EU high speed rail 'plan'

[Austriantrain]

The mystery is really why Bordeaux - Toulouse has still not started actual construction.

Maybe because France is going broke?

I am not sure it has a very good business case either. Sure, Tolouse is a very significant city, but experience tells us that there will rarely be more then one train an hour to Paris by SNCF, probably less in many hours. And it still has to be seen whether competition on the "Western" French HS-network really takes off.

The HSL would of course lend itself to a half-hourly Toulouse - Bordeaux service. But again, experience with France is that that won't happen. That SNCF ordered Oxygène sets (Max 200 kph) for the Bordeaux - Marseille service instead of 250 kph stock really says everything.

So realistically, you will have maybe two trains an hour on average. Not good to justify a new line.

 

[signed]

That SNCF ordered Oxygène sets (Max 200 kph) for the Bordeaux - Marseille service instead of 250 kph stock really says everything.

The whole thing of Intercités is that they don't run on LGV, so even if there were a LGV between Bordeaux and Toulouse, no intercités trains would use it (and there is no way in h*ll, sadly, they would waste a TGV unit on that service).

On top of that the top speed of classic lines AFAIK is 210kph, though I suspect the average is more 160kph. There is absolutely no need for 250kph+ stock.

 

[Tinginys]

Last time I took Paris-Barcelona it took the slow (140-160km/h) line between Avignon and Montpellier and was stopping at all kinds of seemingly random villages with only 2-3 passengers embarking/disembarking at each. Is that how it's meant to work? I mean 220 km/h line exists already (300 km/h nearer to Avignon) and if the HS TGV Duplex train doesn't take it on the most important international route between France and Spain, then what gives?

 

[signed]

And it still has to be seen whether competition on the "Western" French HS-network really takes off.

The main competition between Paris and Toulouse isn't (and likely won't ever be) other OAs, it's flights. Toulouse being this isolated and the train service being relatively slow, it makes it one of the rare cases in the country where flying has a upper edge on trains.

And in fairness, putting the money on either upgrading the line to at least 210kph between Marseille and Monaco/the Italian Border, and actually taking care of the POLT (Paris Orléans Limoges Toulouse) are much more pressing issue than Bordeaux-Toulouse LGV.

 

[Tinginys]

The whole thing of Intercités is that they don't run on LGV, so even if there were a LGV between Bordeaux and Toulouse, no intercités trains would use it (and there is no way in h*ll, sadly, they would waste a TGV unit on that service).

On top of that the top speed of classic lines AFAIK is 210kph, though I suspect the average is more 160kph. There is absolutely no need for 250kph+ stock.

Which 'classic lines' do you mean specifically? It seems most of them are 160 km/h (sometimes less) in France, with some sections of 200-220 here and there.

 

[signed]

Which 'classic lines' do you mean specifically?

Anything that isn't LGV, and what I mean with top-speed is the top-speed accross the whole country.

 

[Tinginys]

Anything that isn't LGV, and what I mean with top-speed is the top-speed accross the whole country.

Ok, in that case it's mostly 160 km/h or thereabouts, at least according to information that's on OpenRailwayMap.

 

[rvdborgt]

Last time I took Paris-Barcelona it took the slow (140-160km/h) line between Avignon and Montpellier and was stopping at all kinds of seemingly random villages with only 2-3 passengers embarking/disembarking at each. Is that how it's meant to work? I mean 220 km/h line exists already (300 km/h nearer to Avignon) and if the HS TGV Duplex train doesn't take it on the most important international route between France and Spain, then what gives?

The only stations of that TGV served on the classic line, where there's a parallel HSL, are Nîmes and Montpellier, which I wouldn't exactly call villages, and where I'd expect many more than 2-3 passengers embarking/disembarking. The TGV using the classic line will stay on the HSL until shortly before Nîmes Pont du Gard. Speed on that classic line is 160 km/h, except in both cities. After that, these TGVs stop at Béziers, Narbonne and Perpignan, which are smaller with fewer passengers, but still not villages. The speed of the classic line drops to (mostly) 150 km/h south of Narbonne. There is currently no HSL between (west of) Montpellier and Perpignan. The TGVs scheduled via the HSL are only a few minutes faster, so for passengers in the cities there's hardly any advantage when stations outside are served.

