Brussels - Antwerp speeds

[Krokodil]

Can anyone please tell me what the line speeds are between Brussels and Antwerp on the lines used by Eurostars? The journey seemed tediously slow, so I'm wondering whether there were speed restrictions, were we on restrictive signals, or is the route genuinely as slow as it felt?

 

[finlaywilson2]

Can anyone please tell me what the line speeds are between Brussels and Antwerp on the lines used by Eurostars? The journey seemed tediously slow, so I'm wondering whether there were speed restrictions, were we on restrictive signals, or is the route genuinely as slow as it felt?

160kmh limit though when I commute to Amsterdam on this, late running trains and restrictive signals mean lots of stops and slow speeds.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Sep 2023 ==

160kmh limit though when I commute to Amsterdam on this, late running trains and restrictive signals mean lots of stops and slow speeds.

I believe it lowers further to 75 on some sections though I’m not entirely certain whereabouts.

 

[JonasB]

A good place to check the line speed is https://www.openrailwaymap.org/

While not an official source, it is usually pretty correct.

 

[Krokodil]

160kmh limit

So even with a clear road it's not particularly quick then. The UK has third rail commuter services with higher top speeds.

Do the Belgians have any plans to close the gap in high speed provision?

A good place to check the line speed is https://www.openrailwaymap.org/

While not an official source, it is usually pretty correct.

I'd forgotten about this map, thanks!

 

[Bemined]

Eurostars from Amsterdam to London are deliberately slower as well because they use the same path as the trains from Amsterdam to Paris, but they don't stop at Antwerp. So they have like 4 minutes extra they need to burn away by coasting or running below the line speed.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The curious thing is that a new line was built from Schaerbeek (North Brussels) to Mechelen, but it is scarcely faster than the old main line. A missed opportunity to build a high-speed line to Antwerp via Brussels Airport I think - one wonders if this would have been better value than the lightly used high-speed line to Aachen.

 

[MarcVD]

The curious thing is that a new line was built from Schaerbeek (North Brussels) to Mechelen, but it is scarcely faster than the old main line. A missed opportunity to build a high-speed line to Antwerp via Brussels Airport I think - one wonders if this would have been better value than the lightly used high-speed line to Aachen.

1) there is no high speed line between Brussels and Antwerp because the land in this part of the country is either almost totally built-up or used by high value businesses, so appropriating all the needed land would be hideously expensive. It would also be extremely unpopular, so no flemish politician would ever take the risk. So you are left with the existing lines only.

2) there is a new line between Schaerbeek and Mechelen because it was possible to build it on the central reservation of the Brussels Antwerp motorway. This central reservation was initially foreseen for a superfast motorway that has never been built. However, it doesn't go all the way to Antwerp and ends in the middle of nowhere, with no easy connection with other railway lines. So this new line will never go further north than Mechelen.

3) the situation and configuration of the station of Mechelen imposes a maximum speed of 120 km/h to traverse the station. At the exception of the HSTs, all trains stop there. A top speed of more than 160 km/h on the rail lines north and south of Mechelen will only save a few minutes in the total journey.

4) Belgian population has clearly expressed their desire to see the public money invested in railways used for everyday's life, not for the advantage of international travellers. So there won't be any further developments on the belgian high speed network. All available funds are now directed to renovation of stations, increase of capacity, and increase of speed only when it benefits to domestic travel.

 

[rvdborgt]

3) the situation and configuration of the station of Mechelen imposes a maximum speed of 120 km/h to traverse the station. At the exception of the HSTs, all trains stop there. A top speed of more than 160 km/h on the rail lines north and south of Mechelen will only save a few minutes in the total journey.

If it's that much. The difference for Brussel-Noord to Leuven between line 36 (160 km/h) and 36N (200 km/h) is 1 minute.

 

[GWVillager]

Can anyone please tell me what the line speeds are between Brussels and Antwerp on the lines used by Eurostars? The journey seemed tediously slow, so I'm wondering whether there were speed restrictions, were we on restrictive signals, or is the route genuinely as slow as it felt?

It certainly feels like 160km/h from the conventional trains. The line is relatively slow (by British standards) but extremely busy, increasing line speeds would be relatively meaningless considering the 160km/h max speed of SNCB's stock. It would, ironically, probably feel faster if Eurostar stopped at Antwerp, which they really should.

 

[MarcVD]

It would, ironically, probably feel faster if Eurostar stopped at Antwerp, which they really should.

