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!
Current planning headway is 3 minutes. Same as the WCML fast lines which has technical headways of (typically) 75 seconds. Anything more than 15tph even with all on the same stopping pattern is a recipe for horrendous punctuality.
Getting 400m trains into St Pancras, on the current track layout, at anything less than 3 minute headways would be ‘courageous’.
Current planning headway is 3 minutes. Same as the WCML fast lines which has technical headways of (typically) 75 seconds. Anything more than 15tph even with all on the same stopping pattern is a recipe for horrendous punctuality.
Getting 400m trains into St Pancras, on the current track layout, at anything less than 3 minute headways would be ‘courageous’.
If this is the case, then one option is to take over the space on the left side (as you arrive) inside the station and funnel passengers through there as an arrivals corridor. It wouldn't need anything more than some small movable barriers in front of the escalators, while the customs formalities can be handled inside the station rather than at the platform-level space. You can even reduce the space needed by having the green lane on the left side of the glass partition, then the vast majority of passengers wouldn't even need to enter the building, as you'd only enter if you had something to declare.
Is HS1 actually short of paths anyway? I thought that the blockage always was the ability to process passengers at St Pancras. Obviously it would help if any additional trains called at the intermediate stops to spread out the demand but staffing those stations again will cost money and Eurostar don't consider it worth it. Or at least they're happy just making money with the less frequent service they do run without any competition to force them to improve it.
My understanding is that there is a small number of hours with a fifth path per hour through the tunnel
St. P departures at .01, .04, .31, .34 every hour, with an extra .16 departure some hours
We're not currently at 4/5 trains an hour international anyway.
There's currently 4 domestic trains per hour, and I imagine you could run 5 or 6tph from the current 3 platforms. Is there a need or want for more than that?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
In my view, a pretty close to ideal long-term timetable for international cross-channel services would be:
1-2 tph to Paris Nord (2tph at busy times only)
1 tp2h to Amsterdam serving Lille, Brussels, Rotterdam
1 tp2h to Brussels serving Lille (alternating with the above)
3 tpd to Marne-la-Vallee, continuing on to other destinations (security shuffle on the way back at MLV)
1-2 tpd to Geneva
This way, the key destinations get an hourly service. If more capacity to the Netherlands is required or desirable, extend (some of) the Brussels terminators to Amsterdam
The trains continuing beyond MLV should also sell tickets from MLV to the other destinations
I am aware that Geneva without shuffle is by far the least likely of the services above to come to pass
French border and security were at MLV, UK border was at St. Pancras. You'd have to move UK border to MLV for this to work, as handling UK border in St Pancras isn't realistic anymore
Given the original estimates were for 20m+ Eurostar passengers per year, as well as the freight that never happened, how would that have worked? There seem to be 7 shuttle services in the next hour which is about what it has been for years
Given the original estimates were for 20m+ Eurostar passengers per year, as well as the freight that never happened, how would that have worked? There seem to be 7 shuttle services in the next hour which is about what it has been for years
There's currently 4 domestic trains per hour, and I imagine you could run 5 or 6tph from the current 3 platforms. Is there a need or want for more than that?
Given the original estimates were for 20m+ Eurostar passengers per year, as well as the freight that never happened, how would that have worked? There seem to be 7 shuttle services in the next hour which is about what it has been for years
French border and security were at MLV, UK border was at St. Pancras. You'd have to move UK border to MLV for this to work, as handling UK border in St Pancras isn't realistic anymore
Perhaps Marne-le-Vallee to Ebbsfleet could be a decent initial for a lower cost Channel Tunnel operation (with auxillary services like connecting coaches to Ebbsfleet/MlV for an additional fee like Ryanair-dominant airports, reasonable additional baggage fees like with Ouigo).
Obviously it can't be a "true" low cost operation, because of the high usage fees for the Channel Tunnel and HS1, but maybe Evolyn would be interested.
Perhaps Marne-le-Vallee to Ebbsfleet could be a decent initial for a lower cost Channel Tunnel operation (with auxillary services like connecting coaches to Ebbsfleet/MlV for an additional fee like Ryanair-dominant airports, reasonable additional baggage fees like with Ouigo).
Obviously it can't be a "true" low cost operation, because of the high usage fees for the Channel Tunnel and HS1, but maybe Evolyn would be interested.
French border and security were at MLV, UK border was at St. Pancras. You'd have to move UK border to MLV for this to work, as handling UK border in St Pancras isn't realistic anymore
Why? Wouldn't the surrounding road network and facilities at Ebbsfleet/MlV permit the use of more frequent high density high speed trains, with lots of different feeder coaches dropping passengers off?
Why? Wouldn't the surrounding road network and facilities at Ebbsfleet/MlV permit the use of more frequent high density high speed trains, with lots of different feeder coaches dropping passengers off?
The cost base. You still have to pay for the train including maintenance, the crew, the access rights (where - as you say - the tunnel is by far the most expensive bit), the cost of selling tickets, the oberhead staff, and presumbly you want to make a small margin. There is also the cost of station staff - if you are using Ebbsfleet and MLV that means border security and customs that no-one else is paying for which you will pick up the whole tab for. You will also need addtional station staff for the platfroms which you wouldn’t need at St P.
So you pick up all the cost base of eurostar, less a tiny amount on traction electricity and crew hours for being 20 mins short of St P), plus a whole load of additional staff costs.
