Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[Bald Rick]

I think it could be valuable, and destinations like Manchester and Birmingham could definitely provide adequate passenger levels

The thing is, they couldn’t as a stand alone international service. The entire daily flow between the North West (Manchester & Liverpool airports) the West Midlands (Birmingham airport) and Paris could comfortably fit on 2 eurostars each way (compared to 7-9 flights daily). Many of those air passengers would not be prepared to spend 4-5 hours on the train and/or pay substantially more for the journey and/or travel at the times the more limited train service would run. Some other passengers are travelling to Paris CDG to change planes to head further afield, so the train would be no good anyway.

If the servicewas essentially open calls everywhere, ie in Schengen, then it would be quite feasible to run a bi- hourly WCML* to Paris and bi-hourly ECML to Paris with a London call probably as a reverse at St P or possibly at Stratford. Albeit that would need UK gauge trains.

*not HS2

 

[AndrewE]

If the service was essentially open calls everywhere, ie in Schengen, then it would be quite feasible to run a bi- hourly WCML* to Paris with a London call probably as a reverse at St P or possibly at Stratford. Albeit that would need UK gauge trains.

*not HS2

Just bring it on! I wouldn't mind stopping at Brum or Rugby to pick up en route...
but I'm afraid I'll be dead before it happens!

 

[Bald Rick]

Just bring it on! I wouldn't mind stopping at Brum or Rugby to pick up en route...
but I'm afraid I'll be dead before it happens!

I would genuinely quite like a national conversation that basically said - if we were to join Schengen, no need for immigration checks at the airport / station for your european trips, through trains from the regions to Europe, lots more rail destinations in europe direct from the UK (realisitically, only from London), and also causes an immediate delivery of “stop the boats“ *.

* albeit not in a way that a certain part of the political spectrum would be happy about.

 

[Mikey C]

I would genuinely quite like a national conversation that basically said - if we were to join Schengen, no need for immigration checks at the airport / station for your european trips, through trains from the regions to Europe, lots more rail destinations in europe direct from the UK (realisitically, only from London), and also causes an immediate delivery of “stop the boats“ *.

* albeit not in a way that a certain part of the political spectrum would be happy about.

The immigration checks at airports (and indeed Eurostar terminals) aren't a major hassle, It's the SECURITY checks which are the horrible bit, and that won't change.

 

[Shrop]

The thing is, they couldn’t as a stand alone international service. The entire daily flow between the North West (Manchester & Liverpool airports) the West Midlands (Birmingham airport) and Paris could comfortably fit on 2 eurostars each way (compared to 7-9 flights daily). Many of those air passengers would not be prepared to spend 4-5 hours on the train and/or pay substantially more for the journey and/or travel at the times the more limited train service would run. Some other passengers are travelling to Paris CDG to change planes to head further afield, so the train would be no good anyway.

If the servicewas essentially open calls everywhere, ie in Schengen, then it would be quite feasible to run a bi- hourly WCML* to Paris and bi-hourly ECML to Paris with a London call probably as a reverse at St P or possibly at Stratford. Albeit that would need UK gauge trains.

*not HS2

Schengen and the resultant reduction or even removal of security would certainly be key to any hope of meaningful services between provincial UK and Paris (etc), however I'm not convinced of the argument about poor train loadings.
Using figures based on existing flights between airports at Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester and Paris is far too limited, and perhaps even blinkered by the very poor loadings of the HST services that connected from Waterloo back in the 1990s. Those loadings were always doomed, thanks to the combination of slow trains through Kent, followed by a change of train, then a tedious crossing of London, and after all that, a rail journey a whole lot slower than HS2 will provide. So consideration (however hypothetically) of an HS1-HS2 link combined with embracing Schengen, shouldn't in any way be influenced by that completely irrelevant history.
So having removed that, now let's add to those existing UK destinations, a whole load more cities. After all, today's trains stop far more frequently than they used to, thanks to their greatly improved acceleration characteristics, as has been pointed out many times in this forum. So why not use this factor to open up a whole lot more journey options, and recognise the potential to fill many more trains than you have suggested?

 

[Krokodil]

The immigration checks at airports (and indeed Euurostar terminals) aren't a major hassle, It's the SECURITY checks which are the horrible bit, and that won't change.

It's immigration checks that cause the queuing, and while any contractor could operate an X-ray machine at random out stations you need multiple governments to cooperate to man border posts.

 

[Bald Rick]

Using figures based on existing flights between airports at Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester and Paris is far too limited,

Why? What other indication of the size of the market is there?

