# EUROPE | Eurostar and Inter-country Railways



## hkskyline

*Eurostar - 10 & Still Losing Money*

*Eurostar at year 10: better, faster but still losing money *

PARIS, Nov 12 (AFP) - Eurostar, the high-speed passenger train service linking Britain, France and Belgium, marks its 10th year Sunday boasting record performances, but has yet to get on track to profitability. 

Despite the gloomy bottom line, the company plans to kick up its heels in public galas at train stations in Paris, Lille, London and Brussels. 

But it is keeping under wraps a special celebration planned Monday in London. The festivities had been postponed a week after a deadly British train crash. 

For the Eurostar Group, there is cause for celebration this year after notching record passenger numbers, punctuality and market share last month. 

But with all its success, the loss-making company is still struggling. It hopes to come close to the break-even point this year after posting a loss of 60 million euros (77.5 million dollars) in 2003, less than half of the 130 million in 2002. 

Since its launch on November 14, 1994, the under-Channel rail service has carried about 59 million passengers on rails operated by the French company SNCF, its Belgian counterpart SNCB and British Eurostar UK on their own territories. 

Service has mushroomed up to 16 daily trains each way on the London-Paris route and nine between London and Brussels, compared with an original two each way on each route. 

The sleek yellow and gray trains arrive more often on time, or early -- 89 percent in the first six months of 2004, compared with 77 percent a year earlier. 

They are faster, with the London-Paris trip now taking two hours and 35 minutes and the London-Brussels route to two hours and 15 minutes. 

Instrumental in speeding up the service was last year's opening of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link in Britain, allowing Eurostar trains to reach their full speed of 300 kilometers (186 miles) per hour and shaving 20 minutes off travel time. 

Eurostar says it carries more passengers than all of the airlines combined on the London-Paris and London-Brussels routes, citing Civil Aviation Authority figures for August. Eurostar had a record-busting 68 percent of the London-Paris train/air market and 63 percent of the London-Brussels route. 

In October it carried a monthly record of 641,957 passengers. 

Over the first 10 months of they year, more than six million people have boarded the trains, 16.2 percent more than a year earlier, fueling hopes the 2000 record of 7.1 million passengers will be smashed. 

Like other forms of public transport, Eurostar was dealt a blow by the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States. It also has had to cope with the arrival of new air travel competition from low-cost airlines. 

Launched with grand visions of some 12 million passengers in the first year, the 766-seat Eurostar trains, however, have only been half filled on average, much less than the French high-speed TGV trains, whose cars are twice as small. 

Although the company's books remain mired in red, management is seeing the end of a decade-long tunnel. 

Last week Eurostar chairman Guillaume Pepy said the group "should finish 2004 close to the break-even point" and added the goal was to become "profitable from 2007." 

Pepy blamed the company's financial troubles on the high cost of fees paid to infrastructure managers, including "exorbitant" tolls demanded by Channel tunnel operator Eurotunnel. 

Such fees amounted to 60 percent of sales last year, he said. 

However, the damage caused by the fees -- originally calculated on overly optimistic traffic projections -- was expected to ease as passenger numbers rise. 

And the year 2007 also promises to build up steam for the rail company, with the completion of a second section of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link in Britain that will cut the fastest journey time by 15 minutes.


----------



## Vertigo

Yeah, pretty sad. It is indeed mainly due to the very high infrastructure costs for the Channel Tunnel, which makes it impossible for them to compete with low-cost carriers. 

Flying on such short distances is redicious, it pollutes enourmously while the train is a great alternative. In my opinion the governments should lower the infrastructure charges for Eurostar to promote rail travel. 

But governments nowadays want to get maximised revenue from rail infrastructure.. you'll see the same thing happening at new high speed lines in Europe. But they're still losing money on it. Governments should make up their mind. They should either build no high speed lines, or if they do they should make sure it is used well and you get all enviromental and economical use out of it. Building very expensive infrastructure and then making service almost impossible by charging too much is just stupid.

Just my € 0,02...


----------



## samsonyuen

I hope it breaks even soon, and expands further out into Europe and northern England. Are there any plans to do so?


----------



## Vertigo

Not at this moment. One of the reasons is that Eurostar has very high security requirements. Therefore it needs seperate platforms, so passengers can be security checked before boarding. This makes it very expensive to run to other places, because you need to rebuild the place.

But most importantly: it is already losing money between London and Paris, where lots of people are travelling and Eurostar offers competative journey times. On other relations, there are less travellers and longer journey times --> Eurostar would lose even more money.


----------



## Nick in Atlanta

Concord gone; Berlin Wall gone (thank God); Eurostar still here. Maybe I'll get a chance to see or ride on one of the three most interesting things in Europe.


----------



## hkskyline

*Portugal & Spain Mull Lisbon - Madrid HSR*

*Portugal and Spain mull using high-speed rail link for cargo *

LISBON, May 4 (AFP) - Portugal and Spain are looking into using a high speed rail link being built between their two capitals to carry cargo as well as passengers, Portuguese Public Works and Transport Minister Mario Lino said Wednesday. 

"This will not affect what is important which is that the transportation of cargo and people be carried out at high speed and take just two hours and 45 minutes," he told reporters following talks with his visiting Spanish counterpart Magdalena Alvarez. 

It currently takes more than 10 hours to travel by train between Lisbon and Madrid. 

Portugal and Spain agreed at a summit in 2003 to build four high-speed rail links at a cost of 7.5 billion euros (9.7 billion dollars) by 2018. 

The first link is to be completed in 2009 and link Oporto, in the industrialized north of Portugal, with Vigo in northern Spain. 

The link between Lisbon and Madrid, scheduled to open in 2010 and which would also connect with high-speed rail connections in France and beyond, is expected to carry more than five million passengers each year. 

Another line is to connect the central Portuguese coastal town of Aveiro with the Spanish university city of Salamanca, a main corridor for freight, by 2015. 

The last of the four lines would link Faro, the capital of Portugal's southernmost Algarve tourist province, to the southern Spanish city of Seville by 2018. 

The rail track between Madrid and Lisbon is to allow trains to travel at speeds of up to 350 kilometres an hour (217 miles an hour), while the other tracks would permit speeds of up to 200 kilometres an hour.


----------



## Paulo2004

Portugal on the move!!!!

Portuguese map


----------



## willo

that map is a litlle bit outdated ^^

the high speed line between madrid and Zaragoza is on service. the track to barcelona is being built as well as the track seville-malaga. the line madrid-valencia ius being built too


----------



## Bitxofo

Which map?
I cannot see it!
:redx:
:redx:


----------



## Vertigo

I don't see a map either...


----------



## Paulo2004

Click on the Portuguese Map link!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## hkskyline

*Paris - Frankfurt & Stuttgart HSR by 2007*

*GERMAN PRESS : French-German High Speed Rail Link Starts 07 *
24 May 2005
FRANKFURT (Dow Jones)--German rail operator Deutsche Bahn (DBU.YY) and French state rail company Societe Nationale des Chemins de Fer Francais (SNCF.YY) will start high speed train services between Paris and two German cities in June 2007, Financial Times Deutschland reports Tuesday. 

The managers of the two companies signed a statement of intent Monday. 

The high speed trains will connect Paris on two routes with Frankfurt and Stuttgart in June 2007, and the transport companies said they expect an increase in passengers by 50% to 1.5 million on these routes.


----------



## Nodder

The ICE and TGV will run rotationally on the track. It is also said that the trains will take just under 4h.


----------



## hkskyline

4 hours is not bad considering the flight is 1 hour, and it takes an hour to check-in before the flight plus at least another hour on top of that to get to Charles de Gaulle and getting out of Frankfurt airport afterwards.


----------



## IchO

hm.


----------



## Justme

hkskyline said:


> 4 hours is not bad considering the flight is 1 hour, and it takes an hour to check-in before the flight plus at least another hour on top of that to get to Charles de Gaulle and getting out of Frankfurt airport afterwards.


Agreed. 4 hours is pretty good, especially if it's just under.

It still won't be quite as fast as flying, as a flight would take an hour, plus you would have to be at the airport at least an hour before the flight (usually 1.5 hours is better, as it can take 30minutes to get from checkin to your gate) plus the time to get to each airport - although Frankfurt airport is very close to the city. A flight would probably take 3.5hours all up, city center to city center.

The train 45 minutes more, allowing the time to get to your train, but a damn sight less hassle. One can just turn up 10minutes before your train, take your seat and relax in comfort for the rest of the journey.

I've travelled on the current direct train from Frankfurt to Paris, which took about 6 hours - a little too long really. But will certainly use this faster train when it is completed.


----------



## goschio

Frankfurt-Paris in under 4 hours sounds good.

I think I will do that just for fun!


----------



## CharlieP

Isn't 3 hours the notional magic point at which HSR beats flying (not including budget airlines where people put up with the hassle of transfers etc. because they're only paying a couple of pounds/euros )...? Is there much scope for improvement in the future (i.e. if this is presumably using the new LGV Est, can improved tracks/a straighter route be laid in the German section?)


----------



## Nephasto

^Yes.
The slow section is in germany for sure...
Paris-Frankfurt by road is 575 km, so 4 hours, is too long for high speed(144 km/h average speed).

I wonder how long will Paris-Metz(330 km) take. Probably less than 1h30m if it's all in the new (under construction) TGV-Est line.


----------



## DonQui

^ well, if only about 575 km separate the two cities, then, using the same speed as the Madrid-Barcelona high speed rail line, you could get to the two cities in about 2,5 hours.


----------



## hkskyline

*UK: Eurotunnel's Raymond reveals split on strategy *
By ROBERT WRIGHT
14 June 2005
Financial Times

Eurotunnel's outgoing chief executive yesterday launched an extraordinary attack on the company's recent direction as the board appointed Jacques Gounon to be chief executive in addition to his present post as chairman.

The events appeared to add a clear split on strategy to the existing bitter personality clashes that have caused severe problems for the board of the Channel Tunnel operator ahead of its annual meeting on Friday.

Jean Louis Raymond told a press conference yesterday, at which he was joined by Herve Huas, formerly deputy chief executive and now a non-executive director, that he would stand for chairman against Mr Gounon at Friday's meeting and put up a list of alternative directors should Mr Gounon be defeated.

Mr Raymond will have the support of Nicolas Miguet, the maverick financier and would-be politician who ran the campaign to unseat Eurotunnel's then Franco-British board at last year's annual meeting, replacing them with an entirely French board of largely inexperienced businessmen.

Mr Miguet had already for some months been running a campaign against confirming Mr Gounon's reappointment as chairman at the AGM.

Mr Raymond went on to call for coming renegotiations with creditors over the company's Pounds 6.4bn debt to be consensual. The present board's aggressive strategy towards creditors could only lead either to the company's bankruptcy or to creditors using their right to substitute their management for the company's in the tunnel's operation, he said.

"In that case, the big losers will be the shareholders and employees," he said.

Eurotunnel needs to renegotiate its debts before a cash crunch that is looming next year.

The new position is a significant reversal of the line Mr Miguet and his supporters took in the run-up to last year's AGM. Then, he told shareholders it was necessary to take a far harder line against creditors than the then board.

However, the latest stance is likely to be welcomed by creditors, who have been concerned by the extreme language Mr Gounon has been using in the run-up to the AGM. He has regularly called on creditors to forgive a majority of the company's debt for nothing in return.

Mr Miguet's appointees have gradually fallen out, since last year's AGM, with board members close to Adacte, a small French Eurotunnel shareholders' action group, whose appointees have made up the bulk of the board since last year's coup.

Mr Gounon is seen as being close to the Adacte-supporting members of the board, who continue to insist that a debt renegotiation can be carried out without diluting the company's existing shareholders' stakes. Most financial observers think that very unlikely.

As Mr Raymond and Mr Huas addressed yesterday's press conference, Eurotunnel announced that Mr Gounon was to take over as chief executive. Mr Raymond's resignation, announced on Friday, took effect from today's meeting.

It is not clear which side on the divided board will have more support at Friday's meeting - or whether the 25 per cent of shareholders needed for the meeting to be valid will vote.

Eurotunnel nevertheless welcomed yesterday statements from PIRC, ABI and ISS, corporate governance analysts, recommending that shareholders support the existing board at the meeting.

The recommendations look unlikely to make much difference to the voting intentions of Eurotunnel's shareholders, who are mostly French private shareholders.


----------



## hkskyline

*Tunnel deepens UK-French divide *
The French directors and shareholders must reach agreement with the mainly British and US debt holders 
By ROBERT WRIGHT
15 June 2005
Financial Times

When French and British tunnellers met under the English Channel in December 1990, it was hailed as a transforming moment: the Channel Tunnel would bring France and Britain culturally and economically closer.

But as Eurotunnel, the tunnel operator, approaches a vital annual meeting this Friday, the venture has not only failed to bring the two countries closer together but has underlined their deep differences.

Crucial to Eurotunnel's future will be whether its French directors and mostly French shareholders can reach agreement with the mainly British and American holders of the company's Pounds 6.3bn (Euros 8.9bn) debt.

In spite of the fanfare that greeted the Channel Tunnel opening in 1994, Eurotunnel has struggled to make money. Higher-than-expected building costs and lower-than-expected traffic, especially on the Eurostar passenger services and international freight services, have left it with soaring debts.

The company needs a restructuring agreement to avoid insolvency next year or in 2007. Its revenues are set to fall sharply when agreements guaranteeing minimum income from rail operators expire in November 2006. At the same time, compulsory debt repayments start in 2006, with payments on most debt coming in 2007.

Yet, since last year's annual meeting on April 7, when angry French shareholders voted out the incumbent Franco-British board, the new, entirely French board's efforts to respond to shareholders' unhappiness over the creditors' demands have pushed the two sides further apart.

Relations have reached a new low in recent weeks after Jacques Gounon, chairman, asked creditors to forgive all but Euros 3.3bn of the company's debt.

People close to the main creditors' group have branded the demand economically illiterate and have warned that Mr Gounon is making it harder to persuade shareholders to accept the dilution of their shareholdings and loss of control that will result from any restructuring agreement.

If the company either defaults on debt or interest payments, or becomes insolvent, credit agreements give creditors the right to take over management of the tunnel and run it until their debts are repaid.

But Mr Gounon has said in many interviews that the French government and courts would never allow such a move - known as substitution - for such a politically sensitive company.

In an interview with the Financial Times, he dismisses the creditors' position as "Anglo-saxon". "We have to take care (bear in mind) that Eurotunnel is more a French company than a UK one," he says.

Creditors should look at the company's cash flows and agree the level of debt the cash flows are likely to repay over the life of Eurotunnel's concession to run the tunnel, which expires in 2086, Mr Gounon says. A further conversion of debt to equity - the last was in 1998 - would be unacceptable to shareholders.

"I'm just saying to the creditors, 'OK, if you want to make a substitution you will take over the company'," he says. "'But this will not change the cash flows and you will have on top of that to manage the company, which is not an easy task'."

Mr Gounon is backed by board members supported by Adacte, a French Eurotunnel shareholders' group. He now takes an even more hardline position than board members allied with Nicolas Miguet, a share tipster and would-be politician who led the revolt at last year's annual meeting.

At Friday's meeting Mr Gounon will face a challenge for the chairman's position from Jean Louis Raymond, an ally of Mr Miguet's, who on Monday resigned as chief executive. The board has appointed Mr Gounon to succeed Mr Raymond, naming him executive chairman.

Mr Miguet, who last year branded the creditors "banksters" in a populist campaign, now accepts that some dilution of shareholders' interests is inevitable.

At the heart of the problems is the unusual shareholding and debt structure of Eurotunnel. When the company was awarded the concession to build the Channel Tunnel in 1986, private shareholders in France - where publicity guaranteed nearly risk-free returns - bought far more shares than British individuals.

About 1m private French shareholders - against 100,000 in the UK - have retained shares in the hope of one day making a return.

Much of the debt has been sold below face value to speculative investors, such as hedge funds, who are likely to take a very tough line in restructuring talks.

Mr Gounon's campaign for a debt write-off and against further shareholder dilution has echoed French shareholders' worries but alienated debt-holders.

To have any chance of rescuing Eurotunnel from insolvency, however, the board will need to sell at least one agreement diluting shareholders' interests very soon.

The company has the right to convert Pounds 500m of debt held in so-called stabilisation notes into equity at one share for every Pounds 1.14 of debt - well above Eurotunnel's current 16 1/4p share price - by the end of this year.

The conversion must be approved at an extraordinary meeting, which must be called by October.

Yet Mr Gounon doubts shareholders would agree even to such an advantageous dilution, let alone the more comprehensive agreement necessary to stabilise the company.

It is a position that has gradually exasperated creditors. They now appear more ready than before to consider substitution to remove an erratic management.

Even a new management led by Mr Raymond might struggle to complete a comprehensive restructuring agreement in the little time Eurotunnel has left to secure one. The last restructuring took 18 months.

Creditors also fear they might, as Mr Gounon suggests, face problems from the French government and courts if substitution becomes necessary.

The tunnel has significant further scope to deepen the Franco-British divide.


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurotunnel's Raymond to propose board of 3 British, 6 French people *
16 June 2005

PARIS (AFX) - Jean-Louis Raymond will propose three British and six French people as directors of Eurotunnel SA/PLC when he mounts his challenge to win the chairmanship of the debt-laden Channel tunnel operator at tomorrow's AGM, he said on BFM radio. 

Raymond, who resigned as chief executive last Friday after falling out with acting chairman Jacques Gounon, did not name the people he will put forward for the nine-member board. 

He said he has not sought the support of Nicolas Miguet, the shareholder who is leading the campaign to block the confirmation of Gounon as head of the company. 

Raymond announced on Monday that he will challenge Gounon for the post a will put forward of full slate of nominations for all places on the board. 

Eurotunnel investment units rose amid strong demand today as voting for the rival candidates for the chairmanship was thrown into confusion when the company said some shareholders have voted twice. 

At 1.57 pm, Eurotunnel was up 0.02 eur or 8.00 pct at 0.27 eur with 10.3 mln units traded as the CAC-40 index added 17.09 points or 0.51 pct to 4,201.45. 

A Eurotunnel spokesman told AFX News that some people have filled in proxy voting forms sent out by Miguet and have also submitted proxy forms direct to the company. 

Although Miguet is a convicted fraudster the spokeswoman said there is no indication that the double voting is attempted fraud. 

It is too early to assess the scale of the duplicate voting, she said. 

Eurotunnel announced earlier that as of 5.00 pm yesterday its agents had received proxies and votes from more than 75,000 shareholders, representing a provisional quorum of over 40 pct for tomorrow's annual general meeting. 

Tabulation of the proxies is continuing 'due to the appearance of a certain number of doubles', it said, without giving details. 

At the previous AGM, in April last year, rebel shareholders voted out the entire board. 

Eurotunnel has until July 15 to submit proposals to creditors for restructuring its 9 bln eur debt. 

Gounon wants the debt written down to 3.3 bln eur and has predicted the company could collapse as soon as October if no agreement is reached.


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurotunnel pleads for removal of government 'constraints' *
Angela Jameson
21 June 2005
The Times

Eurotunnel will approach the French and British Governments for help to get back on its feet, once the company has agreed the outline of a restructuring plan with its creditors.

Jacques Gounon, executive chairman of the Anglo-French Channel Tunnel group, said yesterday that he hoped certain "constraints" that prevent the debt-laden Eurotunnel from increasing its revenues could be removed.

"Some government involvement could be helpful on specific tax issues for example," M Gounon told British shareholders who attended an information meeting in London.

"I have been upset to see that nothing has changed since 1987. We still have the same constraints we had ten years ago, even though everyone knows that world has fully changed."

A spokesman for the company said that Eurotunnel was looking for an easing of red tape, such as the requirement to run one shuttle per hour even if it is empty. It also wants a lifting of restrictions that make it difficult for Eurotunnel to become a fully fledged railway operator in its own right.

M Gounon has said that Eurotunnel, which is struggling under the weight of its Pounds 6.3 billion debt, could compete with other international operators or run a freight operation, as a way of kickstarting traffic through the tunnel.

Ruling out a direct government bailout, M Gounon's comments raised the prospect that the company could implement elements of Project Galaxie, the rescue solution proposed by the former British management team. The Galaxie plan, rejected last year, envisaged Eurotunnel joining forces with another transport infrastructure company, such as London & Continental Railways, in a complex financial deal that would allow it to restructure its debt.

There was support for M Gounon from most British shareholders, who were impressed by the French engineer's handling of the meeting and some very early improvements in operations.

"(M) Gounon has shown leadership and guts," Tony Hein, a member of the British shareholder committee, said. "His approach is bullish and who knows whether he will pull it off, but what this company really needs is a period of stability, so that it can be given a chance."

There was applause for M Gounon when he told investors to "please forget" Nicolas Miguet, the French maverick investor who has been leading shareholder activism in France. M Miguet's decision to give his votes to M Gounon on Friday secured the chairman's overwhelming victory at the annual meeting in northern France.

"M Miguet is part of the past and I have no comment to make about his behaviour," M Gounon said.

The executive chairman said that he expected Herve Huas, the former finance director, and Jean-Louis Raymond, the former chief executive, to resign the board positions they have just been elected to, as soon as Friday.

"They tried to push me out, fully supported by M Miguet. If they have any sense of honour they will resign," M Gounon said.

The meeting heard that 2005 had started well and that Eurotunnel was on track to meet or to beat annual business targets for its car, coach and truck shuttles.


----------



## Grygry

Englishman said:


> That sucks. Bloody French labour laws meaning cuts have to be in hte UK. Still it shows how a company might be more inclined to employ people in the UK than France.


But eurotunnel employs more in britain than in France anyway, isn't this right?


----------



## hkskyline

*EU Wants to Spend EUR 5 Billion to Upgrade Rail Networks*

*EU head office to spend EUR5 billion on single Europe-wide rail system*
4 July 2005

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - The European Union head office said Monday it wants to spend euro5 billion (US$6 billion) to upgrade European railway networks, setting up a single rail signaling system on transnational rail routes to improve service.

EU spokesman Stefaan De Rynck said national rail networks still posed technical problems to creating a seamless rail system across the continent.

"Currently we have more than 20 different signaling systems in Europe, speed control systems that operate on trains," said De Rynck.

He said the European Commission was willing to help pay for 50 percent of the investment cost to set up the so-called European Rail Traffic Management System, which will lay out a single network so trains can cross borders without having to switch locomotives.

De Rynck said the Commission was looking to invest euro500 million (US$604 million) a year over 10 years -- totaling euro5 billion (US$6 billion) -- to upgrade some 20,000 kilometers (12,400 miles) of rail track. He said some of that money would have to come from the railway sector.

The Commission hopes to get its share of the funding from the EU's 2007-2013 budget, but negotiations over the new budget collapsed at an EU leaders summit last month.

The Commission has said using one signal system will provide more effective and speedier rail transport for cargo and passenger services and will reduce maintenance costs. It said however substantial investment was needed to get as many EU countries to make the switch as soon as possible to make the new network feasible.

The new signals system would also benefit from the EU's global satellite navigation system, Galileo, which is to be launched later this year. Trains equipped with new signaling software will be able to use the navigation system to determine their speed and location.

New lines are set to open first in Spain, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands later this year. Between 2007 and 2008 other projects in France, Britain and Greece are expected to come on line.


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurostar 1H Passenger Numbers +8%, Sales GBP245M *
19 July 2005
Dow Jones International News
Edited Press Release 

LONDON (Dow Jones)--Eurostar, the cross-channel train operator, said Tuesday it carried 3.68 million passengers in the first half of 2005, an 8% rise on the previous year. Sales rose 14% to GBP245 million. 

Eurostar is channel tunnel operator Eurotunnel's (ETL.LN) largest customer.


----------



## PornStar

/\ great news :cheers:


----------



## Nick in Atlanta

Aren't there two components to the whole "Chunnel" thing? One is the well known high speed train from London to Brussels and Paris. But the other is the train that carries trucks loaded with products between the entrance/exit in England to the entrance/exit in France. I'm sure that this second part of the Chunnel must be doing well, because it doesn't have to compete with low-cost flights.


----------



## Bitxofo

Finally good news...
kay:


----------



## Rational Plan

I'm afraid not. The problem is that the whole enterprise is saddled huge amounts of debt. When the project was announced the wildly over predicted the amount of passengers on the Eurostar and cross channel traffic. 

Then the tunnel ended up costing twice as much as predicted.

Now when the first contracts were signed with eurostar (the high speed train link) the various national rail comapnies promised to pay a minimum amount to Eurotunnel (owners of the tunnel and shuttle). This would have been fine if the predicted 16 million customers had turned up. But in fact they have been lucky to break 7 million recently. So Eurostar was saddled with high fixed costs. Now this agreement runs out within a year and eurostar will be free to pass access charges that actually reflect use. With the stage two of the channel tunnel rail finished in 2007 this will provide another boost as it will cut another 15 minutes from the journey. But even with a big growth in passengers it will be a while before they need to run more services as the trains only run half full at the moment.

Of course turn around in Eurostars fortunes spells impending doom for Eurotunnel. The high access charges are the only thing keeping the company afloat. While the shuttle does transport a large number of vehicles, the ferry companies did not roll over and die as expected. They invested in large new ships and played up the leisure aspect of travelling by ferry rather in steel tube underground. A fierce price war has cut profit margins drastically. A showdown is now developing between Eurotunnels shareholders and the banks. A part from vulture funds institional investors have largely dumped eurotunnel leaving the company largely owned french small investors. The old board was ousted by a shareholder revolt, when the board said there would have to be a debt for equity swap if they wanted to restructure the debt. The new board who have been criticised for being inexperienced have proposed that the bank take a two thirds loss on the £6 billion debt. The reaction from the banks has been cool to say the least. The shareholders have no choice. They either accept the loss of most of their equity now, or when the company is declared bankrupt the banks have first call on the assets and the shareholders are left with nothing.


----------



## Nick in Atlanta

^Very interesting!!^ Thanks for a very comprehensive and clear answer to a difficult problem. 

It's too bad that the Eurostar is facing so many hurdles. I really would love to ride it from Central London to Central Paris someday.


----------



## Falubaz

i rode it last sunday and monday, that's so ql going in any 2hours and 40minuts from london to paris. it's better than to fly, 'cause u don't have to ride so far away from the city to the airport wasteing your time.

does anybody know how many km are there between Lnd and Prs by eurostar line???


----------



## Metropolis

Eurostar should make better deals with Thalys for passengers from Cologne, Aachen, Rotterdam, Amsterdam and surrounding cities and it should make good deal with High Speed Alliance (company for the new high speed track from Amsterdam to Brussels) to attract more customers from The Netherlands.

Simple, clear and affordable package deals will attrack a lot of customers.
I live only 5 min. bij tram and 7 min. by train to Amsterdam airport, but going by normal train to Brussels and then to London by Eurostar takes the same ammount of time then going by airplane, waiting at the arport, checking in at the airport, going from a London airport to London city.


----------



## Landos

About time the EU came up with some funds to upgrade the Greek train lines. They should also build a train bridge next to the Rio/Antirio automotive bridge.


----------



## hkskyline

*HSR Co-operation in Europe : Eurostar + Thalys*

*High-speed rail groups couple up in Europe push *
By ROBERT WRIGHT 
26 October 2005
Financial Times

Europe's two leading international high-speed train operators are to offer joint ticketing and shared loyalty cards as they prepare for a major expansion of Europe's dedicated high-speed rail network. 

Eurostar - which operates mainly between London and Paris and Brussels - and Thalys - which operates mainly between Paris and Brussels, Amsterdam and Cologne - will call the airline-style co-operation deal RailTeam. 

The move appears to mark Eurostar's abandonment of plans to launch London-Amsterdam services when the HSL Zuid dedicated high-speed rail line from Antwerp to Amsterdam opens. 

Opening had been scheduled for 2007 but now looks set to be postponed until 2008. 

Instead of travelling directly from London to destinations east of Brussels, passengers will change at Brussels for Thalys services. 

Observers of Europe's rail scene will welcome the greater co-operation which many had thought long overdue because of the significant common interests of the two operators. Eurostar is controlled by a consortium led by SNCF, the French state rail operator, with 55 per cent, LCR, a government-backed British company, with 40 per cent, and SNCB, the Belgian state train operator, with 5 per cent. 

Thalys is 70 per cent owned by SNCF and 30 per cent by SNCB, although it also co-operates with NS, the Dutch state train operator, and Deutsche Bahn, the German state train operator. 

Both operators' services are set to be transformed by the opening of new sections of line. 

The second section of the UK's Channel Tunnel Rail Link from London to the Channel Tunnel will cut 15 minutes off journeys to continental Europe when it opens in 2007, while a new section of Belgium's high-speed route from Leuven to near the German border, also due to open in 2007, will reduce Brussels-Cologne train times. 

The 100km Antwerp-Amsterdam line is presenting significant technical challenges for Thalys, which will have to adapt its 300kph trains to understand a new EU-wide signalling system being used on the line.


----------



## SE9

Oh good idea! It'll make travelling to Koln-Cologne much easier for me


----------



## Brett

To bad North America has nothing like this. flying is so expensive!


----------



## Momo1435

To bad Eurostar won't go to Amsterdam, I thought that those plans where pretty definite. But this is more logical, cost and operational wise.


----------



## hkskyline

*Portugal govt estimates Lisbon's 2 high speed rail links to cost 7.2 bln eur *
7 December 2005

LISBON (AFX) - The construction of high speed rail links connecting Lisbon with Madrid and with Porto, due to be operational by 2013, is estimated to cost around 7.2 bln eur, the Portuguese press reported, citing a government study. 

The construction of the Lisbon-Madrid link is expected to cost the Portuguese side 2.2 bln eur, while the Lisbon-Porto line is expected to cost almost 5 bln eur, the daily Publico reported. 

According to the study, the high-speed rail link between Portugal's two main cities, with a journey time of less than an hour and a half, is expected to attract almost 6 mln passengers per year, while the Lisbon-Madrid link is expected to have 5 mln passengers per year. 

The Publico newspaper questioned whether the investment will be profitable, comparing it to the cost of a new international airport near Lisbon scheduled for 2017, which is estimated at 3 bln eur. 

The Portuguese prime minister is expected to confirm the two rail projects today, with construction work due to start in 2008 and to be completed by 2013.


----------



## Paulo2004

Yes!!!!


----------



## hkskyline

*Italians Protest Turin - Lyon HSR*

*Italian PM undeterred by mass protest over Lyon-Turin rail link *

ROME, Dec 8 (AFP) - Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on Thursday stuck to his guns over the need to build a high-speed rail link between Turin in Italy and Lyon in France, despite escalating protests. 

Tens of thousands of demonstrators protesting against the railway occupied the site of the planned Alpine tunnel in Italy's northwestern Susa Valley. 

Several people were injured in scuffles with police who fired tear gas, though security forces did not act to stop protesters entering the site at Venaus, some 60 kilometres (37 miles) from Turin. 

About the same time as the protest was under way, Berlusconi voiced his determination at a press conference in the capital, Rome, to see the multi-billion-euro project come to fruition. 

"The high-speed rail link is a job which it is impossible to give up on, and all the guarantees have been taken on the aspect of the environment," he told reporters. 

The protesters were dislodged from the site on Tuesday in a police charge that injured about 20 people. 

The government deployed 1,000 riot police to prevent the protestors occupying the site on Thursday, but Berlusconi's political allies were divided on whether they should intervene again. 

Employment Minister Roberto Maroni, a member of the locally popular Northern League, spoke out against police action on Thursday and called for dialogue to solve the crisis. 

A 53-kilometre (33-mile) cross-border train tunnel into France is to be cut through the valley, angering people living in the region who question the usefulness, cost and environmental consequences of the project. 

While valley communities are sharply opposed, the proposed rail link is backed by both governments, the European Commission and the region of Piedmont. 

Thursday's marchers numbered nearly 40,000, according to one participant, Gianandrea Torasso, a local mayor. 

Earlier this week, opponents of the project blocked roads into the area and announced a national demonstration in Turin on December 17. 

The Italian prime minister denounced what he called "the activism of extremist left-wing groups and anarchists" and promised to take action, although he also acknowledged there had been communication failures. 

"You only have to think of the pollution caused by heavy goods vehicles to realise the interest of this rail link and to not call into question such a project," Berlusconi said. 

Opponents denounce both the inconvenience and dangers of the project, especially for the water basin during tunneling into the mountain side because of the presence of uranium and asbestos. 

Turin is to host the Winter Olympics in February 2006 and a massive security operation is already being planned. 

The Turin-Lyon link, considered a key element of a planned network of high-speed railways across Europe, will cost an estimated 12.5 billion euros (15 billion dollars) and is due to be completed by 2020. 

Six thousand trucks pass through the Susa Valley every day. 

Two million trucks cross the Alps frontier between France and Italy every year. Freight traffic is forecast to grow to 80 million tonnes by 2030. 

The aim is to increase the share transported by rail from 10 million to 40 million tonnes.


----------



## THINK€R

fuckin fools!


----------



## matthewcs

doesn't sound like the enivroment could be much more damaged with a HSR compared to 6000 trucks a day


----------



## GENIUS LOCI

Now it became a political issues with Green Party and Comunists (_Partito della Rifondazione Comunista_) enter the protests to have more space in their political coalition wing facing next year elections...
But Anarchic groups enter the protest and now situation degenerated

This is an incredible extreme exemple of NIMBY
But, political games apart, I suspect there is more behind the protests...
Infact the run of HS wich works are going to start had been concorded with local communities (the same now started the protest): initially railway had to run in the middle of the Valley, they modified (under the pressure and the suggestion of Valley inhabitants, now protesting) the project and made it run into a tunnel under the mountain (what is much more expensive...)
Now they contest this solution they suggested...

Why?

I have a suspect: someone wanted the project of 5th corridor passing South of the Alps to fail (for non-EU forumers: corridors decided and financed by EU are the "backbones" of future continental transport and trade; corridor 5 is the one wich will link Lisboa with Kiev: pratically the most important transcontinental route in East-West direction; if it will pass North of Alps the most improved nation will be Germany, if it will pass South it will be Italy. Italy obtained - "momentainely": iter is pretty long - corridor 5 passes South. But if infrastructuration as HS Turin-Lion track will be late could be probable, pratically sure, corridor 5 will "change" the route and pass North)
So: protests in Val di Susa are going to damage the project of corridor 5 passing in Italy
I really think there is any foreign societies behind today episodes: financing and organizing protest groups and even mouvements...

Anyway this extreme NIMBY protest maybe reached the record to be the most unpopular ever: non one in Italy (apart Greens, Comunist and Anarchic groups, very few people all things considered) out of Val di Susa agrees with this protest; and everybody think HS railway is prioritarian and necessary


----------



## Nicux

Those fools don't represent italian people at all. But there's no need to fuss about it: Works will go on, no matter what people in that valley of Piedmont want.


----------



## Momo1435

The fun thing about this protests is that in France the public opinion is completely the opposite. They are more against all the trucks coming through part of the alps.


----------



## GENIUS LOCI

momochan said:


> The fun thing about this protests is that in France the public opinion is completely the opposite. They are more against all the trucks coming through part of the alps.


In Italy 99% of pubblic opinion is in favour of HSR Turin-Lyon

The opponents are inhabitants of Val di Susa (that are no more than 50 k people, and someone says true opponents are not the major part of inhabitants) and people, as Anarchic groups, who like to make riots its political issue :sleepy:

Then, about the true reasons that IMO stand behind these protests: I exposed them in my previous post
And they've nothing to do with what was decleared officially by opponents...