And, being blunt, having an operaton that requires you to get a coach to north Kent so that you can get to a fun park outside Paris is not going to drive that much in the way of custom.
No, it's not so complicated. Eurostar (or any other operator) can operate border controls in the traditional way if they want at stations not covered by the juxtaposed controls, but with the provision that they can be fined up to £2,000 for every passenger who arrives without a valid travel document and a visa (or ETA, or e-visa, or whatever is required for them). The rules are quite lengthy, but the idea is that the carrier is responsible for making sure that the person had those documents before travel. If you want to do this, then you need a manual check-in process to ensure that the traveller is kosher. In comparison, with the juxtaposed controls, it's enough to have automatic check-in facilities because the juxtaposed controls handle the process of checking documents.
The UK doesn't impose a requirement for juxtaposed controls, it's just that it makes things much faster and easier to deal with if travellers are checked before departure. It's also better for the UK not to have arrival controls at St Pancras, as the space can be used for departing passengers, while departing passengers also don't have to deal with passport controls on arrival.
The cost base. You still have to pay for the train including maintenance, the crew, the access rights (where - as you say - the tunnel is by far the most expensive bit), the cost of selling tickets, the oberhead staff, and presumbly you want to make a small margin. There is also the cost of station staff - if you are using Ebbsfleet and MLV that means border security and customs that no-one else is paying for which you will pick up the whole tab for. You will also need addtional station staff for the platfroms which you wouldn’t need at St P.
So you pick up all the cost base of eurostar, less a tiny amount on traction electricity and crew hours for being 20 mins short of St P), plus a whole load of additional staff costs.
And, being blunt, having an operaton that requires you to get a coach to north Kent so that you can get to a fun park outside Paris is not going to drive that much in the way of custom.
Yes, there will be still be relatively high costs, so it wouldn't ever have super cheap fares, but there's a lot of suppressed demand for rail travel to the Continent.
The connecting coach operation would take passengers from Manchester/South Wales/West Mids/West Yorks and other major conurbations, as these are areas where rail (especially with the cost of Eurostar post-Brexit) is often a completely unaffordable option and the airport experience can be unpleasant a lot of the time.
There is also the advantage of a domestic rail connection to Central/East London or central Paris and other parts of France/Belgium/Germany, for onward travellers. plus plenty of underused car parks at Ebbsfleet, so lots of passengers (especially families) could drive there or be dropped off, park and travel to Europe without dealing with connecting trains at the British end, or taxis.
Yes, there will be still be relatively high costs, so it wouldn't ever have super cheap fares, but there's a lot of suppressed demand for rail travel to the Continent.
The connecting coach operation would take passengers from Manchester/South Wales/West Mids/West Yorks and other major conurbations, as these are areas where rail (especially with the cost of Eurostar post-Brexit) is often a completely unaffordable option and the airport experience can be unpleasant a lot of the time.
There is also the advantage of a domestic rail connection to Central/East London or central Paris and other parts of France/Belgium/Germany, for onward travellers. plus plenty of underused car parks at Ebbsfleet, so lots of passengers (especially families) could drive there or be dropped off, park and travel to Europe without dealing with connecting trains at the British end, or taxis.
No, it's not so complicated. Eurostar (or any other operator) can operate border controls in the traditional way if they want at stations not covered by the juxtaposed controls, but with the provision that they can be fined up to £2,000 for every passenger who arrives without a valid travel document and a visa (or ETA, or e-visa, or whatever is required for them). The rules are quite lengthy, but the idea is that the carrier is responsible for making sure that the person had those documents before travel. If you want to do this, then you need a manual check-in process to ensure that the traveller is kosher. In comparison, with the juxtaposed controls, it's enough to have automatic check-in facilities because the juxtaposed controls handle the process of checking documents.
The UK doesn't impose a requirement for juxtaposed controls, it's just that it makes things much faster and easier to deal with if travellers are checked before departure. It's also better for the UK not to have arrival controls at St Pancras, as the space can be used for departing passengers, while departing passengers also don't have to deal with passport controls on arrival.
Why do you assume that base fares will be the same?
As I said, there's a range of ancillary services they can charge for.
Parking at Ebbsfleet, connecting coaches, luggage, overpriced food/drink, duty free etc...
This could make the headline fare a lot lower a la low cost airline style marketing and fill high density standard class only trains in a similar fashion to Lumo.
This could make the headline fare a lot lower a la low cost airline style marketing and fill high density standard class only trains in a similar fashion to Lumo.
Well, AIUI all the Ouigo services that start / finish in the greater Paris area do so at the conventional termini (Est, Lyon, Montparnasse). There are a few that go from Tourcoing / Lille and via the Interconnexxion calling at CDG Nd MLV, but they would do that for obvious reasons.
Well, AIUI all the Ouigo services that start / finish in the greater Paris area do so at the conventional termini (Est, Lyon, Montparnasse). There are a few that go from Tourcoing / Lille and via the Interconnexxion calling at CDG Nd MLV, but they would do that for obvious reasons.
They have used out of city terminals in other cities though (e.g Lyon Saint-Exupery TGV, so it's not unheard of for a lower-cost operator (note not full-on low cost) to use this as a way to reduce costs and make access easier for drivers.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
