370
Thats why I said "original condition".
Although I am fairly sure that third rail equipment for the Class 373 is not lost technology that could not be replicated!
Unless it is raining.
Is NLL to HS1 not a permitted route then?
I'll double down a bit though, no new railway needs building and no new track needs laying to run a train from Birmingham to Paris. Signalling that link wouldn't be free, but it wouldn't be enough to kill a decent business case for such a service.
Never been commissioned.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There isnt a decent business case though. If there was, someone would have done it by now!
Regional Eurostar as a whole seems unrealistic in retrospect, but Birmingham to Paris might've been feasible at least from an infrastructure point of view. As a matter of fact, looking on Google Maps, there's space on the northeastern side of Birmingham International for a sixth platform, one that could have served international trains and be easily segregated from platforms 1 through 5. If it weren't for lack of spare capacity on the NLL and WCML I reckon Birmingham could've been the only city north of London with direct Eurostar services.
Alas, the NoL 373s are no longer around, and those still with ES won't be here for much longer.
ShadowKnight
Member
I think that extending southeastern high-speed north of London would be more viable than extending any international services north of London.
TrainTraveler
Member
In conjunction with a channel tunnel operator with stops at Ebbsfleet or Ashford that would be quite attractive once some west coast mainline paths become available.
The question then becomes what would be a useful north of London start point for the service. Milton Keynes perhaps or Birmingham International?
The question then becomes what would be a useful north of London start point for the service. Milton Keynes perhaps or Birmingham International?
Any hope of an international service starting north of London would largely hinge on HS2, and had the line been built in full with provisions for border and security checks at the new stations at Curzon Street and Piccadilly along with the original connection to HS1 then a 3-hour Birmingham to Paris and 4-hour Manchester to Paris would've very well been possible. Maybe even a 4-5 hour journey from Leeds as well at a push.
Had Northern Powerhouse Rail been built too then Manchester Piccadilly could've even become a northern rail hub for international and domestic travel much like it's airport, though that's arguably among the more ambitious of ideas for the route. But using the West Coast Main Line and North London Line for such services is practically a pipe dream.
Aside from the capacity not being there you'd need to set up new provisions for the border and security checks at existing stations, and then there's also the question as to whether the journey times would be competitive enough to make it a viable alternative to air travel, because ultimately that's what international rail services are competing against.
I wouldn't worry about capacity on HS2 though because I doubt that they would ever use the full 18tph anyway unless it becomes so popular that the market demands it.
Had Northern Powerhouse Rail been built too then Manchester Piccadilly could've even become a northern rail hub for international and domestic travel much like it's airport, though that's arguably among the more ambitious of ideas for the route. But using the West Coast Main Line and North London Line for such services is practically a pipe dream.
Aside from the capacity not being there you'd need to set up new provisions for the border and security checks at existing stations, and then there's also the question as to whether the journey times would be competitive enough to make it a viable alternative to air travel, because ultimately that's what international rail services are competing against.
I wouldn't worry about capacity on HS2 though because I doubt that they would ever use the full 18tph anyway unless it becomes so popular that the market demands it.
Unless the Eastern Leg is reinstated then there will be something like six unused paths on the core part of the route. Come to think about it, weren't there some cutbacks at Euston that would jeapardise the eighteenth path anyway? Not an issue if you aren't going into Euston of course.
That's right, Euston has been cutback to only six platforms if I'm not mistaken. I must admit though, when I talked about not using the full 18tph, I was basing that on current WCML capacity using 10tph for the same services. I did not consider the ECML or MML services to Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh which would easily fill the route up to max capacity. Bit of an oversight on my half, so please don't ever put me in charge of the railway.
But in that respect there wouldn't even be much room for international services, though it might still at least give improved connectivity by enabling faster journey times. Crossrail 2 could've given a nice underground passage with Euston St Pancras station for those transferring but again, that's being very ambitious, and it's not like the two stations aren't connected already anyway.
The *only* advantage of that would be that it would be out of the weather.
For most people it would take much longer than walking on the street, four changes of levels (two down, two up), and you would have two sets of barriers to negotiate.
Based on some of what's been said relating to hauling luggage down Euston Road, I would've thought being out of the weather would be a good enough reason for many people. I suppose if people wanted to haul it down escalators and pass barriers though they'd just use the Northern or Victoria Lines instead.
For some reason this has brought the Exhibition Rd subway to my mind... ISTR that was very useful for avoiding unpleasant weather! I can't imagine anything like it being a success on the northern pedestrian route from Eversholt St to St P though, too many dog-legs and hidden corners for low-lifes to colonise.
A straight-line pedestrian subway under the Euston Rd pavement might work - but probably couldn't be fitted in!
Six and half a dozen.
ShadowKnight
Member
Not so much as a domestic cross London train will attract both domestic travellers travelling across/around London and long distance domestic/international travellers
Austriantrain
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 1,812
Which Route could they they take through London?
HS1 - NLL - WCML, presumably. GWML would also be accessible.