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurostar urges UK to Build North-South High-Speed Line*

*Eurostar urges UK to build north-south high-speed line *
9 December 2005

LONDON (AFX) - High-speed train operator Eurostar has urged the UK government to approve the construction of a north-south high-speed rail line. 

Eurostar, whose owners include British Airways PLC and National Express PLC, said a high-speed route between London and Scotland would cut journey times, reduce pollution and boost economic regeneration. 

While Eurostar runs services at up to 185 mph on dedicated high-speed lines between London, Paris and Brussels, the maximum speed that trains on domestic UK lines can reach is 125 mph. 

Chief executive Richard Brown told a rail and public transport conference in Glasgow that a new UK line would incentivise businesses to relocate offices out of the south east and into the UK's regions. 

Brown said the construction of high-speed lines in France in the 1990s had transformed the economic fortunes of cities such as Lille and Lyon. 

'A UK high-speed line would provide urban regeneration and, crucially, protect the environment by encouraging travellers to switch from carbon dioxide-producing short-haul flights to environmentally friendly rail,' he said. 

French state railway SNCF, Belgian state rail operator SNCB and the Eurostar UK Ltd consortium run Eurostar. Eurostar UK Ltd consists of National Express Group PLC, SNCF, SNCB and British Airways PLC.


----------



## ChrisCharlton

:applause:

This would seem to be a total no-brainer - and incidentally I think such a project should veer towards the North West of England on it's way up in order to capture the greater population density in this region and help us to sustain the fantastic development growth we have.

The government will have no objection to this - but they wont want to pay much towards it, so there would have to be some very clever commercial partnering to make it happen.


----------



## Tubeman

If we could only build one line I'd go for:

London > Milton keynes > Birmingham > Manchester > Leeds > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow...

A sort of WCML / ECML hybrid

It would miss out major cities like Liverpool, Sheffield, Leicester, Nottingham (and of course Bristol, Plymouth etc) but I think if there was one trunk route, this should be it.


----------



## shenqie

Maglev instead please - why build the past when you can build for the future ? London - Edinburgh 1hr10 anyone ? Better value by far ...


----------



## Gareth

Tubeman said:


> If we could only build one line I'd go for:
> 
> London > Milton keynes > Birmingham > Manchester > Leeds > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow...
> 
> A sort of WCML / ECML hybrid
> 
> It would miss out major cities like Liverpool, Sheffield, Leicester, Nottingham (and of course Bristol, Plymouth etc) but I think if there was one trunk route, this should be it.



Of course Liverpool would be the largest city in the country not to have a Eurostar stop which merely adds to the trend of Liverpool being seen as a glorified Mancunian housing estate. To be fair, any line going to Liverpool has to terminate in the city but it's the fact the missing out of Liverpool will most certainly not be seen as an anomaly, as most of the influencial people in this country seem to think the city is a lot smaller and less significant, both economically and culturally, than it actually is. I'm sure they could spare the odd service to branch off at Crewe at least, even if it's frequency wasn't particlarly hight, it'd be better than nothing.


----------



## Tubeman

Gareth said:


> Of course Liverpool would be the largest city in the country not to have a Eurostar stop which merely adds to the trend of Liverpool being seen as a glorified Mancunian housing estate. To be fair, any line going to Liverpool has to terminate in the city but it's the fact the missing out of Liverpool will most certainly not be seen as an anomaly, as most of the influencial people in this country seem to think the city is a lot smaller and less significant, both economically and culturally, than it actually is. I'm sure they could spare the odd service to branch off at Crewe at least, even if it's frequency wasn't particlarly hight, it'd be better than nothing.


My executive decision is purely geographical, as you said Liverpool will always be the 'end of the line'. My route would be the trunk route from London to Scotland if there could only be the one line with no branches... Its nothing personal! Of course Liverpool is more significant than MK, it just so happens MK is between London and Birmingham and so could be on the trunk route.


----------



## Accura4Matalan

Gareth said:


> Of course Liverpool would be the largest city in the country not to have a Eurostar stop which merely adds to the trend of Liverpool being seen as a glorified Mancunian housing estate. To be fair, any line going to Liverpool has to terminate in the city but it's the fact the missing out of Liverpool will most certainly not be seen as an anomaly, as most of the influencial people in this country seem to think the city is a lot smaller and less significant, both economically and culturally, than it actually is. I'm sure they could spare the odd service to branch off at Crewe at least, even if it's frequency wasn't particlarly hight, it'd be better than nothing.


Remember that next time you think being a coastal city is better than being a landlocked city


----------



## JDRS

I'd prefer us to build a maglev but that's not going to happen with this government so I say go for it although again I don't think the government will go ahead with this considering its state of affairs with other transport networks.


----------



## empersouf

Yes, and do it fast!!!!!!!!!
England lays behind in comparisson to other euro country's...


----------



## ChrisCharlton

> Of course Liverpool would be the largest city in the country not to have a Eurostar stop which merely adds to the trend of Liverpool being seen as a glorified Mancunian housing estate. To be fair, any line going to Liverpool has to terminate in the city but it's the fact the missing out of Liverpool will most certainly not be seen as an anomaly, as most of the influencial people in this country seem to think the city is a lot smaller and less significant, both economically and culturally, than it actually is. I'm sure they could spare the odd service to branch off at Crewe at least, even if it's frequency wasn't particlarly hight, it'd be better than nothing.


Agree that Liverpool is unfairly often sidelined. I reckon a good way to resolve this is something we should be doing anyway - upgrading the Transpennine link. The whole Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds situation should be more like a conveyor belt with people not thinking twice about popping from one to the other. The new Eurostar line going straight up to Scotland via Manchester would then be within easy reach of Liverpool and Leeds, neither excluding the capital of culture, or needing to snake through the Penines to fit Leeds onto the 'calling at' list!


----------



## ChrisCharlton

> Remember that next time you think being a coastal city is better than being a landlocked city.


What's with the anti-Manchester/Liverpool bias? Surely Preston can fit into a bigger vision for the whole NW without being the bitchy cousin of the two great cities?


----------



## samsonyuen

Poor Sheffield would be missed too! What can ya do? Either way, it's definitely needed.


----------



## earthJoker

well it should at least be kmph and not kph.


----------



## CharlieP

The other thing that grates about the map is the "Other high-speed lines" in the legend. To me, slower than 180km/h is *not* high-speed rail!


----------



## TohrAlkimista

In Italy are planning a "high-capacity"(200/250 km/h) line from Naples to Bari.


----------



## Cicerón

After 13 posts, the only clear thing is that the graph is completely wrong.


----------



## Guest

With plenty of optimism hopefully those blue lines in the UK will become red lines


----------



## Booze

I was very dissapointed when I read the article, as it makes no mention of the future and large spanish high speed network hno:


----------



## an-148

here is the official "raiteam" map:










and the official website:
http://www.railteam.com/


----------



## an-148

Booze said:


> I was very dissapointed when I read the article, as it makes no mention of the future and large spanish high speed network hno:


For now, the RENFE didn't sign the Railteam agreement, the same for FS and CP: therefore the respective spanish, italian and portugese networks are not present on the map and in the article. Also, the present members only involved some of their tracks (sometimes even "improved classic tracks" but with international purpose)

The main purpose is to edit a single international (international is mandatory) ticket and booking engine regardless where the ticket has been delivered.
(a kind of "flashback" on former TEE network). A kind of code-sharing agreement like we know them from airlines.

Only the companies that have an agreement to share the codes offer the continuous ticket! The same here, and as soon as one more railway company joins Railteam, her "Railteam dedicated" network will be included in the agreement and the map will be updatad consequently!!!!!!

Europeans can reasonnabily expect RENFE, FS, CP and others to join Railteam.


----------



## eomer

Will Italy and Spain join Railteam ?


----------



## Booze

an-148 said:


> For now, the RENFE didn't sign the Railteam agreement, the same for FS and CP: therefore the respective spanish, italian and portugese networks are not present on the map and in the article. Also, the present members only involved some of their tracks (sometimes even "improved classic tracks" but with international purpose)
> 
> The main purpose is to edit a single international (international is mandatory) ticket and booking engine regardless where the ticket has been delivered.
> (a kind of "flashback" on former TEE network). A kind of code-sharing agreement like we know them from airlines.
> 
> Only the companies that have an agreement to share the codes offer the continuous ticket! The same here, and as soon as one more railway company joins Railteam, her "Railteam dedicated" network will be included in the agreement and the map will be updatad consequently!!!!!!
> 
> Europeans can reasonnabily expect RENFE, FS, CP and others to join Railteam.


I know, but RENFE doesn't need to sign any agreement until the high speed line arrives to France and Portugal. I guess by that time free competition will just make the same effect.

Regarding that map, the spanish network will be much larger than that.


----------



## an-148

Booze said:


> I know, but RENFE doesn't need to sign any agreement until the high speed line arrives to France and Portugal. I guess by that time free competition will just make the same effect.
> 
> Regarding that map, the spanish network will be much larger than that.



ok, we all know, but my comments originated in the fact that *YOU were disappointed not to see a mention about the spanish network*: it was ONLY to explain why  

in addition, RENFE joining Railteam, will not AUTOMATICALLY include all the tracks, but only the tracks that can resonnabily be considered by RENFE *itself* as potentially interesting for INTERNATIONAL traffic.


----------



## an-148

eomer said:


> Will Italy and Spain join Railteam ?


 bonjour,

we can suppose or at least hope that other companies will join in the near future (I prefer to speak about companies than about countries in that matter, because Railteam is a company's alliance).

In my opinion, FS could sign as soon as they want to, also if there is a need to use older tracks between Lyon and Turin or on the Brenner route or the Swiss routes: the trains will join the Highspeedlines as soon as they can connect to them (simply like Geneva or Bern). Look at ÖBB: they signed the agreement with no highspeedline to offer for now, just with the expected ones; for now Railteam traffic has to be served on regular tracks. SBB/CFF and BLS are also far from having finished all their "mountain base tunnels" but they signed the agreement.

For Spain, I guess that RENFE will consider joining only when there will be a continuous track at 1.435 gauge linking their highspeed network to the French one: so I guess not before 2012!


----------



## FM 2258

I took the train from Milano to Roma that sped through Piacenza, Bologna and Firenze in May and thought that was a really nice ride. I just never realized it was a "high speed" train. It was going damn fast though. 

The train stopped in Bologna and Firenze but the whole trip was less than 5 hours.


----------



## an-148

FM 2258 said:


> I took the train from Milano to Roma that sped through Piacenza, Bologna and Firenze in May and thought that was a really nice ride. I just never realized it was a "high speed" train. It was going damn fast though.
> 
> The train stopped in Bologna and Firenze but the whole trip was less than 5 hours.


yes, when those bullet-trains drive on their dedicated tracks one would never think they drive 300km/h. I used as well the Thalys from Liège to Paris as the ICE3 from Liège to Frankfurt: it's a real Pullman once they drive on the dedicated tracks :cheers:


----------



## Booze

an-148 said:


> ok, we all know, but my comments originated in the fact that *YOU were disappointed not to see a mention about the spanish network*: it was ONLY to explain why
> 
> in addition, RENFE joining Railteam, will not AUTOMATICALLY include all the tracks, but only the tracks that can resonnabily be considered by RENFE *itself* as potentially interesting for INTERNATIONAL traffic.


I know the article is more about competition than explaining the network (damn, I read The Economist every week and they always have the very same approach regardless of what they talk about ^_^) but the map is simply wrong.

Still, I do think the real revolution in terms of network is happening right now in Spain, and for HS trains competition comes after massive investment. Given the fact that the Madrid - Barcelona route is the *busiest* air link of the world, and taking into account that those 2 cities will be linked (in months) by a line designed to allow *constant operational* speed of 350KM/h, im am a bit disappointed as it just didn't deserve a line for a not very informed journalist. Having wonderfull trains departing every 15 minutes ( much less in the near future) and connecting the cities in less than 2.5 hours is a direct thread to the air link with a similar capacity.

What I didn't really like about the article is that it almost considers train market itself, while nowadays we really have a mobility market instead. To me the real competition is trains vs planes, and that agreement is just a small step toward full liberalisation and network extension.


----------



## an-148

totally agree with you

and the track Madrid-Barcelona will be amazing (already now!)


----------



## Coccodrillo

FM 2258 said:


> I took the train from Milano to Roma that sped through Piacenza, Bologna and Firenze in May and thought that was a really nice ride. I just never realized it was a "high speed" train. It was going damn fast though.
> 
> The train stopped in Bologna and Firenze but the whole trip was less than 5 hours.


The high-speed line will open in 2009. Milan-Rome line is in fact divided into three parts:
- Milan-Bologna opened somewhere in the XIX century, but it is a straight line in a plain
- Bologna-Firenze opened in 1934 and permitted quite high speeds for the time (it includes two main tunnels of 18,5 and 7,1 km, or 11.5 and 4.4 miles), trains can reach 180 km/h-110 mph. The main 18,5 km tunnel included an underground station opened to public, but it has been closed in the '60s. It replaced an older and slower single track line opened in 1864 (that is still in use)
- Firenze-Roma opened in the '70s-'80s and is a real high-speed line, permitting 300 km/h-185 mph on some stretches (even if being electrified to 3 kV DC, trains are limited to 250 km/h)

A new Milan-Bologna-Firenze HSL is under construction:
http://www.bueker.net/trainspotting/map.php?file=maps/italian-network/italian-network.gif (dark blue dotted lines, electrified in 25 kV AC)
This line is 78 km in length of which 73 are in tunnels.


----------



## earthJoker

The NEAT tunnels should be blue in the first map as they will support sppeds upto 250 km/h


----------



## FM 2258

Coccodrillo said:


> The high-speed line will open in 2009. Milan-Rome line is in fact divided into three parts:
> - Milan-Bologna opened somewhere in the XIX century, but it is a straight line in a plain
> - Bologna-Firenze opened in 1934 and permitted quite high speeds for the time (it includes two main tunnels of 18,5 and 7,1 km, or 11.5 and 4.4 miles), trains can reach 180 km/h-110 mph. The main 18,5 km tunnel included an underground station opened to public, but it has been closed in the '60s. It replaced an older and slower single track line opened in 1864 (that is still in use)
> - Firenze-Roma opened in the '70s-'80s and is a real high-speed line, permitting 300 km/h-185 mph on some stretches (even if being electrified to 3 kV DC, trains are limited to 250 km/h)
> 
> A new Milan-Bologna-Firenze HSL is under construction:
> http://www.bueker.net/trainspotting/map.php?file=maps/italian-network/italian-network.gif (dark blue dotted lines, electrified in 25 kV AC)
> This line is 78 km in length of which 73 are in tunnels.


Very, very interesting. I noticed we went through some loooooong tunnels between Bologna and Firenze. There also a few tunnels I remember between Firenze and Roma. Also along the route there were quite a few areas where new track was being constructed. 

Thanks for the information. It's too bad that the new lines are mostly going to be tunnels. The Italian countryside was the most beautiful I've seen almost anywhere.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Between Firenze and Roma there are also some long tunnels: 11 km, 9,3 km, 7,4 km, 5,7 km, and some shorter.


----------



## hkskyline

*EU To Open Intl Passenger Rail Svcs To Competition*

*EU To Open Intl Passenger Rail Svcs To Competition By 2010 *
25 September 2007










STRASBOURG, France (AP)--International passenger rail services in the European Union will open to cross-border competition by 2010, giving passengers more choice and railways new ways to fight stiff competition from airlines. 

New guidelines approved by the European Parliament on Tuesday will be reviewed in 2012 to see if domestic train lines should also be liberalized, the E.U. assembly said. 

A proposal to open those lines to foreign competition by 2017 has been rejected by countries where state companies dominate the market, such as France, Belgium or Austria. 

Smaller E.U. states, such as Luxembourg and some Central European nations, also fear their national providers could fold if a giant company, such as Germany's Deutsche Bahn AG, entered their domestic market. 

But competition will increase on international lines, where any company from any of the E.U.'s 27 member states will be able to run services. 

In a package of rules governing the E.U. railway sector, lawmakers also voted in favor of setting minimum standards on compensation for delays on domestic and international routes, and of certifying train crews to show they meet professional, medical and linguistic standards. 

Under the rules, which will enter into force in 2009, passengers could be compensated 25% for an hour's delay, if the operator is responsible, or 50% for a delay of two hours or more. 

Also, operators must allow folding bikes on trains but may ban other bicycles if there is no space for them in the cars as most European trains are not yet designed to carry a large number of bikes. 

The rules have already been backed by E.U. member states.


----------



## keber

Was about time.


----------



## Momo1435

Good we need some competition on the Amsterdam - Brussel - Paris route!


----------



## Bitxofo

Good news finally!
:happy:


----------



## an-148

testing of line Liège-Aachen:
http://www.rtc.be/content/view/2952/166/


----------



## Fugit

Thank you for info!


----------



## hkskyline

*New high-speed train puts eastern France's wine and Champagne country on daytrippers' map *
17 October 2007

REIMS, France (AP) - After a Paris breakfast of cafe and croissant, how about lunch and a glass of bubbly in France's Champagne region? 

Thanks to a new high-speed train line, Reims, the ancient heart of Champagne country, is now just 45 minutes from Paris -- less time than it takes to cross the French capital during rush hour. 

Running at up to 320 kph (200 mph), France's network of bullet trains -- known as the TGV, or Train a Grande Vitesse (high-speed train) -- is shrinking the country. Its newest line, the TGV Est, puts eastern France on the daytrippers' map, slashing travel times to the line's 30-plus destinations in eastern France and Germany. 

The previous 90-minute trip to Reims has been cut by half. Colmar, a picture postcard town in another famed French wine region -- Alsace, on the German border -- is now three hours from Paris, down from nearly five hours before. 

Shiny and sleek with their pointed, aerodynamic noses, the TGV lives up to its name. As it leaves Paris, the train picks up speed and landscapes dissolve into blurry, impressionistic patches of color. Gliding silently along, you almost feel like you're flying, soaring low over the plains that give way, eastward, to gently rolling hills. 

Though you can't see the Champagne region's famous vineyards from the train as you arrive in Reims, the drink's enormous influence on the city is immediately palpable: More than an occasional, celebratory beverage, here bubbly is a way of life. 

Decorative bunches of stone grapes adorn the stately bourgeois mansions in the historic center, and architectural details on City Hall and even the famous cathedral of Reims -- where generations of French monarchs were anointed -- pay homage to the sparkling wine. 

Reims is the headquarters for many of France's main Champagne houses, including luxury labels Veuve Clicquot, Ruinart and Pommery. Most labels offer tours of their cellars with English-speaking guides several times a day. 

Clustered in the residential neighborhoods south of the city center -- a good 45-minute walk from the train station -- the best way to get to the cellars is by taxi. 

I visited Taittinger, founded in 1930 by entrepreneur Pierre-Charles Taittinger. Among the youngest of the major labels, the Taittinger cellar is built on the meandering corridors of a Roman chalk mine and dates from the 4th century. Vestiges of the mine -- and an abbey built in the 13th century by Champagne-making monks -- can be seen in Taittinger's 20-meter-deep (66-foot-deep) cellar, which holds some 3 million bottles of bubbly. 

While in the cellar-filled southern part of town, be sure to swing by Saint Remi Basilica, an 11th century church that holds the remains of the city's most celebrated native son, Remi of Reims, a 5th century archbishop credited with converting France to Catholicism. 

It was Remi who baptized the barbarian Clovis, the Franks' first king, around A.D. 498 in Notre Dame de Reims cathedral. For a millennium, nearly all French monarchs followed in Clovis' footsteps, holding their coronation ceremonies in the cathedral. 

Rebuilt in the 12th century after a devastating fire, the cathedral represents French Gothic architecture at its riotous, exuberant best, with intricately carved sculptures that cover the inside and out, bursting from the limestone surfaces. 

The Germans heavily bombed the cathedral during World War I, knocking hundreds of sculptures off the walls and destroying many of the arched stained-glass windows. 

Russian-born French artist Marc Chagall designed replacement panels, depicting Old Testament scenes and the coronation of several French kings in light, bright stained glass. Installed in 1971, Chagall's hallmark dreamy, curling figures never looked so ethereal as in this holy site. 

Another panel pays homage to Champagne, depicting workers making the drink, step by laborious step. 

Many of the sculptures damaged during WWI found their way to the Palais du Tau, a former archbishop's residence next door that has been converted into a museum. As well as giving a unique, close-up view of the sculptures, it also houses a rich collection of paraphernalia used in regal coronations. 

A host of restaurants around the cathedral serve up delectable local dishes like "pied de porc," or pig's foot, a traditional specialty that washes down well with -- surprise, surprise -- a glass of Champagne. 

France's TGV network dates back more than 20 years. The first line, connecting Paris with Lyon, was inaugurated in 1981. The addition of each of the network's now six main lines has shrunk France, putting destinations like the Mediterranean port city of Marseille and Bordeaux, on the Atlantic coast, nearly in Paris' backyard. 

And they keep getting faster. A special train with a 25,000-horsepower engine and special wheels broke the world speed record for conventional rail trains, reaching 574.8 kph (357.2 mph) on a stretch of the TGV Est's track. 

Stay on the TVG Est beyond Reims and you leave Champagne country and head into sweet white wine territory -- Alsace. 

Just 20 kilometers (12 miles) from the German border, the town of Colmar is a picture-perfect hybrid of French and German culture, with typical German half-timbered houses and broad French promenades and parks. 

It's about a 20-minute walk from the station into the historic city center. A small tourist bus that stops in front of the station will get you there as well -- with running commentary in English, French and German detailing the history of local landmarks. 

Better yet, rent a bike at a stand in the Champ de Mars park, a 10-minute walk from the station. The bikes -- which come with baskets perfect for stashing bread, cheese, sausage and other picnic essentials -- cost euro5 (US$7) for half a day and euro6 (US$8.50) for the entire day. 

With its light traffic, Colmar is ideal for cyclists, though the old town's cobbled streets make riding here a bumpy affair. Navigation is a cinch: Just head for the towering spires of the Collegiale Saint Martin. The luminous 13th century monument marks the heart of the old city. 

Moderately priced cafes radiating out from the cathedral are great stops for invigorating midmorning shots of espresso. 

Hop back on your bike for a quick visit to the Unterlinden Museum, housed in a 13th century Dominican monastery. The jewel of the museum's collection is the Issenheim Altarpiece, a triptych with layers of panels depicting the lives of Christ and several saints that unfold like a massive book. The paintings, by 15th century German artist Matthias Grunewald, look like Technicolor dreamscapes: haunting, expressive, disturbing. 

Another nearby museum, the Musee Bartholdi, pays homage to sculptor Frederic Auguste Bartholdi -- a Colmar native and the designer of the Statue of Liberty. Sketches and clay mock-ups of Lady Liberty make up the core of the collection. 

If you're museumed out, head for the Petite Venise, or Little Venice neighborhood -- a canal flanked by charming German-style buildings with exposed crossbeams and flower baskets overflowing with geraniums. You can even take a ride in little wooden boats that look like truncated gondolas. 

But don't expect to be serenaded. 

"We don't do that kind of thing," one boatman told me. 

Restaurants serving local specialties like a beef, potato and white wine stew called baeckeofe and saumagen, or stuffed pork stomach, line the canal. 

Colmar's twice-weekly farmers' market is also a showcase for the region's culinary traditions. 

Local vintners hawking crisp local white wines rub shoulders with organic farmers offering homemade sausages, hand-picked berries, yogurts and cheeses. Bakers, drawing from the best of the French and German traditions, sell both crusty baguettes and oversized, doughy pretzels. 

Most of the region's vintners are based outside Colmar, amid the endless rows of vineyards that surround the city, but a handful of wine makers do their production in Colmar. 

Domaine Karcher is one of them. In a small compound tucked into a side street in old Colmar, Georges Karcher and his family turn chardonnay and pinot noir grapes into seven varieties of wine. 

Karcher offers daily tours of his wine cellar, with new stainless steel vats and century-old oak barrels. No visit would be complete, of course, without a tasting. Karcher's fruity Riesling and his sweet Gewurtztraminer -- which both run for about euro7 (US$10) a bottle -- are not to be missed. 

And after sampling half a dozen varieties of Karcher's wines, the high-speed train ride back to Paris ought to go even faster. 

------ 

If You Go... 

REIMS: http://www.reims-tourisme.com

COLMAR: http://www.ot-colmar.fr

GETTING THERE: From Paris' Gare de l'Est station, there are eight round-trip high-speed trains to Reims daily and three to Colmar. Ticket prices vary by season and time; round-trip to Reims currently runs about euro45 (US$63), to Colmar about euro130 (US$183). Buy tickets in person at one of the SNCF railway company's Paris boutiques, not online. You need a European credit card in order to pick up tickets purchased on the Web site. 

IN REIMS: Reserve visits to Champagne cellars at least 24 hours in advance. Most cellars offer at least three English tours daily. Tickets cost about euro10 (US$14) per person and generally include a glass of Champagne. 

WHAT TO EAT: Try a "biscuit rose de Reims," a light, crunchy delicately rose-flavored cookie that puts the perfect finishing touch on a hearty Champagne-country lunch. 

IN COLMAR: The farmer's market is held Thursday morning around the Koifhus and on Saturday mornings at the Place St. Joseph. Domaine Karcher wine cellar: 11, rue de l'Ours in Colmar; http://www.vins-karcher.com . Open Monday-Saturday on demand during business hours and Sunday morning.


----------



## Moby92

Lol.. the map on the first page isn't right either. Places like Breda and The Hague aren't on the map.


----------



## Guest

When are SNCF extending their TGV network to Birmingham and Manchester? :lol:


----------



## Minato ku

^^ Do you like strike ? SNCF 


Strasbourg station, the recently added front glass.
Pictures by Grumpy


----------



## Bitxofo

^^Très belle!
:drool:


----------



## Rohne

Why the hell this glass front? The old building looks too good that it would need such architectural trash.


----------



## Insane alex

WOW! Awesome! It looks so futuristic!


----------



## Slartibartfas

I like it as well. But the best about it I guess is that if trends change and people start hating it, you can get rid of it again and the old facade will reappear pretty unharmed.


----------



## hkskyline

*German railway wants to work with Eurostar on London services *

BERLIN, Nov 1, 2007 (AFP) - The German railway operator Deutsche Bahn said Thursday it wanted to work with Eurostar on routes to London via the Channel Tunnel and rejected a report it had sought clearance for its own services. 

"At the moment, we have no concrete plans to run direct services (from Germany) to London with the ICE (high-speed train). Accordingly, we have not asked for clearance (from Eurostar)," a Deutsche Bahn spokeswoman told AFP. 

The spokeswoman, asked to comment on a British report that the German railway wanted to compete with Eurostar on the route, said routes to London had a promising future. 

"Our common interest, with Eurostar, is to increase the role rail plays in transport services to London," she added. 

Currently, German rail passengers travelling to London have to change to Eurostar services in Brussels, making for a six-hour journey from Cologne to the British capital. 

The Times of London reported earlier that Deutsche Bahn wanted to operate its own services through the Channel Tunnel in direct competition with Eurostar, hoping to cut journey times from Cologne to four hours.


----------



## mrmoopt

How does a rail operator apply to get accreditation to run thru on the Chunnel?


----------



## Irish Blood English Heart

That would be amazing if it happened, I would love to travel on an ICE direct to Cologne


----------



## elfabyanos

cal_t said:


> How does a rail operator apply to get accreditation to run thru on the Chunnel?


The Channel Tunnel and the rail link is built to a European standard, so it shouldn't be too hard I think. If the operator wanted to run trains on the normal old uk railway lines that would be hell to organise though. The main issue I believe is fire-protection through the tunnel - Eurostar and Le Shuttle having back up doors and such like.


----------



## mrmoopt

elfabyanos said:


> The Channel Tunnel and the rail link is built to a European standard, so it shouldn't be too hard I think. If the operator wanted to run trains on the normal old uk railway lines that would be hell to organise though. The main issue I believe is fire-protection through the tunnel - Eurostar and Le Shuttle having back up doors and such like.


Thanks for that. Where do we find the Specs for the tunnel compliance? If DB did want to run such services, then we might see an ICE 3M mk2!


----------



## OriK

In Spain we have 2 central government owned rail companies, ADIF (infraestructure manager) and Renfe (passenger services).

Almost the entire rail network is owned by ADIF, regional governments can also build infraestructure (like in Madrid where the autonomous government extended a line because it wasn't on ADIF's plans), I don't know if private companies can build it, so when a Renfe's train (or other companies' trains, but actually only for freight trains) stops in a station or goes throw a rail, they pay a fee to the infraestructure owner (usually ADIF).

An example of private rail company in Spain is Continental-Rail http://www.continentalrail.es/, partly owned by an important bus company called Continental-Auto.

 Bye^2


----------



## earthJoker

Steve87 said:


> Yes, and I am also pretty sure that there are on-board passport controls on trains between Switzerland and Schengen countries. Does anyone know what happens to people without valid documentation? Sent back on the next train? Everyone single culprit accompanied by one or two border guards? Can't quite imagine that... Any experiences earthJoker?


I think it depends. I mean if you just forgot your passport probably you will be sent back with the next train (if possible). If you have a criminal inention, you might get arrested. Actually I don't know but I know someone in the business I will ask him (well I try).



> I think the Cisalpino between Switzerland and Italy is actually quite comparable given that it is an international service into a Schengen country (Italy) with major tunnels en route. Does anyone know if similar safety regulations apply here?


Well the Cisalpino from Bern is somehow comparable, it goes throught the Lötschberg Base Tunnel (34,6 km) and the Simplon tunnel (20km), the border is in the Middle of the Simplontunnel.
The safety regulations on the trains are not nearly as strict. I went with a normal InterCity train throught the Lötschberg Base Tunnel. The train has to have ETCS Level 2.


----------



## Steve87

I just came across this article here. A little outdated, but 2010 will probably see a lot of change in cross-border rail services.. Is there a thread on that?


May 3, 2007
Airline prepares to challenge Eurostar
Carl Mortished 

Air France is considering launching a rival service to Eurostar on the London-to-Paris high-speed route as Europe’s national railways prepare to embrace the chill wind of competition. 

From 2010, foreign train operators will be entitled to operate international services within Europe and the French airline has signalled already that it may seek to recoup some of the traffic lost through the Channel Tunnel. 

Eurostar secured a boost from last summer’s terrorist scare at British airports, with ticket sales up by a fifth and business passengers up by a quarter. A significant portion of the lost traffic is sticking to rail and Air France hopes to hit back by using high-speed trains to funnel British-bound passengers to and from the TGV station at Charles de Gaulle Airport. 

More uncertain is the future behaviour of rival national rail companies as investment in high-speed rail track connects more European cities. SNCF, which has a stake in Eurostar, is developing TGV Est, the network to Strasbourg and across the German border, with Deutsche Bahn. 

Rhealys, a joint venture co-owned by SNCF and Deutsche Bahn, is coordinating marketing on the new routes between Paris and Frankfurt, Stuttgart and Munich. 

Deutsche Bahn has had to buy French signalling equipment for the TGV Est corridor so that the locomotives can communicate with the track. 

The two companies do have the option to go it alone. Competitors on the French network may, however, struggle with the close relationship between Reseau Ferre de France, which owns the French track network, and SNCF.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article1739207.ece


----------



## himbaman

*Why are European train companies being privatised?*

does anyone know why?

I myself don't think it's a good idea, because the European transport market will become even more fragmented and complicated than it is now. The European Union should better take the initiative for some kind of united train company for the entire continent. (kind of like Amtrak in the US, but way better )


----------



## Steve87

Interesting question, actually.

An important factor in European rail privatisation is probably the European Commission's mandate to create the EU Single Market.

Then there is the global trend to privatise state assets, as before telecom companies, property assets, energy companies etc.

I am sure that most people would agree that in the UK rail privatisation has not been that much of a success (although I am not sure how British Rail performed prior to that), and Switzerland, France and Spain seem to be relatively well off with state-owned railway companies.


----------



## elfabyanos

I dunno, I was way against privatisation in the UK, but 10 years later it's not so bad. In fact, since Railtrack were killed off it's getting better and better.


----------



## Steve87

elfabyanos said:


> I dunno, I was way against privatisation in the UK, but 10 years later it's not so bad. In fact, since Railtrack were killed off it's getting better and better.


What is Railtrack?


----------



## elfabyanos

Railtrack was the company that took over the operation of the railway infrastructure like tracks, signalling etc. They had shareholders and had absolutely no competition as there wasn't an alternative for the market - the train operating companies could only run on Railtrack's tracks. Add to that Railtrack was run by a bunch of morons they slowly ran all the infrastructure into the ground for 5 years. There were a few high profile crashes related to tracks falling apart so Railtrack then finally decided to start repairing everything, only it then found out it had poured all of it's money down the toilet already and wanted hand outs from the government. So the government renationalised them, and the country's rail infrastructure is now run by National Rail, a not-for-profit company that reinvests all profits back into the infrastructure.


----------



## Yardmaster

I can't really comment on the financial situation of European Railways, but my advice is: don't go down the British Road! We did, and so did New Zealand, and it did bugger-all good for either of us.

What happened here was that, on the election of a Conservative Government, they would follow in Maggie Thatcher's footsteps. After fixing up the non-essential infrastructure (painting station buildings and fixing up platform lighting) they sold off the system to private operators. After the British model, there was a multitude of operators, but they all in fact were funded by the Government by in-confidence agreements, not open to public scrutiny. The Government kept on paying the bills, and the private companies only "operated" the services under licences, the details of which have yet to be revealed.

When one of the major contractors- National Express- walked away from three of its contracts, they were let go: admittedly by that time the Government had changed again. All three of the regional rail operators backed out; so did one of the metropolitan railway operators, and one of the tramway operators. Yes, that's five contracts, and three were ...

The simple fact is, it was a very bad model for an area like this in the first place. Ultimately the delivery of services fell back on the Government. The public expects services, and they hold the Government accountable for that. It's interesting to note that in certain other areas here where the Government has sold off public instrumentalities (aviation, telecommunications), there's now concern because the "private" companies are being taken over by foreign interests: in particular, the state-run equivalents in Singapore. As for the power industry, which was a state-owned asset also sold off by the former Government here, my right-wing acquaintances (one of whom insisted that the only legitimate arms of Government were the Army and the Police!) now lament that merchant-banks are going to screw us every time we turn on the tap: because we're going to need to buy power to distill water.

That's what you get when you sell essential assets off ... to organizations which are only motivated by profit, and have no obligation to provide essential services.

And take it from me, by the time whoever bought your national assets has decided it wasn't such a good idea, he'll have walked away with a very handsome separation payment; the Government will have changed, and the people that advocated this in the first place will be whingeing ... about anything and everything.


----------



## thun

Difficult question. In fact, the EU wants to break all the monopols by state-owned companies as they did in the nineties with the electricity suppliers, parcel services or telecommunication providers. Mail services are currently getting private opponents (at least in Germany) and railways do have them since the nineties as well. Deutsche Bahn was transformed from a state structure (run like an administration office) to private economy standards, but the federal state still holds the majority.
But they get more and more opponents. Mostly on freight services run by numerous rail companies, but also on passenger services. Here, it works like this: The Bundesland orders a regional transport service and pays for it, the company that offers the best package gets the deal. On most lines it's still DB that runs the trains, but on several lines there also (or exclusively) private companies operating regional trains.


----------



## C-Beam

Networks are natural monopolies as it is very inefficient to construct several competing networks in parallel. The rail tracks should therefore stay in the hand of the government because the government is at least elected in contrast to a private monopoly. The trains running on the tracks should be privatized. Timeslots on the tracks should be auctioned to to private companies every year.