Forget about that. There is way too much traffic in Antwerpen Centraal to allow the sterilization of a platform for Eurostar trains. If you really want that, the prerequisite is to convince your politicians to join Schengen first.

 

[GWVillager]

Forget about that. There is way too much traffic in Antwerpen Centraal to allow the sterilization of a platform for Eurostar trains. If you really want that, the prerequisite is to convince your politicians to join Schengen first.

I forgot about security/passport checks. But even still, they should stop there, if other factors didn't get in the way.

 

[johncrossley]

It certainly feels like 160km/h from the conventional trains. The line is relatively slow (by British standards)

Slow compared with certain mainlines out of London, but there is no city in Belgium remotely the size of London. Comparing the line speed between Manchester and Leeds or Manchester and Liverpool would be fairer.

 

[RedPostJunc]

Can anyone please tell me what the line speeds are between Brussels and Antwerp on the lines used by Eurostars? The journey seemed tediously slow, so I'm wondering whether there were speed restrictions, were we on restrictive signals, or is the route genuinely as slow as it felt?

I noticed the same thing when travelling from London to Amsterdam about three weeks ago. The journey through Belgium to Brussels seemed very fast, but when the train restarted, it crawled as far as Antwerp. As another person noted, that part of Belgium is very built up.

 

[GWVillager]

Slow compared with certain mainlines out of London, but there is no city in Belgium remotely the size of London. Comparing the line speed between Manchester and Leeds or Manchester and Liverpool would be fairer.

Equally, though, it’s a major corridor between countries. It’s just as much a Paris-Amsterdam mainline as it is a Brussels to Antwerp one.

 

[philg999]

High speed lines only get built if they bring a meaningful improvement to travel times in a national context. Brussels->Antwerp only takes about 30 mins as it is. Is it worth spending 100bn euro on a 60km tunnel through northern Belgium to cut 10 mins off that journey time? (No idea what the real cost would be but it wouldn’t be cheap). The cost-benefit analysis is more favourable if there’s empty countryside to build the line across but there isn’t in this case.

 

[JonasB]

Forget about that. There is way too much traffic in Antwerpen Centraal to allow the sterilization of a platform for Eurostar trains. If you really want that, the prerequisite is to convince your politicians to join Schengen first.

UK joining Schengen would make things a lot easier. But until then, stopping in Antwerpen on the way to Amsterdam might attract a few travellers.

 

[Bemined]

Looking at some recent timetables, I don't think the timetable was actually adjusted after the new tracks at Mechelen were opened. So perhaps it could run faster, but they didn't feel like redesigning the timetable for this.

 

[Krokodil]

High speed lines only get built if they bring a meaningful improvement to travel times in a national context. Brussels->Antwerp only takes about 30 mins as it is. Is it worth spending 100bn euro on a 60km tunnel through northern Belgium to cut 10 mins off that journey time? (No idea what the real cost would be but it wouldn’t be cheap). The cost-benefit analysis is more favourable if there’s empty countryside to build the line across but there isn’t in this case.

Congestion appears to be an issue given that we were doing closer to 60kph than 160kph. Reducing that ought to be in the national interest. Would there be any European money for such a project? Given that it's a TEN-R route.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2023 ==

Looking at some recent timetables, I don't think the timetable was actually adjusted after the new tracks at Mechelen were opened. So perhaps it could run faster, but they didn't feel like redesigning the timetable for this.

That's an interesting point

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Equally, though, it’s a major corridor between countries. It’s just as much a Paris-Amsterdam mainline as it is a Brussels to Antwerp one.

This isn't really true. It doesn't even support an all-day hourly end-to-end service. The heaviest demand around Brussels is very much to/from Brussels. And the end-to-end journey time is long enough that for some total journeys flying will be quicker. Having a genuine HSR all the way from the Dutch to the French border, even if it was politically and socially acceptable, wouldn't change the picture very much. All this can change only if the governments concerned decide to heavily restrict, or even ban, flights between Paris and Amsterdam.

 

[MarcVD]

Looking at some recent timetables, I don't think the timetable was actually adjusted after the new tracks at Mechelen were opened. So perhaps it could run faster, but they didn't feel like redesigning the timetable for this.

Because the new tracks do not allow any higher speed than the old ones for the moment. There are still 2 to 3 years of work ahead before that can happen. All point work on both sides of the station needs to be remodeled, and before that, two other new tracks must be built.