 

[zwk500]

The immigration checks at airports (and indeed Eurostar terminals) aren't a major hassle, It's the SECURITY checks which are the horrible bit, and that won't change.

immigration checks require a secured border zone for the 'airside' bit, which is much of the problems.

Using figures based on existing flights between airports at Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester and Paris is far too limited, and perhaps even blinkered by the very poor loadings of the HST services that connected from Waterloo back in the 1990s.

How is using flight figures blinkered by the trains of 35 years ago? Unless there are external constraints on the number of flights able to operate from those airports or between those airport pairs, the flight schedules are a very good reflection of the current demand profile across the day.

 

[Shrop]

How is using flight figures blinkered by the trains of 35 years ago? Unless there are external constraints on the number of flights able to operate from those airports or between those airport pairs, the flight schedules are a very good reflection of the current demand profile across the day.

To clarify, previous suggestions about providing links between provincial UK cities and France have been met with responses pointing out how poor the loadings were in the 1990s, when HSTs were provided at Waterloo to connect with Eurostars, which then ran to Birmingham and Manchester. In the context of an HS2-HS1 link I reiterate the word "hypothetical" since it's never really going to happen, but it does make for an interesting discussion which can be revealing about the manner in which our travel planners think. So it's worth also reiterating the hope that these poor loadings would no longer be in the minds of anyone arguing against an HS2-HS1 link.

As for using the present airport pairs, why on earth would these be a good reflection of current demand? People travel when the facility is there, and much less so when it isn't, which is why it's a very well known fact that the building of a by-pass for a congested town doesn't simply provide relief for that town, it also generates many new journeys. In rail terms, look at the passenger loadings of the French TGVs between Paris and many other cities - it would be crazy to claim that all these people were previously making these journeys by air, and it also follows that air simply could not facilitate all of these journeys today.

 

[zwk500]

To clarify, previous suggestions about providing links between provincial UK cities and France have been met with responses pointing out how poor the loadings were in the 1990s, when HSTs were provided at Waterloo to connect with Eurostars, which then ran to Birmingham and Manchester. In the context of an HS2-HS1 link I reiterate the word "hypothetical" since it's never really going to happen, but it does make for an interesting discussion which can be revealing about the manner in which our travel planners think. So it's worth also reiterating the hope that these poor loadings would no longer be in the minds of anyone arguing against an HS2-HS1 link.

Nothing in @Bald Rick's post claimed low numbers from the original HST connecting trains. You have objected to a point nobody raised.

As for using the present airport pairs, why on earth would these be a good reflection of current demand?

Because airlines are incredibly responsive to demand. And notice I said demand *profile*, not total demand numbers.

People travel when the facility is there, and much less so when it isn't, which is why it's a very well known fact that the building of a by-pass for a congested town doesn't simply provide relief for that town, it also generates many new journeys.

Comparing domestic travel with international travel is not comparing Apples with Apples. Yes, latent or induced demand is very much a thing but demand ceilings are also a thing. If you built a 6-lane motorway to bypass a small town, it would not fill up.

In rail terms, look at the passenger loadings of the French TGVs between Paris and many other cities - it would be crazy to claim that all these people were previously making these journeys by air, and it also follows that air simply could not facilitate all of these journeys today.

Again, you're not comparing Apples with Apples. TGVs are replacing domestic classic line trains. HS2 is doing that job. But Paris to Lyon by TGV is sub-2hr which is a very different market to the 4-5hr bracket Manchester to Paris would be, which is far more into the time zone when airlines can compete effectively.

It's 1h20-1h35 to fly from Manchester to Paris. Allowing 1.5hrs for check-in and 1hr transfer at either end, that gives 1+1.5+1.5+1 = 5hr Door-to-Door travel time by air. Manchester Piccadilly to London is 2h30 by train, London to Paris is 2h30 by train, or 5hrs centre to centre. The train would 100% be competing with the airlines, and therefore the airline demand is very instructive.

 

[Shrop]

Nothing in @Bald Rick's post claimed low numbers from the original HST connecting trains. You have objected to a point nobody raised.

Perhaps not in this particular thread, but this point has been raised previously.

Because airlines are incredibly responsive to demand. And notice I said demand *profile*, not total demand numbers.

Comparing domestic travel with international travel is not comparing Apples with Apples. Yes, latent or induced demand is very much a thing but demand ceilings are also a thing. If you built a 6-lane motorway to bypass a small town, it would not fill up.