----------



## Xusein

Funny, because I think that the privatization model would work better than our current status quo. It's not even like Amtrak controls a large part of the rail network...a lot of the rail lines are owned by the freighters and they have higher priority on plenty of them too. 

I like Amtrak, but unless the government pays more attention to it, it's better off privatized.

Wouldn't want to see the UK example work here though.


----------



## elfabyanos

The UK privatisation package was awful. A new government and a considerable amount of time has allowed a workable system to develop, and now I would advocate keeping privatisation in the UK, if only for some stability. The current system is working, trains are getting better overall, and the infrastructure is getting imporved albeit slowly. The Department for Transport keeps a tight hold on what services the franchises have to run, as in minimum service levels, which basically accounts for nearly all the services most operators actually provide. They keep tight control over what rolling stock the train companies can lease from the roscos (the owners of the trains). They keep a tight grip on everything. However, it seems to be working now better than state-owned railways did in the last BR days.

The main examples of positives are the way in which the various stakeholders get a fair say in infrastructure developments etc. The freight operators are paying for a service from National Rail, and cannot be sidelined when Network Rail is planning on remodelling junction etc as they could get sued if they impact freight performance. In the old days it was easier for BR's management to 'fix' a junction on the cheap for the benefit of the express trains, and leave the freight trains impacted with delays due to lack of consideration for their movements.

Open access is a bonus as well, due to speculative 'open access operators' cities like Hull, Sunderland, Telford, Shrewsbury and Wrexham now have direct services to London, which is a great bonus, especially for trainspotters!

Ultimately I would have preferred BR to have stayed, and for that to have been sorted out, maybe with part privatisation of the train operations, but leaving infrastructure intact. Now we have what we have I wish to keep it, I would not now see the benefit of turning the clock back, what's done is done.


----------



## earthJoker

C-Beam said:


> Networks are natural monopolies as it is very inefficient to construct several competing networks in parallel. The rail tracks should therefore stay in the hand of the government because the government is at least elected in contrast to a private monopoly. The trains running on the tracks should be privatized. Timeslots on the tracks should be auctioned to to private companies every year.


Can you read my mind? My thoughts written into letters. kay:


----------



## priamos

himbaman said:


> does anyone know why?


The privatisations are in preparation for what has been termed "The Third Raiway Package" passed by the EU in 2007. According to the Package all railway operators must grant third-party access to their network no later than in 2010. You can read more here: 
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_...arliament_approves_third_railway_package.html

Privatisation does not follow organically from this, of course, but the separation of a track operating company from the national railway incumbent does: you can't have competition if one of the competitors owns the tracks and decides unilaterally on the access fees levied on the others.


----------



## Steve87

Thanks for the link priamos! That's what I had in mind when I mentionned liberalisation at EU level.

Personally, I agree with the German model of keeping the network in government hands but letting a partly privatised incumbent rail operator compete with private rail companies.

I read the other day that the German constitution requires the rail infrastructure to be majority owned by the government.


----------



## elfabyanos

Steve87 said:


> Personally, I agree with the German model of keeping the network in government hands but letting a partly privatised incumbent rail operator compete with private rail companies.


That's the UK system too. Sort of.


----------



## Jonesy55

I agree with C-Beam, infrastructure should remain public, auction off slots to private train operators. There is a tendency in the UK to blame all the faults of the system on privatisation but they forget that British Rail was also crap and the government had not invested much at all in the network for 20 years prior to privatisation during which time passenger numbers showed a consistent decline.

In the past ten years though, rolling stock has been thoroughly modernised and passenger numbers are up by 40% to record levels. This week, Shrewsbury has recommenced a direct link to London thanks to the open-access principle that privatisation has enabled so it can't be all bad.


----------



## Metropolitan

Not really Elfabyanos considering that the German government requires the rail companies to respect a management plan including a large collection of goals an objectives. Maybe the UK has reformed the system in the German way, but initially this wasn't the case at all in Britain.

As a matter of fact, when Germany privatized its rail providers, the federal government has only one obsession : to not repeat Britain's mistakes!


----------



## elfabyanos

That's not how privatisation started out but that's how it is now. The train operating companies are very tightly regulated by central government, they must respect the department for transport's objectives for the franchise (which can be found on the DfT website). The government stipulate how many trains must run on every single route under the franchise, the companies can run more if they like, if they can negotiate the track access and the leasing of the required vehicles, again with the blessing of the ever controlling hand of the Department for Transport. They also must achieve other goals such as reliability and safety or face fines, or, like Connex South Eastern, have their franchise removed.


----------



## urbanfan89

In Canada we have two large railway companies who own parallel networks of tracks: CN (Canadian National) and CP (Canadian Pacific). CN was state-owned while CP was private. Hence we had a public and private rail network coexisting.

Both used to run their own passenger services until the 1970s, when they became money-losers and transferred them into Via Rail, a crown corporation created to provide passenger trains.

Via Rail funding was erratic over the 1980s, with governments cutting funds or restoring them whenever they wanted.

But CN was still a state-owned operation and thus was bloated and money-losing. In 1995 the government privatized CN, while Via Rail was left on the back burner.

Since then CN has become more commercially-oriented, though the safety record has deteriorated. Every month there's a big CN train crash and the company is called "Crash National".


----------



## Maxx☢Power

elfabyanos said:


> Why would you need border controls if you aint crossing a border? Thats the difference.


They're borders between states. 50 of those states happen to be in a tight federation while the other 27 are in a much looser confederation. I'm just saying don't get too hung up on the word "country", which has a very loose, non-political definition.

The passport/ID check is a formality, but it's annoying and slightly arrogant. "Of course you have the right to be here, but _we're watching you_."


----------



## sotavento

Tallsmurf said:


> The reasons behind UK not being in Schengen are purely historical and driven by a litle-Englander mentality
> 
> Fears about control
> ===============
> My wife is non-European - it has always been much easier to take her to Uk than to Schengen zone.
> 
> Fears about terrorism
> ================
> Main source of terrorism used to be Ireland (no passport:visa required). Now it is Islamoc extremists holding British passports
> 
> Fears about being flooded with east European immigrants
> ==========================================
> They are let in without restriction...
> 
> The reasosn Britain does not have Schengen is anti-EU paranoia - nothing else:bash::bash::bash:


^^ I stoped "caring" about the tipical British "anti-eu-paranoia" when some old lady over there said to me:

"Portugal ... oh ... I have a summer home near there ... in chipre" :nuts:

On the other hand ... customs are ... customs and It feals great to have a lovely young lady dessed up in "tipical" indian stile fashion looking for 5 minutes at your ID card and at the pupils of your eyes and then hear someone "caliming" that the barriers at the frontiers are for "keeping" outsiders at check...

^^ 1st time I took a trip to Standstead the 2 "dudes" at the X-Ray were ... a) Tipical "turbant" wearer (even the grey beard was present) ... and B) turkish(?) with "flower-vase-hat" and pointy golden soft shoes.


----------



## :jax:

Steve87 said:


> What I don't understand about this whole Nightstar idea is why they wanted to run the trains from regional UK stations into Continental cities. I would have thought that it makes a lot more sense to run night trains out of London into the typical airline destinations, i.e. Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, Munich, Frankfurt etc.
> 
> At the moment it is necessary to change from Eurostar into night train in Paris or Brussels. The extra change takes the whole convenience point out of it and it becomes more senseful to do the 5hr Heathrow hassle either at 6am in the morning or from late in the afternoon on a workday to catch a flight for a next day meeting.


I could see the logic. Air traffic is point-to-point, jettisoning the hub-and-spoke mentality dominant in the 1990s, the days of the national carriers. Air travel is inconvenient, but air travel with transfers considerably more so, but for major cities within Europe you don't have transfer anymore. For minor cities you do.

Rail traffic on the other hand is line traffic. On a day journey you don't want it to last more than three or at most four hours, otherwise you take the plane. From Prague I would take train or bus to Berlin, Munich, Vienna, Bratislava, but go to the airport for any other major European city. On a night train you would like to get your 8 hours of sleep or so, you wouldn't want to spend less than 6 hours nor more than 11 hours (the 3-4 hours of day travel reduced by train fatigue).

Airports are inconvenient, but so is spending your night in a bedroom not your own, a bathroom not your own. 

Putting all of the above, a regional strategy makes sense. If you live in London and want to go to Frankfurt, Copenhagen, or Milan, you take the morning plane, no question about it. But what if you live in Birmingham or Liverpool? There are no direct morning planes going between these cities, I think, and people getting on from the English cities in the evening could get off in the other European cities in the morning. 

But apart from the economic and logistical problems running a night train service, there are other demands. You should get on no earlier than 20:00, no later than 24:00, you should get off no earlier than 06:00, no later than 10:00, and as mentioned the trip should last at least 6 hours and at most 11. This is hard to achieve with regional travel. 

Even with a strategy using major cities this is hard. The article mentioned stopping in Amsterdam at 3:30 before going on to Copenhagen and Stockholm (where you would arrive so late as to prefer the two hour direct flight instead). Amsterdam is a nice city, but not when you arrive there 3:30 in the morning. 

One solution might be to have a dedicated car for Amsterdam that you disconnect and let the passengers sleep in the station until say 07:00. Things like this has been tried, when they did I've been tempted to travel by train, but all such services I know of have been discontinued. Scandianavia/Sweden has a system where the cities of Stockholm, Oslo, Gothenburg, and Copenhagen/Malmö are connected by night by three trains going to Gothenburg, the middle point in the triangle, and then the cars reconnected into three trains going to Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhagen in the morning. Not a success as far as I know, maybe related to that I still haven't figured out how to get a ticket, let alone how much that would cost.


----------



## BIL

*Sweden/Norway*

In Sweden the SJ state railway has a monopoly if they can run the trains profitable. If they can't any operator can offer to operate with financial support, and the lowest bidder will be given the contract.

However for international trains it is already deregulated, and there is one competitor train, going Oslo-Stockholm. However they are not allowed to sell ticket on domestic streches in Sweden. All sold tickets must be cross-border.


----------



## elfabyanos

cal_t said:


> Thanks for that. Where do we find the Specs for the tunnel compliance? If DB did want to run such services, then we might see an ICE 3M mk2!


Sorry for not replying. Basically I've got no idea who has the standards details.


----------



## Republica

sotavento said:


> ^^ I stoped "caring" about the tipical British "anti-eu-paranoia" when some old lady over there said to me:
> 
> "Portugal ... oh ... I have a summer home near there ... in chipre" :nuts:
> 
> On the other hand ... customs are ... customs and It feals great to have a lovely young lady dessed up in "tipical" indian stile fashion looking for 5 minutes at your ID card and at the pupils of your eyes and then hear someone "caliming" that the barriers at the frontiers are for "keeping" outsiders at check...
> 
> ^^ 1st time I took a trip to Standstead the 2 "dudes" at the X-Ray were ... a) Tipical "turbant" wearer (even the grey beard was present) ... and B) turkish(?) with "flower-vase-hat" and pointy golden soft shoes.


Firstly, your spelling and grammar are shocking.

Secondly, your post is borderline racist.

Thirdly, your 'point' about a woman having a holiday home in Portugal makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## Glodenox

I think he meant Cyprus with "chipre", which would make much more sense.

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## sotavento

Republica said:


> Firstly, your spelling and grammar are shocking.
> 
> Secondly, your post is borderline racist.
> 
> Thirdly, your 'point' about a woman having a holiday home in Portugal makes no sense whatsoever.


Spelling ??? do you even know what quoting marks are ??? 

How do you presume to know the right spelling of what someone puts inside some quoting marks ??? 

And about grammar ... FYIO (for your info only), I'm a straight A graduate in english. 

Claiming that someone is Borderline racist when the subject one is talking about is "ethnicity" is being completely stupid.

It's all in the "meaning" you put in those tecnicalities ... YOU are the one being a racist since you assume that by detailing some "evident" traits I'm being whatever/racist ... I'm just detailing the cultural diversity found on england. 

^^ NOWHERE ELSE on earth have I seen anyone alowed to use his/her homeland (or his/her ancesstors homeland) traditional clothing instead of the "mandatory" uniform of the job ... that is "political correctness" (or racism on a bizzar twisted turn).

About the holidays in portugal ... do you even know where portugal and cyprus are (chipre is a portuguese word for kypros ... cyprus is the english word) ??? 


> Cyprus (Greek: Κύπρος, Kýpros; Turkish: Kıbrıs), officially the Republic of Cyprus (Greek: Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, Kypriakḗ Dēmokratía; Turkish: Kıbrıs Cumhuriyeti) is a Eurasian island country situated in the eastern Mediterranean south of Turkey, west of the Levant, north of Egypt, and east of Greece.


^^3500km apart from each other ... but to a "knowledgeable" tourist they are just close to each other in the southern europe specialy when that particular tourist is talking in perfect portuguese accent (being a british) to a foreigner. :lol: 
That would make Portugal and Britain "Neighbours" since both are just 880km apart from each other. hno:

considering that my previous post was a response about this post by Tallsmurf:



> Originally Posted by Tallsmurf
> The reasons behind UK not being in Schengen are purely historical and driven by a litle-Englander mentality
> 
> Fears about control
> ===============
> My wife is non-European - it has always been much easier to take her to Uk than to Schengen zone.
> 
> Fears about terrorism
> ================
> Main source of terrorism used to be Ireland (no passport:visa required). Now it is Islamoc extremists holding British passports
> 
> Fears about being flooded with east European immigrants
> ==========================================
> They are let in without restriction...
> 
> The reasosn Britain does not have Schengen is anti-EU paranoia - nothing else


I can only "presume" that you either a) never went to britain [I sincerely wish that you are british] or b) have no knowledge about those things like "free speech" and "no second intentions" when speaking about something or even d) are a white british suffering from overusage of "political correctness". hno:


----------



## CharlieP

sotavento said:


> I'm a straight A graduate in english.


Really?



> Spelling ??? *D*o you even know what quot*ation* marks are ???
> 
> How do you presume to know the right spelling of what someone puts inside some quot*ation* marks ???
> 
> And *about* *as for* grammar ... FYIO (for your info only), I'm a straight A graduate in *E*nglish.
> 
> Claiming that someone is Borderline racist when the subject one is talking about is "ethnicity" is being completely stupid.
> 
> It's all in the "meaning" you put in those tec*h*nicalities ... YOU are the one being a racist since you assume that by detailing some "evident" traits I'm being whatever/racist ... I'm just detailing the cultural diversity found *on* *in E*ngland.
> 
> ^^ NOWHERE ELSE on *E*arth have I seen anyone alowed to use his/her homeland*'s* (or his/her ance*s*stors*'* homeland*'s*) traditional clothing instead of the "mandatory" uniform of the job ... that is "political correctness" (or racism *on* *in* a bi*z*zar*re* twisted turn).
> 
> About the holidays in *P*ortugal ... do you even know where *P*ortugal and *C*yprus are (*C*hipre is a *P*ortuguese word for *K*ypros ... *C*yprus is the english word) ???
> 
> 
> ^^3500km apart from each other ... but to a "knowledgeable" tourist they are just close to each other in *the* *S*outhern *E*urope*, e*specially when that particular tourist is talking in *a* perfect *P*ortuguese accent (being *a* *B*ritish) to a foreigner. :lol:
> That would make Portugal and Britain "Neighbours" since both are just 880km apart from each other. hno:
> 
> *C*onsidering that my previous post was a response about this post by Tallsmurf:
> 
> 
> 
> I can only "presume" that you either a) *never went* *have never been* to *B*ritain [I sincerely wish that you are *B*ritish] or b) have no knowledge about *those* *such* things *like* *as* "free speech" and "no second intentions" when speaking about something or even d) are a white *british* *Briton* suffering from *overusage* *over-use* of "political correctness". hno:


I give this post a 'C'. :lol:


----------



## Alexriga

He can speak more than one language unlike most of British citizens.


----------



## Alexriga

Tallsmurf said:


> The reasons behind UK not being in Schengen are purely historical and driven by a litle-Englander mentality
> 
> Fears about control
> ===============
> My wife is non-European - it has always been much easier to take her to Uk than to Schengen zone.
> 
> Fears about terrorism
> ================
> Main source of terrorism used to be Ireland (no passport:visa required). Now it is Islamoc extremists holding British passports
> 
> Fears about being flooded with east European immigrants
> ==========================================
> They are let in without restriction...
> 
> The reasosn Britain does not have Schengen is anti-EU paranoia - nothing else:bash::bash::bash:


Very wit remarks. Immigrants are everywhere, workers from EE also. looks like Schengen works better than British customs


----------



## Dan

BIL said:


> In Sweden the SJ state railway has a monopoly if they can run the trains profitable. If they can't any operator can offer to operate with financial support, and the lowest bidder will be given the contract.
> 
> However for international trains it is already deregulated, and there is one competitor train, going Oslo-Stockholm. However they are not allowed to sell ticket on domestic streches in Sweden. All sold tickets must be cross-border.


SJ pretty much has a monopoly within Sweden though, and now they even got most routes to the very north. However starting in 2010 or 2012 their monopoly will end and all will be free to run trains within the country.  Though of course track allowance etc will limit this.


----------



## Micrav

GO BACK to SUBJECT pls. Who cares about grammar. 

Project is new routes through chunnel. There are technical solutions also if one day, they want to scan for safety running trains full of containers. I find a bit absurd today now that there is need to develop special trains to go in the tunnel only for terrorist reasons. Terrorism is fought elsewhere, it is fought in minds first. 

I can really imagine trains of containers running through tunnel. Schengen is a concept of free mobility for people. Whatever you name it, it will expand, rename it "Exeter" and you will have the UK apply to it with four hands  

We need that the tunnel generates money and service, be cost effective, the most trains going through, the better for everybody! So why not direct lines from Germany, Spain, Switzerland to England through tunnel...


----------



## Republica

sotavento said:


> I can only "presume" that you either a) never went to britain [I sincerely wish that you are british] or b) have no knowledge about those things like "free speech" and "no second intentions" when speaking about something or even d) are a white british suffering from overusage of "political correctness". hno:


Well, I've got to say I stand by my point about your spelling and grammar. Yours _is_ quite bizarre.

I accept that you probably weren't intending to come over as borderline racist, you just didnt express your point well enough, which leads back to the sentence above. Note the 'borderline'. Yes, those are quotation marks, which I know exactly how to use, unlike you.

As for Schengen, I cant see us joining it any time soon. Unfortunately we are going the opposite direction in making our borders more secure.


----------



## Republica

Alexriga said:


> He can speak more than one language unlike most of British citizens.


Yes, he at least manages to be just about intelligible, which I admire, but it is in a strange style  

Theres a reason that English speakers (not just British, see the Yanks, Aussies, Canadians etc. etc.) are on the whole poor at learning other languages: The global 'Lingua Franca'. It's tricky for us!


----------



## sotonsi

sotavento said:


> How do you presume to know the right spelling of what someone puts inside some quoting marks ???


One would guess that an British person either does actually have a house in a place called "chipre" in Portugal, or said Cyprus when she was being stupid (and so you are mis-quoting). They don't call it "Chipre" outside Portugal, so why would she use the Portuguese word? You either misunderstood her completely, or you are making it up to imply that British people have no idea about Europe and therefore are stupid and can't say anything sensible about Europe (which is what seems to be the case - you stopped "caring" about English "anti-eu-mentality" after this incident).


> And about grammar ... FYIO (for your info only), I'm a straight A graduate in english.


I have an A in German, but can only speak "ein bisein Deutch" and can't spell it at all now (as you can see), as that was a long time ago, and I haven't had cause to use it much since I stopped learning. Grades mean nothing.


> Claiming that someone is Borderline racist when the subject one is talking about is "ethnicity" is being completely stupid.


It read to me as more than borderline. Your A in English is also a rather crap one (just like my one in German), ethnicity is a synonym (ie has the same meaning (well pretty much) of race, and someone who is actually good at English would know that the two are similar things.


> On the other hand ... customs are ... customs and It feals great to have a lovely young lady dressed up in "tipical" Indian stiyle fashion looking for 5 minutes at your ID card and at the pupils of your eyes and then hear someone "caliming" that the barriers at the frontiers are for "keeping" outsiders at check...
> 
> 1st time I took a trip to Standstead the 2 "dudes" at the X-Ray were ... a) Tiypical "turbant" wearer (even the grey beard was present) ... and B) turkish(?) with "flower-vase-hat" and pointy golden soft shoes.


Firstly, I don't understand these quotes - tipical and typical would be pronounced the same, so if it was said, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference (then again, it's a spelling mistake you seem to always make), and I can't imagine someone saying "turbant", you just misheard turban due to the accent (likely to be a London or Estuary one for a Sikh) (though why they would have to say it, I have no idea - maybe you asked "what's that thing" in a rather rude manner).

On to the more serious things - you seem to be pointing out the irony that those of Turkish or South Asian ethnicity are on the border of the UK "keeping outsiders out". Therefore implying that you seem to be pointing out that 'outsiders' are there keeping other outsiders out.


> It's all in the "meaning" you put in those technicalities ... YOU are the one being a racist since you assume that by detailing some "evident" traits I'm being whatever/racist ... I'm just detailing the cultural diversity found on England.


I think I've shown you have to work at what you say and twist it to come to the conclusion that it's not pushing the limits of racism. You are pointing out differences - you are making a thing of race. If you English is so good, you can actually explain something without leaving the reader in much doubt of what it means - I know mine is often not this good. You sound as if you are backtracking here. You aren't just detailing, you're implying irony, you're implying that there's something wrong about this.


> NOWHERE ELSE on earth have I seen anyone allowed to use his/her homeland (or his/her ancesstors homeland) traditional clothing instead of the "mandatory" uniform of the job ... that is "political correctness" (or racism on a bizzar twisted turn).


It's not racist, it's freedom to wear whatever they want. If they were white, European looking and wearing jeans and a shirt, then you wouldn't have had a problem. I'm not a fan of PC or this freedom they should be wearing uniforms like all our other border controls, however they have a right to wear turbans (given by the European Convention on Human Rights) and other religious items (providing that they don't get in the way of the uniform, like a burqa). Beards and stuff are also allowed, or should we be PC and ban them as women can't grow decent ones?

You are making a huge thing about race and the fact that these people look and dress differently - it may not have been your intention to be racist, however your English style and the content of your post read to natives as being racist, or pushing the limits.

If I had said, "I went to Norway and there was a black guy there on immigration control trying to keep outsiders out" and that was basically the sum total of my post, it makes no sense unless it's making an underhand racist comment about the black person being an outsider and you are enjoying the irony. Either your post made no sense (very likely) or was racist.


----------



## Gag Halfrunt

I've never seen a British passport officer wearing a uniform. They used to be ordinary Home Office civil servants, but I think that they're supposed to have uniforms now that they're part of the Border and Immigration Agency or Border Agency or whatever it's called. Customs officers, who are entirely separate, do wear uniforms. X-Ray machines at UK airports are operated by private security staff, so uniform and dress rules are up to the individual company.


----------



## sotavento

CharlieP said:


> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> I give this post a 'C'. :lol:


^^ try being a "leftie" with a broken left wrist at age 10 , since a violent car accident age 21 I'm a total dilexic (I change words in letters and don't even know it while reading) ... hell ... I'm just happy to be alive and don't give me crap about bad spelling on the internet.

(even this post can probably/certainly be full of tipo's for what I know) :lol:


I can _miss-spell_ in some 20 or 30 different languages (wich totals some hundreds of localized dialects) ... can you say the same for yourself ??? If yes good for you ... if no shame on you. :lol:

Now one even has to take som "political-correct" grammar corrections from a homophobic racist when in his country they don't even translate a foreign country's name correctly ??? 

It's Kypros so everyone else's translation is incorrect ... keep whinning if you want.



Republica said:


> Well, I've got to say I stand by my point about your spelling and grammar. Yours _is_ quite bizarre.
> 
> I accept that you probably weren't intending to come over as borderline racist, you just didnt express your point well enough, which leads back to the sentence above. Note the 'borderline'. Yes, those are quotation marks, which I know exactly how to use, unlike you.
> 
> As for Schengen, I cant see us joining it any time soon. Unfortunately we are going the opposite direction in making our borders more secure.


^^ Re-read the topic ... and I used my " " pretty well. :lol:

You are using single ' ' as a rule like british do ... Since I learned english from an american teacher I tend to use more americanized english wich bases itself on double quotation marks " ". hno: 

To start correcting other peoples grammar and spelling you better learn ALL of english language regional variations first. :bash:

And consider yourself lucky that I actualy can speak proper english ... imagine if I were to start flamming you in a language unkpnown to you because I simply didn't liked the result from the online translation of your response (there's a large portion of the userbase of SSC that can't speak "cambridge/oxford/whatever" english and relies on translations) ... to came crashing on a foreign language speaker for grammar errors ... shame on you. hno:


Back on topic:

There are 2 misleading "assumptions" about Britain:

i) everyone in britain if fearfull(?) of immigration/violence/whatever fanatism ???

ii) britain is completely multicultural ... who is ever right to assume that one extreme position by any given "ethnic" group can count as a majority rule decision ... 


^^ Britain simply had no voluntary wish to be "inside" shengen until now ... they seem to still have no wish to be inside in the near future. 

Considering that it is an island country and that most (if not all) of its connections to the mainland involve some degree of security prevention ... what is the difference between "free passage" with or without passport control ??? 

And by the way ... there is not even "ID cards" in the UK. hno:


----------



## sotavento

sotonsi said:


> One would guess that an British person either does actually have a house in a place called "chipre" in Portugal, or said Cyprus when she was being stupid (and so you are mis-quoting). They don't call it "Chipre" outside Portugal, so why would she use the Portuguese word? You either misunderstood her completely, or you are making it up to imply that British people have no idea about Europe and therefore are stupid and can't say anything sensible about Europe (which is what seems to be the case - you stopped "caring" about English "anti-eu-mentality" after this incident).I have an A in German, but can only speak "ein bisein Deutch" and can't spell it at all now (as you can see), as that was a long time ago, and I haven't had cause to use it much since I stopped learning. Grades mean nothing.It read to me as more than borderline. Your A in English is also a rather crap one (just like my one in German), ethnicity is a synonym (ie has the same meaning (well pretty much) of race, and someone who is actually good at English would know that the two are similar things.
> Firstly, I don't understand these quotes - tipical and typical would be pronounced the same, so if it was said, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference (then again, it's a spelling mistake you seem to always make), and I can't imagine someone saying "turbant", you just misheard turban due to the accent (likely to be a London or Estuary one for a Sikh) (though why they would have to say it, I have no idea - maybe you asked "what's that thing" in a rather rude manner).
> 
> On to the more serious things - you seem to be pointing out the irony that those of Turkish or South Asian ethnicity are on the border of the UK "keeping outsiders out". Therefore implying that you seem to be pointing out that 'outsiders' are there keeping other outsiders out.
> I think I've shown you have to work at what you say and twist it to come to the conclusion that it's not pushing the limits of racism. You are pointing out differences - you are making a thing of race. If you English is so good, you can actually explain something without leaving the reader in much doubt of what it means - I know mine is often not this good. You sound as if you are backtracking here. You aren't just detailing, you're implying irony, you're implying that there's something wrong about this.
> It's not racist, it's freedom to wear whatever they want. If they were white, European looking and wearing jeans and a shirt, then you wouldn't have had a problem. I'm not a fan of PC or this freedom they should be wearing uniforms like all our other border controls, however they have a right to wear turbans (given by the European Convention on Human Rights) and other religious items (providing that they don't get in the way of the uniform, like a burqa). Beards and stuff are also allowed, or should we be PC and ban them as women can't grow decent ones?
> 
> You are making a huge thing about race and the fact that these people look and dress differently - it may not have been your intention to be racist, however your English style and the content of your post read to natives as being racist, or pushing the limits.
> 
> If I had said, "I went to Norway and there was a black guy there on immigration control trying to keep outsiders out" and that was basically the sum total of my post, it makes no sense unless it's making an underhand racist comment about the black person being an outsider and you are enjoying the irony. Either your post made no sense (very likely) or was racist.


^^ You (and others here) clearly missinterpreter my entire post.

Chipre is like we in iberia (portugal + spain) call the tiny dual country island in eastern mediterraneum ... and actualy the woman could speak fluently in portuguese , spanish and greek. :lol:

And that's the hole point ... there is "no" mainstream anti-EU-mentality over there ... or at least it doens't seem to be a major current of opinion in the UK ... they simply don't eve ncare about EU enough to be against it. hno: 



And you can forget the crap you said about any "atempted"/"assumed" intention that I had on my previous post ... simply there is no "concept" of in/out in the UK nowadays (it's actualy one of the most globalized countries in the world). 

sidenotice: About the wrongly written words (to you) ... try to speak in 3 or 4 different languages in sucessive posts (here in SSC) and see if you don't get flammed ... turban ... to me it's turbante (in portuguese) ... I didn't even translate it to uk.english ... well ... my bad.
The point is that people sometimes read the news and think that there's a big problem but in the end it's just the "tipical" british press overblowing things ... "freedom" (your words and not mine) is much more "free" in the UK than in mainland europe (if you get what I'm saying here). 

hno: 

Don't claim ethnicity and racism are synonims here because if you start that they you open a can of worms ... ethnicity has no "derrogatory"/"depreciative" background atached to it.

^^ atleast not in the english language newcasts that we get here (aljazeera , cnn , bbc , sky , etc). :bash:


And to sum it all up ... You are entirely correct in your assumption of the correctness of what you claim that I intended to say in my previous post. 

You think whatever you want to think about what you want to think you read in others peoples posts ...


I "only" replied to this post:



> Originally Posted by Tallsmurf
> The reasons behind UK not being in Schengen are purely historical and driven by a litle-Englander mentality
> 
> Fears about control
> ===============
> My wife is non-European - it has always been much easier to take her to Uk than to Schengen zone.
> 
> Fears about terrorism
> ================
> Main source of terrorism used to be Ireland (no passport:visa required). Now it is Islamoc extremists holding British passports
> 
> Fears about being flooded with east European immigrants
> ==========================================
> They are let in without restriction...
> 
> The reasosn Britain does not have Schengen is anti-EU paranoia - nothing else


if you re-read my entire post in the context of the "discussion" going around here ... you might get some light. :cheers:


----------



## sotavento

Micrav said:


> GO BACK to SUBJECT pls. Who cares about grammar.
> 
> Project is new routes through chunnel. There are technical solutions also if one day, they want to scan for safety running trains full of containers. I find a bit absurd today now that there is need to develop special trains to go in the tunnel only for terrorist reasons. Terrorism is fought elsewhere, it is fought in minds first.
> 
> I can really imagine trains of containers running through tunnel. Schengen is a concept of free mobility for people. Whatever you name it, it will expand, rename it "Exeter" and you will have the UK apply to it with four hands
> 
> We need that the tunnel generates money and service, be cost effective, the most trains going through, the better for everybody! So why not direct lines from Germany, Spain, Switzerland to England through tunnel...


For "terrorist" of for "security" reasons ??? different things ...


----------



## sotonsi

sotavento said:


> ^^ You (and others here) clearly missinterpreter my entire post.


I interpret it and explain why it was called racist - you made it so that for a native English speaker it would sound at least a little bit racist.


> Chipre is like we in Iberia (Portugal + Spain) call the tiny dual country island in eastern Mediterranean ... and actually the woman could speak fluently in Portuguese, Spanish and Greek. :lol:


and are you quite sure that there's no place in Portugal called Chipre (or something similar)? Are you quite sure you didn't misunderstand her? If she can speak fluently in three foreign languages, she's unlikely to be that stupid as to think Cyprus is in Portugal, especially as she can speak the lingo in both those places (she'd know that the alphabet used in the southern part of Cyprus is different to that used in Portugal, for instance).


> And that's the whole point ... there is "no" mainstream anti-EU-mentality over there ... or at least it doesn't seem to be a major current of opinion in the UK ... they simply don't even care about EU enough to be against it. hno:


which just shows your ignorance about the UK! To base a country's opinions on one person (who does seem to be a Europhile and also completely misunderstood by you) is absurd. It would be like as if I was to say that all Portuguese people are racist, because you made some comments that could be considered racist because something got lost in translation (and giving you the benefit of the doubt it did). In fact your above statement is both misinformed and racist - you are tarring a whole nation with a derogatory brush.


> And you can forget the crap you said about any "atempted"/"assumed" intention that I had on my previous post ... simply there is no "concept" of in/out in the UK nowadays (it's actualy one of the most globalized countries in the world).


what are you talking about? And as for implying intention that there was an irony in the fact that the border controls you've seen in the UK have been run by non-white people, I've shown that a native English speaker could easily read that message in your post. You kept making the point that these people were wearing turbans, and dresses and looked foreign. There is a concept of 'in' and 'out' in the UK, at least among a sizeable proportion of it - however the definition of 'in' isn't based on ethnicity or anything like that. You would be seen as 'out', as you don't understand what being British is like - it's a cultural thing.


> Don't claim ethnicity and racism are synonims here because if you start that they you open a can of worms ... ethnicity has no "derrogatory"/"depreciative" background atached to it.


I didn't - I said that race and ethnicity are the same. I then showed how what you said could be seen to be derogatory - 'outsiders', even if the intention wasn't there. You also made a big thing out of the ethnicity of the border control officers and that they weren't of British origin - who cares what race they come from! Your post read like you were saying - look at those white people jump (after all 'white people can't jump' as the film title says), that's amazing! It's subtle, but the racism is there.

As I said earlier, I cannot see what the point of the post in question unless it actually was to make a couple of racist points - about the people of Britain being stupid, lazy and ignorant and about it being strange that those who aren't from European ethnicities and wearing reminders of their heritage are the ones guarding the UK's borders from 'outsiders'.


----------



## Lightness

Uh, what happened to this thread?


----------



## Republica

The sotavento effect!


----------



## serdar samanlı1

TCDD is being privatized too!


----------



## sotavento

Republica said:


> The sotavento effect!


Not quite right ... the Republica (and others) _flamming_.



hno:


----------



## sotavento

^^ Nationalization of infraestructures is a _"last resourse"_ in terms of infraestructure , transportation and telecomunications. 

Nationalisation of operations is *THE* last resource before doomday in terms of infraestructure , transportation and telecomunications. 

Slightly different things.


EU directives are an atempt to create european wide large companies and regional wide small companies ... both specialized in different tipes of traffic.

Looking at the recent and present developments we will be having a DB/SNCF-owned european wide freight company (gogo self imploding BR Renfe and FS) and then a great variety of regional(state/region owned or not) and private companies (most of them with only one a to b route) ... most private are rail sub.companies of either distribution roadhaulers or infraestructure contractors.

Private passenger companies tend to be exclusively subsidiaries of private road passenger corporations (like arriva and first) or local municipalities.

So if one considers the 50 years of "full nationalization" (between the end of WW2 and the end of the century) as THE anormality ... we can clearly see that railways in europe returned to the old self sustained private enterprise driven companies ... as was always intended from the start. :cheers:


----------



## amirtaheri

The privatisation of British Rail was a disaster that was brought about through lack of vision, planning and proper consultation. The process was rushed because the late Conservative government were desperate to privatise the railways before, what they then believed, would be an inevitable defeat at the polls a couple years later. As a result of the rush to privatise, it was done badly. Privatising the infrastructure was a huge mistake. Railtrack turned the railways into a national joke and disaster was always going to be inevitable. After a number of crashes, Railtrack went under and what rose from the ashes was Network Rail, a private, not for profit hybrid company that would look after the railways, in effect a semi-nationalised body with a huge monopoly.

I think I read somewhere that the Competition Commission or the ORR (Office for Rail Regulation) recommended that there be two infrastructure companies to compete with one another and break the monopoly held. Personally, I prefer the current option we have now because I don't think competition in regard to infrastructure works.