 

[Austriantrain]

The whole thing of Intercités is that they don't run on LGV, so even if there were a LGV between Bordeaux and Toulouse, no intercités trains would use it (and there is no way in h*ll, sadly, they would waste a TGV unit on that service).

Yes, what an utterly french absuridty. You build a new HSL with two intermediate stations and very limited service anyway, and don't use it for the other long distance services on the some route... I mean, what better way to throw taxpayers' money out of the window?

So on the contrary, there would be plenty of need for 250 kmh stock on this line if it was operated as it should be.

 

[signed]

Yes, what an utterly french absuridty. You build a new HSL with two intermediate stations and where limited service anyway, and don't use it for the other long distance services on the some route... I mean, what better way to throw taxpaeyers' money out of the window.

It would make it absurdly uneconomical

Ignoring the fact that money comes from and goes, some way or another, to the same purse, Intercités services are tendered by the central government to serve underserved communities, and are inherently loss-making.

So if you add up the way higher price of the stock (which they can't use TGVs for as they are legally owned by SNCF Voyageurs, a private company, short of wet-leasing it but that still becomes absurdly expensive), insane track access fees on LGV (~€9.5/km, even more sometimes), it makes a lot of sense to not do that, else it would just end up being TGV service, priced at the TGV level (i.e. a lot of people can't really afford).

 

[Austriantrain]

It would make it absurdly uneconomical

Ignoring the fact that money comes from and goes, some way or another, to the same purse, Intercités services are tendered by the central government to serve underserved communities, and are inherently loss-making.

So if you add up the way higher price of the stock (which they can't use TGVs for as they are legally owned by SNCF Voyageurs, a private company, short of wet-leasing it but that still becomes absurdly expensive), insane track access fees on LGV (~€9.5/km, even more sometimes), it makes a lot of sense to not do that, else it would just end up being TGV service, priced at the TGV level (i.e. a lot of people can't really afford).

The whole thing seen together does not make sense at all. If the HSL is so expensive that most services cannot run there anyway, you don't build it in the first place. Not running those services makes the problem of maintenance cost - and indirectly of access charges - even worse. An HSL should not be built for 1 to 2 trains an hour (one an hour to Paris, a few to Lyon and further on, maybe an occasional one via Bordeaux and Tours to Lille).

 

[The exile]

An HSL should not be built for 1 to 2 trains an hour (one an hour to Paris, a few to Lyon and further on, maybe an occasional one via Bordeaux and Tours to Lille).

If you can’t see traffic building to justify 3-4 tph (except on connecting spurs) then it’s seriously questionable whether money spent on an HSL is money well spent.

 

[Austriantrain]

The airlines-on-rails operating model in France and Spain really don't help matters. It wouldn't take much to operate a Swiss-style timetable with Narbonne acting as a takt node and I think just that would boost ridership considerably,

Fully agree. I am sure a two hourly cross border service, probably even an hourly one, would work and as long as Montpellier - Perpignan has no HSL, it would not need to be a real HS service, a 200-250 kph train would do nicely: Perpignan - Barcelona is, in practice, not operated very fast, especially with stops at Girona and Figueres - both of them necessary; Narbonne to Bordeaux is classic line, both Montpellier and Nimes are much better served at the old, central stations. If a train goes on to Marseille, using the classic line is not disaster either, so it is really only the occasional service to Lyon and Paris that needs a TGV. Narbonne would be the perfect Takt hub for an Intercity-style network (I have at least 10 iterations of it somewhere - all probably unworkable, but a real timetable planner should manage to do it easily ).

