Farnborough
Member
There is a certain vicious irony if international services were to be constrained by domestic services
-
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
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
quantinghome
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,914
To be honest I'd be desperate to stretch my legs after 6 hours on a train so a break in Brussels wouldn't be a bad thing.
Passing through Geneva Cornavin last week I noted with interest that there is quite a bit of space for customs and borders under the TGV Lyria platforms, so presumably it can be modified without too much difficulty.
I can see Geneva coming relatively easily. Eurostar should hustle and get in there first.
I could see 3 trains per day once established.
Berlin is interesting but I agree, too far. I don’t mind 6 hours (a good bar car walk stretches the legs more than anything on a 6 hour flight) - and one would be very productive. But the distance vs flight time is tough. Koln and Frankfurt are a good place to begin at any rate.
Amsterdam is a price thing - huge volume and demand inc LCCs - with more frequency and crucially, fuller trains and St P capacity, I can see more price competition coming to gain market share.
I could see 3 trains per day once established.
Berlin is interesting but I agree, too far. I don’t mind 6 hours (a good bar car walk stretches the legs more than anything on a 6 hour flight) - and one would be very productive. But the distance vs flight time is tough. Koln and Frankfurt are a good place to begin at any rate.
Amsterdam is a price thing - huge volume and demand inc LCCs - with more frequency and crucially, fuller trains and St P capacity, I can see more price competition coming to gain market share.
The loop (aka Rounder) services you refer to haven't run since before the pandemic. All HS services nowadays start/terminate in Thanet.
Trainbike46
Established Member
Sorry, should have checked if anything changed since I was last in Kent.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
except that clearly isn't happening. There are no proposals to go beyond the current 4/5 paths per hour, so why would you negatively impact the Kent services, for no benefit at all for international services?
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
They have been split into two services by Southeastern which operated independently from each other. The Margate-St Pancras services 1Js go via Ashford and the Ramsgate-St Pancras services 1Ls go via Gravesend.
Other people have said once St Pancras is upgraded there will be capacity for 5,000k per hour which is capacity for 5-6tph of international services.
Here is a possible timetable for HS1 in the down direction post the extra services proposed are introduced.
Spare = 2tph
Virgin = 2tph
Eurostar = 4tph
Southeastern = 8tph
Total =16tph
| Operator | Eurostar | Eurostar | Southeastern | Southeastern | Spare | Virgin | Southeastern | Southeastern | Eurostar | Eurostar | Southeastern | Southeastern | Spare | Virgin | Southeastern | Southeastern |
| Headcode | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1LXX | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1LXX | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1LXX | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1LXX |
| St Pancras International | XX:00d | XX:03d | XX:07d | XX:10d | XX:15d | XX:18d | XX:22d | XX:25d | XX:30d | XX:33d | XX:37d | XX:40d | XX:45d | XX:48d | XX:22d | XX:55d |
| Stratford High Speed | XX:05p | XX:08p | XX:13a/XX:14d | XX:15a/XX:26d | XX:20p | XX:23p | XX:28a/XX:29d | XX:30a/XX:41d | XX:35p | XX:38p | XX:43a/XX:44d | XX:45a/XX:56d | XX:50p | XX:53p | XX:28a/XX:29d | XX:00a/XX:11d |
| Ebbsfleet International | XX:13p | XX:16p | XX:24a/XX:34d | XX:36a | XX:28p | XX:31p | XX:39a/XX:49d | XX:51a | XX:43p | XX:43p | XX:54a/XX:04d | XX:06a | XX:58p | XX:01p | XX:09a/XX:19d | XX:21a |
| Ashford West Jn | XX:25p | XX:28p | XX:50p | Via Gravesend | XX:40p | XX:43p | XX:05p | Via Gravesend | XX:55p | XX:58p | XX:20p | Via Gravesend | XX:10p | XX:13p | XX:35p | Via Gravesend |
| Ashford International | XX:25p | XX:28p | XX:53a | Via Gravesend | XX:40p | XX:43p | XX:08a | Via Gravesend | XX:55p | XX:58p | XX:23a | Via Gravesend | XX:10p | XX:13p | XX:38a | Via Gravesend |
d=departure
a=arrival
Jn=Junction
Stratford International would have to be converted to have four domestic platforms to enable this to operate.
I didn't realise just how much capacity a few extra services would take up, but 16tph is actually pushing HS1 to it's limits. I have no doubt TVM430 signalling could handle it, but it's still a lot of trains for a railway that's less advanced than HS2 with potential for 18tph will be.
