Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[zwk500]

Problems with accessibility guidelines and TGV-M.

Is it a problem with TGV-M not meeting the accessibility requirements, or separate problems with accessibility, and the TGV-M?

 

[HS2isgood]

They made some weird system to move the floor level? I don't remember and I definitely lack the technical knowledge to comment much more in depth. But yeah it's likely it'll be TGV-M. That raises the interesting point of where the remaining e320 would be. Also, as they're 200 m sets, replacing all the e300, PBA and PBKA's, it's actually a net increase of... two 200 m trainsets, not much. Even though they should allow more service, as they intend to reduce turning time at termini and they've cut all service south of Paris/MLV.

 

[Snow1964]

Is it a problem with TGV-M not meeting the accessibility requirements, or separate problems with accessibility, and the TGV-M?

The problem is explained in detail in this article that I have just found.

Platforms normally 550mm or 760mm, but there is a door threshold at 617mm and a floor height of 300mm. It also seems the wheelchair lift equipped vehicles have active suspension and can be raised a bit when stationary to reduce platform-train height differences

The accessibility problems with Alstom’s new TGV-M train – with implications for future Channel Tunnel operators

There is no way to sweeten this: my original conclusion that Alstom's Avelia Horizon (known as TGV-M with SNCF) is not legal at higher station platforms outside France was incorrect. Because transparency and correcting my errors matters to me, you can read the original blog entry in full here -...

crossborderrail.trainsforeurope.eu

 

[Trainbike46]

This might be somewhat controversial, but if the TGV M poses such issues for accessibility on services that encounter both 550mm and 760mm platforms, then maybe a different train design makes more sense, whether it be from Siemens, Alstom, or even some other manufacturer.

 

[NCT]

Surely a single deck flat floor unit with distributed traction is the most straightforward choice?

 

[Trainbike46]

Surely a single deck flat floor unit with distributed traction is the most straightforward choice?

So, something like the eurostar e320? That would make lots of sense. Maybe too much for Eurostar!

For non-high-speed trains there are also trains that have a mix of double and single deck coaches, would such a design make sense for a high-speed operation? Simply have the accessible seats and wheelchair places in the single deck sections.

 

[30907]

For non-high-speed trains there are also trains that have a mix of double and single deck coaches, would such a design make sense for a high-speed operation? Simply have the accessible seats and wheelchair places in the single deck sections.

They (eg the Omneo Premium) are ingenious, I agree - I wonder how you would cope with the aerodynamics at 330km/h though?

There's still the issue of two different platform heights to cope with.

 

[Trainbike46]

They (eg the Omneo Premium) are ingenious, I agree - I wonder how you would cope with the aerodynamics at 330km/h though?

That should be doable - the region 2N / Omneo premium already gets close by using the roof of the single-deck cars to install equipment. Or just have VERY tall ceilings on the single deck cars

There's still the issue of two different platform heights to cope with.

The two main ways for dealing with the platform heights are:
- offer level boarding at 760mm (and a 21 cm step up 550mm, using a ramp at 550mm stations)
- have separate entry doors on the accessible coach, one for use at 550 mm stations, one for use at 760 mm stations, and use an internal fixed ramp to get to/from each door to the wheelchair spaces (I believe DB uses this approach on some rolling stock?)

 

[martin2345uk]

Why did HS1 build its international platforms at a different height to those in France..?

 

[HSTEd]

Why did HS1 build its international platforms at a different height to those in France..?

I don't have access to the original documents, but likely to make it easier to board trains designed for 915mm height platforms.

760mm is the higher of the two permitted TSI heights (leaving aisde national special heights like 915mm or the Dutch one)

 

[Trainbike46]

Why did HS1 build its international platforms at a different height to those in France..?

They followed the standard of Belgium, the Netherlands and western Germany (760mm). Why mainland europe has decided to standardise on two different levels (550 and 760mm), I do not know.

Eurostar would have to be able to use both heights in any case, so there isn't really a massive reason to prefer the French height on HS1.

I don't have access to the original documents, but likely to make it easier to board trains designed for 915mm height platforms.

760mm is the higher of the two permitted TSI heights (leaving aisde national special heights like 915mm or the Dutch one)

The old dutch height was 840mm, but the Netherlands is changing to 760mm. Fortunately they are pretty close, so both heights existing at the same time is not really an issue.

Many new trains have internal floor heights that offer level boarding at 760mm platforms, e.g. the NS FLIRT with 780mm internal floors.

 

[MarkyT]

France probably decided on 550mm for new HS platforms because of the extent of TGV running at routes' extremities on classic infrastructure, most of which traditionally had very low platforms. That's the case in much of southern Europe, even including south Germany and many rural areas. Rebuilding to anything higher than 550mm at so many stations would be impractical, so the lower option has become locked in across a wide part of Europe. That will inevitably cause problems at and across interfaces, particularly for long-distance and international trains.

In France many of those original classic segments have since been replaced by LGV extensions, but even now there's still a fair amount of classic running, partly through a policy of serving as much of the country as possible, even if only with a tiny handful of daily trains, but also where routes are predominantly LGV, HS trains still often share existing platforms and final approaches with classic trains at major city terminals.

It could make sense for LGV Nord to have 760mm platforms at Paris and Lille, as the majority of HS trains on this line are former Thalys on the Benelux/Germany route and London Eurostars that all have to cope with higher 760mm platforms once outside France. Standardisation could allow future level boarding on this northern European HS subnet. There are some longer-distance TGV services from Lille to various other direct destinations in France, but they could plausibly use the adjacent classic terminus instead if there was a platform height issue at the HS station.