 

[erikvd28]

Not that it is in the EU but the Russian new high speed rail line which will be longer than the full HS2 project at 10 times cheaper, is currently in full construction as you can see on openrailwaymap

Russian high-speed train manufacturing plant construction begins

Sinara secured permits for the construction of two new high-speed train manufacturing facilities at the Ural Locomotives site near Yekaterinburg

www.railwaypro.com

The Russian manufacturer Sinara-Development obtained permits from Verkhnyaya Pyshma Administration of the Sverdlovsk Region for the construction of two new high-speed train manufacturing facilities at the Ural Locomotives plant production site. Prior to this decision, positive expert opinions on the design documentation and engineering survey results for these facilities, near Yekaterinburg, were received.


The first document concerns the building for the formation and commissioning of electric trains with a total area of 17,000 square meters, and the second one involves administrative and amenity building with a total area of 7,000 square meters.


The entire project includes the construction of a components shop, a traction equipment testing centre, a commissioning area, an administrative and amenities building, and a design office. The total area of the new high-speed train manufacturing facilities will be more than 60,000 square meters.


It is also planned to technically re-equip the main production building and the central material warehouse, as well as to construct and reconstruct the engineering and transport infrastructure facilities, including the tracks.

 

[NCT]

Fully agree. I am sure a two hourly cross border service, probably even an hourly one, would work and as long as Montpellier - Perpignan has no HSL, it would not need to be a real HS service, a 200-250 kph train would do nicely: Perpignan - Barcelona is, in practice, not operated very fast, especially with stops at Girona and Figueres - both of them necessary; Narbonne to Bordeaux is classic line, both Montpellier and Nimes are much better served at the old, central stations. If a train goes on to Marseille, using the classic line is not disaster either, so it is really only the occasional service to Lyon and Paris that needs a TGV. Narbonne would be the perfect Takt hub for an Intercity-style network (I have at least 10 iterations of it somewhere - all probably unworkable, but a real timetable planner should manage to do it easily ).

Doing a takt-node at Narbonne would be a doddle. If Breclav can work as a takt node for Vienna/Bratislava - Prague/Poland then Narbonne can work similarly. The blocker to the value of a takt node won't be 'timetablability', but ticketing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Nov 2025 ==

Maybe because France is going broke?

I am not sure it has a very good business case either. Sure, Tolouse is a very significant city, but experience tells us that there will rarely be more then one train an hour to Paris by SNCF, probably less in many hours. And it still has to be seen whether competition on the "Western" French HS-network really takes off.

The HSL would of course lend itself to a half-hourly Toulouse - Bordeaux service. But again, experience with France is that that won't happen. That SNCF ordered Oxygène sets (Max 200 kph) for the Bordeaux - Marseille service instead of 250 kph stock really says everything.

So realistically, you will have maybe two trains an hour on average. Not good to justify a new line.

Is 1-2tph even atypical for France? The branch to Renne, and Rhin-Rhone? Isn't Avignon - Marseille also similar?

Paris - Toulouse TGV is already 1tp2h (or 'French' 1tp2h, with irregularities and holes 'just because' - but we'll gloss over that). The air market is currently ~30 flights a day. Once journey time goes to 3h30m there'll be a decisive mode shift, so I'm pretty confident there will be a 1tph Paris - Toulouse service with peak extras (again, in 'French' fashion).

Bordeaux - Marseille will most likely go over to TGV - the LGV to conventional running ratio won't be atypical either. I don't think anyone's seriously thought about the post LGV future of that service - do the French ever design the timetable before building the infrastructure? The LGV timings will be attractive enough for the service to wash its face commercially, and places like Agen and Monteauban will likely get more TER services. Experience suggests regionally tendered TER services tend to be better quality than what SNCF previously ran, so I'm not too worried.

 

[signed]

If the HSL is so expensive that most services cannot run there anyway, you don't build it in the first place

But the services can run on LGV profitably, at the TGV price level, indeed SNCF Voyageurs alone is profitable (despite the propaganda that they tout about that prices rises are needed).

TGV services are the mainline service base, Intercités is an after-thought, and has been since the 80s, all of those are known and volontarily taken political decisions.

Times are very different compared to the early 2000s craze on doing middle of nowhere stations on LGV, indeed SNCF has publically said that there probably won't be another LGV on top of what is currently in planning.

