Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[StephenHunter]

HS1 - NLL - WCML, presumably. GWML would also be accessible.

There was the short-lived Anglia Railways service from Norwich to Basingstoke, but that had problems with pathing on the NLL.

London Crosslink - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

London Crosslink was a passenger train service operated by Anglia Railways between Norwich and Basingstoke, using the North London Line to bypass central London. Class 170 Turbostar diesel multiple units were used, and the service operated between 22 May 2000 and 28 September 2002, supported by funding from the Strategic Rail Authority through its Rail Passenger Partnership fund.

 

[kevin_roche]

There was the short-lived Anglia Railways service from Norwich to Basingstoke, but that had problems with pathing on the NLL.

I caught it several times from Basingstoke. I was occasionally working in a part of London which went through and it saved me two tube jouneys.

 

[cle]

There were 3-4tph on the NLL in those days. There are now 8-12tph all week - and it's far better for it.

 

[TheWierdOne]

#CrossChannelRail Final Report

The PDF of the report (published 17th November 2025) is available to download here, Version 1.0.0, 19mb The stations map is also available in a zoomable web version - that is here. Here is the video from the launch of the report on 17th November: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkAOMhTIjRM The...

crossborderrail.trainsforeurope.eu

Jon Worth has published the findings of his Cross Channel Rail study.

 

[30907]

#CrossChannelRail Final Report

The PDF of the report (published 17th November 2025) is available to download here, Version 1.0.0, 19mb The stations map is also available in a zoomable web version - that is here. Here is the video from the launch of the report on 17th November: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkAOMhTIjRM The...

crossborderrail.trainsforeurope.eu

Jon Worth has published the findings of his Cross Channel Rail study.

A very interesting document, certainly as regards the practicality of stations on potential routes.
His suggestions for Cologne are the outer-suburban station of Horrem or the airport, both of which suffer from poor urban transport connections - the more obvious choice of K-Ehrenfeld he rules out as impractical.
He also flags up that Strasbourg is practical, which raises the possibility of London-Strasbourg-Basel-Zurich.

 

[Austriantrain]

He also flags up that Strasbourg is practical, which raises the possibility of London-Strasbourg-Basel-Zurich.

The obvious question is: can you earn enough to pay for three border outposts?

 

[TheWierdOne]

The obvious question is: can you earn enough to pay for three border outposts?

Strasbourg and Basel are somewhat questionable but by no means dead ducks, Zurich almost certainly. The amount of business passengers on business fares would see to that, topped up by us regular plebs. Zurich is a major business hub and so the route has good potential on an end-to-end basis. Basel and Strasbourg aren't the biggest places, but both have potential to be hubs for wider connections, and Strasbourg in particular could be a southern gateway to the industrial areas around the Rhine.

I think a factor we here in the UK forums often forget when it comes to the London-Switzerland connection is that Swiss travellers are far more accustomed to and accepting towards changing trains. Any route that connects with an SBB service (as Basel and Zurich would) instantly has a wider customer base than a British viewpoint might traditionally accept because Swiss travellers will be more likely to look at an itinerary and go "two changes to connect to my London train? Not eine problem, Hanz pass me the half fare Kart". If I were to speculate I would say that a Basel and a Zurich stop would cover a lot of the demand from a city such as Bern because of SBB's reliability and frequency. Similarly, a service to Geneva from London will probably attract passengers from as far as the far end of Lac Léman (Lake Geneva) and large parts of the French alps potentially as far south as Annecy and Chambéry, although the reach into France will be more limited due to SNCF's less than stellar reputation compared to SBB.

For what it's worth if there is a Geneva service, I would hope that it at least has a dedicated connection en route to/from Lyon, that's far too big a market to miss out on. You could quite easily facilitate a protected change both ways at Mâcon-Loché-TGV (a station that I am surprised Jon Worth did not look at for his recent study)

 

[NCT]

What would running a 'sterile' path between Zurich and Basel mean for the takt?

