They already made a quite substantial investment, and are looking to maximise returns!
-
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
They already made a quite substantial investment, and are looking to maximise returns!
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TheWierdOne
Member
As spotted by @otter11 over in the international section forum, Eurostar will be calling at Antwerp Centraal from December. Outbound from London only and Eurostar has confirmed that they will not be seeking to implement border facilities at Antwerp to allow a direct inbound service. A Lille or Brussels shuffle will be required.
www.headforpoints.com
Eurostar to launch direct services to Antwerp
Eurostar has quietly slipped out the news that it will launch direct services to Antwerp from December 2026, with four trains per day carrrying on from Brussels.
www.headforpoints.com
Interesting, I hope it does well. Probably not a huge penalty re today as it's not a fast passage. Return trip - for Belgians, probably how Antwerpians would travel to London today anyway. For Brits returning, a bit of a faff but not the end of the world.
Does anyone known how Rotterdam performs, specifically? From both POS-s. And anecdotally (are people checking it out for weekends away, etc?)
Does anyone known how Rotterdam performs, specifically? From both POS-s. And anecdotally (are people checking it out for weekends away, etc?)
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 997
It has been a few years since I travelled back from Rotterdam and had to go through passport control there, but the waiting room was very full.
Trainbike46
Established Member
I use Rotterdam a few times a year, and the waiting room has always been busy
Yes, I remember how tedious it was to crawl through Belgium - inevitable if occupying a path timed for stopping without actually stopping. Though the effect might have been exaggerated by either speed restrictions or congestion as we did lose time against the booked schedule.
Excuse me bumping this thread in frivolous manner, but at Stralsund Hbf today I spotted evidence of a new entrant 
The destination reads "London St Pancras" - ODEG ist the major franchise operator in NE Germany and these sets work Rostock to Sassnitz/Binz.
The destination reads "London St Pancras" - ODEG ist the major franchise operator in NE Germany and these sets work Rostock to Sassnitz/Binz.That is excellent!Excuse me bumping this thread in frivolous manner, but at Stralsund Hbf today I spotted evidence of a new entrant
Do you have any idea why?!
TheWierdOne
Member
I think operators do this for a laugh sometimes. Siemens presumably programmed this train with the same PIS software used for the 700s and 717s, which would contain the coding for London St Pancras as a destination. There was a thread a while back about interesting and erroneous destinations seen on trains.
ABB125
Established Member
Somewhat off topic, but is that unit Austrian-registered? I've not come across class 4746s in Germany but plenty in Austria.Excuse me bumping this thread in frivolous manner, but at Stralsund Hbf today I spotted evidence of a new entrant
No idea, sorry, but it did have 4746 in its long number.
eastwestdivide
Established Member
German Wikipedia page at
ODEG-Baureihe 4746 – Wikipedia
94 81 4746 301-2 A-ODEG,
with 81 being the UIC/EVN country code for Austria and the "A" ahead of ODEG also (I think?) denoting Austria, so yes!
Edited for clarity, and to add, we're a long way from the channel tunnel now
Last edited:
Snow1964
Established Member
Not directly a channel tunnel service, but GoVolta (a Dutch open access Operator) has applied to operate services from Amsterdam to Brussels / Paris including high speed services.
It would mean Eurostar Red (the ex Thayls services) have low cost competition on Paris-Amsterdam corridor and might affect how its fleet get deployed
GoVolta seem to do rail & hotel packages, so to some extent seem to operate like some European low cost airlines with their city break packages
There is a map on GoVolta website
govolta.nl
It would mean Eurostar Red (the ex Thayls services) have low cost competition on Paris-Amsterdam corridor and might affect how its fleet get deployed
GoVolta seem to do rail & hotel packages, so to some extent seem to operate like some European low cost airlines with their city break packages
There is a map on GoVolta website
GoVolta – Train tickets to Berlin & Paris from € 19
Amsterdam <> Berlin & Paris & Antwerp & Ghent · Book your train city trip now
Sorry for the crayons, but seeing as the HS2-HS1 link has been bumped up again I wanted to air out a slimmed down version.
1. HS1-HS2 link via a tunneled connection and junction.
2. New "international" platforms or adjacent station at old oak common which can service challenger operators without using up st pancras capacity. Allows for direct international connections to GWR and HS2 networks at OOC sharing HS2 London tunnel but no central terminal space. Can have just one border location, at OOC, as opposed to running international services all the way up HS2 with new border control facilities at each onward city.