The infrastructure, in my opinion should remain in public hands. It makes sense. I also think that railway stations/terminii, should be run like airports, slot controlled. A company bids for certain slots and operates it. If it does not operate well, then it should have it's slot taken away.

Rolling Stock, ROSCO's are probably here to stay and it does allow small companies to start up easily and allow open access. However, since they have no franchise to worry about, the onus should be on them to maintain a modern fleet of trains for operating companies to lease.


----------



## sotavento

^^ more or less of a disaster than the BR years ???


Ever heard about Beeching axe ??? :cheers:

If nationwide "nationalization" never ocurred in the past would there be a better "privatized" environment in todays railways across europe ???

:bash:


----------



## Momo1435

Only after the nationalization of Railtrack the privatization became really successful. 

And most European countries have learned from the Railtrack debacle and only "privatized" the operations while keeping the infrastructure in a government owned body/company. But the national railways in most of the EU countries aren't even privatized, it's usually only deregulation. In this way the national railway companies remain state owned but have to face some sort of competition. And that's usually only when new long term concessions are being given for the core network. Separate concessions are given on local routes, usually by local authorities and not by the state. 

There's not much direct competition going on for now. Only in Germany on some routes and soon in Italy with the AGVs from NTV, even in the UK there are only some operators that run outside the concessions on a few routes. And from 2010 all international routes in the EU will be fully opened for competition, but I doubt it will have big effects other then some new international night trains in the tourist seasons. 

Real privatization, in the sense that the old national railway companies won't be government owned anymore is still far away. Many governments just don't want to part with their national railway companies.


----------



## amirtaheri

sotavento said:


> ^^ more or less of a disaster than the BR years ???
> 
> 
> Ever heard about Beeching axe ??? :cheers:
> 
> If nationwide "nationalization" never ocurred in the past would there be a better "privatized" environment in todays railways across europe ???
> 
> :bash:


Yes I have heard of the Beeching Axe. I never said that the days under British Rail were any better than the disaster of privatisation.

Fact is, the system that arose after privatisation was as bad as, if not worse. It certainly was not an ideal solution and to claim otherwise would be beyond sense. The system in place now, is different to that of the immediate years after privatisation.


----------



## cees

it suppossed to get better with the form of concurrency, and a healthy marked. same thing they did with electricity, and some other things. it supposed to get cheaper and better with privatisation, no more monopoly position for state company's


----------



## mgk920

One benefit with privatization (of at least the operating companies, keeping the track infrastructure in 'common' hands, like the roads, allowed to be used by anyone 'qualified' to do so) is that these operating companies MUST 'sell' their services and haul stuff if they are to make money. The nationalized operating companies did not have that incentive and it shows with the CHOKING levels of lorry traffic on the highways of the countries with such nationalized railways.

If the railways would just go out and get that business, it would clear a LOT of traffic off of those highways.

Just imagine what truck/lorry traffic would be like now on the USA's interstates if not for the private freight railroads, which are now operating at or slightly above their capacities.

Mike


----------



## Republica

cees said:


> it suppossed to get better with the form of concurrency, and a healthy marked. same thing they did with electricity, and some other things. it supposed to get cheaper and better with privatisation, no more monopoly position for state company's


This is completely ridiculous when it comes to many forms of transport, but even more so utilities.

You cant create effective competition with utilities companies or trains, as the consumer has only one choice. Its just not realiastic for someone to take a later train because it has slightly better trains or a discount fare. Just as someone isnt going to take a bus like this.

On top of that, these efforts for the different companies to outdo each other means that they make no effort to help customers have good transport links with the other companies. Different ticketing and rules and regulations just confuse passengers, resulting in people that are put off by the confusion of public transport.

Thankfully, slowly things are getting better, but it is only with regulation that it gets better, free competition just doesnt work IMO (in the majority of caes)


----------



## sotavento

Franchising in portugal has 20/30 years to run ... in the UK they run what ??? 5 years ?? hno:


----------



## amirtaheri

7 years I think is the standard, which is a big problem in my opinion as it discourages franchisee's to invest for the long term as there is little likelihood of them recovering their investment. Personally, I think this limit should be raised to 25-30 years so long as the government have the authority to end the franchise prematurely if there is consistent poor performance. Sort of like Connex


----------



## Republica

The frachising system encourages short term profits. 

I just dont understand how people can make such obviously dimwitted decisions such as these and get away with it. Long term franchises with reviews periodically and targets for good performance which mean bonuses for the operators, penalties for failings and set situations in which a contract can be revoked.


----------



## elfabyanos

sotavento said:


> Franchising in portugal has 20/30 years to run ... in the UK they run what ??? 5 years ?? hno:


It is a bit longer than that but the length varies for each particular franchise. The Competition Commission (or whatever they are called) has just released a statement about its investigation into the railways. It states that the short terms of the franchising is damaging investment in the network by the TOCs and ROSCOs. The full report is due early 2009.


----------



## elfabyanos

Republica said:


> I just dont understand how people can make such obviously dimwitted decisions such as these and get away with it.


Because most of the public are too dimwitted to notice and instead just blame the incumbent prime minister for everything (because thats what the paper tells them to do). I'm pessimistic but everything stupid that has ever happened is because people are being stupid. I wish people would care more about governments than shopping.


----------



## hkskyline

*Air France to launch 'quicker' train to Paris as Eurostar monopoly ends *
11 September 2008
The Independent

FARES AND journey times for passengers travelling to Europe could fall in just two years after an announcement by Air France that it is to compete with Eurostar by running a high-speed rail service to Paris.

The trip from London could take less than two hours under the company's plan to bring a new generation of high-speed trains to St Pancras station. They will be capable of a maximum speed of 224mph, 38mph faster than the current top speed of trains running to France.

Eurostar's monopoly will come to an end at the start of 2010, when new "open access" laws come into force.

The economic downturn has hit airlines hard, while the popularity of high-speed rail travel has been booming. Eurostar saw passenger numbers rise by 18 per cent in the first half of this year.

Eurostar came out fighting last night, saying that it welcomed competition and interest from airlines "had been expected". It added that airlines had "a lot to learn" before they could compete.

"This shows that airlines now realise that high-speed rail is increasingly the natural choice for business and leisure journeys across Europe," a spokesman said.

"It's no surprise that airlines hit by high oil prices and congested airports are trying to turn themselves into train operators. We will continue to compete with them whether they use wings or wheels."

It was also dismissive of Air France's claims that it could reach Paris in under two hours, saying that the current top speed of 186mph had been introduced because of the limitations of the track, rather than its train's capabilities.

But a source involved in the development of St Pancras' track disagreed. "It is no longer the track that is holding back train speeds, but the trains," said the source. "With a few modifications and testing, I see no reason why the new generation of TGV trains cannot run on the track."

Air France-KLM, which is also planning a service between Paris and Amsterdam, said it hoped to launch its London to Paris service by October 2010.

An industry insider said: "Just imagine arriving at the station and being able to pick from destinations from all over Europe such as Prague, Cologne and Frankfurt. Competition will be great news for consumers."

Virgin Atlantic is also thought to be interested in setting up a European high-speed rail service under the liberalisation plan, while the German operator Deutsche Bahn has expressed interest in running a service from London to Cologne. From there, passengers would have easy access to cities including Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Munich, Berlin and Hamburg.


----------



## Republica

If only there were through services from London to elsewhere...

This is certainly very promising. Surely the UK side of the line is engineered with a spec that means it could serve much faster trains. I'm not sure about the French side seeing as it is much older seeing as they got their act together quicker!

Anyone know the top speed of HS1?


----------



## elfabyanos

I think the LGV nord is more likely to be able to go for higher speeds, possibly 350km/h. However, every train on the route would need to be able to go that speed to avoid capacity problems as it is so busy. Maybe HS1 can go higher too.


----------



## hkskyline

*Channel Tunnel - A Vital Undersea Tie*

*Fire in Channel Tunnel a reminder of vital undersea tie that binds Britain and France *
12 September 2008

LONDON (AP) - Above ground, the fire would have been minor. Breaking out deep below the English Channel, it has stranded thousands of travelers, imperiled millions of dollars in trade and starkly demonstrated the importance -- and fragility -- of Britain's only land link to Europe.

The Channel Tunnel remained closed Friday after a fire that started on a truck being carried on a train to France. Firefighters battled through the night trying to quell a blaze that caused temperatures to soar above 1,800 degrees in the tube 130 feet beneath the sea bed.

"This is going to cost the industry millions," said Kate Gibbs at the Road Haulage Association, a trade group for British transport companies.

As she spoke, hundreds of trucks loaded with everything from fruit to furniture sat along a stretch of highway that has become a virtual parking lot on the English side of the tunnel.

At London's St. Pancras station, passengers expecting to be whisked to Paris in a little over two hours were being told no trains would run until Saturday at the earliest. Almost 30,000 people had been due to take Eurostar trains between London, Paris and Brussels on Friday.

"It was going to be the journey of a lifetime, a dream holiday," said Richard Corbett, who had planned a 70th birthday trip to the French capital with his wife. "We came to go through the tunnel. It looks like it's going to be scrapped now."

A marvel of engineering, the "Chunnel" is actually three -- two one-way rail tunnels with a smaller service tunnel running between them. The fire was in the England-to-France section, and operator Eurotunnel said it hoped to reopen the undamaged France-to-England tunnel as soon as Friday night.

However, Eurostar, which operates the passenger trains that use the tunnel, said it did not know when its service would resume. It advised people with tickets for Saturday and Sunday to make other travel plans.

The tunnel has had a few fires in the past, including one in 1996 that disrupted freight traffic for months.

A tunnel linking France and England was a dream of Napoleon's -- and a nightmare for many Britons, who for centuries have regarded the 20-mile-wide English Channel as a bulwark against conquest, rabies and other Continental ills.

The project finally gained official British approval in the 1970s but tunneling did not begin until 1988, under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher -- a committed skeptic of closer integration with Europe but also a champion of business and free trade.

British and French teams, tunneling from each end, met in the middle in 1990. The completed tunnel opened in 1994 and was hailed by Queen Elizabeth II as a mix of "French elan and British pragmatism."

It has not always been a business success, though.

Passenger numbers have fallen far short of the predicted 20 million a year, and Eurotunnel was heavily burdened by debt before reaching a restructuring deal last year. Ferries and budget airlines have retained a large chunk of cross-Channel passenger and freight business.

Nonetheless, the 30-mile undersea link has transformed travel between Britain and the Continent. Before the tunnel, a trip from London to Paris required an expensive plane ticket or a lengthy ferry crossing. Since the opening of the final stretch of high-speed rail line along the route last year, the train journey to Paris takes just 2 hours and 15 minutes, the trip to Brussels less than 2 hours.

Almost 8.3 million people used Eurostar trains last year -- tourists on weekend breaks, business executives attending meetings, even cross-border commuters who live in one country and work in another.

Felix Marquardt, a Paris-based public affairs consultant, used to commute by train twice a week to his London office.

"There were times when I felt like I was take the Tube," he said, referring to London's subway system. "There were people in my office in London who were driving 2 1/2 hours each way from the office. I was taking the train from Paris and it was taking me 3 hours to get to work. I felt sorry for people in Britain."

The tunnel has also been a boon to Anglo-French commerce.

Trade between Britain and France has tripled over the past 20 years, rising steeply since the tunnel was completed. France is Britain's third-largest export market, after the United States and Germany, and its third largest source of imports.

Last year 1.4 million trucks traveled through the tunnel on shuttle trains, carrying 20 million tons of freight -- from chemicals, machinery and transport equipment to wine and beer.

Hundreds of trucks that had planned to use the tunnel sat along a stretch of highway near its English entrance Friday. Police said they faced waits of six to eight hours before they could get on ferries at Dover.

"The knock-on effect is going to be tremendous," said Gibbs at the haulage association.


----------



## earthJoker

Wrong forum.

[edit: seems to be moved now]


----------



## Magellan

Tallsmurf said:


> The reasons behind UK not being in Schengen are purely historical and driven by a litle-Englander mentality
> 
> Fears about control
> ===============
> My wife is non-European - it has always been much easier to take her to Uk than to Schengen zone.
> 
> Fears about terrorism
> ================
> Main source of terrorism used to be Ireland (no passport:visa required). Now it is Islamoc extremists holding British passports
> 
> Fears about being flooded with east European immigrants
> ==========================================
> They are let in without restriction...
> 
> The reasosn Britain does not have Schengen is anti-EU paranoia - nothing else:bash::bash::bash:


There was good reason at the time for the UK to stay out. However things have changed and there is a growing convergance of opinions on teh issues amongst EU technocrats, if not between actual governments.


----------



## Magellan

hkskyline said:


> *Air France to launch 'quicker' train to Paris as Eurostar monopoly ends *
> 11 September 2008
> The Independent
> 
> FARES AND journey times for passengers travelling to Europe could fall in just two years after an announcement by Air France that it is to compete with Eurostar by running a high-speed rail service to Paris.
> 
> The trip from London could take less than two hours under the company's plan to bring a new generation of high-speed trains to St Pancras station. They will be capable of a maximum speed of 224mph, 38mph faster than the current top speed of trains running to France.
> 
> Eurostar's monopoly will come to an end at the start of 2010, when new "open access" laws come into force.
> 
> The economic downturn has hit airlines hard, while the popularity of high-speed rail travel has been booming. Eurostar saw passenger numbers rise by 18 per cent in the first half of this year.
> 
> Eurostar came out fighting last night, saying that it welcomed competition and interest from airlines "had been expected". It added that airlines had "a lot to learn" before they could compete.
> 
> "This shows that airlines now realise that high-speed rail is increasingly the natural choice for business and leisure journeys across Europe," a spokesman said.
> 
> "It's no surprise that airlines hit by high oil prices and congested airports are trying to turn themselves into train operators. We will continue to compete with them whether they use wings or wheels."
> 
> It was also dismissive of Air France's claims that it could reach Paris in under two hours, saying that the current top speed of 186mph had been introduced because of the limitations of the track, rather than its train's capabilities.
> 
> But a source involved in the development of St Pancras' track disagreed. "It is no longer the track that is holding back train speeds, but the trains," said the source. "With a few modifications and testing, I see no reason why the new generation of TGV trains cannot run on the track."
> 
> Air France-KLM, which is also planning a service between Paris and Amsterdam, said it hoped to launch its London to Paris service by October 2010.
> 
> An industry insider said: "Just imagine arriving at the station and being able to pick from destinations from all over Europe such as Prague, Cologne and Frankfurt. Competition will be great news for consumers."
> 
> Virgin Atlantic is also thought to be interested in setting up a European high-speed rail service under the liberalisation plan, while the German operator Deutsche Bahn has expressed interest in running a service from London to Cologne. From there, passengers would have easy access to cities including Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Munich, Berlin and Hamburg.


I think there has been mention in another article that the throat of St Pancras may have to be re-worked to accommodate additional services/operator(s).

I think BA also holds a 10% stake in Eurostar but I wonder if they would now look at franchising services.

It would be interesting to see if Air France KLM decided to own the operation, or franchise it from a rail operator.


----------



## Magellan

Republica said:


> If only there were through services from London to elsewhere...
> 
> This is certainly very promising. Surely the UK side of the line is engineered with a spec that means it could serve much faster trains. I'm not sure about the French side seeing as it is much older seeing as they got their act together quicker!
> 
> Anyone know the top speed of HS1?


When Eurostar moved to St Pancras, there was talk of the steps that could be taken, both on the UK side, and in the area near the tunnel on the French side, to further reduce the journey time.

Also, once the existing work on the HSL between France and Amsterdam are completed there are prospects for the introduction of a London to Amsterdam service. I think however that DB ruled out a London to Germany service in the foreseeable future.


----------



## Momo1435

Magellan said:


> It would be interesting to see if Air France KLM decided to own the operation, or franchise it from a rail operator.


Wasn't it already known that Air France/KLM is doing this together with Veolia?
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7012245233


----------



## DaBigPear

ubj aki ma doraroiahn sebu ku mademas di igh tabama


----------



## DaBigPear

<a href="http://img257.imageshack.us/my.php?image=unohs8.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/4156/unohs8.th.jpg" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://img604.imageshack.us/content.php?page=blogpost&files=img257/4156/unohs8.jpg" title="QuickPost"><img src="http://imageshack.us/img/butansn.png" alt="QuickPost" border="0"></a>


<a href="http://img257.imageshack.us/my.php?image=unohs8.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/4156/unohs8.th.jpg" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://img604.imageshack.us/content.php?page=blogpost&files=img257/4156/unohs8.jpg" title="QuickPost"><img src="http://imageshack.us/img/butansn.png" alt="QuickPost" border="0"></a>


----------



## Alvar Lavague

:wtf:


----------



## Magellan

Momo1435 said:


> Wasn't it already known that Air France/KLM is doing this together with Veolia?
> http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7012245233


Well there you go, I missed that. Thanks.


----------



## hkskyline

Magellan said:


> When Eurostar moved to St Pancras, there was talk of the steps that could be taken, both on the UK side, and in the area near the tunnel on the French side, to further reduce the journey time.
> 
> Also, once the existing work on the HSL between France and Amsterdam are completed there are prospects for the introduction of a London to Amsterdam service. I think however that DB ruled out a London to Germany service in the foreseeable future.


That's a great idea. Considering it's 2 hrs to Brussels, perhaps Amsterdam can be reached in <3 hours. The LCC choice from London is still quite expensive now.


----------



## hkskyline

*Fire-damaged Channel Tunnel to reopen fully in February *
14 October 2008
Agence France Presse

The rail tunnel linking Britain and France should reopen completely next February when the work to repair the damage it sustained in a fire last month is completed, operator Eurotunnel said Tuesday.

The companies carrying out the work have committed to finishing it within the next four months, Eurotunnel said in a statement.

Fire broke out on September 11 aboard a shuttle train carrying 27 trucks from Britain to France. Since then, both cross-Channel freight and Eurostar passenger trains from London to Paris and Brussels have been disrupted.

Investigators are still trying to establish what caused the blaze in the world's longest uninterrupted undersea link.

Officials said soon after the incident that they suspected the fire started in a truck's braking system that overheated and spread to a tyre.

Ferry companies operating the route between Calais, northern France and Dover, south-east England, have since reported a surge in passengers.


----------



## hkskyline

*Deutsche Bahn ICE Train Safety Issues*

*German high-speed trains withdrawn on safety fears: operator *
24 October 2008
Agence France Presse

German train passengers were set for a weekend of chaos after the rail operator withdrew Friday large numbers of high-speed trains for safety checks after two recent derailments.

Deutsche Bahn said that it was withdrawing "almost all" of its 71 ICE-T "Tilt Technology" trains because the consortium of firms that made them had failed to issue safety guarantees as requested.

"Safety has absolute priority," said Deutsche Bahn chief executive Hartmut Mehdorn. "We see ourselves as having been left dangling (by the consortium), which has confronted us with unreliable and unclear information."

The trains were made by German firm Siemens, France's Alstom and Canada's Bombardier. The measures affected lines connecting several large cities including Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Frankfurt and Stuttgart.

Following the derailment of an ICE-T train outside Cologne in July Germany's high-speed trains have been subject to more frequent checks, leading to increased delays. On Thursday another train derailed in Hamburg.

In June 1998 an ICE train travelling 200 km (125 miles) an hour crashed in northern Germany, killing 100 people in Germany's worst postwar rail accident. A faulty wheel had derailed the train, sending it hurtling into a bridge.


----------



## Momo1435

^^ Oops, it wasn't a ICE-T that derailed in July but an ICE 3. But never mind it's good that safety is priority #1, especially after the Eschede disaster.


----------



## Kuvvaci

sad news


----------



## hkskyline

But everything will be back up fresh and new in no time.


----------



## bluemeansgo

hkskyline said:


> *Fire-damaged Channel Tunnel to reopen fully in February *
> 
> Investigators are still trying to establish what caused the blaze in the world's *longest uninterrupted undersea* link.


Isn't the longest (and deepest) undersea tunnel the Seikan tunnel at 53.85km (~33mi)?


----------



## Coccodrillo

The Seikan tunnel is longer, but "only" 23 km of it are under the sea, the rest are under mountains.

The Eurotunnel is 50 km long of which about 40 km are under the sea.


----------



## stevevance

The Eurotunnel company has this photo of the burned out shuttle car, as well as more information, on its website:
http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTheGroup/ukcFocusOn/ukpFocusOn.htm


----------



## Alexriga

Well, it is not the first fire in the tunnel. Maybe sabotage? Why there is fire inside the car? No fire in the sips carrying hundreds of cars for example.


----------



## Timon91

^^A few sparks can start a fire. Again it's proven that tunnels are very vulnerable when it comes to a fires. A small fire gives big problems.


----------



## SeyMan

Aren't cars engines turned off during the crossing? How can the breaking system catch fire if the vehicle is not running?


----------



## elfabyanos

Timon91 said:


> ^^A few sparks can start a fire. Again it's proven that tunnels are very vulnerable when it comes to a fires. A small fire gives big problems.


The authorities who built the tunnel didn't put sprinklers in the shuttle vehicles because their risk assessment said fire would occur once every 1000 years. 10 years and two fires later.....:nuts:


----------



## bluemeansgo

Coccodrillo said:


> The Seikan tunnel is longer, but "only" 23 km of it are under the sea, the rest are under mountains.
> 
> The Eurotunnel is 50 km long of which about 40 km are under the sea.


lol.. i like the way you said "only" in quotes.

I guess the way the reporter wrote it was a bit deceiving. Seikan is the longer "undersea link" (by a touch). The reason for its length is because of the depth, if I'm not mistaken, which requires a longer run-up. 

The Chunnel's undersea portion is definitely longer, though.

Doesn't matter, really... they're both marvels.


----------



## Coccodrillo

The Seikan Tunnel is deeper and pass also under mountains (maximum coverage is about 500 meters), the Eurotunnel lies in a flat region.



Wikipedia said:


> *The Channel Tunnel* (French: Le tunnel sous la Manche), also known by the portmanteau Chunnel, is a 50.5 km (31.4 mi) undersea rail tunnel linking Folkestone, Kent in England with Coquelles near Calais in northern France beneath the English Channel at the Strait of Dover. *At its lowest point it is 75 m (250 ft) deep.* It has the longest undersea portion of any tunnel in the world, although Japan's *Seikan Tunnel* is longer overall at 53.85 km (33.5 mi) *and reaches a depth of 240 m (790 ft).*


----------



## serdar samanlı1

What is the current situation of the tunnel? Have all damages been repaired and train services restored back to normal?


----------



## Coccodrillo

No. The remaining third of the north tunnel will be reopened in spring 2009.


----------



## jarbury

Is that effecting operations greatly?


----------



## elfabyanos

Yeah its adding lots of delays, I think eurostar is running with an extra 20minutes timetabled in.


----------



## serdar samanlı1

Are there any crossovers in the tunnel so trains can switch from tube to tube?


----------



## pietje01

serdar samanlı;28422404 said:


> Are there any crossovers in the tunnel so trains can switch from tube to tube?


Yes, there are 2 crossovers, which can be sealed in case of an incident.
With those 2 crossovers, there are 3 intervals in each tube, that makes 6 intervals in each direction.
Since the last incident there is 1 interval out of service, if i'm not mistaking, at the French side of the tunnel.


----------



## serdar samanlı1

Is the Tunnel still in single-track operation?


----------



## pietje01

serdar samanlı;28466620 said:


> Is the Tunnel still in single-track operation?


As I said, 5 out of 6 intervals are in service, so only the first section on the French side of the tunnel is in single-track operation, the middle part and the British side are in dual track operation.


----------



## Republica

So essentially theres a big bottleneck at the French end. Does anyone know if trains are stopping in the tunnels at this bottleneck, or is this against safety?


----------



## elfabyanos

I've stoppped in the Chunnel before under normal circumstances, on a shuttle, near the French end. Obviously traffic was in the way, so I don't think its against regs.


----------



## serdar samanlı1

pietje01 said:


> As I said, 5 out of 6 intervals are in service, so only the first section on the French side of the tunnel is in single-track operation, the middle part and the British side are in dual track operation.


Is the closed part in Britain-bound tube or France-bound tube?


----------



## pietje01

serdar samanlı;28520986 said:


> Is the closed part in Britain-bound tube or France-bound tube?


The closed part is in the north tunnel, which is normally used for trains, coming from the UK, going towards France.
So the damaged section is the last part in the direction of France.


----------



## 33Hz

We’ll buy UK’s share of Eurostar - and run it better, say Germans

Javelin train speeds into London


----------



## sarflonlad

33Hz said:


> We’ll buy UK’s share of Eurostar - and run it better, say Germans


Why doesn't Germany just come and run the bloody country? It seems so hell bent on telling the UK it's wrong at everything it does these days. Doing herself no favours amongst the impressions of the British populace.

I hope the government does not sell its stake. Yet another industry bought up by Europeans, whose own governments protect and protect from foreign buyers. We already have German owned trains running on French electricity in the UK.

There are no excuses as to why the UK can't run its share of Eurostar better. However, it's a complicated organisation, and I don't think the Germans would be any better sorting it out... even if DB is better to book through tickets with 

The government should wait until 2010 and open access agreement take its toll. That will force Eurostar to perform better with competitors. It will also hopefully reduce the costs that companies have to pay to pass through the tunnel.

EDIT: Only a year ago DB said it had no intention of utilising the Channel Tunnel. What's with the lies?


----------



## hkskyline

*German railway fed up with lack of competition in France: letter *
16 December 2008
Agence France Presse

The German railway Deutsche Bahn is fed up with a lack of competition in France and has fired back at recent charges from French counterpart SNCF, in a letter of which a copy was obtained by AFP.

"We no longer want to accept the lack of reciprocity between Germany and France," Bahn boss Hartmut Mehdorn said in a letter sent to French counterpart Guillaume Pepy.

"The opening of the German market has advanced further than in France," and "the SNCF, like other French companies, profits greatly while we and other foreign companies always come up against the same problems in France," Mehdorn said.

Those problems included "a closed market for passenger transport, a market that is theoretically open but inaccessible for urban transport, and major obstacles" in the freight sector, he added.

Mehdorn also said he was "surprised and affected" by strong attacks last week by Pepy against Deutsche Bahn.

Pepy claimed that a Bahn subsidiary had hacked into the SNCF computer system to try to hire train drivers away from the French group.

The accusation "was groundless" Mehdorn said.

He added that the German railway had "not yet begun any official approach" towards investing in the high-speed Eurostar train that connects London with Brussels and Paris.

British press reports have said Deutsche Bahn would like to buy the part in Eurostar now owned by British interests, which Pepy had said was "premature, pretentious and arrogant."

Tension has risen between the French and German rivals in particular since Deutsche Bahn and the Italian railway complained about a lack of European competition in a letter to the European Commission.

The German company has also sought recourse in court against the attribution in October of the public transport market in the southwestern French city of Bordeaux to the French group Keolis.

It had previously been operated by the French company Veolia.


----------



## sarflonlad

hkskyline said:


> *German railway fed up with lack of competition in France: letter *
> 16 December 2008
> Agence France Presse
> 
> The German railway Deutsche Bahn is fed up with a lack of competition in France and has fired back at recent charges from French counterpart SNCF, in a letter of which a copy was obtained by AFP.


Oh poor Germans. Fed up with the French railway protection.

How about looking at the protectionist closed policies across MANY industries in your own country before criticising the French (which do indeed deserve criticism for their own closed markets). 

Anyway. I await with glee to see what 2010 brings. Either competition, or collapsing railway companies creating a monopoly on the continent.


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurostar sees record passenger numbers *
Financial Times
Tuesday January 13, 10:20 AM

Passenger numbers on Eurostar, the cross-Channel high-speed rail service, grew more than 10 per cent in 2008, thanks to improved journey times and a more accessible London terminus.

Growth would have been still faster, however, without disruption in the last quarter following the September 11 fire in the Channel Tunnel, which continues to restrict service frequency and is prolonging journeys.

The operator, jointly managed by the UK's London & Continental Railways, France's state train operator and the Belgian national railways, carried a record 9.1m passengers during 2008, up 10.3 per cent from the 8.26m it carried during 2007. 

Much of the growth was a result of the opening in November 2007 of the second section of High Speed 1, the UK's first dedicated high-speed rail line. 

The opening cut journey times on the core London-Paris and London-Brussels routes by around 20 minutes, giving best journey times on London-Paris of two hours 15 minutes and on London-Brussels of one hour 51 minutes. 

The new route also brought trains into St Pancras International, which is more accessible for most passengers than the previous terminus at London Waterloo.

The full-year growth, however, was markedly slower than the 18.3 per cent growth recorded in the first half of the year because of the disruption caused by the Channel Tunnel fire. 

Eurostar has had to cancel one service a day in each direction between London and both Paris and Brussels because of the fire. Services take 20 minutes longer because of speed restrictions in the tunnel and the availability of only one tunnel for the last 17km of the 50km twin-bore undersea tunnel on the French side. Eurtounnel, the tunnel owner, hopes to complete repair work by mid-February.

Eurostar's revenues grew 10.9 per cent to £664m, from £599m in 2007. The operator said the economic downturn had so far had little effect on it.

Richard Brown, chief executive, said the increase of 1m passengers in the year demonstrated beyond doubt that passengers preferred high-speed rail to short-haul air.

"The short-term outlook for 2009 is challenging, but the long-term prospects for Eurostar and high-speed rail are very good," he said.


----------



## luci203

hkskyline said:


> The operator, jointly managed by the UK's London & Continental Railways, France's state train operator and the Belgian national railways, carried a record 9.1m passengers during 2008, up 10.3 per cent from the 8.26m it carried during 2007.


9.1m passengers... :uh:

You can imagine that Eurostar, before profitable, is vital.

Even if they use planes with 180 pasengers on average, they would need more than 50,000 flights to serve all of them.

Not to mention they would need around 137 departures every day, only for several cities. :nuts:


----------



## Micrav

They will manage finally to finance the chunnel one day...  Way to go Eurostar, lets go for 10 million passengers/year and open new roads to Alps in winter and make new movies and make people dream about "murder stories" in Eurostar like Agatha Christie did it with the OrientExpress... You know, people like to dream in trains, one writer was saying that stories can happen in trains that cannot happen somewhere else. Trains have something sexual (specially when dealing with tunnels), musical (when wheels hit the joints between rails), practical (of course), meeting place (you can speak with complete strangers or friends), historical and technological, trains have reinvented themselves very well so far. They are alive and kicking! 

Now lets hope that the Eurostar will bring one day Queen Elisabeth or I would prefer King Williams (If Elisabeth resigns this year) to Brussels to sign full integration treaty of UK in Europe! Europe cannot live without United Kingdom and UK cannot live without Europe. Lets ratify those last treaties and everything will be much better for everybody (Schengen, Euro money), UK is Europe, being an Islander is a concept of mind nowadays, we live in a global world


----------



## S.T.A.S.

Well said my friend! I do agree that trains are more enjoyable way of transport, then planes, because of those things you mentioned! Perhaps in the future, more people will appreciate travelling by train, rather then trying to save a few euros or pounds on "destroyers of the environment"(planes, lol).


----------



## hkskyline

*Channel tunnel repairs to end *
20 January 2009
Financial Times

The Channel tunnel will be back at full capacity from the night of Sunday February 8 after repairs following a fire, its operator said yesterday.

Eurotunnel said the end of the work would mean it had the capacity to run six truck shuttles, the company's most lucrative traffic, an hour in each direction from February 9.

Eurostar has said it will resume its full passenger train service through the tunnel on Monday February 23.


----------



## Tagnuzlsx

I hope the Germans do take over. Eurostar is obscenely overpriced. I wish they'd raise capacity in the channel tunnel too


----------



## hkskyline

*Fear of fire disaster forces tunnel chiefs to act *
31 January 2009
The Times

The Channel Tunnel is finally to have a sprinkler system fitted after the third fire in 12 years forced Eurotunnel to admit that it had underestimated the risk of disaster deep under the sea bed.

Burning trains will stop at "extinguishing stations" that will be built at intervals along the 31-mile (50km) twin tunnels.

Heat detectors will locate the fire and high-pressure jets of water or foam will be aimed automatically at the source as soon as the last passenger has escaped into the service tunnel.

Eurotunnel, the French-dominated company that operates the tunnels, is being forced to act after a lorry caught fire in September and caused a 1000C (1830F) inferno that melted cables and destroyed the tunnel's concrete lining.

Millions of passengers and lorries have suffered delays and cancellations for the past five months because all trains have been diverted to the other tunnel. Repairs are costing more than £50 million and normal train services will not resume until February 23.

It was the third time that a lorry travelling on an open wagon had caught fire, the previous incidents being in 1996 and 2006. Car shuttle trains have carriages that can be sealed and filled with a suppressing gas in the event of a fire Eurotunnel spent years debating, then testing, sprinkler systems after the first lorry fire, which closed one tunnel for six months. But it refused to pay for a system to be installed and claimed that the risk of a similar fire was remote.

The company has now admitted its mistake and is drawing up plans for an advanced sprinkler system, similar to one that will be installed on the new rail tunnel under the Alps connecting Lyon and Turin. The system will first have to be approved by the Intergovernmental Commission, which oversees tunnel safety. It is unlikely to be installed before the end of next year.

Bruno Bouthors, Eurotunnel's safety director, told The Times: "People might ask why it wasn't done before, but the fire in 1996 was thought to be exceptional and the one in 2006 was small. The latest fire is showing we need to prepare for the worst case." He said that the system would prevent fires from spreading out of control, allowing time for the firefighters to get to the scene via the service tunnel. In the fires in 1996 and in September, firefighters arrived too late to prevent severe damage.

Mr Bouthors said that the extinguishing stations would be located so that a train could arrive at one within 15 minutes of a fire being detected. He admitted that a fire-suppression system had been considered before the tunnel opened in 1994. He said that it was easy to be critical in hindsight, but at the time the risk of a lorry fire was thought to be very low.

Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat transport spokesman, said that Eurotunnel was acting after years of "putting cost before safety" but it was not enough. Lorries should be in closed wagons and should be banned from carrying extra tanks of cheap fuel from the Continent.


----------



## serdar samanlı1

I still can't understand how the trucks caught fire with their engines off?


----------



## gramercy

*European railway liberalization by 2010*

What do YOU expect from the coming (2010) liberalization of the european railroad market?

For over a century, european railroads had little more in common than standard gauge. Then along comes the EU and from 2010 everything goes.

What do you think the pros and cons of this will be? Are you afraid of losing your 'national' railroad company? Are you afraid of privatization or do you expect a boom similar to what happend in the aviation market?
Will eastern-european nations rapidly gain new rolling stock at the cost of losing their state-owned companies?

Will governments continue to pick up the cost of buildin the infrastructure? Who will look over the shoulders of giant corporations and keep competition going on?

Is it even possible to create real competition on commuting / 's-bahn' / services, or only in long-distance?

Will this speed up the construction of high-speed lines everywhere, including eastern-europe? What about ETCS?


What's gonna happen?


----------



## Micrav

I will create two things: A Luxurious train that runs from Porto to Warsaw and From Edinburgh to Athens. Better than the Orient Express!

The second, I will create new material, lighter and fast (range from 100 to 180 km/h that runs without electricity or diesel and will be able to drive on whichever track in Europe to carry passengers and open new markets. And I will kill the price of current companies that have to deal with electricity or Diesel to run their trains. 

Third, I will create strategic alliances with boat and plane companies to create new areas of opportunities. So trains will fly and planes will float!

Fourth, I will buy old material and convert it into living houses, discos, exhibition cars and shops.