 

[Austriantrain]

Strasbourg and Basel are somewhat questionable but by no means dead ducks, Zurich almost certainly. The amount of business passengers on business fares would see to that, topped up by us regular plebs. Zurich is a major business hub and so the route has good potential on an end-to-end basis. Basel and Strasbourg aren't the biggest places, but both have potential to be hubs for wider connections, and Strasbourg in particular could be a southern gateway to the industrial areas around the Rhine.

Ditching Basel would - in my very humble opinion - be a very bad idea. From many populous parts of Switzerland, going towards the north via Zurich is a major detour and if you first take a train to Zurich, you are almost at Zurich Airport... So I consider Basel a must; if only one station in Switzerland is possible, Basel should come before Zurich. I do believe SBB will insist on both anyway if they are a cooperation partner.

Strasbourg in itself is probably not a large enough market, but if you can catch not only Alsace, but also the adjacent parts of Germany, it might work.

I would obviously root for all three stations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2025 ==

What would running a 'sterile' path between Zurich and Basel mean for the takt?

Nothing, because the Takt is legally protected in Switzerland. They would surely find a path around it, but it would likely be very slow, as were the former TGV paths before they got integrated into the Takt.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Nothing, because the Takt is legally protected in Switzerland. They would surely find a path around it, but it would likely be very slow, as were the former TGV paths before they got integrated into the Takt.

Given the long timescales involved in starting up a UK-Europe service, and the Swiss support for a London service, it's not impossible you could get the Swiss to integrate a service into the Takt from the off if there was enough advance notice of the service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2025 ==

What would running a 'sterile' path between Zurich and Basel mean for the takt?

Depends what runs at the moment, if there is an existing non-stop service then I assume you could flight them together, but otherwise a UK service will likely have to put up with waiting behind a Swiss/Schengen service at least once, or overtaking en route if possible.

 

[Austriantrain]

Given the long timescales involved in starting up a UK-Europe service, and the Swiss support for a London service, it's not impossible you could get the Swiss to integrate a service into the Takt from the off if there was enough advance notice of the service.

How would you integrate a service into the Takt that is not allowed to carry domestic passengers (or any passenger that is not London-bound).

Depends what runs at the moment, if there is an existing non-stop service then I assume you could flight them together, but otherwise a UK service will likely have to put up with waiting behind a Swiss/Schengen service at least once, or overtaking en route if possible.

Flighting them together will most likely be impossible, as especially from Zurich there is a 2-minute headway between departing services already and there will certainly be other pinchpoints.

IIRC, the TGV services formerly ran via Baden und Brugg and had a journey time in line with the Interregio services there. Traffic density has gone up again since then though.

 

[popeter45]

i suspose if you only ran a 200m unit as sterile to London you could keep Takt by combining with a Lyria Service between Zurich and Basel/Geneva?

 

[TheWierdOne]

i suspose if you only ran a 200m unit as sterile to London you could keep Takt by combining with a Lyria Service between Zurich and Basel/Geneva?

Indeed, you could probably split the units fairly far into France, ideally using a service to Lille but I'm not sure there are any from Switzerland to Lille.

How would you integrate a service into the Takt that is not allowed to carry domestic passengers (or any passenger that is not London-bound).

Simply make it a pick-up only stop inbound and drop-off only outbound, and secure a platform just before the train arrives? This is the existing practice at Rotterdam is it not?

 

[cle]

Strasbourg and Basel are somewhat questionable but by no means dead ducks, Zurich almost certainly. The amount of business passengers on business fares would see to that, topped up by us regular plebs. Zurich is a major business hub and so the route has good potential on an end-to-end basis. Basel and Strasbourg aren't the biggest places, but both have potential to be hubs for wider connections, and Strasbourg in particular could be a southern gateway to the industrial areas around the Rhine.

Strasbourg might be convenient, but it's a tiny market. Not even daily flights.