Trainbike46
Established Member
As I stated, 5k passengers is exactly 5tph with a 50-50 mix of 900 seat 374s and 1100 seat TGV double-deckers. the 373s will reach their end of life before too long.
The existing paths for the tunnel involve departing at .01, .04, .16 (some hours only) .31 .34, which lines up with none of the paths you suggest. It may be possible to shift the paths, but that isn't really a given as it depends on paths on LGV north
Last edited:
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
Eurostar might not go for double deckers.
The paths leave St Pancras 1 minute earlier to provide improved reliability, they would get to the French side as now.
| Current | Replacement |
| XX:01 | XX:00 |
| XX:04 | XX:03 |
| XX:16 | XX:15 |
| XX:31 | XX:30 |
| XX:34 | XX:33 |
Last edited:
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,374
If they don't, then that is their decision.
But if they want to leave capacity on the table they should not be given more paths to make up the difference.
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
It according to the Green Signal video Eurostar might be unable to order the TGV M which is the double decker one due to the long backlog. Hence why a single decker might be what Eurostar goes for.
Trainbike46
Established Member
If they don't, there might still be increases in capacity. For example, they might go for only one bar (instead of two next to each other as on the 374s).
Assuming 1000 passengers per path is a reasonable average long-term.
Why do you feel the need to increase padding, there is no significant reliability issue at present. I also find it curious you decided to leave a path that actually exists spare, and instead use paths that don't currently exist (and you may not get in the tunnel or on LGV nord).
Virgin is only planning on getting the equivalent of 6 400m sets (12 200m set), so wouldn't be able to run half-hourly. As a Paris out and back service would take at least 5 hours, and that is the shortest possible diagram, Virgin would need at least 10 sets to run half-hourly, assuming no unused sets!
From an accessibility and comfort pov, I would prefer if they get more velaros, but there have been reports that Eurostar is going for double-deck TGVs, so it is certainly a likely option.
I think the key point you keep missing is that no-one is planning on running anything close to 6tph, currently it never exceeds 3tph and most hours only have 2tph. reserving 8 tph for such a service is insane.
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
That is because St Pancras is currently limited to 1.5k per hour.
Class 466
Established Member
Not Quite, 1J = St Pancras to Margate via Canterbury, 1L is St Pancras to Ramsgate via Dover & 1C is St Pancras to Ramsgate via Faversham (Any terminating short are 1F - 1T for Maidstone) - both sides of kent get 2 trains an hour off peak rather than the 4 in this - 11 minute dwells in the Southeastern services would never be accepted either, Would render the Chatham side services far slower than the Mainline to Victoria for starters.
This forum doesn't half like splitting hairs sometimes ...
If various operators can manage to cobble up 4 international services to/from St Pancras in each direction per hour in most hours it'll be a stonking good result. The 5k/h capacity target for St Pancras is better considered as a design upper bound that normal operation will stay some distance under for a considerable amount of time. There is no market indication of demand exceeding 4 paths an hour or that rolling stock must absolutely max out capacity.
The problem of international and domestic paths constraining each other exists purely in various figments of imagination.
If various operators can manage to cobble up 4 international services to/from St Pancras in each direction per hour in most hours it'll be a stonking good result. The 5k/h capacity target for St Pancras is better considered as a design upper bound that normal operation will stay some distance under for a considerable amount of time. There is no market indication of demand exceeding 4 paths an hour or that rolling stock must absolutely max out capacity.
The problem of international and domestic paths constraining each other exists purely in various figments of imagination.
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
When your trying to get the most out of the railway you need to have fire break paths. Currently since there isn't that many trains it isn't a big issue but once you get close to capacity you need to have spare paths, which is one of the reasons why Open Access has failed on West Coast Mainline apart from that Lumo Stirling service.
What is stopping Virgin from ordering extra sets and keeping there repairs on the Southern side of the channel or create a new depot on HS1 for them?
HS2 was designed to operate at 17tph with ATO.
I know it isn't ideal, however you would have to decide if International trains should stop at Ebbsfleet to remove the need to hold the units for so long at stations.
If we are going to 4tph I would prefer to flight the service at XX:00, XX:03, XX:30 & XX:33 rather than trying to do an every 15 minutes international service as it doesn't to be turn up and go as international trains tend to require you to be on a certain train.
The standard international paths currently are 01, 04, 31 and 34.
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
Which would be moved forward by a minute.
What's to be gained from haggling over a single minute on an amateur internet forum?
Trainbike46
Established Member
I am aware, but it is not relevant to the question I asked.
Which doesn't explain why you're slowing down services, which is what I was asking.