"A 6 lane by-pass for a small town"? "Comparing Apples with Apples"? An appropriate by-pass for a small town would be single lane (each way), or two lanes each way for a larger town. And yes it would fill up.

Again, you're not comparing Apples with Apples. TGVs are replacing domestic classic line trains.

Why do you say this? It's the airline traffic that the TGVs have decimated. How many rail passengers used to travel routes like Paris to Marseille by classic line trains, compared to how many use the TGV now?

HS2 is doing that job.

Try telling that to the people of Yorkshire.

But Paris to Lyon by TGV is sub-2hr which is a very different market to the 4-5hr bracket Manchester to Paris would be, which is far more into the time zone when airlines can compete effectively.

Manchester to Paris by HS2 with an HS2-HS1 link would have been well under 4 hours. this discussion is about the hypothesis that this link would have been provided, along with the full HS2, ie what was promised at the HS2 launch back in 2009. If we were to (hypothetically) assume Schengen inclusion, then we would be talking more like 3.5 hours from Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield to Paris, and just 3 hours from Birmingham. And half an hour less than that between these cities and Brussels. Anyone would think you're not in favour of rail travel

 

[zwk500]

An appropriate by-pass for a small town would be single lane (each way), or two lanes each way for a larger town. And yes it would fill up.

And that's the point, approporiately sized for the demand.

Why do you say this? It's the airline traffic that the TGVs have decimated.

Because international travel and domestic travel are very different markets. And 2hrs is a very different kettle of fish from 4-5hrs.

Try telling that to the people of Yorkshire.

I am equally as frustrated at the failure of HS2 to reach Leeds and Scotland as anybody else who wants more rail travel than air travel.

Manchester to Paris by HS2 with an HS2-HS1 link would have been well under 4 hours. this discussion is about the hypothesis that this link would have been provided, along with the full HS2, ie what was promised at the HS2 launch back in 2009. If we were to (hypothetically) assume Schengen inclusion, then we would be talking more like 3.5 hours from Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield to Paris, and just 3 hours from Birmingham. And half an hour less than that between these cities and Brussels.

This thread is the proposed new services discussion, not the hypothetical HS1-HS2 link we were discussing no?

Anyone would think you're not in favour of rail travel

Being in favour of rail travel does not mean I have to be in favour of every single proposal to run a train in the world. There are jobs that rail does brilliantly, and there are jobs it doesn't do as well as other options.

If we didn't have borders and security controls, running early and late regional trains to Paris and Brussels would be an extremely sensible thing to do. There is absolutely a market for it, but it's not a huge one that will support running all-day 400m trains.

 

[bspahh]

Meanwhile in the Yorkshire Post

Compelling case for HS2 land to be used for a European train terminal in Yorkshire
A sure fire way of supercharging the region’s economy is by investing in transport connectivity, especially high speed rail. That is why places such as Yorkshire have been left feeling betrayed by the decision to curtail HS2. In fact, the current proposals of cutting it short at Birmingham also take the economic wind out of the sails of the project.
However, the land procured for the project could still be utilised to the benefit of the region’s rail infrastructure.

Luke Charters, the Labour MP for York Outer, is expected to put forward a compelling case for using land left over from HS2 to be used to accommodate European connections. He proposes using land near Leeds Station for a dedicated European train terminal.

“Imagine a service running from Leeds to Lille taking just three-and-a-half hours,” Mr Charters is expected to say in the Commons today. “York would offer additional capacity to support connections from surrounding communities.”
While these are laudable ambitions, the problem is that few people will be willing to buy into any promises of such a plan simply because the region has been let down repeatedly. The previous government became notorious for promising the earth and delivering little. This Government needs to work hard to restore trust and it needs to do it fast.

Firstly, it needs to deliver a high speed link that runs from Liverpool to Hull, connecting the North and unlocking its potential as a true powerhouse.

A European rail connection would allow the region to do what it does best, provide a Yorkshire welcome to tourists from across the world.

In order for such a scheme to work, not only does there need to be a political will but the other piece of the puzzle, transport infrastructure within the region, needs to also fall into place.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Meanwhile in the Yorkshire Post

So because HS2 was canceled they want to... build HS2?

 

[zwk500]

So because HS2 was canceled they want to... build HS2?

Apparently, to connect Leeds to the continent requires first build a line from Liverpool to Hull... Maybe he's planning a really fast boat from Hull to Amsterdam?

(FWIW I'm wholly in favour of building HS2 all the way to Leeds.)

 

[Krokodil]

Maybe he's planning a really fast boat from Hull to Amsterdam?