3. Might give more options for an alternative depot to temple mills.
4. Controversial option: tell southeastern HS to do one and send their trains to OOC instead of st pancras, again giving more space for international capacity at st pancras.
This gives the improved international connections without using up central London Terminal capacity. OOC still gives international passengers pretty good connections to central London with potentially cheaper operators.
I look forward to all the boos and hisses.
1. HS1-HS2 link via a tunneled connection and junction.
2. New "international" platforms or adjacent station at old oak common which can service challenger operators without using up st pancras capacity. Allows for direct international connections to GWR and HS2 networks at OOC sharing HS2 London tunnel but no central terminal space. Can have just one border location, at OOC, as opposed to running international services all the way up HS2 with new border control facilities at each onward city.
3. Might give more options for an alternative depot to temple mills.
4. Controversial option: tell southeastern HS to do one and send their trains to OOC instead of st pancras, again giving more space for international capacity at st pancras.
This gives the improved international connections without using up central London Terminal capacity. OOC still gives international passengers pretty good connections to central London with potentially cheaper operators.
I look forward to all the boos and hisses.
I expect this would be a bit like the current Ouigo service between Paris and Brussels where the cheaper service comes with a longer journey time giving passengers a choice between budget-conscious and time-conscious travel. I think this is one of the unspoken benefits of high-speed rail, though for Channel Tunnel services specifically I'm not quite sure it would be possible. Maybe if we had space to run over the old Waterloo route but I feel like the four/five hour journey along with border checks would throw people off anyway.Not directly a channel tunnel service, but GoVolta (a Dutch open access Operator) has applied to operate services from Amsterdam to Brussels / Paris including high speed services.
It would mean Eurostar Red (the ex Thayls services) have low cost competition on Paris-Amsterdam corridor and might affect how its fleet get deployed
GoVolta seem to do rail & hotel packages, so to some extent seem to operate like some European low cost airlines with their city break packages
There is a map on GoVolta website
GoVolta – Train tickets to Berlin & Paris from € 19
Amsterdam <> Berlin & Paris & Antwerp & Ghent · Book your train city trip now
eastwestdivide
Established Member
The SE platforms at StP might be a bit short for international services, and diverting a Kent-central London service to "somewhere W of London" with a time penalty, might be a bit unpopular.
AlastairFraser
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 4,182
Diverting to another central London terminus might not be completely unpopular though. I wonder if Liverpool St would be possible with a connection towards the GEML west of Stratford International? The Tube and international connections aren't quite as good (although you can alleviate the latter with Ebbsfleet reopening if you had more room for growth in terms of E*), but Liverpool St itself is convenient for the City and a lot of domestic commuters might be heading there or somewhere close to the Elizabeth Line?
What’s the slimmed down part of that?
It sounds like that was the plan once, but the middle platform is now considered a useful spare. But how do you empty a train, check it over, and refill it? I haven’t done a Lille shuffle to know how that works, but it’ll need more space than that per passenger. Certainly can’t do a train heading each ways within an hour.
It depends on where the slimmed down tunnel goes, as the original tunnel idea was just HS1 to HS2, so that would mean going to Calvert or Washwood Heath.
At Maryland there is a ~20m elevation difference. At Liverpool St there are platforms at capacity.
As has been explained ad nauseam, that ship has sailed. I don’t know what you meanby ‘slimmed down’ - what was proposed was already slim, and would decimate services on the North Londdon Line.
There is no realistic possibility of constructing additional platforms, or an adjacent station, at OOC. It would be billions.
The domestic platforms would have to be rebuilt for height, and they are not long enough. And you would be disadvantaging rather more SE passengers than giving advantage to international passengers. Besides…
As explained ad nauseam (again) international platform capacity at St Pancras is not remotely an issue. What problem are you trying to resolve?
Not in any practical sense. It would be extraordinarily difficult to build, requiring either another pair of tunnels from Dagenham, or an extended closure of HS1 to build a junction cavern (think years) at that end. The geology there is very difficult, namely wet. Then getting a tunnel into the GEML would require hundreds of residential properties. And then all you are gaining is no extra usuable capacity at St Pancras, and all the SE High Speed passengers who would want to go there being dumped approximatley half a mile from where they can already get to easily via Sevenoaks.