But, there is a moderate to high shortage of TGV stock, there is very little capacity left on LGV Sud-Est, a lot of the Paris terminals are at capacity... and on top of that there isn't any willingness (hard to change ways taken for decades, unless you get pressured by SBB to do it),

 

[NCT]

But, there is a moderate to high shortage of TGV stock, there is very little capacity left on LGV Sud-Est, a lot of the Paris terminals are at capacity... and on top of that there isn't any willingness (hard to change ways taken for decades, unless you get pressured by SBB to do it),

Interesting... what are those hard to change ways that SNCF changed when pressured by SBB?

 

[signed]

Interesting... what are those hard to change ways that SNCF changed when pressured by SBB?

TGV Lyria, SBB had to basically force SNCF to adopt the clockface hourly service that you see now.

 

[NCT]

TGV Lyria, SBB had to basically force SNCF to adopt the clockface hourly service that you see now.

Thanks. That confirms a strong suspicion I've held for a while.

 

[Tinginys]

Not that it is in the EU but the Russian new high speed rail line which will be longer than the full HS2 project at 10 times cheaper, is currently in full construction as you can see on openrailwaymap

Russian high-speed train manufacturing plant construction begins

Sinara secured permits for the construction of two new high-speed train manufacturing facilities at the Ural Locomotives site near Yekaterinburg

www.railwaypro.com

Considering that Russia has pretty much no HSR tech of its own and dealings with Western (or Japanese) companies are probably off the table for the foreseeable future, where are they planning to obtain the trains and their tech? China?

 

[NCT]

It's probably best for all round that we file Russia under' off topic' ...

 

[Austriantrain]

Bordeaux - Marseille will most likely go over to TGV - the LGV to conventional running ratio won't be atypical either.

As I wrote before, CAF Oygéne sets have been ordered for Bordeaux - Marseille. Of course, SNCF might do a couple of TGV in addition to the IC service, but it surely won't be regular. The French are very principled people so TGV services will never get subsidized by "Paris" (a region like Hauts-de-France might pay for TGVs running as TER, but that is it), and IC cannot run on LGV. It obviously leads to very strange and vastly inefficient results. The much better way would be to tender the service (considering the size of everything on it, an hourly service should be easy) predicated on using the LGV, and see what offers come in and whether they actually need a subsidy and if yes, if it is affordable. I do actually believe that 250 kph stock would be sufficient for it.

BTW, in typical french manner, there will be two intermediate stations on Bordeaux - Toulouse, so whatever comes from Paris will often not be nonstop there.

Doing a takt-node at Narbonne would be a doddle. If Breclav can work as a takt node for Vienna/Bratislava - Prague/Poland then Narbonne can work similarly.

The problem is not the takt-node at Narbonne, that is indeed something my children could plan. Fitting everything into the very dense service east of Beziers/Montpellier, integrate it with the TGV and local services both towards Lyon and Marseille, and also at Toulouse is the more complicated part. But certainly doable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Nov 2025 ==

TGV Lyria, SBB had to basically force SNCF to adopt the clockface hourly service that you see now.

In addition, SBB needs to buy their own HSL stock now because SNCF doesn't have any and is apparently not willing to buy more, even though the vast majority of Lyria services is of course on French territory. Indeed, LGV service has been getting much worse in the last years: TGV Inoui switching to Ouigo with incompatible ticketing, and wherever possible reducing the number of services and cram to the max (the extremely high access charges of course have a lot to do with it), even when (outside of "holiday peaks") all or most trains on a route might be sold out days in advance.

It is a self-defeating model: The very high track access charges lead to fewer services, therefore actually reducing income from those charges (and with a bad service for rail users as a result). Reduce charges and run more services = same income for the infrastrucure operator.

 

[signed]

SNCF doesn't have any and is apparently not willing to buy more

Yeah, they prefer to prop-up the ouigo and Italy domestic competition than actually providing service

 

[NCT]

What's the deployment plan of SNCF's framework order of 115 TGV-M sets? Is there room for growth after retirement of the oldest existing TGV sets?