Just as long as Uncle Albert isn’t navigating

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps not in this particular thread, but this point has been raised previously.

Not by me! (to my knowledge)

As for using the present airport pairs, why on earth would these be a good reflection of current demand? People travel when the facility is there, and much less so when it isn't, which is why it's a very well known fact that the building of a by-pass for a congested town doesn't simply provide relief for that town, it also generates many new journeys. In rail terms, look at the passenger loadings of the French TGVs between Paris and many other cities - it would be crazy to claim that all these people were previously making these journeys by air, and it also follows that air simply could not facilitate all of these journeys today.

There has been a lot of research into this. I’ve done some of it myself. New capacity does, of course, generate demand. However it is very, very clear that observed demand between any two city pairs is by far the best indicator of the level of future demand, especially when making comparisons.

Why do you say this? It's the airline traffic that the TGVs have decimated. How many rail passengers used to travel routes like Paris to Marseille by classic line trains, compared to how many use the TGV now?

There are still around 12 flights each way daily between Paris and Marseille. Plenty used to travel by train when it was nearly 5 hours before the LGV Rhône Alpes opened in 1994 and LGV Méditeranée opened in 2001.

Meanwhile we have plenty of evidence about what swings the balance between air and rail, not least with the advent of Eurostar. Nevertheless, the base for all comparisons is the existing passenger numbers.


Specifically for ‘Regions’ to Paris. Today there is roughly an hourly service between London and Paris. London has a decent sized French population (some people claim it is the sixth largest French city by population, although that is dubious). Being the two prime business and cultural centres of Europe, there is a lot of demand and always has been, including pre Eurostar. This includes tourists to Europe who travel by train between the two. And it still hiurly with a couple extra. That demand simply does not exist from the regions at the same level, and never will. Hence why in a non-Schengen for UK world it will never be viable to run regions to Europe services.

In a UK in Schengen world, it becomes viable, but only with a London stop, as I said above. Essential some Paris - London services would be extended to the Midlands and North.

 

[Snow1964]

Just announced
MPs are going to debate bringing International trains back to Ashford

On Tuesday 14 October in Westminster Hall, MPs will hold a debate on the potential merits of returning international rail services to Ashford.

• Backbench Business Committee
• Helena Dollimore put forward this debate.
• Watch the debate live on Parliament TV

A full transcript of the debate which be available three hours after the debate on Commons Hansard.

Backbench Business Committee​

The Backbench Business Committee meets weekly on Tuesdays to consider requests for debates from any backbench Members of Parliament on any subject.
The Committee then has to decide how to allocate the limited Parliamentary time it has at its disposal.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209387/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-potential-merits-of-returning-international-rail-services-to-ashford/

 

[STINT47]

Just announced
MPs are going to debate bringing International trains back to Ashford

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209387/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-potential-merits-of-returning-international-rail-services-to-ashford/

They can debate it but can they compel Eurostar to do it is the bigger question.

 

[Trainbike46]

I'm sure they could convince Eurostar or one of the new operators to serve Ashford International, but whether the government would be willing to pay the subsidy the operator would require is a very different question!

 

[zwk500]

Just announced
MPs are going to debate bringing International trains back to Ashford

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209387/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-potential-merits-of-returning-international-rail-services-to-ashford/

Its a Westminster hall debate, so the chances of the government doing anything about it are pretty minimal. Its a chance for the Ashford MP(s) to show they're doing something for their constituents.

I'm sure they could convince Eurostar or one of the new operators to serve Ashford International, but whether the government would be willing to pay the subsidy the operator would require is a very different question!

I wonder if it could be made to pay by concentrating calls to minimise staffong, and then the government pays to reactivate the terminal as a one-off 'development incentive' or similar. It would mean Ashford gets a bit of a restricted service though

 

[Sorcerer]

If only one of the stations filling the role of a Kent parkway must be reopened then Ashford does seem to be the more sensible choice. Realistically though I can't see much coming out of any debates unless the government can actually incentivise it as a calling point, and as it stands neither Eurostar nor any potential competitors seem too keen on stopping between St. Pancras and the tunnel portal.

 

[Trainbike46]

I wonder if it could be made to pay by concentrating calls to minimise staffong, and then the government pays to reactivate the terminal as a one-off 'development incentive' or similar. It would mean Ashford gets a bit of a restricted service though

I would assume that if services are reintroduced at all, it would be one departure to Paris in the morning, and one departure to Brussels close to it (within about 30 minutes of each other), and arrivals from both in the other direction in the evening, I can't see a frequent service coming to Ashford under any circumstances.