Just need a few millions to start seriously (it is very serious!)

I don't fear too much for National companies, I fear for people. I hope that the quality of service will be better but I fear also that we will soon have to pay an expensive price to travel (true to reality) if we don't change something in the way railways are run today.

Thank you Europe! :banana:


----------



## Coccodrillo

gramercy said:


> What do YOU expect from the coming (2010) liberalization of the european railroad market?



Transport Tycoon-style services, without planification, without integrtaion.


----------



## Republica

As seen in the UK, liberalisation causes fragmentation so that you get a worse all round service.

However I do think this may be a good thing as inter european railways are already fragmented. Things such as rail team are going ahead so it could be good.


----------



## bozata90

Well, the case of GB is quite different. Here we are not speaking of fragmentation, but of internationalisation of the big companies. That will bring profit to them, but I also hope that it will bring quality and comfort to everyone. And the other thing - major reduction of prices, because if a big company has a greater routes network, it will have more revenue, and it will need smaller percent of profit to sustain itself and pay its investments - and will offer smaller prices for better quality.
And I am looking forward to see new trains on the Bulgarian railways.


----------



## Republica

We will definately see an element of fragmentation in ticketing, pricing, standards and facilities, to some extent.

Which is why i hope more standards can be introduced to keep it all simple and easy.


----------



## milwaukee-københavn

The changes in 2010 only involve international passenger rail travel and freight, so it will have little effect on most national railway companies. It's a little much to say "everything goes".


----------



## gramercy

milwaukee-københavn said:


> The changes in 2010 only involve international passenger rail travel and freight, so it will have little effect on most national railway companies. It's a little much to say "everything goes".


i meant more like "anything's possible"


----------



## serdar samanlı1

Liberalization? During the global economical crisis?


----------



## hans280

I would say "convergence". Countries that have invested heavily in new tracks will get the "pleasure" of putting them at the disposal of neighbours who perhaps have not. (The French are fuming over having Deutsche Bahn transport German passengers fast through France...) This may not induce them to invest heavily in the future. OTOH railway companies with crappy rolling stock will be easy victims of foreign and domestic competition. They will no doubt squeal about this, but it is squarly in the interest of their clients. We have the first example already: NTV in Italy, throwing the newest of the new HS trains up against the ETR500 that FS only bought in the first place because of national preference.


----------



## RawLee

Slovakia tries to get a bigger share from the international pie which is the cargo-changing at the former soviet border,by offering closer location to the main markets. What they dont count with is that from now on,whenever Austria/Germany decides to extend the line westwards,they wil loose their % of the changing market.


----------



## DiggerD21

^^
Until Germany and Austria might have built these extensions, Slovakia won't really rely on such income (hopefully).


----------



## Slartibartfas

I don't think Slovakia has to be so afraid of that. Extending the broad gauge, would increase its appeal and therefore the amount of goods transported that way. That would I would guess at least.


----------



## gramercy

I have one question:
http://www.bueker.net/trainspotting/map.php?file=maps/slovakia/slovakia.gif


there are 2 east-west corridors in slovakia, one in the north and one in the south
the northern route is the more important right now (double rail, electrification etc.), however they probably need to reconstruct the southern route in the near future too

so, where will this new connection go? and if they build several 100 kilometres, should'nt it be a dual-gauge system? with special slippers to allow 3 rails?


----------



## mgk920

^^
The problem here is that Russian broad gauge and European/North American/Chinese/Australian standard gauge have the most insidious possible difference between them - 1520 vs 1435 mm (85 mm). The two gauges are too far apart to run trains directly and too close together to allow the easy construction of dual-gauge track by simply laying a third rail. To have dual-gauge track would require four rails.

:no:

Mike


----------



## JoKo65

Right, the difference is not big enough. Iberian gauge and standard gauge can be combined in a three rail track, but for russian gauge and standard gauge a four rail track is needed.
Such a track exists between Finland and Sweden – as far as I know.


----------



## gramercy

still, it would be a waste of money if they built it solely for freight


----------



## JoKo65

gramercy said:


> still, it would be a waste of money if they built it solely for freight


I think they will use it for night trains Vienna–Moscow too.


----------



## JoKo65

> *Transcontainer opens a gateway to the west
> 
> 23 Jan 2009
> 
> SLOVAKIA: A 15-year lease of a container transfer terminal will enable Russia’s intermodal operator to launch direct services between Moscow and the Adriatic ports, boosting its position in the Eurasian landbridge market. Chris Jackson reports from Dobra.*
> 
> […]
> 
> The Dobra agreement is seen by the project partners as a stepping stone towards RZD’s longer-term ambition of pushing a broad-gauge line into western Europe. Upgrading of the existing broad-gauge line to Košice and its extension to Wien is projected to require an investment of around US$4·3bn.
> 
> Describing the project as ‘one of the options for integrating transport between the countries of the European Union and Russia’, Yakunin said he believed that the new line could be operational in about five years.
> 
> He envisages that the line will also carry international passenger services, but the priority is quite clearly long-distance freight. ‘Today’s events will help the railway industry to enhance the unobstructed movement of freight from the Pacific Ocean to Europe and beyond’, said Yakunin. ‘It is an unprecedented project - the first time the railways of Russia, Slovakia, Austria and Ukraine have put their signatures to the intent of creating a new railway corridor’.
> 
> ‘Today the sea route takes 40 days. Last year we ran a train from Beijing to Hamburg in 18 days, but we need to achieve still higher speeds and cut the overall time to 14 days or less’.
> 
> ‘This project has a pan-European character’, Yakunin insisted, adding that ‘door-to-door delivery of freight to the centre of Europe without changing the track gauge will enable a significant increase in delivery speed.’ He also envisages increased flows of European goods into the growing markets of Russia, Ukraine and central Asia.
> 
> […]


http://www.railwaygazette.com/f_sin...anscontainer_opens_a_gateway_to_the_west.html


----------



## gramercy

I've been thinking

this line will cost almost 5 bn usd,

so why not put everything into containers, then pull the two trains up next to each other
then a computerized crane with lazer optics goes through them from end to end, and moves each container from one train to the other, like a caterpillar or like a dna recoding

something similar will have to be done near Bratislava _anyway_, if they want to connect to the adriatic sea...

so save the 5 bn and spend like 1 bn on a terminal near Kassa that is completely modernized and can send trains as well as lorries on their way toward poland, germany, austria, hungary, romania, balkans etc.


----------



## WotaN

gramercy said:


> send trains as well as lorries on their way toward poland, germany, austria, hungary, romania, balkans etc.


We in Poland don't need any lorries with goods from the east. We have our own broad gauge terminal in Sławków (Slawkow) and we can supply Slovakia, Czech Republic, Germany and so on 

http://www.lhs.slawkow.pl/tresc/mapka.htm


----------



## Alexriga

gramercy said:


> I've been thinking
> 
> this line will cost almost 5 bn usd,
> 
> so why not put everything into containers, then pull the two trains up next to each other
> then a computerized crane with lazer optics goes through them from end to end, and moves each container from one train to the other, like a caterpillar or like a dna recoding
> 
> something similar will have to be done near Bratislava _anyway_, if they want to connect to the adriatic sea...
> 
> so save the 5 bn and spend like 1 bn on a terminal near Kassa that is completely modernized and can send trains as well as lorries on their way toward poland, germany, austria, hungary, romania, balkans etc.


In Spain they developed great changing axes technology for trains. They'd better build enough trains and cars with changing wheels for such money and that's it. It works perfect.


----------



## mgk920

Also, conversely, is there any potential for a standard gauge line to be built into Russia (ie, a freight line from western Europe, perhaps Rotterdam or a TGV/ICE line, to Moscow and/or Saint Petersburg)?

Mike


----------



## ArtManDoo

Maby someone could bring clearness why Wien is good end point?

Build terminal for move cargo from one train to another?
What's the difference if it's maid in Ukraine-Slovensko border or in Wien?

Passenger trains?
Moscow - Wien is 2000 + km by rail. I barely belive that there will be some interval passenger service. And for 2 passenger trains per day there is no need for extra line.

Or Slovenia hopes to overtake cargo from other lines by building this line?
In that case there must be some dark intrests, otherwise it's not gonna work.


----------



## Gag Halfrunt

mgk920 said:


> Also, conversely, is there any potential for a standard gauge line to be built into Russia (ie, a freight line from western Europe, perhaps Rotterdam or a TGV/ICE line, to Moscow and/or Saint Petersburg)?


IIRC there's a standard gauge line in the Kaliningrad enclave, linking Kalinlingrad city to the Polish border. It's politically part of Russia but perhaps doesn't really count in geographical terms.


----------



## RawLee

ArtManDoo said:


> Maby someone could bring clearness why Wien is good end point?
> 
> Build terminal for move cargo from one train to another?
> What's the difference if it's maid in Ukraine-Slovensko border or in Wien?
> 
> Passenger trains?
> Moscow - Wien is 2000 + km by rail. I barely belive that there will be some interval passenger service. And for 2 passenger trains per day there is no need for extra line.
> 
> Or Slovenia hopes to overtake cargo from other lines by building this line?
> In that case there must be some dark intrests, otherwise it's not gonna work.


What? 

1,There are direct international trains from Prague to Moscow. It could work with Vienna.
2,Slovenia?!


----------



## ArtManDoo

> 1,There are direct international trains from Prague to Moscow. It could work with Vienna.


I meant interval services. Yes there is one pair per day from Prague to Moscow but it doesn't mean that new line is needed for that one pair.



> 2,Slovenia?!


My mistake, Slovakia is what I meant.


----------



## Qwert

Well, in Slovakia this projects is considered very disputable. It's supported by the government, but the opposition is strictly against it. The main arguments of the opposition are loss of the jobs and revenues from transshipping in the terminals on SK/UKR border. Not to mention Slovakia itself can only hardly afford construction of more than 500 km long broad gauge railway. Those money could be rather invested into modernisation of normal gauge railway or into road network. On the other hand it could bring profits from transit and transshipping in terminals along the railway.

It should be built from Košice via Zvolen to Bratislava river port and to Vienna - thus more or less parallel to present railway Bratislava - Palárikovo - Zvolen - Košice. In the future the terminus station of this wide gauge railway should be in Paris according to Slovak Minister of the Economy. We don't know how it should be built. It could be just modification of present railway, construction of new one parallel to already built railway or combination of both. Feasibility study will tell us more.


----------



## Qwert

ArtManDoo said:


> I meant interval services. Yes there is one pair per day from Prague to Moscow but it doesn't mean that new line is needed for that one pair.


It should be freight railway. I doubt any passenger trains will use it. Its main purpose is to transport cargo, which is transported by ships now, from countries like China, South Korea and Russia to Central and then also to Western Europe.


----------



## JoKo65

Qwert said:


> […]
> Not to mention Slovakia itself can only hardly afford construction of more than 500 km long broad gauge railway. Those money could be rather invested into modernisation of normal gauge railway or into road network.
> […]


As far as I understood it, the Russians want to pay it.


----------



## TedStriker

In fact, I see that you work for the www.railwaymarket.eu site, so no doubt you have some inside knowledge on a few things. 

Do you know why the CIS countries and Russia have not begun carrying unaccompanied semi-trailers by train to any great extent yet? As the loading gauge in the former Soviet network is very generous, that's not the issue. 

Within Finland itself VR Cargo operates some piggyback trains, and the Ukraine saw the operation of a rolling-road type of service, which I believe has stopped now. 

Is it because there's a greater probability of people trying to steal cargo from trains in the CIS and Russia, and therefore carrying European-style curtain-sided trailers would be too risky? 

Or is it because the traffic volumes across the region are not dense enough enough to operate a piggyback system effectively?


----------



## rmcee

Here it is: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=924986

CIs and CEE / SEE countries launched numerous one-time intermodal initatives in the recent past. See for example the recent Romanian Ro-La project. PKP LHS has its owne Ro-La train (Jaroslaw). It's an never ending story of failure. 

If you ask the market insiders about the reasons of such a poor state of these kind of projects in the region (CIS, etc) you will find more answers than you'd like to hear. In most cases it will be tha incoherent pricing policy performed by the state / IMs. Often accompanied / uanaccompanied intermodal transport is several times more expensive than the road it self. And since there is no obligation to take the train, the road operator won't go there. And no demand means lack of interest from the railways. This leads to the lack of platforms and lack of cargo handlig infrastructure. 

And when it comes to CIS - EU rail shipments, the list of underachievements gets much longer (see Slawkow logistic center, LHS). On the other hand many private operators (OKD, CTL) or investors (Kulczyk Investments) see their chances in the East. But they focus on bulk. 

We published an interesting comment from Jan Tymoszczuk of CTL Logistics in Railway Market - CEE Review 2/09.


----------



## TedStriker

Thanks very much, that's helped explain things really well. 

To me, an outsider, the former Soviet region can seem a bit of mystery sometimes, so I value the view of someone closer to the region. 

It's interesting to contrast the highly developed intermodal networks of Kombiverkehr and Hupac, for example, with the void that exists beyond the end of the standard gauge system. 

Having said that, even within the standard gauge territory of the former 'iron curtain' countries, I believe only Losovice, Budapest, Ljubljana and Arad have regular piggyback services. 

I wonder how potential there is for a piggyback train serving Moscow, perhaps going to/from Hamburg Billwerder, which would act as a hub.


----------



## RawLee

There are many. At least 13 combi-terminals,just in Hungary. The biggest here is probably the BILK:









(legifoto.com)


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurostar welcomes 100 millionth passenger *
28 August 2009
Agence France Presse

Eurostar welcomed Friday its 100 millionth passenger on the 15-year-old high-speed rail service linking London with Paris and Brussels.

Graphic designer David Kemp, 35, an Englishman, was the 100 millionth traveller and took his French wife Stephanie from his native London to Paris, along with their two-year-old daughter Mia.

They were the perfect Eurostar couple, the train operator's chief executive Richard Brown said.

Regular commuter Kemp will now be travelling for free for a year. He was given special treatment on the 9:01 am train to Paris Gare du Nord, including a personal butler service.

All the other 700-plus passengers on the train received one free standard-class return ticket, valid for a year.

"I am absolutely thrilled. We do travel on Eurostar from time to time to see my wife's parents in Paris and now we well be able to do so more often," Kemp said.

Eurostar services began on November 14, 1994, travelling through the tunnel underneath the English Channel, which separates Britain from continental Europe.

The trains from London, which hit speeds of 300 kilometres (186 miles) per hour, can reach Paris in two hours, 15 minutes and Brussels in one hour, 51 minutes.


----------



## rmcee

_*Slovakia: Minister Ľubomír Vážny about the broad gauge extension to Vienna*__

Railway Market - CEE interviewed Ľubomír Vážny, Minister of Transport, Post and Telecommunications of the Slovak Republic. Read the excerpt, where Mr. Vážny discusses the project of borad gauge line extension to Vienna.

*Jakub Klimkiewicz: Another interesting project Slovakia is willing to engage in is the extension of the broad gauge line, via Slovak territory, from Ukraine to Austria. What is the purpose of the line?*

Minister Ľubomír Vážny:The purpose of this connection is to create a high-performance infrastructure and eliminate bottlenecks, shifting the goods transshipment and distribution to new multi-modal terminals – closer to end customers. We base our plans on the assumption that in the case of mass carrying bases and containers, one transshipment and handling of goods upon the reloading of goods from broad gauge lines directly to ships on the Danube River would be eliminated. New inter-modal transport terminals should be constructed along with the broad gauge line for further goods distribution and connected to the high-performance road and rail infrastructure. Within the Operational Programme Transport 2007 – 2013, the construction of terminals in Košice, Zvolen and Bratislava is prepared under the planned route, and the inter-modal transport terminal in Košice will be connected to the broad gauge line after its completion in 2012.

*Who and when invented the concept of the broad gauge line extension?*

It is not a brand new project; it was already in 1996 that a detailed technical and economic study of broad gauge line extension up to Bratislava was prepared. The study was initiated by large multi-national forwarding companies, just like in Poland. Naturally, along with conventional transportation of raw materials and their distribution down the Danube further into Europe, the container goods transport from Far East through Transsib into Western Europe was also considered. Yet, the ŽSR was in a critical financial situation at that time, and the interest rates of investment loans made the project unfeasible.

*What is the current scale of transport of goods (road and rail) on the route of the projected broad gauge line?*

Considering the nature of transported goods and transport distances, the goods flows in road transport are not relevant for assessing the project. During the past four years, 16.1 – 17.3 million tons of goods annually were transported into the Slovak Republic through the two border points, whilst the amount transported in 2008 was already affected by the financial crisis. The transshipment amount in Čierna nad Tisou is gradually growing, and in 2008 it achieved approx. 7.1 million tons. Today, the transport on the route of the broad gauge line up to Haniska pri Košiciach, and the transshipment and redistribution of goods from US Steel to other customers depends heavily on the metallurgic production in our country and in the surrounding countries, too. The capacities of the Eastern-Slovakian transshipment terminals and related infrastructure are, of course, much higher; the technological equipment for the transshipment is being modernised. The performance of the transshipment terminal is mostly affected by winter, and the measures resulting from the Schengen Agreement are “set” so as to meet the current capacity. For comparison, the project prognoses of goods flows within the Košice – Bratislava section in 2005 are 17.5 million tons of goods in East – West direction, and 5.5 million tons in West – East direction.

*Who would cover the costs of construction?*

Since it is a very expensive project and just a few facts are known at present, the optimum way of financing will depend on the outcomes of the planned feasibility study. The result should be an “optimal” solution with minimum demands on the public resources. In spite of the negative experience of international banks with financing comparable infrastructure projects in Europe I think that there will be a sufficient number of strong investors and banks providing sources for financing the project.
(...)_


----------



## Qwert

Very interesting although quite old article which says a lot of things which weren't mentioned before from RZD Partner magazine http://www.rzd-partner.com/magazine/rzd-partner-int/11/3596.html:


----------



## TedStriker

^^

Brilliant, thanks for posting that.


----------



## Qwert

TedStriker said:


> ^^
> 
> Brilliant, thanks for posting that.


You are welcome. BTW, in April 2010 Russian president Medvedev will visit Slovakia. We may expect some news about this project in next months.


----------



## hkskyline

*Deutsche Bahn bracing for 'bloody battle' with SNCF: director*
30 October 2009
Agence France Presse

German national railway Deutsche Bahn is bracing for a "bloody battle" with French peer SNCF, which has said it intends to compete on major European routes, a Bahn director said on Friday in an interview.

"It will be a bloody battle that will leave deep scars in the balance sheets," Ulrich Homburg, director of passenger transport for Deutsche Bahn told the Financial Times Deutschland.

SNCF plans to offer inter-city service in Germany, either under its own name or that of its public transport subsidiary Keolis, a source close to the matter told AFP on Thursday.

The project is likely to complicate already tense relations between the two state-owned railways.

Deutsche Bahn has complained several times it is prevented from competing in France while SNCF already runs local trains in Germany via Keolis.

"In war there is no winner," Homburg said in a warning to the French railway.

He called on Chancellor Angela Merkel to defend Germany's interests.

Another Bahn director, who was was not identified by the newspaper, said cross border cooperation between the two railways on high-speed service could suffer as a result of SNCF's plans.


----------



## perdurabo

It seems we will have few large rail groups in Europe in future, DB already bought some companies in Poland, SNCF is trying to buy another one it seems there will be rail-war in EU  (me ass passanger i'm happy it means prices will drop and service goes up ).


----------



## Germanicus

Yip, I think competition is a good thing for the passengers. As long as there is a good supervision which guarantees safety. 
But I can understand that the Deutsche Bahn Manager are complaining about the lack of competition in France. If the SNCF want to offer their services abroad, the French have to open their market, too.


----------



## hkskyline

Wonder how they will work out the scheduling though, and whether tracks owned by existing operators / governments can be fairly allocated to new competitors.


----------



## Momo1435

The EU will be busy with regulating everything, officially the operations and infrastructure should be separated by now in all the countries. But in reality......


----------



## rmcee

*Slovakia: Interest in hosting a leg of an expanded broad-gauge railway*_

Slovakia would be interested in hosting a leg of an expanded broad-gauge railway, planned to run from Ukraine to Austria, if that would increase business for its river ports and the Bratislava airport, said Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico during talks with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Monday.

Russia backs the expansion because it would allow Russian Railways to send more cargo to Europe. Slovak proposals on the railway extension will be “thoroughly studied and, of course, implemented as part of the broader plan,” Putin said.

Putin said he would discuss the plan with his Ukrainian counterpart, Yulia Tymoshenko, when they meet later this week. - The project is moving ahead and moving well - he said._


----------



## henry1394

*passenger rail in europe*

Hi, I am new to this fourm. I like all helpful posts. I have a question for all the experts:

I am planning a trip to Germany starting from from Lisbon travel through capitals of spain, france and belgium and then germany. Is there a such passenger rail that travel such route?

thanks


----------



## thun

Yes.


----------



## Koen Acacia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrail


----------



## da_scotty

Not a direct link as far as i Know

I recommend the Deutsche Bahn site, The Deutsche Bahn Site will help you with an amazing Journey-planner,, and as mentioned above, Interrail is a nice option for you!


----------



## Gag Halfrunt

The Man in Seat Sixty-One might also be helpful.


----------



## heywindup

Yes, if the price matches the budget airlines.


----------



## Maarten Otto

heywindup said:


> Yes, if the price matches the budget airlines.


Budget airlines are very expansive if you decide to travel 14 days prior to departure. Even easyJet charges above EURO 125,- one way.


----------



## heywindup

Are there plans to introduce this route? I've read that DB was planning on starting a Köln - Brussels - London route. Will Amsterdam follow soon?


----------



## Maarten Otto

heywindup said:


> Are there plans to introduce this route? I've read that DB was planning on starting a Köln - Brussels - London route. Will Amsterdam follow soon?


No plans have been drawn up yet... but If your able do lend me 5 million the service might be running in 2011 :lol:


----------



## JoKo65

Maarten Otto said:


> […]
> 
> - Train type: Siemens Velaro (better knows as ICE 3)
> 
> […]


Siemens Velaro and ICE 3 are not the same trains!

ICE 3, ICE 3 M and ICE 3 MF are products of Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens. The Velaro is a product of Siemens. Basically there are two types of Velaros: Velaro E and Velaro CN on the one side (in spite of the fact that the Velaro CN is broader than the Velaro E) and the Velaro RUS on the other side.


----------



## Maarten Otto

JoKo65 said:


> Siemens Velaro and ICE 3 are not the same trains!
> 
> ICE 3, ICE 3 M and ICE 3 MF are products of Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens. The Velaro is a product of Siemens. Basically there are two types of Velaros: Velaro E and Velaro CN on the one side (in spite of the fact that the Velaro CN is broader than the Velaro E) and the Velaro RUS on the other side.


Didn't knew that actually (living in Netherlands... but not following continental railstuff... I prefere the English bit) But thanks for the clarification


----------



## Suburbanist

I think the lowest journey time possible assuming HSL Zuid is open would be 4h30. The problem is that, even more than London-Paris route, the "land" AMS-LON route is far longer than the air route.

Finally, as a practical matter, British immigration would have to set up booths in Amsterdam and Rotterdam AND (more difficult) NS would have to build dedicated, non-shared and physically segregated platforms as UK is not part of the Schengen area and has the policy to accept inbound trains only if passengers are processed before boarding on the continent.


----------



## Maarten Otto

Suburbanist said:


> I think the lowest journey time possible assuming HSL Zuid is open would be 4h30. The problem is that, even more than London-Paris route, the "land" AMS-LON route is far longer than the air route.


Yes but more then 90% of it is at speeds in acces of 300 km'h. Amsterdam to Brussels Via HSL-Zuid is little less then 2 hours, same goes up for Brussels to London... so 4 hours or even 3:50 can be done.



Suburbanist said:


> Finally, as a practical matter, British immigration would have to set up booths in Amsterdam and Rotterdam AND (more difficult) NS would have to build dedicated, non-shared and physically segregated platforms as UK is not part of the Schengen area and has the policy to accept inbound trains only if passengers are processed before boarding on the continent.


True... but don't forget it was the British government who sold their part in Eurostar to allow Open Acces operations on High Speed One between London and the continent. So they will probably have thought about this aswell. Furthermore All three main parties (Tory, Labour and Libdem) aim to reduce carbon emissions....


----------



## woutero

I would totally consider this.

The plane takes about 1h, but you spend a lot of time getting to and from the airports, standing in lines, waiting. I prefer to just sit on a train, and work, read, watch a movie, etc.

The problem with the current connection is that you cannot book Thalys and Eurostar in one ticket. You can book a regular Amsterdam-Brussels IC and a Eurostar in one ticket, but that takes almos an hour longer. In brussels you have to take 30 mins extra for the chckin procedures of the Eurostar. All these factors make the train an unattractive alternative currently.

There are about 60 flights between Amsterdam and London daily (one way). I think you could fill three trains. 

Is there a reason not to stop in Brussels and Antwerp?


----------



## gregwtravels

I did the train journey London - Amsterdam in February. Even with the transfer and extra time required for Eurostar check-in, was more convenient for me than flying because I live a 10 minute walk from St. Pancras. So given that I have already done it on the two trains, I would of course do it again on one train.

As for pricing, £49 one way is decent. For a maximum price, I would think you could still get riders at £200 - last minute walk-ups and folks with expense accounts. I just checked London - Paris for tomorrow morning, and they are charging £179 one-way.


----------



## Maarten Otto

gregwtravels said:


> I did the train journey London - Amsterdam in February. Even with the transfer and extra time required for Eurostar check-in, was more convenient for me than flying because I live a 10 minute walk from St. Pancras. So given that I have already done it on the two trains, I would of course do it again on one train.
> 
> As for pricing, £49 one way is decent. For a maximum price, I would think you could still get riders at £200 - last minute walk-ups and folks with expense accounts. I just checked London - Paris for tomorrow morning, and they are charging £179 one-way.


The reason for not calling in Brussels and Antwerp is due to "Open Acces" regulations which indicate that ANY one is allowed to run trains from ANY station to ANY station aslong as the Train Operating Company (TOC) wich has a contract (in this case Eurostar) doesn't serve the same route and wouldn't lose (too many) ridership. Antwerp is a point of debate Becouse Antwerp does contribute a significant numbers of Eurostar customers. 

The number of Dutch people using Eurostar is below 1% since the service started more then ten years ago.


----------



## earthJoker

Suburbanist said:


> Finally, as a practical matter, British immigration would have to set up booths in Amsterdam and Rotterdam AND (more difficult) NS would have to build dedicated, non-shared and physically segregated platforms as UK is not part of the Schengen area and has the policy to accept inbound trains only if passengers are processed before boarding on the continent.


OR the UK could just get rid of this stupid policy.


----------



## Maarten Otto

earthJoker said:


> OR the UK could just get rid of this stupid policy.


I think - in time - they have no choice as it is costing them an awfull lot of money. Same goes up for the Pound... Giving it up and replacing it for the Euro would save the average household about 40 pounds a year.


----------



## TedStriker

gregwtravels said:


> I did the train journey London - Amsterdam in February. Even with the transfer and extra time required for Eurostar check-in, was more convenient for me than flying because I live a 10 minute walk from St. Pancras. So given that I have already done it on the two trains, I would of course do it again on one train.



I also have done this trip before, several times in fact. Loving to travel by train as I do anyway, I found the journey time to be more than acceptable, and this was before the opening of HS1 and HSL-Zuid. 

So now with the route being HS all the way through, even with the change of trains at Brussels I'm sure than many people who are not instinctively train-friendly would consider a London-Amsterdam rail trip over the airline option. 

It would be important to price such a journey competitively, but I'm sure that the respective train operators would do so.


----------



## TedStriker

Maarten Otto said:


> I think - in time - they have no choice as it is costing them an awfull lot of money. Same goes up for the Pound... Giving it up and replacing it for the Euro would save the average household about 40 pounds a year.



My thoughts exactly. Like many things that are European in focus, Britain, or I should say, the UK, will get around to doing them eventually, it's just a question of when. 

Are the bookies still taking bets on the issue of the UK joining the Euro?


----------



## eomer

4 hours seems a bit too long. 
That kind of train should stop only in Brussels.

But it's possible to have 2 kind of trains:
- London-Lille-Brussels-Antwerp-Rotterdam-Amsterdam
- London-Lille-Brussels-Liege-Aachen-Köln



JoKo65 said:


> Siemens Velaro and ICE 3 are not the same trains!


Siemens's name for it's rolling stock is "Velaro"
ICE is a trade mark of DB.

In Spain, Velaro is called "AVE" like other high speed trains.


----------



## TedStriker

^^

Have you ever got the TGV between Paris and Nice?


----------



## poshbakerloo

it does sound pretty good. i wud rather do it as i dnt like flying much anyway


----------



## poshbakerloo

TedStriker said:


> ^^
> 
> Have you ever got the TGV between Paris and Nice?


i have


----------



## TedStriker

The only reason why I mention the Paris-Nice trip is because it shows that HS services can work for journeys of more than three hours, at least for many people. I'm sure there will be some that don't wish to be on a train for that long, but for the London-Amsterdam market, I'm sure they'll be more than enough people willing to watch the world go by out of a train window.


----------



## Maarten Otto

eomer said:


> 4 hours seems a bit too long.
> That kind of train should stop only in Brussels.
> 
> But it's possible to have 2 kind of trains:
> - London-Lille-Brussels-Antwerp-Rotterdam-Amsterdam
> - London-Lille-Brussels-Liege-Aachen-Köln
> 
> 
> Siemens's name for it's rolling stock is "Velaro"
> ICE is a trade mark of DB.
> 
> In Spain, Velaro is called "AVE" like other high speed trains.


Yes but a stop in Brussels is NOT allowd by law and Open Acces regulations.


----------



## eomer

Maarten Otto said:


> Yes but a stop in Brussels is NOT allowd by law and Open Acces regulations.


Humm...why not ?
This is an international train between 4 coutries (enven 5 if splitted in Brussels): it can load and unload passengers everywhere. Of course, all people boarding the train between Amsterdam/Köln and Lille will have to pass safety control, even if they unboard before crossing channel tunnel.


----------



## Maarten Otto

eomer said:


> Humm...why not ?
> This is an international train between 4 coutries


Read this post http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=55712597&postcount=15


----------



## K_

Maarten Otto said:


> Yes but a stop in Brussels is NOT allowd by law and Open Acces regulations.


I think it is. Open Access regulations mean that it is perfectly possible for someone to offer even Paris - London in competition with Eurostar. Think about the trains DB/OeBB now run to Italy in open access.


----------



## K_

Maarten Otto said:


> What if there were three daily direct services between London and Amsterdam taking aprox. 4 hours for the complete journey... (City centre to City centre) would you board the train?


I'm about to travel Bern - Aberdeen by train. So, yes I would


----------



## makita09

I think we'll see London - Amsterdam at some point. The border controls issue can be overcome, after all Eurostar run trains to the Alps and Avignon and Disneyland, each of which have one train max per day and yet they find a way (that is obviously economically acceptable) to comply with border controls, and the first 2 of the 3 destinations are well over 4 hours journey time and this also appears not to be a problem, though it may not grab a massive market share.

According to an online railway journal, there are discussions underway at the moment to try to change the safety protocols through the tunnel, which currently state the train must be able to separate in two if one half is disabled, to take all the passengers safely out, and they also state that the train must be nearly 400m long so that passengers can safely walk along the train to alight at an emergency exit which are at regular 350 or so metres.

Following on from the recent difficulties both with snow-related break downs and the earlier fire, these safety protocols have been shown to not necessarily be of any advantage whatsoever, especially the splitting in two. And as these protocols affect the available rolling stock scrutiny is now being had over whether they can be changed so that other rolling stock, and therefore other train operators, can use the tunnel.

If changes are made, then operators would find it much easier to start services to Amsterdam.


----------



## Koen Acacia

Suburbanist said:


> Finally, as a practical matter, British immigration would have to set up booths in Amsterdam and Rotterdam AND (more difficult) NS would have to build dedicated, non-shared and physically segregated platforms as UK is not part of the Schengen area and has the policy to accept inbound trains only if passengers are processed before boarding on the continent.


No need for the Brits to join Schengen at all to avoid this crap. Just do it the way it was always done: passport control on the train and if your passport isn't in order you get kicked off at the next station. Voilá: delay problem solved.


----------



## JoKo65

eomer said:


> […]
> Siemens's name for it's rolling stock is "Velaro"
> ICE is a trade mark of DB.
> 
> In Spain, Velaro is called "AVE" like other high speed trains.


It's much more complicated, the ICE 3 is no Velaro. Velaros are only these trains, which are manufactured by Siemens only. ICE 3 aka Baureihe 403/406 are manufactured by Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens.
The first Velaro for Germany will be the ordered Velaro D:









_siemens.com_


----------



## Stainless

Why not just have Amsterdam-London non stop? It would stop it being in direct competition with the Eurostar and cut a few minutes off the journey. If the UK finally decides to join the Schengen (which is merely a pipe dream, we seem to be against integrating with Europe in any tangible way) then London could be the end point of an Amsterdam-London service which stops in Brussels and anywhere else it wants to or even go all the way to Scotland. I would happily use this service, even from Bristol where I usually live, which is another 2 hours from London.


----------



## SagaCity

I would use this service. I have been to Amsterdam from London by train ocassionally, with an change in Brussels. This direct service would be a lot more convenient. 

I did these trips for leisure purposes where service speed is not that critical. I can't see that the 4-hour journey time would be that useful for business travellers since there would not be much time to do some quick on-site work or have a meeting and get back the same day.

What I would really prefer is to have a sleeper train service between London and Amsterdam (and other European cities further away than Paris & Brussels), I could plan my time more efficiently and not have to waste the morning hours being in transit.

added: Waterloo International is not being used at the moment - I think it would make an ideal terminal for international sleeper train services from London.


----------



## joseph1951

eomer said:


> 1-
> 4 hours seems a bit too long.
> That kind of train should stop only in Brussels.
> 
> .


Well, 4hrs are not necessarily too long a time when you consider travelling time to/from the airport + waiting time for check-in.

In my case (I live in kent) 2-3 hrs,I have to consoder the travelling time to London Airports + 3hrs of having to be in the airtport before the departure of the plain + exit from Schipol and travelling time to Amsterdam Town Centre.

Therefore travelling time to /from Airport: * 3hrs + 40 mins*
Waiting time + check-in procedure at the Airport: *3hrs*
Flying time: *1hr*
Time waisted after landing (at Schipol) 1hr 
Train from Schipol To Amsterdam 20-30' 
Total London (from Kent) to Amsterdam * 9hrs 10 minutes.



**Ashford -Amsterdam by train*
3hrs 30' - 
Check-in time: *20-30 mins*
Travelling time to/from Ashford: *15 mins*.
Total: *4hrs 15 mins*.
Travelling by plane from London to Amsterdam seems to take at least 5hrs and 55 minutes more than the HST solution...


----------



## JeroenMostert

*cut your dutch market in half ?*



Stainless said:


> Why not just have Amsterdam-London non stop? It would stop it being in direct competition with the Eurostar and cut a few minutes off the journey.


Because leaving out Rotterdam would cut your dutch market in half. About 3.5 million people live in the southern part of the Randstad. Rotterdam might not be a big tourist destination, but ignoring that many potential tourists TO London does not make sense. The connections with the Hague (the political center of the Netherlands) and Utrecht (4th largest city in NL) are better via Rotterdam ( the Hague 59 minutes faster, Utrecht 30 minutes faster) than the detour via Amsterdam. 