Last edited:
Snow1964
Established Member
I am guessing they mean a short spur linking HS1 to HS2 rather than a high speed tunnel connection, more a mainly single track reversible link, not via the (busy) North London line. Roughly a tunnel under Barker Drive, and Georgiana Street etc. to near the point where HS2 becomes 3 tunnels as it approaches Euston
Not so much platforms for trains to use, more question of circulation space for passengers with luggage who are forced to change there. There are many that think not everyone from Europe will want to go to St Pancras, connect or walk half a mile to Euston platforms then join an HS2 train for the next 100+ years.
Using the middle platform at Old Oak Common for a cross platform to another waiting train alongside, at quieter times when 6 through HS2 platforms aren't needed, via an immigration scan desk with desks along a central fence. Seems a much better idea than making people trek along Euston Road. There is misconception that a shuffle is always emptying a train, checking, and refilling it, rather than option of getting another train across the platform, having passed through an immigration checkpoint
Not allowing for through journeys in 10, 20, 50, 100 years time is short term madness.
There is no way immigration and security can be fitted on a platform island in a border secure or H&S compliant way.
In the long run we are all dead.
If something is needed in 50 years time build it in 50 years time. There's no point making the current generation pay for depreciation of unused assets.
as every North of London Service would need too use Classic compatible stock for anything bar Birmingham Services, do you really need too use HS2?
London - Paris is already only 2:20hr , using the WCML and the existing HS1 link only adds 2hr more for Manchester and even then that’s the same as London - Amsterdam at 4:20hr
London - Paris is already only 2:20hr , using the WCML and the existing HS1 link only adds 2hr more for Manchester and even then that’s the same as London - Amsterdam at 4:20hr
That’s what was proposed; the proposed connection wasn’t high speed, and the tunnel (single line only) went where it was possible to build it.
2hrs wouldn’t be possible for non-tilt stock coming off the NLL. It would take at least 15 - 20 mins just to get to Wembley before it could cross to the Fast lines (good luck with timetabling that, by the way). Then another 2hrs (at least) from there.
Fun Fact: in the early days of West Coast Route Mod, when Regional Eurostar was still expected, the specimen timetables had the eurostars on the slow lines south of Rugby. The fast lines were only for tilting stock at 125/140mph.
even assuming a total of 5:00-5:30 hr i don’t that’s much of a problem especially for an initial service
Thanks for the detailed responses @SynthD and @Bald Rick
Or in other words, it would likely be much cheaper and less disruptive to:
- fix St Pancras (maybe even a substantial rebuild)
- create a travelator route between Euston and St Pancras
Taking a longer view, it would probably be worth using the money to part fund Crossrail 2.
Snow1964
Established Member
There is a long travelator as part of proposed Crossrail 2 station (which is basically a double ended station, one end at Euston, one end at St Pancras.
I am guessing could always build this part, even if rest of Crossrail 2 is years away (if it ever happens).
Of course, if building a tunnel for a travelator, and the escalators and lifts to reach it is better option than a short rail link tunnel is both a question of cost, and practicality for usage for decades which affects its investment worth.
The demand just isn't there for that. Proportionate to the extra 30 mins in the air, vs double on the train.
It's not super competitive for business travel (without the London volumes) - it doesn't have the inbound draw from Paris/France (biz/leisure to London, and disapora / 'expat' / VFR travel) - and the leisure demand isn't huge. Manchester has a fair amount of flights to Paris a day - 9 tomorrow including Ryanair to BVA. Brussels, only 2.
Amsterdam is another story entirely, tons of demand (but many connecting to KL, our true national airline!) - but journey would be much longer.
Chat of Switzerland only works (and it doesn't work or exist yet) - because London is at one end of it. Otherwise, it really is a marginal / too long journey time.
zwk500
Veteran Member
Add an hour for check-in, so 6hrs without transfers. Compared to a 1h30 flight + 2hrs check-in even for the most pessimistic, so the train is 1h30 down on a flight before you even start looking at prices.
That's quite a big problem for an initial service, as you'll need to find enough (a full Eurostar is 800-900 capacity IIRC) people all wanting to leave Manchester/arrive Paris at a similar enough time, who don't care about losing up to 2hrs travelling, and are willing to pay a premium to not fly.