 

[The exile]

I would assume that if services are reintroduced at all, it would be one departure to Paris in the morning, and one departure to Brussels close to it (within about 30 minutes of each other), and arrivals from both in the other direction in the evening, I can't see a frequent service coming to Ashford under any circumstances.

Potentially a pair in the opposite direction in the same time windows - not going to be massive demand for them but the staff will be there anyway so minimal extra cost.

 

[Trainbike46]

Potentially a pair in the opposite direction in the same time windows - not going to be massive demand for them but the staff will be there anyway so minimal extra cost.

Border and security staff would only be needed for passengers travelling towards Europe, so the evening departures would require extra staff, that is not needed for arrivals from Belgium or France

 

[HSTEd]

Border and security staff would only be needed for passengers travelling towards Europe, so the evening departures would require extra staff, that is not needed for arrivals from Belgium or France

Border security people are present at London St Pancras for arrivals although they don't normally stop anyone. They do, however, retain this capability.

I'm not sure how practical it would be for someone to travel to Ashford to meet the train if someone needed to be stopped, and in any case it would be necessary to decide it well in advance.

 

[Trainbike46]

Border security people are present at London St Pancras for arrivals although they don't normally stop anyone. They do, however, retain this capability.

I'm not sure how practical it would be for someone to travel to Ashford to meet the train if someone needed to be stopped, and in any case it would be necessary to decide it well in advance.

That only requires British border staff to be present, not French border staff. If needed border staff could travel from Dover or Folkestone in about 40 minutes. Potentially, local (Kent) police or BTP might be able to do that as well.

I also doubt how necessary this is at all, because there is no equivalent at the European stations, especially not in the Netherlands where they drop you at a seemingly random platform in Rotterdam or Amsterdam.

 

[cle]

Manchester to Paris by HS2 with an HS2-HS1 link would have been well under 4 hours. this discussion is about the hypothesis that this link would have been provided, along with the full HS2, ie what was promised at the HS2 launch back in 2009. If we were to (hypothetically) assume Schengen inclusion, then we would be talking more like 3.5 hours from Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield to Paris, and just 3 hours from Birmingham. And half an hour less than that between these cities and Brussels. Anyone would think you're not in favour of rail travel

But none of this is happening now. Forget HS2-HS1 or Schengen.

If HS2 gets to Euston, walk to St P - that's the move. I can't even see WCML via Camden or MML reversal services happening to Europe.

There are 6-9 flights to Paris a day depending on the day of the week, from Manchester. Those are throughout the day, will include connections to AF, day trips and SkyTeam loyalists - there are many in the region due to AF / KL / VS giving a good spread of destinations. I genuinely don't think even 2 return trains would work demand-wise.

Birmingham is a smaller intl market, but is admittedly a better source today - and moreso when HS2 opens - to change at St P. Manchester is likely to remain a flight dominated route.

 

[zwk500]

That only requires British border staff to be present, not French border staff. If needed border staff could travel from Dover or Folkestone in about 40 minutes. Potentially, local (Kent) police or BTP might be able to do that as well.

Do police have the power to grant entry to the UK?

I also doubt how necessary this is at all, because there is no equivalent at the European stations, especially not in the Netherlands where they drop you at a seemingly random platform in Rotterdam or Amsterdam.

You can doubt the necessity of it all you like but in the current political climate there is zero chance of the Home Office allowing the border to be opened at Ashford without being staffed.

 

[Trainbike46]

Do police have the power to grant entry to the UK?

If someon is in Ashford, they clearly have been granted entry by the border officials at the departure station...

The situation I was replying to was the situation when someone was let through in Paris/Brussels/Lille with the intention of stopping or arresting them on arrival in the UK, as apparently sometimes happens. The police clearly has the power to arrest people. This appears to be the main purpose of the potential for ID'ing people arriving at St Pancras. Then again, maybe the Home Office has some kind of secret other purpose!

The police have the power to request Identification from people in certain specific situations, in Birkenhead they use a port related act (I forgot which year, I'll have to check next time I travel through Birkenhead), that seems to also apply to international airports and train stations. In this way, the police could ID people to help them identify the person they are intending to arrest, if they feel that is needed.

You can doubt the necessity of it all you like but in the current political climate there is zero chance of the Home Office allowing the border to be opened at Ashford without being staffed.

Everyone would still be checked by UK border officials before boarding the Eurostar, so the border would not be unstaffed in any way.