It also doesn't explain why you choose to leave one of the existing paths spare, rather than one of your new paths (that may or may not fit in France and the Tunnel)
Nothing, other than the fact that Virgin isn't planning that at the moment, so why are you allocating paths to them that they don't plan to use?
so you're almost, but not exactly using the current paths.
You still keep avoiding the point that using all the 4/5 existing paths would be an enormous expansion in service already, and no-one is proposing anything close to that in service, so why are you so insistent on imposing a pattern that, as far as I can tell, only brings disadvantages for the services that will actually run?
The .16 path is not a standard path, but it does
LLivery
Established Member
Berlin is far, but the daily DB-SNCF ICE Paris to Berlin service works and is 8hrs, so why can't London, at least demand wise? Likewise Milan post base tunnel?
A Paris - Berlin service can have people getting on and off freely mid service. A London - Berlin service has to be sterile.
The Green Signals podcast episode I watched on the subject of Eurostar competition made a comparison to the competition between Trenitalia and Italo on Italy's high-speed rail network. There's also Iryo and Ouigo in Spain who made a success of open-access high-speed rail operations. But if there's one thing this thread has taught me, it's that this sort of thing is a lot harder when you're running on no less than three different networks and pathing arranges (UK, Channel Tunnel and France for London-Paris alone).
Nope. The concession agreement with Get Link (formerly Eurotunnel) says 4, with provision for 5.
4 / 5 will be more than enough, even if we joined Schengen. With that capacity, St Pancras would handle more international passengers than Gatwick Airport.
LLivery
Established Member
Sterile to London, but I get your point
BerkshireRails
On Moderation
Because people said St Pancras 5k can support 5.5tph, hence I said do workings out on 6tph with 2tph of spare paths for reliability.
Slowing down services is the only way it could fit without removal of domestic stops.
It is easier to path it in 30 minute blocks and just duplicate it, when the frequency is 2tph I find.
Gatwick Airport gets something like 29-30 trains per hour.
Redone Down Timetable using the same codes as before.
| Operator | Eurostar | Virgin | Southeastern | Southeastern | Southeastern | Southeastern | Eurostar | Eurostar | Southeastern | Southeastern | Southeastern | Southeastern |
| Headcode | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1CXX | 1LXX | 1FXX | 9IXX | 9IXX | 1JXX | 1CXX | 1LXX | 1FXX |
| St Pancras International | XX:01d | XX:04d | XX:07d | XX:12d | XX:17d | XX:22d | XX:31d | XX:34d | XX:37d | XX:42d | XX:47d | XX:52d |
| Stratford High Speed | XX:06p | XX:09p | XX:13a/XX:14d | XX:18a/XX:19d | XX:23a/XX:24d | XX:28a/XX:29d | XX:36p | XX:39p | XX:43a/XX:44d | XX:48a/XX:49d | XX:53a/XX:54d | XX:58a/XX:59d |
| Ebbsfleet International | XX:14p | XX:17p | XX:24a/XX:25d | XX:29a | XX:34a/XX:35d | XX:39a | XX:44p | XX:47p | XX:54a/XX:55d | XX:59a | XX:04a/XX:05d | XX:09a |
| Ashford West Jn | XX:26p | XX:29p | XX:41p | Via Gravesend | XX:51p | Via Gravesend | XX:56p | XX:59p | XX:11p | Via Gravesend | XX:21p | Via Gravesend |
| Ashford International | XX:26p | XX:29p | XX:44a | Via Gravesend | XX:54a | Via Gravesend | XX:56p | XX:59p | XX:14a | Via Gravesend | XX:24a | Via Gravesend |
Thats not relevant.
I was comparing the capacity of the 4-5tph international services at St Pancras with the throughput of Gatwick Airport. (Not Gatwick Airport station).
Remember that Pendolino was one of the options that is included in part of the Avelia Stream offering, I don't think it's been confirmed, I feel that we're probably latching on to it as we don't have any Zefiro based units in the UK.
Given that HS2 are buying Zefiro based units, I'd put my money on that being much more likely.
It might. But as mentioned it’s not a huge market for the distance (SoF has far more demand, or Zurich) - and really it’s a one daily proposition.
One day a Lyon/Turn/Milan might be worth interesting, but with much shorter journey times.
Getting to Frankfurt would be a good proof point, as that will edge 4.5/5 hours (vs quick highly frequent flights) - Koln being a happy accident on the way and might add some patronage, like Rotterdam.
And from, only after it has called (Brussels first stop I imagine) - so it’s not perfect.