Remember this is a train, adding a stop might add a few minutes, but it also increases your target audience. The rails are going through Rotterdam central station anyway. You might even want to stop in Schiphol Airport.

I live in the Rotterdam area, and I would this use train for a trip to London. I would be willing to pay a slight premium over the Thalys+Eurostar combination. But I hope you are not using the reactions from an Internet forum about trains as a representative sample .


----------



## urbanfan89

If the planes are completely grounded due to a farting Icelandic god, there will be no choice to this question.


----------



## Suburbanist

urbanfan89 said:


> If the planes are completely grounded due to a farting Icelandic god, there will be no choice to this question.


Just a little off-topic: I've read some very harsh commentaries from the usual environwackos almost wishing that a volcanic ash cloud should ground planes for a month or more... (not saying you're one of them)



SagaCity said:


> What I would really prefer is to have a sleeper train service between London and Amsterdam (and other European cities further away than Paris & Brussels), I could plan my time more efficiently and not have to waste the morning hours being in transit.
> 
> added: Waterloo International is not being used at the moment - I think it would make an ideal terminal for international sleeper train services from London.


I don't think it is viable. HSL Zuid is closed by night for maintenance works. And a sleeper trains is something of the past - or for fringe markets of aficionados anyway -. You could have very early morning services, like one departing 5:00 from Amsterdam, arriving 8h45 London time, but sleeper services are crap by nature, if not by the rolling stock, by the uncomfortable of sleeping on a moving vehicle (airplanes, at least, are "stationary" for resting purposes most of the time). 



Koen Acacia said:


> No need for the Brits to join Schengen at all to avoid this crap. Just do it the way it was always done: passport control on the train and if your passport isn't in order you get kicked off at the next station. Voilá: delay problem solved.


Modern immigration challenges wouldn't allow for that. Britain is the most-sought (illegal) immigration destination in Europe. Imagine a group of illegal immigrants detained on a train... not safe actually. Moreover, you can x-ray luggage on board, so you need _a priori_ checks and security inspection, to have a train that is as immigration-proof as a plane.

The alternative would be immigration controls on arrival in St. Pacras, but I'm not sure it is a feasible solution.


----------



## Stainless

JeroenMostert said:


> Because leaving out Rotterdam would cut your dutch market in half. About 3.5 million people live in the southern part of the Randstad. Rotterdam might not be a big tourist destination, but ignoring that many potential tourists TO London does not make sense. The connections with the Hague (the political center of the Netherlands) and Utrecht (4th largest city in NL) are better via Rotterdam ( the Hague 59 minutes faster, Utrecht 30 minutes faster) than the detour via Amsterdam.
> 
> Remember this is a train, adding a stop might add a few minutes, but it also increases your target audience. The rails are going through Rotterdam central station anyway. You might even want to stop in Schiphol Airport.
> 
> I live in the Rotterdam area, and I would this use train for a trip to London. I would be willing to pay a slight premium over the Thalys+Eurostar combination. But I hope you are not using the reactions from an Internet forum about trains as a representative sample .


Sorry, forgot that Rotterdam was between Amsterdam and Brussels. A train that stops in Rotterdam also would be good, but remember that for the time being at least, you need to set up British immigration points at each station the train picks up passengers. I think an Amsterdam-Rotterdam-London service would work well, it would have to run Amsterdam-Rotterdam half empty though as not many people would go through UK immigration to do a domestic journey in the Netherlands. But compared to the whole journey that is not much, but It would save a lot of time not stopping at Brussels which already has Eurostar. 

Filling up a high speed train in a few medium sized cities before doing a large non-stop section before emptying the train in a large city seems the ideal HSR business model to me as smaller cities can be served by a frequent service.


----------



## urbanfan89

Suburbanist said:


> I don't think it is viable. HSL Zuid is closed by night for maintenance works. And a sleeper trains is something of the past - or for fringe markets of aficionados anyway -. You could have very early morning services, like one departing 5:00 from Amsterdam, arriving 8h45 London time, but sleeper services are crap by nature, if not by the rolling stock, by the uncomfortable of sleeping on a moving vehicle (airplanes, at least, are "stationary" for resting purposes most of the time).


I'm not sure about that. High speed trains are as smooth as a plane, and in China there are now high speed overnight trains. A businessman from Beijing can board an overnight train to Shanghai (for example) which runs on "classic" tracks when the high speed line is down for maintenance, and arrive 10 hours later, saving hotel costs and probably time. It is successful enough to force the five airlines on the Beijing-Shanghai route to merge their services. Similarly, a businessman from the City of London can take an overnight train and arrive early in the morning in Madrid, Rome, or elsewhere. It may not work as well in Europe, but the business plan is worth a look.



Suburbanist said:


> Modern immigration challenges wouldn't allow for that. Britain is the most-sought (illegal) immigration destination in Europe. Imagine a group of illegal immigrants detained on a train... not safe actually. Moreover, you can x-ray luggage on board, so you need _a priori_ checks and security inspection, to have a train that is as immigration-proof as a plane.
> 
> The alternative would be immigration controls on arrival in St. Pacras, but I'm not sure it is a feasible solution.


Perhaps the immigration control problem can be solved with a mandatory stopover in Lille (or the last stop on the French side on the tunnel) to perform immigration checks. The train originates wherever it wants on the continent, but it must stop at Lille so that all passengers stop over and go through immigration checks. The train stops over for 20 minutes, enough for all passengers continuing to London to perform checks, and re-board the train. Illegal immigrants are stopped, and every seat is open for passengers on all legs.


----------



## SagaCity

Suburbanist said:


> I don't think it is viable. HSL Zuid is closed by night for maintenance works. And a sleeper trains is something of the past - or for fringe markets of aficionados anyway -. You could have very early morning services, like one departing 5:00 from Amsterdam, arriving 8h45 London time, but sleeper services are crap by nature, if not by the rolling stock, by the uncomfortable of sleeping on a moving vehicle (airplanes, at least, are "stationary" for resting purposes most of the time).


I disagree. Sleeper trains are not necessarily a speed-critical service. In the case of London-Amsterdam, they don't have to be routed by HSL-Zuid and can use the older tracks.

I also disagree on the comfort factor. Since you are making comparisons with planes, sleeping berths on trains allow you to sleep flat and stretch out completely, whereas plane seats only recline slightly and are very cramped and uncomfortable to sleep in. Indeed on long haul flights nowadays, they encourage you not to sleep all the time but to get out and have a stroll in case of Deep Vein Thrombosis. It is possible to get flat sleeping on planes but this is limited to a few very expensive seats. I've never had problems sleeping in sleeper trains, even older ones. Aeroplanes are not "stationary" for most of the time - it all depends on the weather and I've been on several long haul flights where it's frequently hit turbulence. Also when planes fly through a violent storm (this is very rare, I have to admit) it's not a comfortable experience at all and can be very scary for some people. This might sound like I'm anti-air travel but I'm not. Indeed, air is still the best for for long distance travel especially if travelling half way around the world.

Sleeper trains are not something of the past. They are still used extensively in China and India. And in China, sleeper services have been introduced on modern long-distance high speed trains. Though they have cut back on the services in Europe. I think the problem in Europe is simply the lack of awareness of the benefits of sleeper services and a lack of marketing.


----------



## Maarten Otto

And what if the immigration officer(s) would check your ID on the train after leaving Rotterdam. It works well in Switzerland. Next you call at Lille, give the train another headcode and it is by law another train where people have been checked before they boarded this particular service from Lille.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Modern immigration challenges wouldn't allow for that. Britain is the most-sought (illegal) immigration destination in Europe. Imagine a group of illegal immigrants detained on a train... not safe actually. Moreover, you can x-ray luggage on board, so you need _a priori_ checks and security inspection, to have a train that is as immigration-proof as a plane.


The "Challenge" is the same at EU borders. However, for some reason just inspecting the train (and it's passengers) is deemed quite satisfactory at the Slovenian - Croatian border.
Don't forget that illegal immigrants currently try to enter the UK mostly on trucks. Most trucks and cars that cross the channel are not X-rayed. There is really no good reason why the eurostar's passengers need to be subject to such a strict regime.


----------



## mozatellac

Suburbanist said:


> I don't think it is viable. HSL Zuid is closed by night for maintenance works. And a sleeper trains is something of the past - or for fringe markets of aficionados anyway -. You could have very early morning services, like one departing 5:00 from Amsterdam, arriving 8h45 London time, but sleeper services are crap by nature, if not by the rolling stock, by the uncomfortable of sleeping on a moving vehicle (airplanes, at least, are "stationary" for resting purposes most of the time).


First, London and continental Europe are not in the same time zone, so that would rather be 5:00 Amsterdam, 7:45 London.
Second, have you ever been on a modern sleeper train, and made the comparison with an economy-class flight? In my European experience (in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, set aside France where sleeper trains are effectively crappy), there is no possible comparison. I can sleep in a sleeper train, not in an economy-class plane seat.


----------



## Maarten Otto

mozatellac said:


> First, London and continental Europe are not in the same time zone, so that would rather be 5:00 Amsterdam, 7:45 London time.


Sorry but Amsterdam has been GMT +1 for ages I believe...


----------



## mozatellac

Maarten Otto said:


> Sorry but Amsterdam has been GMT +1 for ages I believe...


Yes, Amsterdam is GMT + 1 in the winter when the UK is GMT, and GMT + 2 in the summer when the UK is GMT + 1, so Amsterdam is consistently one hour ahead of London, right?


----------



## sotavento

Maarten Otto said:


> What if there were three daily direct services between London and Amsterdam taking aprox. 4 hours for the complete journey... (City centre to City centre) would you board the train?
> 
> 
> Specification:
> - Regulation: Open Acces
> - Train type: Siemens Velaro (better knows as ICE 3)
> - Service pattern: Morning, afternoon, evening (both ways)
> - Intermediate calling points: Ashford (board only), Lille, Rotterdam (Alight only), Amsterdam (Alight only)
> - Fare structure: Same as airlines do with a single starting at 49 pounds one way.
> - Service level: Tea and coffee is for free on first and standard class, first class get 3 course meal at seat (included in price)
> 
> Train times: All times in local time
> London to Amsterdam:
> London Departures: 0700, 1230, 1800
> Ashford Departures: 0730, 1300, 1830
> Lille Arrivals/Departures: 0930, 1500, 2030
> Rotterdam Arrivals: 1120, 1650, 2220
> Amsterdam Arrivals: 1200, 1730, 2300
> 
> Amsterdam to London:
> Amsterdam Departures: 0700, 1330, 1900
> Rotterdam Departures: 0740, 1410, 1940
> Lille Arrivals/Departures: 0940, 1610, 2140
> Ashford Arrivals: 0930, 1600, 2130
> London Arrivals: 0955, 1625, 2155
> 
> First London departure can be done at 0600 aswell if proven to be more popular
> 
> Would you use the service... and what do you think the maximum fare for a one way ticket should be?


You need trains that can pass inside the eurotunnel ... so unless you build some NEW trains you get stuck with the eurostar Trainsets. 

ANY new train HAS TO follow the same fire/crash proof standards as the current trains and this doesn't make MANDATORY any kind/brand of train ... purchase some Mitsubishi if you like ... just take into acount that they MUSt have that same security measures aplied.

train times:
??? forget those 3 traisn a day ... at least HOURLY departures in each direction. 

travel time:
London-Folkestone = 25/30 minutes
under the tunnel = 20 minutes 
Calais-Lille = 20 minutes
Lille-Brussels = 20 minutes 
Brussels-Antwerpen = 25/30 minutes
Antwerpen-roterdham = 20 minutes
Roterdham-schiphol = 10 minutes
Schiphol-Amesterdam = 10 minutes

150/160 minutes= 2h30/3h ... :cheers:

There are 550km (more or less) between london and amesterdam ... semi-direct trains under 3h are completelly doable in that corridor. 

give 5 extra minutes to any stop and you continue to fall a great deal below the 4h mark you set. :cheers:


London-Bruxelles-Koln 2tph
London-Bruxelles-Amesterdam 2tph
= London-Bruxelles 4tph 


^^ what's the capacity of the eurotunnel ???


----------



## mozatellac

sotavento said:


> You need trains that can pass inside the eurotunnel ... so unless you build some NEW trains you get stuck with the eurostar Trainsets.
> 
> ANY new train HAS TO follow the same fire/crash proof standards as the current trains and this doesn't make MANDATORY any kind/brand of train ... purchase some Mitsubishi if you like ... just take into acount that they MUSt have that same security measures aplied.


Not for long, my friend: Channel Tunnel working group investigates shorter trains.

As for your schedule, it seems overly optimistic to me: the fastest eurostar service between London and Bruxelles-Midi took 1h51' in 2007. By using more powerful trainsets, the route can -maybe- be done in 1h48'. I don't know enough about the Bruxelles - Amsterdam route to comment.


----------



## sotavento

Suburbanist said:


> I think the lowest journey time possible assuming HSL Zuid is open would be 4h30. The problem is that, even more than London-Paris route, the "land" AMS-LON route is far longer than the air route.
> 
> Finally, as a practical matter, British immigration would have to set up booths in Amsterdam and Rotterdam AND (more difficult) NS would have to build dedicated, non-shared and physically segregated platforms as UK is not part of the Schengen area and has the policy to accept inbound trains only if passengers are processed before boarding on the continent.[/QUOT
> 
> Reserve 1 or 2 platforms in Amesterdam central , roterdam and Bruxelles to this sort of traffic ... strangelly enough the spanish AVE of Renfe have the same procedures in NATIONAL long distance trains. :lol:


----------



## sotavento

Maarten Otto said:


> The reason for not calling in Brussels and Antwerp is due to "Open Acces" regulations which indicate that ANY one is allowed to run trains from ANY station to ANY station aslong as the Train Operating Company (TOC) wich has a contract (in this case Eurostar) doesn't serve the same route and wouldn't lose (too many) ridership. Antwerp is a point of debate Becouse Antwerp does contribute a significant numbers of Eurostar customers.
> 
> The number of Dutch people using Eurostar is below 1% since the service started more then ten years ago.


Or you could "codeshare" with eurostar and carry their passengers for them in those trains. :bash:


----------



## sotavento

Stainless said:


> Sorry, forgot that Rotterdam was between Amsterdam and Brussels. A train that stops in Rotterdam also would be good, but remember that for the time being at least, you need to set up British immigration points at each station the train picks up passengers. I think an Amsterdam-Rotterdam-London service would work well, it would have to run Amsterdam-Rotterdam half empty though as not many people would go through UK immigration to do a domestic journey in the Netherlands. But compared to the whole journey that is not much, but It would save a lot of time not stopping at Brussels which already has Eurostar.
> 
> Filling up a high speed train in a few medium sized cities before doing a large non-stop section before emptying the train in a large city seems the ideal HSR business model to me as smaller cities can be served by a frequent service.


The best of any open acess operation.


Pick up people one side of the chanell ... leave them in the oposite side ...


birmingham, manchester, Liverpool (?), + London & ashford = pich up people
Lille , Bruxelles , Roterdam , Schipoll , amesterdam = dump them there

the oposite in the other direction.


all of these intermediate routes would indeed be served by their local HSR operators. :cheers:


If you can somehow createa "codesharing" agreement then you just add a Thalys LBA to the others ...


----------



## K_

sotavento said:


> Reserve 1 or 2 platforms in Amesterdam central , roterdam and Bruxelles to this sort of traffic ...


Platforms 1&2 at Brussel Zuid are already reserved for "this sort of traffic", but the problem is that these tracks are inaccessible from the North. So that would mean that a Eurostar from Amsterdam would have to take the deviation route around Brussel, and reverse at Brussel Zuid.



> strangely enough the spanish AVE of Renfe have the same procedures in NATIONAL long distance trains. :lol:


They are crazy. A big advantage of trains is the absence of meaningless security theatre. Voluntarily giving up that advantage is foolish.


----------



## Maarten Otto

I don't understand where the Lille - Brussels in 20 minutes comes from... At 300 km'h it takes you 40 minutes by Eurostar. I calculated the same timings to allow for a bit of slack time.


----------



## TedStriker

SagaCity said:


> added: Waterloo International is not being used at the moment - I think it would make an ideal terminal for international sleeper train services from London.



I've also been thinking along the same lines. Waterloo would in effect become the Paris-Bercy of London.

What are your thoughts on these options? 

1. London-Berlin
2. London-Zurich
3. London-Frankfurt

Does anyone have any idea as to how much a sleeper car costs to build these days?


----------



## Coccodrillo

TedStriker said:


> I'm sure they'll be more than enough people willing to watch the world go by out of a train window.


It is often impossible as nearly all modern trains have seats placed near the walls and not by the windows. This is incredibly stupid and claustrophobic (at least for me).


----------



## Suburbanist

sotavento said:


> strangelly enough the spanish AVE of Renfe have the same procedures in NATIONAL long distance trains. :lol:


Those Spain's controls are for anti-terrorism purposes. I think all high-speed trains in Europe should have airport-like security prior to boarding like in Spain, but it seems this measure are not in favor with operator in other countries.


----------



## czm3

mozatellac said:


> Second, have you ever been on a modern sleeper train, and made the comparison with an economy-class flight? In my European experience (in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, set aside France where sleeper trains are effectively crappy), there is no possible comparison. I can sleep in a sleeper train, not in an economy-class plane seat.


I dont mean to single you out, but this is an absolutely rediculous comparison. Of course the economy seat is less comfortable, but remember that you wont be sitting there for very long. What takes a sleeper train 8 hours can be done on a plane in 75 minutes. Lets not compare comfort on a train from Paris to Madrid with a long haul flight from London to Hong Kong...


----------



## Coccodrillo

Suburbanist said:


> Those Spain's controls are for anti-terrorism purposes. I think all high-speed trains in Europe should have airport-like security prior to boarding like in Spain, but it seems this measure are not in favor with operator in other countries.


It would be useless...


----------



## Baron Hirsch

TedStriker said:


> I've also been thinking along the same lines. Waterloo would in effect become the Paris-Bercy of London.
> 
> What are your thoughts on these options?
> 
> 1. London-Berlin
> 2. London-Zurich
> 3. London-Frankfurt
> 
> Does anyone have any idea as to how much a sleeper car costs to build these days?


London-Berlin would definitely be a winner. The Berlin-Paris night train used to be packed, the most successful night train I've seen, and it used to cough up a number of customers in Brussels on the way, who would then more asleep then awake make their way through Eurostar's cumbersome check-in in the early morning. Thanks to DB's stupid rerouting of the train, this option is now dead, but if somebody would offer a direct service and not too awful prices, I am sure it would be popular. At ICE/Eurostar speeds, a direct run would take 8 1/2 hours, an ideal span for a nap, at conventional (200 km/h) speeds, it would still get you there in good time.


----------



## K_

Baron Hirsch said:


> London-Berlin would definitely be a winner. The Berlin-Paris night train used to be packed, the most successful night train I've seen, and it used to cough up a number of customers in Brussels on the way, who would then more asleep then awake make their way through Eurostar's cumbersome check-in in the early morning. Thanks to DB's stupid rerouting of the train, this option is now dead,



It's not "DB's stupid rerouting", it's the NMBS that basically kicked the train of their network. Hopefully it will return once the trade unions have accepted that open access is here to stay.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Those Spain's controls are for anti-terrorism purposes. I think all high-speed trains in Europe should have airport-like security prior to boarding like in Spain, but it seems this measure are not in favor with operator in other countries.


Yeah, we've seen how useful these anti terrorism measures are... Please save us from having the same meaningless security theatre on trains. It does not serve any purpose whatsoever. 
Just admit it. You want to impose arbitrary restrictions on rail so it has a higher chance to fail.


----------



## TedStriker

Coccodrillo said:


> It is often impossible as nearly all modern trains have seats placed near the walls and not by the windows. This is incredibly stupid and claustrophobic (at least for me).


I thought it was only for the British market that the train designers chose to forget about coordinating seats with windows. 

You mean to tell me that even in Switzerland, which is where you're from I see, the same situation is true?


----------



## K_

TedStriker said:


> I thought it was only for the British market that the train designers chose to forget about coordinating seats with windows.


It's more a question of those responsible for the railway car's structure putting in X windows, and the interior designers being asked by the railway company to put in (2X)+1 rows of seats...



> You mean to tell me that even in Switzerland, which is where you're from I see, the same situation is true?


In Switzerland it's not really an issue with SBB stock, as that mostly uses "viz a viz" seating, nicely lined up with the windows. The problem exists with some foreign stock running in Switzerland.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Nearly all trains in Spain and France (and at least the German ICE 1-2-3) have blind seats. In Switzerland only the ETR 610 has a few nearly blind seats, unlike the similar ETR 600 that has much of them (both types of trains are New Pendolino with the same length and the same number of seats, one approved in Switzerland and Italy, the second only in Italy, the difference being that in the 610 the seats line up with windows, a clear demonstration that placing seats near windows don't mean a reduction in capacity).


----------



## sotavento

K_ said:


> This would certainly be a "nice to have", but it would not cut two hours. Currently the Eurostart requires a check in half an hour before departure, and walking from Paris Est to Paris Nord only takes 10 minutes. So you usually plan an hour for the total transfer in the direction Zürich - London, and 20 minutes the other way.
> As long as the UK insist on pre boarding checks a Eurostar departure from Zürich is however out of the question.
> What would be possible is having Eurostars leave from Basel. Reserving a track a Basel SNCF for an Eurostar is possible. However at the moment the most useful additional TGV service out of Zürich would be a Zürich - Basel - Strasbourg - CDG - Lille-Europe service, timed so that a good connection with Eurostar exists in Lille.





Belxos said:


> So basically, just let Eurostar trains London - Brussels continue towards Amsterdam/Köln, make the TGV Brussel - France Amsterdam - France and increase the number of Eurostar services London - French Alps (and maybe reroute some of them to Marseille/Nice/Perpignan.
> Now surely there must be a reason why they haven't done this yet.
> Low demand and no profitability anyone?



^^ Increasing capacity in 600km long sections with ongoing travellers changing at the HUB is much simpler than just creating _redundant_ direct trains ... 


on the other hand ... there are 410km between Koln and Calais ... plenty of time for a check-in-and-identify procedure ??? 


^^ I just remembered my last visit to Newcastle ... everyone boarded in a single line of passengers and everyone entered by the last door of a 5 car long train. :nuts:



K_ said:


> The biggest obstacle is however the pre boarding check-in. That is what we need to get rid of first. As long as that exists a direct Amsterdam - London train will never happen.


Strangely enough ... the solution coulcome from ... spain.


Most (if not all) High speed /long distance passengers in spain have to go tru a check-in wich usually involves bagage scanning and identification checking.


----------



## tk780

sotavento said:


> KOln is the "linking point" inside germany.
> 
> Koln-Berlin = 550km (speeds at 160/200/250 nowadays???)
> Koln-Bruxelles-Paris = 500km
> Koln-bruxelles-London = 550km
> 
> So that would make the distances:
> Berlin-Paris = 1050km
> Berlin-London = 1100km
> 
> But nonetheless you already conect with the ICE network in its main spot ... Koln ... it's the door to both the Ruhr cities , southern cities (like munich , frankfurt and stutgard) and to the northern (berlin , hamburg , hannover) ... and why stop there ... both Vienna and Warsov are just a little further away ???? :cheers:


Actually, Frankfurt is the most important hub in Germany' ICE network.


----------



## sergiogiorgini

Oh I'd board. If the fares are reasonable, definitely. I've considered it even before the HSL-Zuid opened but was put off by last-minute fares for Eurostar (which, combined with Thalys to Brussels, are ludicrous).

Four hours is not that long! I don't know what everyone is complaining about. And it spares you from the horrible London airports.


----------



## K_

sotavento said:


> Most (if not all) High speed /long distance passengers in spain have to go tru a check-in wich usually involves bagage scanning and identification checking.


And I would really like to know what the management at Renfe has been smoking. It is completely pointless to force railway passengers to go through airline style security. That some railways engage in this pointless security theatre should not be an reason to find it "acceptable".

In Zürich every platform has five entrances, and four more are being added. In modern railway operations you empty a train in 2 minutes, fill it again and send it back where it came from. And that four times per hour for every terminal platform. There is absolutely no place for security theatre here. It servers no purpose, and only increases frictions between the modes.


----------



## thun

You've heard of the Madrid bombings in 2004, haven't you?

Honestly, safety check in Spain it's not nearly as annoying than in any airport. And if you spend some hours in the train anyhow (due to the large distance), that 15min don't bother me as I would sit around on the platform otherwise.
It's far from comfortable (and I don't get why they think they need that), but it's not as bad as it sounds.


----------



## sergiogiorgini

If it's not nearly as thorough as airport security checks, then it's not going to be very effective anyway. What do they subject you to, the bag-open-glance-inside check like Disney's?

I say get rid of it. We can't install permanent security checks everywhere some madman decides to kamikaze himself.


----------



## Koen Acacia

thun said:


> You've heard of the Madrid bombings in 2004, haven't you?


Yes - the explosions happened on short-distance commuter trains (which still aren't being controlled, that would be a logistical nightmare), with one large bomb found _on the track_ of a high-speed train before it could be detonated, so access control on that train wouldn't have made any difference at all either. Ditto with the attack on that Moscow-Petersburg train: they simply blew up the track as the train passed.
That's one big difference between a plane and a train: it's rather easy, and much safer, to blow up a train from the outside than it is to smuggle a bomb on board. With a plane that's traveling at 10km height the story is a bit different.

While access control on planes might make some sense, on trains it means that you're being protected against the threats that don't matter much anyway, while the threats that _do _matter are being ignored.


----------



## earthJoker

thun said:


> You've heard of the Madrid bombings in 2004, haven't you?
> 
> Honestly, safety check in Spain it's not nearly as annoying than in any airport. And if you spend some hours in the train anyhow (due to the large distance), that 15min don't bother me as I would sit around on the platform otherwise.
> It's far from comfortable (and I don't get why they think they need that), but it's not as bad as it sounds.


I don't agree. First - as been said - the attacks where on commuter trains. Secondly if the security check is xx minutes, those minutes are _extra_ minutes. I have to plan them into my travel schedule. I wouldn't sit around on the platform otherwise, why should I?


----------



## K_

thun said:


> You've heard of the Madrid bombings in 2004, haven't you?


I have. They prove how pointless safety checks at railway stations are. 



> Honestly, safety check in Spain it's not nearly as annoying than in any airport. And if you spend some hours in the train anyhow (due to the large distance), that 15min don't bother me as I would sit around on the platform otherwise.
> It's far from comfortable (and I don't get why they think they need that), but it's not as bad as it sounds.


15 minutes do bother me. It also bothers railway companies. In Zürich every terminal platform must handle 4 trains per hour. That means that you need to get people of incoming trains fast. And once the train is empty and reversed you need to fill it again, fast. You can't fit a security checkpoint in to a station where every platform has 9 exits, and where people expect to be able to transfer between trains in three minutes.


----------



## K_

Koen Acacia said:


> While access control on planes might make some sense, on trains it means that you're being protected against the threats that don't matter much anyway, while the threats that _do _matter are being ignored.



Actually what makes sense is to stop worrying about terrorism. That so few terrorist attacks happen is not because terrorism is hard. It's easy. And it's not because our anti terrorism measures are effective. They aren't.
The main reason why so few terrorism attacks happen is simple because terrorists are rare. The kind of diseased mind that flies planes loaded with innocent people in to buildings is extremely rare. That is why planes, trains and buses don't get blown up regularly. 
The only thing all the security theatre now inflicted on the public does is annoy people and take away their liberties. It's one reason why I'm not flying anymore. 
Please save us from security theatre on the railways too.


----------



## earthJoker

K_ said:


> It also bothers railway companies. In Zürich every terminal platform must handle 4 trains per hour. That means that you need to get people of incoming trains fast. And once the train is empty and reversed you need to fill it again, fast. You can't fit a security checkpoint in to a station where every platform has 9 exits, and where people expect to be able to transfer between trains in three minutes.


Yes, in Zürich these checks will never be possible, and at the new through station the frequencies will be even higher.


----------



## Suburbanist

I guess we need to re-establish some point here: the _main_ reason for the security check procedures are related to immigration control. I know some people here see the fact of UK being not a part of Schengen area as a detail, but they have their reasons.

I also don't think there is any feasible and optimal solution to immigration procedures in UK-continent routes:

- *control on departure (as now)* => only authorized passengers board the train, but it requires costly foreign presence on each other's stations and dedicated platforms.

- *control at the tunnel entrance, like ferries* (train stops, everyone get off at the entrance of Chunnel for procedures) => would facilitate routes beyond France, would require only British/France staff. However, it would be highly disruptive for short services and add 40-50 minutes to present journey times.

- *control at arrival, like airplanes* => foreign officers stationed away from country of origin wouldn't be needed, but sealed platforms would be required anyway. Forced deportation/repatriation through trains would be problematic.


----------



## mozatellac

Suburbanist said:


> I guess we need to re-establish some point here: the _main_ reason for the security check procedures are related to immigration control. I know some people here see the fact of UK being not a part of Schengen area as a detail, but they have their reasons.
> 
> I also don't think there is any feasible and optimal solution to immigration procedures in UK-continent routes:
> 
> - *control on departure (as now)* => only authorized passengers board the train, but it requires costly foreign presence on each other's stations and dedicated platforms.
> 
> - *control at the tunnel entrance, like ferries* (train stops, everyone get off at the entrance of Chunnel for procedures) => would facilitate routes beyond France, would require only British/France staff. However, it would be highly disruptive for short services and add 40-50 minutes to present journey times.
> 
> - *control at arrival, like airplanes* => foreign officers stationed away from country of origin wouldn't be needed, but sealed platforms would be required anyway. Forced deportation/repatriation through trains would be problematic.


What about a control on the train, once it has departed? Since it is only about checking passports, there is no reason to do it on the ground.


----------



## Suburbanist

mozatellac said:


> What about a control on the train, once it has departed? Since it is only about checking passports, there is no reason to do it on the ground.


Not effective. UK Border Force is far more stringent in its admission criteria than countries at the Eastern Schengen border (the slums of wannabe-immigrants in Calais are an example of this policy).

You would need UK Border Force agents on the trains, connected with Frontex and other UK online databases to decide whether each passenger is admissible or not. Then, you would have to secure a place in the trains where people deemed not admissible would be detained until the arrival in London (or Ashford for that matter), where they would be supervised until being boarded, against their will, in the next France-bound train - and vice-versa.

Onboard passport control is a things of the past. It had its heyday when it was a mere formality of having a proper stamp on your passport. Now countries have terror databases, illegal immigrants databases, FRONTEX etc. It is not feasible anymore.


----------



## earthJoker

Suburbanist said:


> I guess we need to re-establish some point here: the _main_ reason for the security check procedures are related to immigration control. I know some people here see the fact of UK being not a part of Schengen area as a detail, but they have their reasons.


Just a reminder, Switzerland just joined Schengen recently and didn't had any of those regulations before. Schengen is not really the reason here



> I also don't think there is any feasible and optimal solution to immigration procedures in UK-continent routes:
> 
> - *control on departure (as now)* => only authorized passengers board the train, but it requires costly foreign presence on each other's stations and dedicated platforms.


This is really infeasible for many train stations, it's limiting the numbers of destinations for trains from the UK.


> - *control at the tunnel entrance, like ferries* (train stops, everyone get off at the entrance of Chunnel for procedures) => would facilitate routes beyond France, would require only British/France staff. However, it would be highly disruptive for short services and add 40-50 minutes to present journey times.


Infeasible to the extreme. Even suggesting a solution like this, is ridiculous.


> - *control at arrival, like airplanes* => foreign officers stationed away from country of origin wouldn't be needed, but sealed platforms would be required anyway. Forced deportation/repatriation through trains would be problematic.


This is possible, it works for air-planes. And also the UK would have to handle the mess they are creating themselves. I don't see how deportation/repatriation would be any different to air-traffic.


Suburbanist said:


> You would need UK Border Force agents on the trains, connected with Frontex and other UK online databases to decide whether each passenger is admissible or not. Then, you would have to secure a place in the trains where people deemed not admissible would be detained until the arrival in London (or Ashford for that matter), where they would be supervised until being boarded, against their will, in the next France-bound train - and vice-versa.
> 
> Onboard passport control is a things of the past. It had its heyday when it was a mere formality of having a proper stamp on your passport. Now countries have terror databases, illegal immigrants databases, FRONTEX etc. It is not feasible anymore.


Nonsense, onboard passport controls are daily business even with Schengen (They are just not systematic). We don't live in the stone age, communication from a running train with any data-base is no problem at all.

Also it is also daily business to hand over a person in a train to the authorities at the stations. This also happens when a person has no ticket and doesn't comply with the personal on the train (I witnessed that already once when I arrived in Hamburg).


----------



## Koen Acacia

Suburbanist said:


> I guess we need to re-establish some point here: the _main_ reason for the security check procedures are related to immigration control. I know some people here see the fact of UK being not a part of Schengen area as a detail, but they have their reasons.


Well - as has been said before: just check those passports on the train then, and kick anyone without a valid passport off the train in Lille or Calais or so.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Onboard passport control is a things of the past. It had its heyday when it was a mere formality of having a proper stamp on your passport. Now countries have terror databases, illegal immigrants databases, FRONTEX etc. It is not feasible anymore.


There was even a time one could travel all over Europe without a passport. Those were days. It is said that freedom requires eternal vigilance. It is obvious we've been sound asleep for the last decades.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> There was even a time one could travel all over Europe without a passport. Those were days. It is said that freedom requires eternal vigilance. It is obvious we've been sound asleep for the last decades.


In "those days" you didn't have either massive wannabe immigrants from underdeveloped countries or terrorists waiting to blowup our cities.


----------



## Stainless

Suburbanist said:


> You would need UK Border Force agents on the trains, connected with Frontex and other UK online databases to decide whether each passenger is admissible or not. Then, you would have to secure a place in the trains where people deemed not admissible would be detained until the arrival in London (or Ashford for that matter), where they would be supervised until being boarded, against their will, in the next France-bound train - and vice-versa.


Currently anything heading towards the UK (well the CTA to be precise) has to submit a passenger list before departure, so if any name pops up as questionable they can be met on arrival. This is why they check your passport when checking in to a flight, the airline gets fined if they send through someone who isn't allowed in. If whoever runs trains through the tunnel uses a few more conductors and just checks passports against a passenger list (pre booking would still be needed unfortunately) while people board. This could easily be done by only opening doors when a conductor is there and filling the train from one end to the other. It might not be the easiest solution but would allow the train to pick up passengers from any station.


----------



## sergiogiorgini

Do they really need a revolutionary new passport control system for the Netherlands, though?

I mean, Eurostar calls at Marne-la-Vallée - Chessy, the rather small connecting station located inside Disneyland Paris. It has two platforms. If they can manage the passport control there, surely Amsterdam and Rotterdam can manage it as well?


----------



## Suburbanist

rheintram said:


> So all of this was common practices some 15-20 years ago, in many parts of the European Union. Only the British seem to make a big deal out of it these days.


Immigration, terrorism and other threats were far less significant back them. And Britain has always been... an island. Pretty much more used to border controls than Germany, Italy, let alone the Benelux.


----------



## Belxos

rheintram said:


> The passport check is really not that big of a deal. I used to live in Austria close to the German border, in the pre-Schengen times. We had (and still have) regional trains that would go over the border to Lindau, which was a popular destination for the weekend or shopping. There you would leave the train, pass through a room, where they quickly checked your documents and that was all. And this wasn't even a big train station, it was merely a local one.


That doesn't solve the luggage problem: Eurostar scans all luggage (Eurotunnel regulations I believe). If you would allow passengers on-board without checking their luggage you would have to search the whole train at the border.