Spain has standardised on 760mm for HS, like northern Europe, though much of the traditional network has very low platforms like France. Interrunning between HS and classic networks due to different track gauges is limited but occurs on some routes using gauge-changing rolling stock. International HS trains between France and Spain will face similar compatibility challenges over platform height.

 

[Snow1964]

DfT announcement : deal with Switzerland for direct rail link

Millions of passengers could benefit from quicker, greener and more convenient travel across Europe as the Transport Secretary signs a landmark agreement to progress a new direct rail link to Switzerland.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed today (9 May 2025) between the Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander, and Federal Councillor, Albert Rösti, will lay the groundwork for future commercial services that could boost tourism to the UK, support jobs and businesses and strengthen cross-border trade.

This landmark agreement, signed today at London St Pancras Station, signifies the government’s ambition to boost sustainable transport links across Europe and unlock the significant economic, social and environmental benefits a direct rail connection brings.

The move will help formalise cooperation between the 2 governments, building on industry efforts, to address the barriers to establishing direct rail services, in particular the need to establish border controls and meet Channel Tunnel safety rules.

It will also support the industry’s existing plans to realise long-term ambitions for enhanced rail connectivity between the UK and central Europe.

Transport Secretary forges landmark deal to progress new Swiss rail link

Direct rail link between UK and Switzerland could boost tourism and grow our economy, while offering a greener option for passengers.

www.gov.uk

 

[zwk500]

Mention of border controls is interesting, suggesting intent to avoid a Lille shuffle?

 

[Trainbike46]

DfT announcement : deal with Switzerland for direct rail link

Transport Secretary forges landmark deal to progress new Swiss rail link

Direct rail link between UK and Switzerland could boost tourism and grow our economy, while offering a greener option for passengers.

www.gov.uk

There is also a specific thread for this announcement: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/london-to-switzerland-direct.285973/

 

[BahrainLad]

The transport tech giant Uber is to take on Eurostar through the Channel Tunnel – but you may need an Uber to reach the departure station in east London.

Uber has teamed up with a start-up operator, Gemini Trains, to promote a planned rival service linking London with Paris and Brussels.

If the partners are permitted to launch trains to Continental Europe, they will not start from the terminal at St Pancras – but six miles down the track at Stratford International.


“Stratford is actually a bit of a blank canvas,” said Adrian Quine, chief executive of Gemini Trains. “It’s a bit like London City airport as opposed to Heathrow or Gatwick: it’s very quick and easy to get through. It’s going to be far less crowded, so we think it's a bit of a jewel in the crown.”

Could Stratford replace St Pancras as the gateway to Europe?

Exclusive: ’We think it's a bit of a jewel in the crown’ says Gemini Trains CEO Adrian Quine

www.independent.co.uk

 

[TheWierdOne]

Could Stratford replace St Pancras as the gateway to Europe?

Exclusive: ’We think it's a bit of a jewel in the crown’ says Gemini Trains CEO Adrian Quine

www.independent.co.uk

Replace? Probably not
Supplement? Definitely

 

[6Gman]

Replace? Probably not
Supplement? Definitely

Can it though?

Given the issues of turning at Stratford and access to Platforms 1 and 4 would it work without huge investment?

 

[TheWierdOne]

Can it though?

Given the issues of turning at Stratford and access to Platforms 1 and 4 would it work without huge investment?

It remains to be seen what Gemini’s plan is because as you say the investment required is nothing to sniff at, unless they plan to deadhead to St Pancras and back. But I assume they must have thought of this

 

[BahrainLad]

Is reversing at St Pancras really such a big deal?

 

[SynthD]

Is reversing at St Pancras really such a big deal?

In not serving passengers at St Pancras, they are trying to avoid the cost of using HS1 for that distance and St P for that time. Reversing in platform costs a large portion of serving the station like Eurostar, and there are no sidings in the station. The line towards Camden Road may have been ruled out as a siding.

 

[BahrainLad]

In not serving passengers at St Pancras, they are trying to avoid the cost of using HS1 for that distance and St P for that time. Reversing in platform costs a large portion of serving the station like Eurostar, and there are no sidings in the station. The line towards Camden Road may have been ruled out as a siding.

Presumably then, if HS1 really want to stimulate competition via opening Stratford (also another question!) then they should adapt their charging structure so that only reversing in St Pancras is a small portion of the cost of serving the station rather than a large one.

 

[HSTEd]

The international facilities at Stratford are not really lying idle, most of them do not exist!

They will need an awful lot of money to pay to finish the terminal and then operate it, unless they expect the government to provide a major additional subsidy.

 

[Tobberz]

So would it be at all possible to terminate trains at Stratford as it stands?

 

[Peterthegreat]

So would it be at all possible to terminate trains at Stratford as it stands?

You can terminate but only the domestic platforms allow trains to reverse. You would need to run to St Pancras to reverse.

 

[zwk500]

So would it be at all possible to terminate trains at Stratford as it stands?

Not from abroad.

 

[pieswick]

Would switching the domestic and international platforms come at incredibly large cost?

 

[signed]

Would switching the domestic and international platforms come at incredibly large cost?

Yes, the international are 760mm high and the domestic 915mm high (they had to prop up the international for Javelin service during the Olympics to serve the volume)

 

[Bald Rick]

The international facilities at Stratford are not really lying idle, most of them do not exist!

They will need an awful lot of money to pay to finish the terminal and then operate it, unless they expect the government to provide a major additional subsidy.

Not only that, but they are very definitely not sized to deal with a whole train of international passengers, even a 200metre long one.

 

[zwk500]

Would switching the domestic and international platforms come at incredibly large cost?

Yes, the international are 760mm high and the domestic 915mm high (they had to prop up the international for Javelin service during the Olympics to serve the volume)

not only that but the domestic platforms in the middle are half the length of the international platforms.