 

[signed]

What's the deployment plan of SNCF's framework order of 115 TGV-M sets?

15 => Domestic Italy service
A unknown number => OUIGO

Is there room for growth after retirement of the oldest existing TGV sets?

From Wikipedia (from 2023), there is 27 TGV Atlantique 10 car sets in service, 27 8-car TGV Réseau dual-voltage, 6 Réseau tri-voltage Italy sets, 19 Réseau tri-voltage used for the intersector services.

Atlantique sets are for sure going, probably through cascade of EuroDuplexes. I don't think we know publically whether Réseau sets, especially the tri-voltage variety will be going or not, as they are quite newer than the Atlantique sets.

Assuming everything, including the Italy fleet, goes with the current 115 unit order (which IMO is unlikely), we are at 79 sets to retire.

We can assume that it will be a 1 for 1 replacement, and 21 OUIGO sets doesn't sound far fetched, so no, there won't be any room.

 

[NCT]

15 => Domestic Italy service
A unknown number => OUIGO


From Wikipedia (from 2023), there is 27 TGV Atlantique 10 car sets in service, 27 8-car TGV Réseau dual-voltage, 6 Réseau tri-voltage Italy sets, 19 Réseau tri-voltage used for the intersector services.

Atlantique sets are for sure going, probably through cascade of EuroDuplexes. I don't think we know publically whether Réseau sets, especially the tri-voltage variety will be going or not, as they are quite newer than the Atlantique sets.

Assuming everything, including the Italy fleet, goes with the current 115 unit order (which IMO is unlikely), we are at 79 sets to retire.

We can assume that it will be a 1 for 1 replacement, and 21 OUIGO sets doesn't sound far fetched, so no, there won't be any room.

Thanks for the detailed breakdown. Well that's not very clever is it, though not surprising ...

As I wrote before, CAF Oygéne sets have been ordered for Bordeaux - Marseille. Of course, SNCF might do a couple of TGV in addition to the IC service, but it surely won't be regular. The French are very principled people so TGV services will never get subsidized by "Paris" (a region like Hauts-de-France might pay for TGVs running as TER, but that is it), and IC cannot run on LGV. It obviously leads to very strange and vastly inefficient results.

I know SNCF are 'principled' in that ICs will not run on LGV, but are they actually disciplined to the extent that they know precisely what's ordered for what? I thought the Oxygenes were ordered into a generic IC pool.

My point was that Bordeaux - Marseille will be of a journey time and LGV/conventional running ratio that a ~2-hourly TGV service will become commercially viable (like Lyon - Mulhouse), and the Oxygene sets will be cascaded within SNCF's contract work.

The much better way would be to tender the service (considering the size of everything on it, an hourly service should be easy) predicated on using the LGV, and see what offers come in and whether they actually need a subsidy and if yes, if it is affordable. I do actually believe that 250 kph stock would be sufficient for it.

GB-style franchising, eh?

The problem is not the takt-node at Narbonne, that is indeed something my children could plan. Fitting everything into the very dense service east of Beziers/Montpellier, integrate it with the TGV and local services both towards Lyon and Marseille, and also at Toulouse is the more complicated part. But certainly doable.

There actually is a semblance of a takt-node at Narbonne - the subsidised ICs and devolved TERs are mostly around xx00 at Narbonne. It's the TGVs and AVEs that drive a coach and horse through the whole thing. It doesn't help that out of the 4 daily Barcelona - Narbonne TGVs/AVEs, 2 of them run 6 minutes apart in one direction.

In addition, SBB needs to buy their own HSL stock now because SNCF doesn't have any and is apparently not willing to buy more, even though the vast majority of Lyria services is of course on French territory. Indeed, LGV service has been getting much worse in the last years: TGV Inoui switching to Ouigo with incompatible ticketing, and wherever possible reducing the number of services and cram to the max (the extremely high access charges of course have a lot to do with it), even when (outside of "holiday peaks") all or most trains on a route might be sold out days in advance.