Ditching Basel would - in my very humble opinion - be a very bad idea. From many populous parts of Switzerland, going towards the north via Zurich is a major detour and if you first take a train to Zurich, you are almost at Zurich Airport... So I consider Basel a must; if only one station in Switzerland is possible, Basel should come before Zurich. I do believe SBB will insist on both anyway if they are a cooperation partner.

Basel on the other hand is a huge railhead for the region (multiple countries!) - and as noted, for Bern especially. Which doesn't have much of an airport either, so Swiss people are very used to connecting, if it's reliable. Even Zurich folks connect in Basel for the far better rail services into France and Germany.

It also has 3x BA flights a day to LHR (not tons, but a market) - and plenty of business demand, especially in pharma and bio/tech. And the art world, for a brief moment - and general shady wealth. It also has a big, grand station with room to do this.

 

[RT4038]

Basel on the other hand is a huge railhead for the region (multiple countries!) - and as noted, for Bern especially. Which doesn't have much of an airport either, so Swiss people are very used to connecting, if it's reliable. Even Zurich folks connect in Basel for the far better rail services into France and Germany.

Zurich is better for connecting to Germany (Munich), Austria (Innsbruck and Vienna) and Italy (Milano) than Basel. (Yes I know there are through services from Basel to Milano, but not very often)

 

[cle]

Zurich is better for connecting to Germany (Munich), Austria (Innsbruck and Vienna) and Italy (Milano) than Basel. (Yes I know there are through services from Basel to Milano, but not very often)

Yes but those places are even further from London.

My point wasn't about onward connections - of course Zurich has many - but the hinterland of who might use a Eurostar from Basel as either a railhead, or a connection that day (both ways) - which I don't think Milan would do, via Zurich!

 

[Bald Rick]

It also has 3x BA flights a day to LHR (not tons, but a market) - and plenty of business demand, especially in pharma and bio/tech.

Geneva has 14-15 London flights a day in low season, 30 a day in ski season and more on Saturdays.

Geneva will happen first (if Switzerland happens at all)

 

[Austriantrain]

i suspose if you only ran a 200m unit as sterile to London you could keep Takt by combining with a Lyria Service between Zurich and Basel/Geneva?

You can‘t. Many times of the day, you need a 400m Set for domestic passengers alone. I don’t know if it is still done, but there where instances where a single TGV came from Paris and was doubled up with a second set at Basel for passengers to Zurich. They might always run double from Paris now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2025 ==

Geneva has 14-15 London flights a day in low season, 30 a day in ski season and more on Saturdays.

Geneva will happen first (if Switzerland happens at all)

I count 23 London - Zurich flights next wednesday, very low season. Granted, about half of them are by Swiss and will carry lots of passengers connecting at Zurich, but overall capacity will not be significantly lower. It does not have the same peaks though. It does however certainly have much more demand from the Swiss themselves, used to high prices and with a a high inclination to use the train. So I really am not sure if Geneva is the better market, unless you hope to serve Skiers, but they will go for price (and their final destination is the French Alps, so a return of the Ski train might be much more useful).

And as written by many others, Basel instead of Zurich would work very well.

 

[Bald Rick]

So I really am not sure if Geneva is the better market, unless you hope to serve Skiers, but they will go for price (and their final destination is the French Alps, so a return of the Ski train might be much more useful).

Skiers are rather less price sensitive than most. The price of the flight to Geneva is about 15-20% of a French / Swiss Alps ski trip. And typically about £300 return once you have paid for your bags. Much more at some times of day / week / year. The ski train only served the 3 valleys and Tarentaise, there’s a lot more on offer from Geneva.

I agree Zurich is a decent end destination, but it’s a bit too far, and as you say has a lot of transit traffic which the train won‘t get. Geneva has very little of that from the UK.

 

[Snow1964]

According to FT Eurotunnel has pulled the proposed UK rail investments including Barking freight terminal which would have allowed truck carrying trains to work a Barking - Dorges (near Lille) service. This is because of massive jump in business rates

The operator of the Channel Tunnel said it has cancelled all future rail investments in the UK because of an expected tripling in its business rates bill. Eurotunnel has scrapped plans to reopen a freight terminal in Barking and to run a new direct freight service from Lille and will make no further spending commitments in the country, its chief executive Yann Leriche told the FT.