Off course, it is a whole unnecessary parade (there are a bazillion other ways to sabotage a train or the Eurotunnel), but regulations won't change overnight just because they don't make sense.


----------



## rheintram

Suburbanist said:


> And Britain has always been... an island. Pretty much more used to border controls than Germany, Italy, let alone the Benelux.


And where's the logic in that? Germany has/had thousands of border stations, whereas Britain has far less. Obviously the vast majority of people enters an island either by plane, by ship and in Britain's case by train. That means the number of places where people immigrate is naturally limited. Whereas a landbound country offers countless ways to enter.

I'm currently in a town right next to the Swiss border. This town alone has three border stations with Switzerland. So don't tell me that border controls are something that only the British are accustomed to.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Immigration, terrorism and other threats were far less significant back them.


Actually terrorisme was a bigger threat in the 70ies and 80ies than it is now. Remember the IRA?


----------



## Slagathor

Suburbanist said:


> Immigration, terrorism and other threats were far less significant back them.


Nonsense. Despite the media hype of Islamist terrorism, terrorism in Europe today is far less significant than it was an odd 30-40 years ago. The IRA, the Brigate Rosse, the ETA... Our homegrown terrorism was very violent and influential then. Much more so than the Islamic version today. Even the Netherlands got hit by terrorism sprung from it's old colonies.


----------



## Maarten Otto

To remain at the subject, what train type do you think would fit the bill most? Velaro, AGV or an upgraded Hitachi class 395?


----------



## K_

Maarten Otto said:


> To remain at the subject, what train type do you think would fit the bill most? Velaro, AGV or an upgraded Hitachi class 395?


Velaro has a head start here. The sets currently being delivered to DB could be used for such a service. 

Whoever starts such a service will have to take a (calculated) risk. That is easier for DB, which could use the trainsets elselwhere if the service fails to attract enough passengers.


----------



## Glodenox

As I posted in the Fyra topic: the new railway section that's being laid out between Brussels and Mechelen (so towards Antwerp) will allow for speeds up to 200km/h, but it'll have to slow down to like 140km/h halfway due to the switching points towards Brussels Airport and later on when they leave the median of the E19. So all in all they'll hardly be riding 200km/h, but at least it'll be possible.

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## MarcVD

Glodenox said:


> As I posted in the Fyra topic: the new railway section that's being laid out between Brussels and Mechelen (so towards Antwerp) will allow for speeds up to 200km/h, but it'll have to slow down to like 140km/h halfway due to the switching points towards Brussels Airport and later on when they leave the median of the E19. So all in all they'll hardly be riding 200km/h, but at least it'll be possible.
> 
> Greetings,
> Glodenox


This is because this line is not built as a high-speed line but mainly as an
additional line for the domestic network whose main role will be to serve
the airport and relieve the extreme traffic congestion that exists in this
area. The focal point of attention is capacity, not speed, which only
comes as a by-product.


----------



## rheintram

As for trainsets, currently ICE3 fulfills all the legal and technical requirements for all the countries along the route.


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

*Good news.* 



> *Eurostar set to buy new trains*
> 
> July 22, 2010
> 
> *EUROSTAR is in talks with German manufacturer Siemens to renew its fleet of cross-Channel trains from 2012, according to reports.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Le Figaro says the train operator wants to replace some of its ageing trains, which were built by French firm Alstom and have been in service since the route launched 16 years ago.
> 
> The group will shortly put the project out to tender, but is understood to have shown a keen interest in Siemens.
> 
> Alstom's German rival has sold its high-speed Velaro trains to Spain, China and Russia so far.
> 
> Eurostar has 28 trains operating on the routes to Paris, Brussels, Avignon and the Alps from London. It is not yet clear how many of these are to be replaced.
> 
> A source familiar with the project told Le Figaro that the Siemens trains were "more luxurious" and would allow Eurostar to offer a better service, especially to business class passengers.
> 
> In an interview with The Connexion last November, Eurostar France head of marketing Lionel Benbassat said: "The first renovated train will come into service in 2012 and the project will be completed by 2016."
> 
> The improvement works will also prepare the rail operator for the opening up of the cross-Channel line to competition.
> 
> Deutsche Bahn is reported to be interested in running services to London from the continent in time for the 2012 Olympics.
> 
> French public services giant Veolia is also in the running, in a joint venture with Italian train operator Trenitalia.



*[URL="http://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/events/industry/mobility/2010-04-velaro-d/whitepaper_siemens_velaro_projekte_en.pdf"]Siemens Velaro - On the rails worldwide*[/URL] *(PDF)*

*Velaro D*



























Source


----------



## Koen Acacia

[British accent]Not bad, not bad at all![/British accent]

I wonder what their passenger numbers for 2010 are going to look like, with that ash cloud it must have been a killer year for them.


----------



## Suburbanist

Koen Acacia said:


> [British accent]Not bad, not bad at all![/British accent]
> 
> I wonder what their passenger numbers for 2010 are going to look like, with that ash cloud it must have been a killer year for them.


On the flop side, their trains suffered during winter with a 5-days cancellation and there was that accident in Brussels with a local train that forced the cancellation of many Brussels services for 2 or 3 weeks.


----------



## K_

Koen Acacia said:


> I wonder what their passenger numbers for 2010 are going to look like, with that ash cloud it must have been a killer year for them.


Eurostar just released their numbers for the first half of 2010. Passenger numbers are up 6%, revenue 18%...


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> Eurostar just released their numbers for the first half of 2010. Passenger numbers are up 6%, revenue 18%...


Those are good news for the heavily indebted corporation. Hope they increase fares and thus revenue in the second half of 2010 too.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Those are good news for the heavily indebted corporation. Hope they increase fares and thus revenue in the second half of 2010 too.


Eurostar has only been a corporation since the beginning of this year. Until that it was just a joint venture between SNCF, NMBS and EUKL. The Eurostar corporation doesn't have a lot of assets though, as they don't own the trains. So I asume they wouldn't be heavily indebted either. Maybe you're a bit confused with Eurotunnel?


----------



## hkskyline

Suburbanist said:


> Those are good news for the heavily indebted corporation. Hope they increase fares and thus revenue in the second half of 2010 too.


Here's the thread : 

Saving Eurotunnel
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=222122


----------



## K_

hkskyline said:


> Here's the thread :
> 
> Saving Eurotunnel
> http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=222122


Eurostar is not Eurotunnel. Eurostar is just one of the customers of Eurotunnel...


----------



## hkskyline

K_ said:


> Eurostar is not Eurotunnel. Eurostar is just one of the customers of Eurotunnel...


I was referring the reader to the Eurotunnel thread for more info on that heavily-indebted corporation. There was some confusion over Eurotunnel and Eurostar.


----------



## RichW1

Not a chance to the Thread question - love trains but at 4 hours even with the hassles of flying it's much quicker - 40 mins and even with allowing and hour and a half at each end being ridiculous 3hrs 40 mins - so can't see 4 hours being a winner. The straight line distance between the 2 cities isn't much further than it is to Sheffield and on this route we might be bowing to planes straight line superiority over water. Can't see it taking off personally!


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> However why should the arrangements that work at other Schengen borders not work at the UK border?


Because UK is not part of Schengen and is a destination-of-choice of a disproportional share of potential illegal immigrants. They are in the middle of an immigration crisis.

Seriously, I just think like this: TODAY, illegals are already using or trying to use deceptive and life-threatening tactics like hiding under trucks, near moving parts, they used to jump on freight trains (with occasional deaths) near Calais, they sometimes make desperate attempts to cross the Channel by home-made boats (that France doesn't deport those people is another story).

I just imagine if, like many suggest, British border controls existed only onboard, as many suggest. First, we'd need technology to connect the officers onboard with real-time notepads, as they are all now integrated with Frontex sharing real time info on terrorists, people who are banned from crossing into UK and/or EU for previous overstaying/denial of visa/residence permit, deportees and so on. But that is still manageable, though expensive.

Now think how would immigration officers handle these people onboard, some of them having made expensive (in terms of their little income) overland journeys from Asia, from instance, now a few minutes from "promise land" and their ethnic communities in UK where they expect to fit in and feed their children, and they are told they will be arrested and denied entry onboard.

It seems a very, very awkward, disruptive and potentially dangerous situation to me, don't you think? What if they start vandalizing the train or fighting? What if they make desperate attempts like trying to open a door or broke a window? Will each Eurostar have its own "pre-deporation holding area" like international airports? It can become an ugly situation.

There are two possible solutions, consider UK will NOT join Schengen (they have many other reasons, providing an easier train service is not enough of an incentive)

(1) install post-arrival checks. British officers would no longer be required at departure points for UK-bound trains. Each country would staff it's own stations with customs officers only, like if stations were airports.

(2) they decide to turn a blind-eye and make Eurostar (or whatever transchannel service) a sort-of uncontrolled route, like if it were a domestic route in Britain (an illegal immigrant can easily use a train from London to Manchester without being caught, as there are no permanent staff to check identities of those using domestic trains).


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Because UK is not part of Schengen and is a destination-of-choice of a disproportional share of potential illegal immigrants. They are in the middle of an immigration crisis.


I'll refrase: Why should arrangements that worked perfectly at other borders before the Schengen treaty not work at the UK border. Why would what works at ferries not work at the UK border? After all there are other train services that cross UK borders, with far less hassle.



> (1) install post-arrival checks. British officers would no longer be required at departure points for UK-bound trains. Each country would staff it's own stations with customs officers only, like if stations were airports.


That's the best option.


----------



## Stainless

K_ said:


> I'll refrase: Why should arrangements that worked perfectly at other borders before the Schengen treaty not work at the UK border. Why would what works at ferries not work at the UK border? After all there are other train services that cross UK borders, with far less hassle.
> 
> 
> That's the best option.


I will assume you meant EU borders as the only other train to cross UK borders is the Enterprise into Ireland, which is in a customs union with the UK. Other train services I have used into and out of the EU stop at the border so anyone denied entry is easily removed, which often takes a while. Doing that with the channel tunnel would stop it being a 'high speed' service.


----------



## earthJoker

Stainless said:


> I will assume you meant EU borders as the only other train to cross UK borders is the Enterprise into Ireland, which is in a customs union with the UK. Other train services I have used into and out of the EU stop at the border so anyone denied entry is easily removed, which often takes a while. Doing that with the channel tunnel would stop it being a 'high speed' service.


I traveled many times into and out-of the EU on a train without stopping.


----------



## Stainless

earthJoker said:


> I traveled many times into and out-of the EU on a train without stopping.


Obviously with Switzerland it is a bit different, especially as you are now in the Schengen area and before you were surrounded by it. It is the external borders to the east they often stop the train at. Although most land borders offer more attractive illegal crossing points than a sea crossing.


----------



## earthJoker

But UK/France isn't an an external border either, it's exactly the same as Switzerland was before it joined Schengen.


----------



## DarkLoki

If you ask me some people are overly afraid of illegal immigrants. How would immigrants get to Amsterdam in the first place, they can not just enter Europe at will (far from it). I think it is reasonable that you have to show your passport when you enter the UK and I do not see you need more to stop an immigrant. Why don't they just build a sort of train terminal in Londen where they receive trains from the continent.


----------



## Suburbanist

DarkLoki said:


> If you ask me some people are overly afraid of illegal immigrants. How would immigrants get to Amsterdam in the first place, they can not just enter Europe at will (far from it). I think it is reasonable that you have to show your passport when you enter the UK and I do not see you need more to stop an immigrant. Why don't they just build a sort of train terminal in Londen where they receive trains from the continent.


They already have one: St. Pancras International. They had other before: Waterloo International. You don't need only to show your passport, you need also (if you are from outside EU) to undergo an interview with British Border Protection officers.

The real problem is not in UK, but in the continent: passengers coming from UK would have to be scanned/interviewed by the immigration/customs officers in the country they are arriving. So they'd have to set up border inspection in every station where such UK-out or inbound services are calling, or establish a permanent control passport zone in Calais or elsewhere in France where these trains would be stopped.

A compromise solution would involve scanning UK-bound passengers and St. Pancras and having French customs' officers scanning continental-bound passengers at St. Pancras. But that would create an asymmetry.


----------



## ArthurK

^^ Euhmmm... Continent-bound passengers are checked by French customs at St. Pancras already. Also passengers to Brussels are checked by French gendarmerie at St. Pancras, even if their train doesn't stop in France.


----------



## JoFMO

The real problem is, that the British don't want people to travel through the Channal without being 'properly' checked on the continent. 

It would be a breakthrough if we could agree that all border patrols are jointly done in St Pancras, Ebbsfleet and Ashford for people boarding or aligning.


----------



## Suburbanist

ArthurK said:


> ^^ Euhmmm... Continent-bound passengers are checked by French customs at St. Pancras already. Also passengers to Brussels are checked by French gendarmerie at St. Pancras, even if their train doesn't stop in France.


To have the French check Belgium-bound passengers is normal. It is like a passenger flying Boston - Lisboa - Roma. The Portuguese will "deplane" and grant entry to the non-Schengen arrival and the Lisboa - Roma journey will be a domestic one.

The "catch" is that the plane (and passenger) first stops in Portuguese soil.


----------



## earthJoker

Yeah, but a solution would be to extend Schengen to the International part of the St.Pancras station. It would be de jure Schengen soil.


----------



## K_

earthJoker said:


> Yeah, but a solution would be to extend Schengen to the International part of the St.Pancras station. It would be de jure Schengen soil.


Indeed. A bit like the way the French sections of Basel and Geneva operated before Switzerland joined Schengen.


----------



## Gadiri

*Moscow-Nice new train service*



> *Un train de luxe relie désormais Moscou à Nice​*
> Par FX M François Xavier Moran
> 
> 27/09/2010
> 
> *Samedi soir en gare de Nice, une centaine de Russes embarqués jeudi à Moscou ont été accueillis par le maire Christian Estrosi.
> Ce dimanche soir, des Français sont partis vers la Russie pour un périple de 3318 kilomètres. *
> 
> 
> Samedi soir en gare de Nice, une centaine de Russes embarqués jeudi à Moscou ont été accueillis par le maire Christian Estrosi. ​
> La première liaison ferroviaire commerciale directe entre la capitale russe et la Côte d'Azur a été inaugurée samedi. Ils sont arrivés avec une bonne demi-heure de retard. Une broutille à leurs yeux, après *53 heures *passées à bord du train. Samedi soir en gare de Nice, une centaine de Russes embarqués jeudi à Moscou ont été accueillis en héros avec fanfare, petits-fours et allocutions officielles. Une réception à la hauteur de l'événement puisque ces voyageurs ont inauguré la liaison directe hebdomadaire entre Moscou et Nice. Le convoi de douze voitures traverse pas moins de *cinq pays (Biélorussie, Pologne, République tchèque, Autriche et Italie*), suivant un périple de 3318 kilomètres.
> 
> En classe luxe, deux passagers par compartiment disposent d'un lit chacun, d'un cabinet de toilette et d'un téléviseur à écran plat. Sans compter un bar dans chaque voiture, où il ne manque guère que le Wi-Fi. En *seconde* et en *première*, où les tarifs sont plus accessibles (respectivement* 306 € *et *459 € l'aller *contre *1050 € en classe luxe*), les passagers parviennent à destination frais et dispos. «Ce voyage a été extraordinaire, témoigne Frédéric Pardé, chargé de mission à la SNCF, venu accompagner ces pionniers. En avion, on se déplace d'un point à un autre, là, on voyage. On prend le temps de lire, de discuter au wagon-restaurant. À l'arrivée, on est presque triste de descendre du train!»
> 
> 
> 29 arrêts sur la ligne
> 
> Exceptionnelle par sa durée et son ambiance, cette liaison l'est aussi sur le plan technique. À chaque pays traversé la locomotive change. À la frontière entre la Biélorussie et la Pologne, ce sont même les roues et l'attelage qu'il faut modifier, en raison des différences d'écartement des essieux, soit deux heures d'attente… Tout au long du trajet, des arrêts commerciaux sont prévus, 29 au total, pour descendre à *Varsovie, Vienne, Innsbruck ou Menton*. Le train quitte Moscou chaque jeudi, avant d'effectuer, le dimanche, le trajet en sens inverse. Ce dimanche soir, les premiers Français se sont offert cette traversée de l'Europe. Ils arriveront mardi à bon port à 23 heures locales.
> 
> L'idée de cette ligne a été lancée il y a deux ans par le président des chemins de fer russes, Vladimir Yakounine. Pour les Russes, cette desserte s'inscrit dans un plan plus large visant à renforcer leurs lignes continentales. La liaison Paris-Moscou, qui se limite aujourd'hui à une voiture tous les deux jours, pourrait redevenir une ligne à part entière. La SNCF, sous-traitante sur la portion Vintimille-Nice du trajet, observe prudemment ces débuts. «On les a accompagnés sans investissement majeur, précise Frédéric Pardé. Le train de nuit, nous ne le pratiquons plus beaucoup. Le test est intéressant.» Car si les Russes sont, eux, habitués aux trajets longue distance, rien ne dit que les Français vont se remettre aux joies du train couchette pour s'offrir un Noël sur la place Rouge…


http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-fr...ain-de-luxe-relie-desormais-moscou-a-nice.php

Google translation 



> _A luxury train now connects Moscow to Nice_​
> 
> By FX M Moran Francis Xavier
> 27/09/2010 |
> 
> 
> *The first commercial direct rail link between the Russian capital and Côte d'Azur was inaugurated on Saturday. They arrived with half an hour late. A trifle to them after 53 hours spent on the train. Saturday night in Nice station, hundreds of Russians on board Thursday at Moscow were greeted as heroes with fanfare, petit fours and official speeches. A reception at the height of the event as these travelers have opened weekly direct link between Moscow and Nice. The convoy of twelve cars through no fewer than five countries (Belarus, Poland, Czech Republic, Austria and Italy), following a journey of 3318 km.*
> 
> In class luxury, two passengers per compartment each have a bed, a bathroom and a flat screen TV. Besides a bar in each car, where he seldom fails than Wi-Fi In the *second and first*, where prices are more accessible (respectively € *306 € and 459 € 1050 going against the class luxury*), the passengers reach their destination refreshed. "This trip has been extraordinary testament Pardé Frederick, project manager at the station, come support these pioneers. By plane, it moves from one point to another, then we travel. We take the time to read, discuss in the dining car. Upon arrival, it is almost sad to leave the train! "
> 
> 
> *29 stops on the line*
> 
> Exceptional in its duration and atmosphere, this route is also technically. In each country crossed the locomotive changes. At the border between Belarus and Poland, they are even wheels and hitch needs to be changed, because of differences in axle spacing, two hours waiting ... Throughout the route, stops malls are planned, *29 in total, falling to Warsaw, Vienna, Innsbruck or Menton.* *The train leaves Moscow every Thursday to perform on Sunday, the journey in reverse. This Sunday evening, the first French have offered this trip to Europe. They will arrive safely on Tuesday at 23 am local time.*
> 
> The idea of this line was launched two years ago by the president of Russian Railways, Vladimir Yakunin. *For Russians, this route is part of a broader plan to strengthen their continental lines. The Paris-Moscow, which is now limited to one car every two days, could again become a fully fledged online*. SNCF, a subcontractor on the portion of Ventimiglia-Nice route, observe carefully these beginnings. "We went along without major investment," says Frederick Pardé. The overnight train, we do not practice much. The test is interesting. "For if the Russians are themselves accustomed to long distance trips, nothing says that the French will get back to the joys of the sleeper train to afford a Christmas in Red Square ...


----------



## Gadiri

*In French*


----------



## Gadiri

*In Russian*








> Россия и Франция возобновили железнодорожное сообщение впервые за почти сто лет. В субботу вечером в Ниццу прибудет поезд из Москвы. Напомним, поезда из России в страны Средиземноморья прекратили ходить после революции 1917 года. Поэтому этот запуск называют историческим.
> Комментирует:
> Игорь Якушев, водитель поезда


----------



## Gadiri

*Severals different locos are used *

*Poland *








> The film presents train from Moscow to Nice. First chapter has been recorded on railway station in Chybie (Poland) and second chapter has been recorded near station in Petrovice u Karvine after going trough polish-czech border by train.


*Wien *






*Nice *


----------



## Gadiri

*Other loco*


----------



## Gadiri

How are they doing for coaches between IUC and russian gauge ?


----------



## thun

Like they do it between Spain and France, I suppose: lifting the whole body and replacing the bogies.


----------



## Coccodrillo

^^ About the 30 minutes delay, there are heavy works on the short french section, where one of the two tracks is closed for several kilometres.



Suburbanist said:


> Who is going to pay more than € 400 to travel 54h? Let alone € 1000? With the latter, you can buy business class air tickets :nuts:
> 
> In a nutshell: an expensive toys the Russian state company is using to promote itself in Europe. Don't think it will last, it is not adequate to remain 54h in a closed compartment.
> 
> It failed badly arriving 30min late on its first journey. A fiasco in terms of any train journey. Let's see how it goes on.
> 
> Meanwhile, I hope European governments keep an eye on the car's safety records, maintenance and so.


There are various variable gauge systems: Talgo, CAF, the SUW2000, MOB, a japanese one...some of them are already used between russian and standard gauge networks. The problem is their cost, say 50.000 € for a freight wagon and the same for a pair of variable gauge bogies. That's why the trains changing between 1435 and 1524 mm are only few experimental services, and why there are absolutely no freight trains doing that between 1668 and 1435 except a few Talgo's prototypes. All other freight trains tranship the goods or change bogies.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I looked at the Nice-Moscow schedule. For sake, it takes 11h to travel from Ventemiglia to Brennero - and it doesn't even stop at Milano Centrale -. Then, almost 8 hours from Innsbruck-Wien. Too slow IMO.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Maybe it could be accelerated a little, but nobody use it only to go from A to B. It's more a short cruise on rails instead of sea.


----------



## trainrover

Might this news mean that Moscovites'll finally boot down their collective closet door?!?


----------



## Gadiri

*In english *








> New train route, longest in Europe - Moscow to Nice via Warsaw and Vienna. Travels through 7 countries.


----------



## Koen Acacia

When I first saw this thread I thought it was about a "nice new train service", somewhere around Moscow or so. 


MarcVD said:


> Why then are all trans-siberian trains, that take even longer, packed to death
> each summer ? And why do you have to reserve months in advance, and pay
> $5000, to cross Siberia on board the Golden Eagle Express ? There are
> countless other examples of the same thing. *People board those trains the
> same way they embark for a cruise. *Same for all long-distance Amtrak trains,
> which are also often running full, even in seated class.


Yup, it's basically a land cruise. Less efficient, but more pleasant. Also sounds like a rather romantic way to start off a vacation near the Med. Clever idea.


----------



## ABC LV

Luli Pop said:


> why don't they use variable gauge rolling stock such as Talgo?


To be fair Talgo is "crap". Whole system is very expensive and can only be used with Talgo manufactured trains. 
Polish SUW 2000 in that is case is better, SUW2000 boogies can be installed on any trains but is still too expensive for mass use in Eastern Europe, one boogie costs more than 50,000 USD.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I looked at the Nice-Moscow schedule. For sake, it takes 11h to travel from Ventemiglia to Brennero - and it doesn't even stop at Milano Centrale -. Then, almost 8 hours from Innsbruck-Wien. Too slow IMO.


When are you finally going to understand that speed isn't everything ?
People wanting to go from Moscow to Nice in the shortest time are not
going to board that train anyway. There are daily flights on the same route.
People on board this train are there to enjoy it, not to endure it, so why
speed up ? There are probably 30 minutes stops here and there to allow
people to strech their legs a bit, may be buy something at a station shop.
And also may be a speed voluntarily limited at night to preserve sleep
comfort. There was a time (don't know if it is still the case) night trains in
Germany were voluntarily limited to 120 km/h, even if track and rolling stock
allowed faster speeds, in order to avoid shaking asleep passengers out of
their beds...


----------



## K_

ABC LV said:


> To be fair Talgo is "crap". Whole system is very expensive and can only be used with Talgo manufactured trains.
> Polish SUW 2000 in that is case is better, SUW2000 boogies can be installed on any trains but is still too expensive for mass use in Eastern Europe, one boogie costs more than 50,000 USD.


That's not a lot. A modern railway carriage will cost 2 million and over. so two gauge changing bogies would just add about 5% to the cost.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> When are you finally going to understand that speed isn't everything ?


And I could imagine that you'd want to maximize the chance to enjoy the scenery. The current schedule has the train pass through Austria by daylight. I wouldn't be surprised if that was on purpose...


----------



## Gadiri

ABC LV said:


> To be fair Talgo is "crap". Whole system is very expensive and can only be used with Talgo manufactured trains.
> Polish SUW 2000 in that is case is better, SUW2000 boogies can be installed on any trains but is still too expensive for mass use in Eastern Europe, one boogie costs more than 50,000 USD.


There this also CAF system.

All are presented on this thread : Automatic and manual changing gauge .

It should be better to talk about other possibilty on it, for more visibility.


----------



## Suburbanist

MarcVD said:


> When are you finally going to understand that speed isn't everything ?
> People wanting to go from Moscow to Nice in the shortest time are not
> going to board that train anyway. There are daily flights on the same route.
> People on board this train are there to enjoy it, not to endure it, so why
> speed up ? There are probably 30 minutes stops here and there to allow
> people to strech their legs a bit, may be buy something at a station shop.
> And also may be a speed voluntarily limited at night to preserve sleep
> comfort. There was a time (don't know if it is still the case) night trains in
> Germany were voluntarily limited to 120 km/h, even if track and rolling stock
> allowed faster speeds, in order to avoid shaking asleep passengers out of
> their beds...


ROFL, you are essentially mimicking those filthy buses I sometimes see in Italy and France coming from Eastern Europe, taking 40, 50, 60h trips from Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova and other countries to Italy, France and even Spain. It is unhealthy to keep passengers so long in the same carriages without throughout cleaning. No way a carriage being used consistently for 40h can remain clean as if it were a daily service in which the cleaning companies took care of it.

I'd favor some studies about how cleaning standards are kept in those carriages (and on such long-distance buses, for that matter). EU should impose harsh regulations on how clean buses, train carriages and aircraft cabins must be, and with each frequency they should be emptied and cleaned top-to-bottom and so.

Something says that the cleaning standards of such long-distance trains are not up to par with an ICE or an Eurostar or even a Frecciarossa.

I generally don't like the idea of vintage trains using normal railroads, but as far as they are paying for their paths and not using public subsidies on the countries they cross, that is fine.

In any case, I bet a better planned train could take that trip at most in 30 hours if routed through Germany and Switzerland. 

Finally, the "reduce speed to increase comfort" argument doesn't hold. Sleeping in tilting trains would be, theoretically, less comfortable if the ride were taken at a lower-than-maximum speed. Updated railways have smooth switches and concrete bases, modern rolling stock have state-of-the-art suspension technology more than able to offset any "bump" generated from updated tracks (not talking about high-speed tracks which have black-outs during nighttime).

Personally, I'd never ride a night train. I don't like trains usually, unless high-speed, and night trains - and the idea of sharing compartments with strangers - are dreadful. But let them run in any case. A train like this is more like horse riding...


----------



## Coccodrillo

K_ said:


> That's not a lot. A modern railway carriage will cost 2 million and over. so two gauge changing bogies would just add about 5% to the cost.


The problem is not for passenger carriages but for freight wagons that usually cost around 50.000-100.000 (EUR or USD doesn't matter).


----------



## AlexisMD

^^
you don't want to understand that going by train somewhere is a traveling pleasure too 
all those people can afford to fly even in business class here and there but they _enjoy_ trains 
And it has nothing to do with speed. They don't want simply to go from a to b. They like the  process and all related to this (communication, new friends and acquaintances, drinking in restaurant car finally ) 
And comparing buses and trains is not the most smart thing to do


----------



## Augusto

MarcVD said:


> At the border between ex-URSS and neighbouring countries, such installations
> still exist and function several times per day, like for example at Brest-Litovsk
> on the line from Warsaw to Moscow. This is probably where this new train
> Nice-Moscow has its bogies changed.


Those installations still exist and no doubt that new ones will appear in the future. 
AFAIK the newest is the one that has been opened by the Iranian Railways in Zahedan, where the very new Bam-Zahedan railway (UIC gauge) meet the "indian gauge" Zahedan-Pakistan border railway. 
This should allow direct trains between Calcuta and London. But the Pakistan needs to drastically upgrade the Taftan (Iranian border)-Quetta line first..


----------



## thun

Suburbanist said:


> ROFL, you are essentially mimicking those filthy buses I sometimes see in Italy and France coming from Eastern Europe, taking 40, 50, 60h trips from Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova and other countries to Italy, France and even Spain. It is unhealthy to keep passengers so long in the same carriages without throughout cleaning. No way a carriage being used consistently for 40h can remain clean as if it were a daily service in which the cleaning companies took care of it.
> I'd favor some studies about how cleaning standards are kept in those carriages (and on such long-distance buses, for that matter). EU should impose harsh regulations on how clean buses, train carriages and aircraft cabins must be, and with each frequency they should be emptied and cleaned top-to-bottom and so.


Where the heck does that argument come from? I'd rather prefer start improving hygiene standards on motorway service stations. Car drivers are way more disgusting than train riders. :cheers:
Btw., your beloved free markets would solve the problem on its own - if the standard wouldn't be acceptable, no-one would use the services of that company. Why don't you believe in them on this matter?



> I generally don't like the idea of vintage trains using normal railroads, but as far as they are paying for their paths and not using public subsidies on the countries they cross, that is fine.


Who talked about heritage trains?



> In any case, I bet a better planned train could take that trip at most in 30 hours if routed through Germany and Switzerland.


But you can read, can't you? The fastest route isn't the idea of that train. A cruise ship travelling from Barcelona to Athens doesn't a direct trip either. 



> Finally, the "reduce speed to increase comfort" argument doesn't hold. Sleeping in tilting trains would be, theoretically, less comfortable if the ride were taken at a lower-than-maximum speed. Updated railways have smooth switches and concrete bases, modern rolling stock have state-of-the-art suspension technology more than able to offset any "bump" generated from updated tracks (not talking about high-speed tracks which have black-outs during nighttime).


Problem: It's not a tilting train. And most of the tracks on that route probably don't fit the most modern standard. And again - it's a cruise. Comfort is more important than speed on that service.



> Personally, I'd never ride a night train. I don't like trains usually, unless high-speed, and night trains - and the idea of sharing compartments with strangers - are dreadful. But let them run in any case. A train like this is more like horse riding...


Why am i not surprised? :nuts::lol:


Your concept of how railways should operate does apply on that train even less than is applies on normal services. Ironically, it might still work just fine.


----------



## Peloso

What the hell, Suburbanist, you have a pretty warped idea of progress... speed up, speed up... what for? We should loosen up a lot instead.


----------



## Suburbanist

Peloso said:


> What the hell, Suburbanist, you have a pretty warped idea of progress... speed up, speed up... what for? We should loosen up a lot instead.


The faster, the bigger, the brighter - the better. Time is money and speed is modernity :cheers:


----------



## MarcVD

Augusto said:


> AFAIK the newest is the one that has been opened by the Iranian Railways in Zahedan, where the very new Bam-Zahedan railway (UIC gauge) meet the "indian gauge" Zahedan-Pakistan border railway.
> This should allow direct trains between Calcuta and London. But the Pakistan needs to drastically upgrade the Taftan (Iranian border)-Quetta line first..


I know about that place, I monitor the iranian railways web site about once a
month to see if/when passenger trains to Zahedan will appear. Last time I
checked, there was still nothing advertised further than Bam. I want to go
to India all the way by train...

On the other hand, I'm not sure that there is a real bogie changing facility
over there. I know it's where UIC and indian track gauge meet (for the first time!) but it's difficult to say whether it's a full bogie changing plant or a 
simple trans-shipment installation. Google Earth on that part of the world
hasn't been updated since years and list time I checked it still showed the
site under construction. Pakistani railways having announced its intention to
rebuild the Zahedan-Taftan-Quetta line to standard gauge, it might very
well be that Iranians did not invest in a full facility if it will be only temporary.
As soon as paggenger trains operate there and if security conditions allow it,
I'll be there and bring back some pictures...


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> ROFL, you are essentially mimicking those filthy buses I sometimes see in Italy and France coming from Eastern Europe, taking 40, 50, 60h trips from Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova and other countries to Italy, France and even Spain.


Given the price, I doubt very much that this train will be filthy in any way.
If it is kept like the trains on the trans-siberian route, with one provodnista
per carriage, then there is no reason to worry about. But you have never 
boarded such a train, have you ?



Suburbanist said:


> It is unhealthy to keep passengers so long in the same carriages without throughout cleaning. No way a carriage being used consistently for 40h can remain clean as if it were a daily service in which the cleaning companies took care of it.
> 
> I'd favor some studies about how cleaning standards are kept in those carriages (and on such long-distance buses, for that matter). EU should impose harsh regulations on how clean buses, train carriages and aircraft cabins must be, and with each frequency they should be emptied and cleaned top-to-bottom and so.


Why is it that your faith in free market suddently disappears for subjects like
this ? You don't believe in regulation, do you ? Well, let the free market take
care of that too ! If it does not meet basic cleanliness standards, it will lose
its customers...



Suburbanist said:


> Something says that the cleaning standards of such long-distance trains are not up to par with an ICE or an Eurostar or even a Frecciarossa.


How do you know, you never saw it for yourself... I have, and didn't see
any noticeable difference between that and the passenger cabin of a plane
used on short haul flights.



Suburbanist said:


> In any case, I bet a better planned train could take that trip at most in 30 hours if routed through Germany and Switzerland.


30 hours seem a bit short. May be 48 hours instead of 56. But what would
be the point ? I repeat : people boarding this train are NOT interested by
speed !



Suburbanist said:


> Finally, the "reduce speed to increase comfort" argument doesn't hold. Sleeping in tilting trains would be, theoretically, less comfortable if the ride were taken at a lower-than-maximum speed. Updated railways have smooth switches and concrete bases, modern rolling stock have state-of-the-art suspension technology more than able to offset any "bump" generated from updated tracks (not talking about high-speed tracks which have black-outs during nighttime).


Conventional coaches with tilting mechanism do not exist yet. Tilt trains
only exist in the form of MU sets or talgo rakes. This train isn't anything
like that.

And this train crosses countries where most of the track is still very 
conventional : jointed rails on wooden sleepers. I still remember my trip to
Iran, you can really "feel" the borders, when track maintenance standards
change : down between Austria and Hungary, down again when entering 
Romania, even further when entering Turkey, and then noticeably up when
entering Iran... But on such tracks, keeping a limited speed definitely 
increases comfort.



Suburbanist said:


> Personally, I'd never ride a night train. I don't like trains usually, unless high-speed, and night trains - and the idea of sharing compartments with strangers - are dreadful. But let them run in any case. A train like this is more like horse riding.


That is the most useless thing you ever wrote here. Every one of us already
understood that, you know !


----------



## Gadiri

> Eurostar *selected the Velaro-D*, the latest version of Germany’s ICE high-speed train family, over *Alstom’s AGV*, as its preferred option in June, but the deal became public only on Friday


What a punch for Alstom !


----------



## Rail_Serbia

Threads like this are for railfans, people who like friendships, landscapes, meeting with foreigners... 

Suburbanist wrote his opinion, and why to discus who is more clever... For example, I like trains and don`t want to have a car. I have driving licence only to put something more in CV. Why to use bad words for different people?