It is a self-defeating model: The very high track access charges lead to fewer services, therefore actually reducing income from those charges (and with a bad service for rail users as a result). Reduce charges and run more services = same income for the infrastrucure operator.

I don't know how the SNCF Reseaux charging regime is regulated. Someone in other parts of the web gutter tells me the LGV access charges actually allow LGV construction costs to be recovered, and that's probably credible. My understanding is that when there's a 'capital recovery' portion in access charges (as a mark-up above the variable costs), that portion is supposed to be reduced per path if more paths are being applied for. I don't know if this is how SNCF Reseaux charging works - clearly there's no impetus from the traditional SNCF empire for things to work that way (I don't see SNCF voyageur pushing for it).

 

[signed]

I don't know how the SNCF Reseaux charging regime is regulated.

It is regulated by the state through an agency, and all players have right to vote for or against a charge modification

Though, taken with extreme amounts of salt, rumors are that the regime, along with Spain's, are illegal against EU law.

but are they actually disciplined to the extent that they know precisely what's ordered for what? I thought the Oxygenes were ordered into a generic IC pool.

CallumC.Gurney, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. Map of services running with Corail stock in France.

Oxygènes units have been ordered to run all the day Intercités services left running on Corail stock, i.e Bordeaux-Marseille, Paris-Clermont-Ferrand and POLT (Paris Orléans Limoges Toulouse) line services (in Orange on the map)

My point was that Bordeaux - Marseille will be of a journey time and LGV/conventional running ratio that a ~2-hourly TGV service will become commercially viable (like Lyon - Mulhouse), and the Oxygene sets will be cascaded within SNCF's contract work.

That isn't how that works

I knowingly skip the fact that SNCF {Voyageurs, Réseau...} are controlled by the French State, just stating the legal facts.

Any stock working Intercités service are owned by the French state in its own capacity, and only operated by a legally separate operator, SNCF Voyageurs, a private company. If the tender for a particular service goes to someone else, the stock will go to that operator (like TER services).

If SNCF Voyageurs wants to run open-access TGV services, as all TGV services run without subsidy, they can (not that they will, again there is a shortage of TGV units that it seems SNCF Voyageurs don't want to fix for whatever stupid reason), and that won't impact the tendered contract they will likely hold to run the IC service on behalf of the French state.

On top of that, quite plausible, rumors are that the French Gov wants to privatise IC services (likely as a coverup of the unwillingness and the underinvestment on the classic lines), and that SNCF Voyageurs is likely to not even tender to the night IC with the new stock (as we already knew that SNCF doesn't want to deal with night trains in the slightest).

I do actually believe that 250 kph stock would be sufficient for it.

SNCF Réseau don't allow any stock < 300kph (and even then, it is likely to be 320kph on the busier) to run on LGV. The only exception, I know of, is the 200kph Z21700 TER units that needs to use the Virgule de Sablé, to run the Rennes-Nantes via Angers services.

TGV Inoui switching to Ouigo with incompatible ticketing, and wherever possible reducing the number of services and cram to the max

That is very likely intentional, and not only from the track changing, there is also a incredible demand for ouigo services (flat child pricing is a big part). The EU will start to reform, despite heavy lobbying by the French and Germans, ticketing starting in 2026, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest that Ouigo gets excluded.

 

[Austriantrain]

I don't know how the SNCF Reseaux charging regime is regulated. Someone in other parts of the web gutter tells me the LGV access charges actually allow LGV construction costs to be recovered, and that's probably credible.

Having „toured“ the web, also in French, interestingly enough, I could not find anything definitive one way or the other. I don’t find it so credible for the newer, not very well used LGV.

Some Information about LGV SEA, which was financed in a concession model seems to imply that the half of the Investment financed by the private partner should be recouped from access charges within 50 years (and they have grumbled in the past about low traffic, clearly being nervous - and trying to encourage competition for good reason).