From April its business rates bill will rise from £22mn to £65mn, under current proposals from the Valuation Office Agency that sets rates for the government. The expected increase “makes all of our investments lossmaking, so we won’t be making any more investments,” he said. “As of today, we have frozen our investment in rail assets in the UK.” The two freight projects would have cost around £15mn, and allowed the company to increase capacity in the tunnel by shifting trucks that run on trains during the day to freight-only trains that typically run at night.

The company also passes on around half of its business rates bill straight to train operators including Eurostar — and in the future Virgin Trains.

Leriche warned that adding “tens of millions” to the bill for the operators would increase fares and delay them opening new routes or reopening passenger stations such as Ashford and Ebbsfleet. More than 8,000 trucks a day cross the English Channel between the UK and France via the tunnel or through the ports, but Eurotunnel only operates three dedicated freight trains a day — the equivalent of around 90 trucks. Reopening its Barking freight terminal — a project on which it was about to embark alongside Network Rail — would have allowed the company to offer more services, and stem the decline of rail freight crossing the channel, he added.

Its proposed service from Dourges near Lille would also have seen truck trailers transported straight to Barking, preventing lorries from adding to congestion north of Paris and freeing up capacity in the wider transport system.

Channel Tunnel owner cancels UK rail projects over rise in business rates

Eurotunnel said expected tripling of levy makes planned freight investments untenable

www.ft.com

 

[HSTEd]

Or at least, that is the excuse Eurotunnel are using to cancel the project.

I wonder how healthy the project economics were even before this.

 

[Austriantrain]

Skiers are rather less price sensitive than most. The price of the flight to Geneva is about 15-20% of a French / Swiss Alps ski trip. And typically about £300 return once you have paid for your bags. Much more at some times of day / week / year.

Thank you. I supposed that since skiing is so expensive already, people would try to minimize transport costs. But it makes sense (never having had to take a flight to go skiing I never put much thought into it), and if they can, for instance, offer a second Geneva service on Winter saturdays with a set that might do "rush hour" Paris - London services during the week (without needing an additional shift for CBP and security personnel of course), that might work out quite well.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Or at least, that is the excuse Eurotunnel are using to cancel the project.

I wonder how healthy the project economics were even before this.

It’s a private company so anyone’s guess. Le Shuttle is in a good state but from what is publicly known the freight market through the tunnel is well below expectations

 

[Krokodil]

Thank you. I supposed that since skiing is so expensive already, people would try to minimize transport costs. But it makes sense (never having had to take a flight to go skiing I never put much thought into it), and if they can, for instance, offer a second Geneva service on Winter saturdays with a set that might do "rush hour" Paris - London services during the week (without needing an additional shift for CBP and security personnel of course), that might work out quite well.

Those who do need to keep costs down (predominantly schools and other youth groups) will go by road.

 

[cle]

Geneva has 14-15 London flights a day in low season, 30 a day in ski season and more on Saturdays.

Geneva will happen first (if Switzerland happens at all)

To be clear, I don't think Basel washes its face by itself. But it's an important call if this went to Zurich. And having two calls in country (same w Amsterdam and Rotterdam) and then running fast might be easier than calls in France. Zurich is a larger business market overall and larger Swiss market/domestic city, year-round.

But non-stop that is 53 mins from Basel, so with a decent dwell there, it's an hour more journey time. Via LGV Est would be quicker as assuming no Mulhouse etc calls, and full 320 running.

However, I agree that Geneva is immediately more appealing. And without any calls in France (Bourg etc), around the 3h mark to MdV/CDG and the mainline Nord.

Basel is a shade quicker to get to CDG especially if non-stop from LGV Nord (TGVs have 2-3 calls)

In short, both in time would be great. a

 

[Bald Rick]

Thank you. I supposed that since skiing is so expensive already, people would try to minimize transport costs. But it makes sense (never having had to take a flight to go skiing I never put much thought into it), and if they can, for instance, offer a second Geneva service on Winter saturdays with a set that might do "rush hour" Paris - London services during the week (without needing an additional shift for CBP and security personnel of course), that might work out quite well.