Cinquante ans pour financer la ligne à grande vitesse Tours-Bordeaux - l'Opinion

Avec quatorze sites classés Natura 2000 et 223 espèces protégées, la ligne à grande vitesse qui relie Tours à Bordeaux a bravé la nature. Son financement est lui aussi remarquable : les 8 milliards d'euros nécessaires ont largement été financés par le recours à concession, une nouveauté dans le…

www.lopinion.fr

That still leaves the other half, probably taking then another 50 years, provided modernisation costs in the meanwhile don’t crowd out the recovery of construction costs.

100 years is a long time and a good reason for the French state to drag their feet on new lines, because it still has to carry the debt and pay interest. It also makes the „let them pay to the max“ system while accepting that the public gets a very bad service not that convincing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Nov 2025 ==

There actually is a semblance of a takt-node at Narbonne - the subsidised ICs and devolved TERs are mostly around xx00 at Narbonne. It's the TGVs and AVEs that drive a coach and horse through the whole thing. It doesn't help that out of the 4 daily Barcelona - Narbonne TGVs/AVEs, 2 of them run 6 minutes apart in one direction.

At least as a crayonista exercice, it is not particularly hard to fit the TGV network into a decent Takt, Swiss-Style mostly, more dutch-style closer to Paris where traffic is dense. Much much easier than the UK or even Germany and Switzerland itself, on a hobby level of course… but even inserting regional traffic only gets really hard around Lyon (provided you accept the basic fact about TGV planning that the paths from Massy TGV towards LGV SE/interconnection are set in stone).

 

[Snow1964]

Completing the Fehmarn (Germany-Denmark) Rail Tunnel, the Brenner Base Tunnel (Austria-Italy) and the Mont Cenis Base Tunnel to connect Lyon and Turin will surely be key to faster train journeys on the routes they connect.

And of course making sure long distance trains can reach these is important too, as an example that's why Sweden is building rail bypasses at Slätthult and improving capacity between Alvesta, Älmhult and Hässleholm on a major route to Fehmarn Belt link.

There are other International high speed lines under construction too, eg Madrid-Lisbon. the Austrians have just opening additional part of Westbahn etc.

So although the EU can't afford to fund new lines, it is right the hint, nudge, cajole (whatever term you choose) to fill in some gaps to get whole network.

 

[NCT]

It is regulated by the state through an agency, and all players have right to vote for or against a charge modification

Though, taken with extreme amounts of salt, rumors are that the regime, along with Spain's, are illegal against EU law.

CallumC.Gurney, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. Map of services running with Corail stock in France.

Oxygènes units have been ordered to run all the day Intercités services left running on Corail stock, i.e Bordeaux-Marseille, Paris-Clermont-Ferrand and POLT (Paris Orléans Limoges Toulouse) line services (in Orange on the map)


That isn't how that works

I knowingly skip the fact that SNCF {Voyageurs, Réseau...} are controlled by the French State, just stating the legal facts.

Any stock working Intercités service are owned by the French state in its own capacity, and only operated by a legally separate operator, SNCF Voyageurs, a private company. If the tender for a particular service goes to someone else, the stock will go to that operator (like TER services).

If SNCF Voyageurs wants to run open-access TGV services, as all TGV services run without subsidy, they can (not that they will, again there is a shortage of TGV units that it seems SNCF Voyageurs don't want to fix for whatever stupid reason), and that won't impact the tendered contract they will likely hold to run the IC service on behalf of the French state.

On top of that, quite plausible, rumors are that the French Gov wants to privatise IC services (likely as a coverup of the unwillingness and the underinvestment on the classic lines), and that SNCF Voyageurs is likely to not even tender to the night IC with the new stock (as we already knew that SNCF doesn't want to deal with night trains in the slightest).

I expressed myself poorly.

My main point is that there's a strong likelihood of a Bordeaux - Marseille TGV service being commercially viable, operating at a frequency similar to Lyon - Mulhouse. As for rolling stock, if the current order of 115 is only sufficient for replacements, SNCF can exercise options. Is the Oxygene order so rigidly and precisely sized that you end up with surplus stock with no cascade options in the event the Bordeaux - Marseille IC gets discontinued (or downgraded to a TER / absorbed into the TER concessions)?