To be clear, I don't think Basel washes its face by itself. But it's an important call if this went to Zurich. And having two calls in country (same w Amsterdam and Rotterdam) and then running fast might be easier than calls in France. Zurich is a larger business market overall and larger Swiss market/domestic city, year-round.

But non-stop that is 53 mins from Basel, so with a decent dwell there, it's an hour more journey time. Via LGV Est would be quicker as assuming no Mulhouse etc calls, and full 320 running.

However, I agree that Geneva is immediately more appealing. And without any calls in France (Bourg etc), around the 3h mark to MdV/CDG and the mainline Nord.

Basel is a shade quicker to get to CDG especially if non-stop from LGV Nord (TGVs have 2-3 calls)

In short, both in time would be great. a

Indeed. I’m not saying Basel / Zurich is a non-starter, just that Geneva will be more attractive. And there will be big money to be made in winter - whilst I am guessing I think that a non-trivial proporton of Easyjet’s annual profit is made on weekend flights to ski airports, especially February half term. The average price of a return from London to Geneva departing before 1500 on 14 Feb next year and returning after 1100 the following Saturday is not far short of £1000 when you add in bags and seat selecton.

 

[cle]

But that is just 1-2 weeks, and did apply to the Ski trains and of course, to Disney too. Both of those have gone, half-term is a time for specials (addl frequency) - but not enough to direct year round business activity in itself.

But Geneva has strong demand outside of ski season too. Lots of finance, P&G, some tourism, Swiss peeps inbound to London... a good mix - and for those in the know, and for people who don't just aspire to a beach, summer in the Alps is of course divine. Dolomites are better then, but I digress.

 

[BogiePicker]

There's been much discussion of 200m combinations, but I thought that any Channel Tunnel train had to be a continuous 400m set for evacuation reasons. Seems both Virgin and Gemini are going for 200m EMUs, and whilst of course the 373 is a TGV-based 400m single set, the latest TGV M DD are 200m out of the box and I'm not sure what it would take to get them as a single 400m set

 

[TheWierdOne]

There's been much discussion of 200m combinations, but I thought that any Channel Tunnel train had to be a continuous 400m set for evacuation reasons. Seems both Virgin and Gemini are going for 200m EMUs, and whilst of course the 373 is a TGV-based 400m single set, the latest TGV M DD are 200m out of the box and I'm not sure what it would take to get them as a single 400m set

The 400m rule was dropped some time ago as Deutsche Bahn were also planning to run 200m units. The greater unknown is whether a double deck unit is permitted due to the greater amount of time it would take to evacuate them.

 

[Austriantrain]

To be clear, I don't think Basel washes its face by itself.

I do believe it does. Both Basel and Zurich would be better of course, but if it can be only one, it has to be Basel. For everyone traveling from Switzerland, including people from Zurich, going to Basel to change there is fine. They happily do that to go to France and Germany, and just as happily take one or more trains to go to Zurich Airport. Changing trains comes as naturally to them as buying a coffee at the station.

I do believe that unlike Geneva, Basel/Zurich would carry more Swiss than Brits, but for the Brits, I am not sure Zurich itself is the biggest draw. The private banking crowd won‘t take the train, there will be Business traffic, but Basel has that too (it is actually a very significant „commercial“ city with lots of pharma etc.) and while Zurich is a lovely city (if you have the money), it is probably not interesting enough for most people to only go there. Most tourists would visit somewhere else in Switzerland too and would likely do so by train anyway.

Happy to be corrected of course. And the thing going for Zurich ist that it seems easier to have a safe platform there. Basel might have to wait until the planned rebuilding.
In any case… we will wait and see. The biggest thing going in favor of Swiss destinations is that SBB is interested, because having a strong local partner will be essential.