I used train Belgrade-Moscow-Yekaterinburg-Belgrade in 2008, and that was the best travel in my life. I like Russian railways and Russian people. I just start to learn Russian language in those trains, surrounded with people who don`t speak English, and never feel like a stranger. Long distance trains are very popular in Russia. One girl in Yekaterinburg told me "When all train tickets are sold, I don`t want to travel. I don`t understand that someone can don`t like trains" .


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ This is pretty much the issue with these threads. People associate cars with a lifestyle who'd be inherently bad and negative and question whether those who are not exactly "fans" of rail should participate - in a forum that is not a railfan forum only like SSC -.

Calling those who dare to be train critics or skeptics (like me) "a troll" or something alike is just random online display of rudeness.

There is nothing wrong being a person interested in rail, but there should be nothing wrong being someone who is interested in car-centered lifestyle.


----------



## Svartmetall

^^ It's not that, it's that we just get a little tired of your constant anti-PT/density/urbanity rhetoric. We don't pollute the Highways and Autobahn section with our views on the whole so why should we put up with yours in oh so many threads?


----------



## thun

Exactly. Nothing wrong about criticism, but if every thrad in the section is spammed with the same stuff, it's trolling somehow. 

"People associate cars with a lifestyle who'd be inherently bad and negative and question whether those who are not exactly "fans" of rail should participate - in a forum that is not a railfan forum only like SSC."
I'm afraid if we turn the sentence around, we'll end up with a perfect description of your behaviour here.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ This is pretty much the issue with these threads. People associate cars with a lifestyle who'd be inherently bad and negative and question whether those who are not exactly "fans" of rail should participate - in a forum that is not a railfan forum only like SSC -.


It's to you that car versus PT seems to be a lifestyle choice, not a choice of mode of transportation. Don't be surprised it doesn't go well with some people here.
You have been constantly using the argument car = individualist = capitalist = free market = good and public transport = collectivist = statist = bad. You should be aware that this argument can be turned around. Roads have always been collectivist, whereas railways actually originated in the heydays of free market capitalism... There you have it. The train is capitalist, and the car is communist. That's why I like trains.


----------



## K_

JeroenMostert said:


> ^^ Actually tgv-europe.com is willing to sell me a ticket Perpignan-Milano on the Salvador Dali elipsos hoteltrain for EUR 69. (Tuesday 5 Oct, as it only runs every other day)


Elipsos will sell you tickets from Perpignan to Italy or Milano, but not from Barcelona to Perpignan. That's their choice. They only want passengers that stay on the train overnight.

As to the rules regarding transportation of domestic passengers on international trains; that varies from service to service.
In most European countries open access passenger railways are only allowed to operate international trains. So they cannot pick up passengers within one country and set them down again in the same country (cabotage). A bit like with long distance buses.
But where international services are just cooperations between national railways companies there is no legal barrier to "cabotage". An example: The TGV Lyria from Zürich to Basel. This train can (and is) used for domestic trips. A lot of people board this in Zürich to go to Basel (and normal domestic fares and passes apply, reservastion is not needed), and this train also picks up passengers in Mulhouse and Strassbourgh for Paris.


----------



## void0

Some photos











































They have discount for senior people, older than 60 y.o., the price starts from 225e


----------



## thun

Regarding the route in Austria? It does go from Vienna via Kitzbühel to Innsbruck, right? Or do they take the route via Germany?


----------



## Gag Halfrunt

Sol said:


> Sururbanist is from the Netherlands. The Dutch (not all but a substantial part of them) don't like the free markets anymore...... Actually, they are against everything which is connected with foreign countries. In this perspective, I can understand why Suburbanist doesn't advocate a train from Moscow to Nice.


On the contrary, Suburbanist opposes all regulation of and subsidies for public transport as competition-distorting interference in the free market.


----------



## Suburbanist

Gag Halfrunt said:


> On the contrary, Suburbanist opposes all regulation of and subsidies for public transport as competition-distorting interference in the free market.


I have supported and defended in this forum that infra-structure should/could be built and maintainded by the government, directly or indirectly (tracks, runways, waterways and highways/roads), while the VECHICLE OPERATION and TRANSPORTATION of goods and people should be done by private enterprise only. 

I'm fiercly against government-operated train services, though I'm not against government-built and government-maintained tracks, stations and other infra-structure trains need to run over. But the moment a state or state-sponsored company sings a lease for a trainset, it overstep its boundaries.

For me it is clear as water, but many forumers don't get the idea of separating property, operation and scheduling of tracks from trains, while airplanes are separated from runways, cars and trucks are separated from highways, and barges/vessels are separated from ports/channels/waterways.

We have a reasonable free market on air transport and water transport, we should have one in rail.

Moreover, coordinated train schedules are my enemy #1, because they essentially oblige private parties to adhere to a central planning concerned with "managing and tweaking" the whole system, picking winners and losers, not providing infrastructure so private operators could thrive.

As for regulation, I amall in favor or safety regulations and those essential to guarantee minimum operating standards and consumer protection.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Moreover, coordinated train schedules are my enemy #1, because they essentially oblige private parties to adhere to a central planning concerned with "managing and tweaking" the whole system, picking winners and losers, not providing infrastructure so private operators could thrive.


This is what I don't get. You are basically in favor of using tax payer money to the benefit of more profit for private enterprise. En you call yourself pro free market? You seem to believe that the governments main purpose is to serve as a milking cow for rent seeking private companies. (And if you don't know what "rent seeking" is, you've got no business defending the free market).


----------



## Maxx☢Power

Sol said:


> Sururbanist is from the Netherlands. The Dutch (not all but a substantial part of them) don't like the free markets anymore...... Actually, they are against everything which is connected with foreign countries. In this perspective, I can understand why Suburbanist doesn't advocate a train from Moscow to Nice.


You're an idiot.



K_ said:


> This is what I don't get. You are basically in favor of using tax payer money to the benefit of more profit for private enterprise. En you call yourself pro free market? You seem to believe that the governments main purpose is to serve as a milking cow for rent seeking private companies. (And if you don't know what "rent seeking" is, you've got no business defending the free market).


You're assuming he favours a free market for ideological reasons. While I don't know his reasons, there are many of us who see the free market as a means to an end as opposed to an end goal in itself. If, all in all, a state-maintained rail infrastructure is more cost-effective than a disparate patchwork operated by private companies while free competition among transport companies operating _on_ the tracks yields the best service for the lowest price then that's how we get the most value for money. In this case, the role of the state is to provide an even ground (the tracks) for competitors to fight it out on. Rent-seeking or not.


----------



## Rail_Serbia

Please, the thread is *Moscow-Nice new train service*.

Make new thread and call it: *Is it necessary to subsidize public transport *

If there is moderator, he can replace some posts from this thread to new one. I have my opinion, but I don`t want to write it on this place.


----------



## LUCAFUSAR

K_ said:


> ...
> 
> Given that the train had to pass through Italy only being late by 30 minutes is actually quite an achievement.
> 
> ...


Who cares about this?


----------



## Suburbanist

LUCAFUSAR said:


> Who cares about this?


Well, most people prefer their trips to begin and end on time.


----------



## Timon91

Coccodrillo said:


> I don't know if it accept passengers from and to a city outside Russia.





K_ said:


> I suppose they would be. The Basel - Moscow train can be used to travel from Basel to Berlin, for example.





thun said:


> I'm pretty sure that that's allowed. Free markets, you know.


Just to get back to this: last summer I took the direct Amsterdam-Moscow train, which is also only one carriage, coupled with other carriages (just like the Basel-Moscow train). As far as I know these carriages can only be used for travel to or from Belarus/Russia. Same with the CNL/EN from Prague/Warsaw to Amsterdam. It's not allowed to board the train after Berlin. So you cannot use this train to get from e.g. Hannover to Amsterdam. All platform signs ("Zugzielanzeiger", I don't know the English word) show that it's not allowed to enter the train.


----------



## thun

^^
Yes, but as we said, that does not necessarily has to be because of EU regulations. especially for the intra-EU trains.
For night trains the more obvious explanation is that these only have sleeping compartments which can't be used for trips too short to use the bed (e.g. the Talgo trenhoteles to Milan and Zurich which don't have any seats to my knowledge) or where getting off after 4 or 5 hours would mean disturbing other passengers which want to sleep. Therefore, such trains typically feature one, two or more boarding stations and one, two or more destinations with sufficient time in between.


----------



## K_

Timon91 said:


> Just to get back to this: last summer I took the direct Amsterdam-Moscow train, which is also only one carriage, coupled with other carriages (just like the Basel-Moscow train). As far as I know these carriages can only be used for travel to or from Belarus/Russia.


About two years ago when I was booking Basel - Berlin both trains where suggested. However I see now that the Basel - Warsawa - Moskva train doesn't officially call at Berlin anymore. Which is a bit odd, since it gets combined with the train from Amsterdam, which does...


----------



## K_

Maxx☢Power;64719559 said:


> You're assuming he favours a free market for ideological reasons. While I don't know his reasons, there are many of us who see the free market as a means to an end as opposed to an end goal in itself. If, all in all, a state-maintained rail infrastructure is more cost-effective than a disparate patchwork operated by private companies while free competition among transport companies operating _on_ the tracks yields the best service for the lowest price then that's how we get the most value for money. In this case, the role of the state is to provide an even ground (the tracks) for competitors to fight it out on. Rent-seeking or not.


I'm not against free market. However when tax payer money is poured in to infrastructure the main concern of the government should not be providing maximum value to train operating companies. It should be providing maximum value to the tax payer.
In that case I think the state does have a role beyond simply leveling the field. I think there is nothing wrong with encouraging operating companies to provide a comprehensive schedules, and keep them from cherry picking only the most profitable services.
A line with a train ever half hour has more value to the public than a line where 5 companies all compete for the rush hour traffic, but leave the line underserved at other times.


----------



## x-type

of course it's an addition, but i would expect AGV, not new Velaro for Eurostar


----------



## AlexNL

Larmey said:


> What will happen with the current train sets? It's so hard to believe that they are pushing on upwards of 20 years of age?


Those trains will remain in service, these 10 new Velaro's are in addition to the trainsets already in use. Eurostar wants to expand their offerings but to be able to do so they need more trains.


----------



## thun

Actually, the video would have said what is going to happen to the old trains. 
They will be refurbished.

Direct connections to Austria (and possibly Switzerland) might only make sense as seasonal services, in particular for skiers (just like Eurostar already offered/offers to some French ressorts). They wouldn't compete with planes in the business traveller target group but rather with cars people would otherwise use to get there.


----------



## AlexNL

From what I've understood Geneva is on the radar as well. Geneva - London would be about 5 hours which matches the average time a plane takes when you include all the safety checks, getting around at the airports and getting to/from the airports.


----------



## MareCar

Can anyone elaborate on the rules of the Eurotunnel and why the Velaro does not meet them?


----------



## DiggerD21

Maybe because the Velaro is not a french production? :lol:


----------



## thun

Afaik, the Velaro already has all necessary certifications. Apparently it's really one more episode of classic French industry-government rope teams here.


----------



## JustinB

MareCar said:


> Can anyone elaborate on the rules of the Eurotunnel and why the Velaro does not meet them?


The Velaro D was specifically designed for international services. The older models do not meet the Tunnel rule of being able to split a train in the tunnel. One of the reasons the Eurostars are so long. 
From what I read, there was a review that recommended changing the rules to allow non-splittable trains to use the channel. Hopefully the rules will be changed.

I know one great feature of the Siemens train sets are the glass operator doors that allow a driver's eye view. Do TGV's have this feature too?


----------



## AlexNL

TGVs do not have that feature, as the first and the last car of a TGV trainset are its locomotives. The current Eurostar trainsets are TGVs as well so the same applies.

Up until recently, several rules were placed upon passenger trains wanting to go through the tunnel:
* The train should be able to be split in the middle
* The minimum length should be 400 meters so there is always a door opposite or close to an emergency exit, 2 doors if the driver stops his train well
* The train manager should be a certified train driver who resides in the other cab car during the tunnel crossing, so that in case of an emergency he can drive the splitted part back to where they came from

Because in 15 years of operating the Channel Tunnel none of these measures have ever been required, most of them are being looked into and altered or dropped. The 400 meter length is likely to stay, but the splitting rule is to be dropped.

I am not quite sure what restrictions would be in place which would make the E320 unsuited for the Channel Tunnel. I guess it's French protectionism.


----------



## poshbakerloo

They look good...but will this actually happen?


----------



## K_

JustinB said:


> I know one great feature of the Siemens train sets are the glass operator doors that allow a driver's eye view. Do TGV's have this feature too?


The TGV doesn't, and neither does the Velaro. It's one of these things Siemens had to sacrifice in order to make the train TSI compliant.
A pity, though. I really like the forward lounge.


----------



## K_

thun said:


> Direct connections to Austria (and possibly Switzerland) might only make sense as seasonal services, in particular for skiers (just like Eurostar already offered/offers to some French ressorts). They wouldn't compete with planes in the business traveller target group but rather with cars people would otherwise use to get there.


One advantage of the train is that it can serve more destinations with one service. But the problem Eurostar has is the idiotic check in and security requirement. Otherwise you could have a London - Geneva - Brig Eurostar with stops at all the major transfer points on the way.


----------



## K_

sergiogiorgini said:


> I don't want to be too geographically self-centered here, but so Eurostar really does plan to service Amsterdam one day, as the Velaro will allow it to. (That's what it says on Railway Gazette, anyway.) I thought it had been firmly established around here that this would be practically impossible for infrastructural reasons in the Netherlands. (Space for check-in areas in already overcrowded stations, etc.)


Maybe that idiocy will finally be dispensed with.



> Anyway, it sounds like good news to me, even if it's quite the dagger in the back of the French.


Times are changing. Even the French sometimes buy German trains nowadays. A lot of noise will be made to appease the unions, but in the end the trains will be aproved, as France really can't put to much obstacles in the path of a train that meets the TSI specs.


----------



## 33Hz

Given that this is basically a double length Velaro D, who is to say that electrically it isn't in fact two units joined together? It could be two trains with normal passenger cars rather than driving cars in the middle. Then it could be split.

I'm a bit disappointed that the top speed is only 320 km/h. With its Chinese brother now claiming 380 km/h, I'd have thought they would have at least specified 350 km/h minimum for the train. I'm sure we will see that become allowable on some lines during this train's lifetime. It would also allow them to get London - Paris well under 2 hours.

As for the French protectionism... Like I said in another thread recently, it seems a bit daft to criticise distributed traction when your competing offer was the AGV. Idiots. Still, I am sure they will come up with some insurmountable reason why the train can't go on the LGV Nord Europe without a lengthy test campaign. So much for European harmonisation. It's all very nice until it doesn't work in their favour.


----------



## x-type

^^
i'm surprised with 320 as well. there are many articles which say how costs rapidly rise for each km/h above 300. at all, are there any lines in France (except Paris - Strasbourg) made for speeds over 300 km/h? equiping the train with limitators for higher speed is the least problem.

btw, what is with platforms? how will they deal with them if the service comes to Geneva or some other cities? will they use those funny american-styled plastic steps?


----------



## K_

x-type said:


> btw, what is with platforms? how will they deal with them if the service comes to Geneva or some other cities? will they use those funny american-styled plastic steps?


What problem with platforms do you expect? The train is 400m long, which is the maximum length allowed under the interoperability standard. Most major railway stations in Europe have platforms long enough for these trains. Both DB, SNCF and SBB already run trains of that length.


----------



## makita09

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I don't see any market for an Austria-London train service. It would take at least 7 hours. That is too much. You can "compete" with airlines when your high-speed train travel time is below 3h, sometimes when it is below 4h30, rarely otherwise. It just takes too long.


By compete you mean achieve significant market share. Eurostar already operates long long high speed services to the Alps and Avignon which have been a success, although at one train per day to the alps and less to Avignon its not part of the central strategy.

As Eurostar does not need to justify the contruction of infrastructure to reach Geneva, it does not need to obtain a stranglehold market share on the route and can do perhaps one or two trains per day. I would imagine this is the sort of service they are looking at to begin with. Such a service is looking primarily at the leisure and not-in-a-mad-hurry business markets. I think its sensible to try it.



x-type said:


> ^^
> i'm surprised with 320 as well. there are many articles which say how costs rapidly rise for each km/h above 300. at all, are there any lines in France (except Paris - Strasbourg) made for speeds over 300 km/h? equiping the train with limitators for higher speed is the least problem.


The LGV Nord is capable of 350km/h, both track and signalling, though operation is not above 300km/h at the moment. AFAIK LGV Mediterranee is the same. As I mentioned in the other thread the French realised it was an error to not have a bit of future speed increases available - LGV Sud-Est was built for 270km/h and this quickly became a hindrence. Now much of it has been sped up, some bits to 320km/h, but due to alignment limitations there are still some 270km/h sections apparently.


----------



## Slagathor

Thermo said:


> New livery looks also great


Its head looks like a wasp...


----------



## chornedsnorkack

Slagathor said:


> Its head looks like a wasp...


Wasps and bees pick the same conspicuous colour scheme.

Do any trains look like ladybirds?


----------



## x-type

K_ said:


> What problem with platforms do you expect? The train is 400m long, which is the maximum length allowed under the interoperability standard. Most major railway stations in Europe have platforms long enough for these trains. Both DB, SNCF and SBB already run trains of that length.


aren't British platforms due to height of cars (wagons?) higher?


----------



## K_

x-type said:


> aren't British platforms due to height of cars (wagons?) higher?


The European "standard" platform height of 760mm is used on HS1 in the UK. As that is the same as in Germany I don't think it will be a problem. A step will extend when the train calls at a station with a lower platform level as is already the case when a ICE stops in a Swiss station.


----------



## Coccodrillo

New Swiss tunnels have much less restrictive rules. I sincerly don't think they are dangerous for that.


----------



## makita09

All the Channel Tunnel rules are being reviewed. The recent fires and Eurostar breakdowns has confirmed that a few of them are ineffective and some are positively terrible.


----------



## Augusto

makita09 said:


> As Eurostar does not need to justify the contruction of infrastructure to reach Geneva, it does not need to obtain a stranglehold market share on the route and can do perhaps one or two trains per day. I would imagine this is the sort of service they are looking at to begin with. Such a service is looking primarily at the leisure and not-in-a-mad-hurry business markets. I think its sensible to try it.


It could be interesting to note that infrastructure to Geneva is going to improve in december: the newly upgraded "Haut Bugey" line will open, the travel time between Paris and Geneva will be reduced by 22 min and frequencies will increase. Thalys service between Brussels and Geneva may resume as well. 
The Haut Bugey line, la Cluse-Bellegarde, used to be a small mountain line with a local traffic only until 2005 but now it will be totally dedicated to the TGV service to Geneva.


----------



## HyperMiler

x-type said:


> there are many articles which say how costs rapidly rise for each km/h above 300.


Indeed, the only way to have a service speed higher than 350 km/hr affordably is to lighten the axle load. 

This is why Velaro is a bad choice for China's 380 km/hr service; Shinkansen E2 is perfect for this role.


----------



## Jay

What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen?


----------



## HyperMiler

Jay said:


> What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen?


Velaro, TGV, AGV, Zefiro : 17 ton
Shinkansen : There is no official limit. However, Shinkansen axle loads are kept to around 11~12 ton by design. This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.

Shinkansen E2 based CRH380A is in far better position to attain 380 km/hr service speed than CRH380B. But this speed is for China only, as CRH380A cannot meet US/EU railway safety regulations and 3rd world countries that are buying CRH system on credit cannot afford the constant repair and maintenance demand on railway and train sets that the 380 km//hr service speed requires, so the top revenue service speed must be kept lower to a reasonable level.

As of now, only HEMU-400X appears to be capable of sustained 380 km/hr service speed on the US and Euro railways, due to its Shinkansen-like low axle load of 13 tons while still being UIC-crashworthiness regulation compliant thanks to its composite body structure. Zefiro fails on this regards because of its high axle road and is being marketed as a 350 km/hr class train model in the US and Europe.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Around 17 t versus 11 t.

Edit: posted contemporary to HyperMiler.


----------



## rheintram

I doubt we will ever see a direct Eurostar London to Vienna service, especially since Germany is neglecting the Munich to Salzburg line.


----------



## Gadiri

Jay said:


> *What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen*?





HyperMiler said:


> *Velaro, TGV, AGV, Zefiro : 17 ton
> Shinkansen : There is no official limit*. However, Shinkansen axle loads are kept to around *11~12 ton by design*. This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.
> 
> Shinkansen E2 based CRH380A is in far better position to attain 380 km/hr service speed than CRH380B. But this speed is for China only, as CRH380A cannot meet US/EU railway safety regulations and 3rd world countries that are buying CRH system on credit cannot afford the constant repair and maintenance demand on railway and train sets that the 380 km//hr service speed requires, so the top revenue service speed must be kept lower to a reasonable level.
> 
> As of now, only HEMU-400X appears to be capable of sustained 380 km/hr service speed on the US and Euro railways, due to its *Shinkansen-like low axle load of 13 tons* while still being UIC-crashworthiness regulation compliant thanks to its composite body structure. Zefiro fails on this regards because of its high axle road and is being marketed as a 350 km/hr class train model in the US and Europe.





Coccodrillo said:


> *Around 17 t versus 11 t*.
> 
> Edit: posted contemporary to HyperMiler.


*All questions have an answer on moroccan forum thread* : High-Speed Railway Networks around The World . 

Some comparaison :


> *This Chinese HST will not be able to run in Europe. Max is 17 T. And here is 19,5 T ! *


----------



## Jay

> This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.


No offense but that's kind of stupid to build a flimsy train, I know Shinkansen has a great accident record but still. Bad call. Structural integrity is important.


----------



## HyperMiler

Jay said:


> No offense but that's kind of stupid to build a flimsy train


You can construct a flimsy train if you can guarantee that there would be no possibility of collision with either another train or an automobile at level crossing, which Japanese have. 

But this policy of 100% dedicated track is not economically viable in other countries including the US and Europe, and this is why Shinkansen(and presumably CRH trains) is such a tough sell outside of its native country.


----------



## Jay

HyperMiler said:


> You can construct a flimsy train if you can guarantee that there would be no possibility of collision with either another train or an automobile at level crossing, which Japanese have.
> 
> But this policy of 100% dedicated track is not economically viable in other countries including the US and Europe, and this is why Shinkansen(and presumably CRH trains) is such a tough sell outside of its native country.


CRH trains are built pretty hefty I'm pretty sure. 

It's just that you can't ever guarantee that there won't be a collision so better safe then sorry. Structual integrity is important for anything that travels at 300 kph. 

Here in North America at least and in most other places I assume, Trains are HUGE machines that could crush any automobile, truck, bus, bulldozer whatever without a problem. I understand that weights must go down in order to have high speeds, but there are many high speed single level trains that weigh more than 60 tons per car, Italian ETR, Sapsan, Zefiro are just a few examples. Shinkansen cars just make me nervous because of their design. 45 tons is still a lot of weight and with 8-16 cars I'm sure a Shinkansen train would have the upperhand in a collision with another huge vehicle but I believe there has to be some sort of balance. 40 tons a car is too light and 70 or so tons is obviously too heavy, in order to be fast and durable I'd say the 50 to 60 ton range is the safest and most efficient.


----------



## hans280

Jay said:


> Here in North America at least and in most other places I assume, Trains are HUGE machines that could crush any automobile, truck, bus, bulldozer whatever without a problem.


Yeah, but that's rather the problem, isn't it? As you yourself hint, current safety rules makes it virtually impossible to introduce proper HS technology in the US. The Acela Express, for example, is extremely heavy by international comparison and consequently accelerates and brakes very slowly. 

This kind of rules makes sence if and only if you expect that the train will be running mostly in mixed traffic, at slow speeds and/or with level crossings to the roads. In that case, as you say, passengers are offered a better safety by very solid trains. However, if you build a dedicated highspeed line where trains run at more than 250 km/h - or don't run at all - then using strong trains is an oximoron: if you have a collision at that speed then everbody inside will die instantly, regardless of how strong the engine car and wagons are. 

Summa summarum, the Japanese with their 100% separate HS tracks are well adviced to make the trains as featherlight as they can. In Europe... the pixture is a bit more... mixed.


----------



## HyperMiler

Jay said:


> CRH trains are built pretty hefty I'm pretty sure.


Zefiro V300 for Europe has an axle load of 17 tons.
Zefiro 380 for China packing a much bigger body and a heavier electrical system for higher speed also has an axle load limit of 17 tons. How? Bombardier cut corners somewhere. Where? Think about it.



> It's just that you can't ever guarantee that there won't be a collision so better safe then sorry.


Shinkansen system is pretty close to guaranteeing that. Unfortunately, Shinkansen system also cost more to build because of this guarantee.



> Structual integrity is important for anything that travels at 300 kph.


Shinkansen trains are designed for a top speed of 300 km/hr or less. Anything above 300 km/kr is none of Japan's problem; it is CSR's problem now as CSR is trying to do with Shinkansen E2 what Kawasaki never intended to do. 



> Shinkansen cars just make me nervous because of their design.


Shinkansen will not show up in the US, save for the possibility of private lines built with Japanese money in Texas.
Ditto for CRH380s, they won't show up in the US.



> 40 tons a car is too light and 70 or so tons is obviously too heavy, in order to be fast and durable I'd say the 50 to 60 ton range is the safest and most efficient.


Or the third option is to build the train with composite and the resulting structure is as strong as Velaro, but weigh closer to Shinkansen. The best of both words.


----------



## x-type

talking about axle loads - what is situation with Talgo 350?


----------



## Jay

hans280 said:


> Yeah, but that's rather the problem, isn't it? As you yourself hint, current safety rules makes it virtually impossible to introduce proper HS technology in the US. The Acela Express, for example, is extremely heavy by international comparison and consequently accelerates and brakes very slowly.



Not really, as I said before, Sapsan, Zefiro and Italian ETR are all just a few examples of heavy high speed trains. 

These trains have more like, say, the body of a commercial aircraft (or maybe tougher) rather than a tin can. 

There is never any excuse for building a flimsy train. That's absurd.


----------



## Jay

Here's a Shinkansen car, looks like pretty solid, tough metal to me. Maybe they just use really light but really strong metal.


----------



## thun

What did you expect? PET? :lol:


----------



## Suburbanist

Of the "accelerated" train sets available out there, the ones serving Acela routes have by far and large the highest survivability and sturdiness of all. In regard of HS crash worthiness, these two philosophies will keep competing: the "nuclear power plant approach" (make and encase the reactor strongly, redundantly and capable of surviving almost anything) or the "hydro power dam approach" (build well the whole dam as to avoid any risk of cracking on the embankment, because if it cracks, chaos will ensure).

Ultimately, it has to be decided where money will be spent: on tracks and other infrastructure, as to render collisions near impossible, or on trains to make eventual collisions less severe to their passengers). You can, again, compare the approaches in regard of airplanes (passengers can't eject from a civilian aircraft, and if a wing fails, everybody will die, but you build and maintain so well the damn plane that it will just not lose a wing) and cars (crashes will happen, so you put airbags, ABS, fire retardants, seat-belts etc).


----------



## Jay

That's my point, crashes WILL happen, they just do, there are so many ways that something could go wrong so it's better safe than sorry. Why not just be extra safe and try and avoid accidents and all that while at the same time being safe it they do. 


I don't really get the "Let's just try not to make anything go wrong, but if it does we are all screwed" approach. These are people's lives we are talking about.


----------



## Simfan34

Jay said:


> Not really, as I said before, Sapsan, Zefiro and Italian ETR are all just a few examples of heavy high speed trains.
> 
> These trains have more like, say, the body of a commercial aircraft (or maybe tougher) rather than a tin can.
> 
> There is never any excuse for building a flimsy train. That's absurd.


Sure there is- just reduce the external causes of accidents and a lighter train will go faster.

And BTW, I think Acela could reach up to 2X the speeds it operates at...


----------



## Pansori

So what was exactly the reason for not buying new TGVs? I mean the company is partially owned by the French and buying German trains by a French owned company is just very very strange.


----------



## Simfan34

Pansori said:


> So what was exactly the reason for not buying new TGVs? I mean the company is partially owned by the French and buying German trains by a French owned company is just very very strange.


Aren't the "new" TGVs like five years old? The next generation is AGV, which is not due for a couple of years.


----------



## Jay

^ Yea I'm pretty sure trains with Power cars or locomotives are a thing of the past, at least for very high speed passenger trains.


----------



## Pansori

But what happened to Alstom anyway? They didn't seem active in the Chinese HSR bids (by far the largest HSR projects to ever take place), we don't hear much about their other initiatives and their AGV trains are a little late compared to the competitors. Are they loosing competitiveness or what?


----------



## Apoc89

Jay said:


> That's my point, crashes WILL happen, they just do, there are so many ways that something could go wrong so it's better safe than sorry. Why not just be extra safe and try and avoid accidents and all that while at the same time being safe it they do.
> 
> 
> I don't really get the "Let's just try not to make anything go wrong, but if it does we are all screwed" approach. These are people's lives we are talking about.


You could similarly criticize the other approach with "Let's let things go wrong and hope our trains survive them, but if they don't we're screwed". Obviously the choice between a preventative and protective approach isn't that simple.

Still, the Shinkansen network has over nearly half a century transported several billion people without a single collision or derailment fatality. I think it's safe to say that their safety plan works pretty damn well.


----------



## K_

Jay said:


> No offense but that's kind of stupid to build a flimsy train, I know Shinkansen has a great accident record but still. Bad call. Structural integrity is important.


You know what is flimsy? An aircraft. Airliners are built as flimsy as possible, and still they are considered safe. Nobody considers this stupid.


----------



## K_

Jay said:


> That's my point, crashes WILL happen, they just do, there are so many ways that something could go wrong so it's better safe than sorry. Why not just be extra safe and try and avoid accidents and all that while at the same time being safe it they do.


Crashes do indeed happen. However so far no person has died in a high speed TGV crash (and there have been a few), so I'd say that the concept is sound.



> I don't really get the "Let's just try not to make anything go wrong, but if it does we are all screwed" approach. These are people's lives we are talking about.


There are as always trade-offs to be made. At the one hand one wants to travel in safety. On the other hand one wants to travel. Spending lots of money to reduce the risk from "too small to worry about" to "too small to worry about"/2 is a waste. Such money is better spend on expanding services.


----------



## foxmulder

Pansori said:


> But what happened to Alstom anyway? They didn't seem active in the Chinese HSR bids (by far the largest HSR projects to ever take place), we don't hear much about their other initiatives and their AGV trains are a little late compared to the competitors. Are they loosing competitiveness or what?



Alstom CEO couldn't do his job and pissed Chinese and now Chinese do not even see them  They have already absorbed best technology out there from Kawasaki and Siemens. Chinase are actively cooperating with Bombardier too, so last chance has been gone for Alstom in China.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Pansori said:


> So what was exactly the reason for not buying new TGVs? I mean the company is partially owned by the French and buying German trains by a French owned company is just very very strange.


European laws oblige all public companies to bid and in this case Siemens presented the best offer They cannot choose themselves what to buy. At least in theory.


----------



## Jay

K_ said:


> You know what is flimsy? An aircraft. Airliners are built as flimsy as possible, and still they are considered safe. Nobody considers this stupid.



Gotta disagree... A commercial aircraft??

They are not flimsy at all

You can see they actually have metal frames in them, not just thin skin. 





























This one crashed into water and was fine, no one was killed. 













> There are as always trade-offs to be made. At the one hand one wants to travel in safety. On the other hand one wants to travel. Spending lots of money to reduce the risk from "too small to worry about" to "too small to worry about"/2 is a waste. Such money is better spend on expanding services.


You don't really have to spend that much more money. It really wouldn't be hard to do both.


----------



## K_

Jay said:


> Gotta disagree... A commercial aircraft??
> 
> They are not flimsy at all


As an aircraft engineer told me: An aircraft is a cloud of aluminium, stretched thin enough to still hold together. Just see what happens when an aircraft hits something solid. You end up with lots of little pieces spread over a large area.

The average airliner weighs about as much as one or two railway carriages...


----------



## K_

Jay said:


> You don't really have to spend that much more money. It really wouldn't be hard to do both.


Well, we only have to look at the US to see that it isn't that trivial.


----------



## Gadiri

Pansori said:


> *But what happened to Alstom anyway? They didn't seem active in the Chinese HSR bids *(by far the largest HSR projects to ever take place), we don't hear much about their other initiatives and their AGV trains are a little late compared to the competitors. Are they loosing competitiveness or what?





foxmulder said:


> Alstom CEO couldn't do his job and pissed Chinese and now Chinese do not even see them  They have already absorbed best technology out there from Kawasaki and Siemens. Chinase are actively cooperating with Bombardier too, so last chance has been gone for Alstom in China.


Don't forget the Chinese Pendolino. Alstom sold it to Chinese. Now they have the technology.


----------



## Ariel74

Siemens is playing a LOT smarter than Alstom. In fact, Siemens allows China to tell the world that CRH380B is China-made, while they quietly maintains the control of some very key technologies. That's why they will have business for some time to come in China.

Japan is eating the sour grapes precisely because they are regretting having handed over *all* the technologies for E2-1000. Even though the E2 was not cutting edge, completely transferring the technologies have allowed China to come up very fast with their own vastly improved designs.

Alstom.... well, what can I say, outdated technology, a CEO who cares more about his ego than about the public relations of his firm, ... Short Alstom if you can.

I say this even though I am personally absolutely *no* fan of Siemens. All the Siemens products I bought I ended up sending for repair multiple times. As a matter of fact, the ICE3 - for which Siemens was partly responsible - had quality problems every now and then. But somehow they are doing smart business with their Velaros.


----------



## Jay

K_ said:


> As an aircraft engineer told me: An aircraft is a cloud of aluminium, stretched thin enough to still hold together. Just see what happens when an aircraft hits something solid. You end up with lots of little pieces spread over a large area.
> 
> The average airliner weighs about as much as one or two railway carriages...



I mean compared to a loaded mining truck maybe, but 747's can take off with over 350 tonnes of weight and A380's nearly twice that much. 

My point is that metal can be extremely strong yet be not even a couple inches thick. Aircraft have extremely strong metal compared to most machines so they just don't fall apart in air. 

Proportionately I would say an 85 foot rail car that's 10 feet wide and 45-50 tons would be close to similar is strength and weight to an aircraft. 

I think some people underestimate how powerful a train is. If you were to drive even a light shinkansen train into a battle tank at full speed that tank would be destroyed along with probably the front car of that train. But since the train is so much heavier it is possible that it could be engineered to absorb that impact. Even a light bullet train is 4-700 tonnes of weight that is more or less a solid mass since the cars are nearly permanently connected.

It's all about the right engineering and trains where the wagons share axel loads like TGV and the new AGV have the right idea.


----------



## makita09

Jay said:


> I mean compared to a loaded mining truck maybe, but 747's can take off with over 350 tonnes of weight and A380's nearly twice that much.
> 
> My point is that metal can be extremely strong yet be not even a couple inches thick. Aircraft have extremely strong metal compared to most machines so they just don't fall apart in air.
> 
> Proportionately I would say an 85 foot rail car that's 10 feet wide and 45-50 tons would be close to similar is strength and weight to an aircraft.
> 
> I think some people underestimate how powerful a train is. If you were to drive even a light shinkansen train into a battle tank at full speed that tank would be destroyed along with probably the front car of that train. But since the train is so much heavier it is possible that it could be engineered to absorb that impact. Even a light bullet train is 4-700 tonnes of weight that is more or less a solid mass since the cars are nearly permanently connected.
> 
> It's all about the right engineering and trains where the wagons share axel loads like TGV and the new AGV have the right idea.


But you previously said an aircraft is better built than a train.

Anyway, if a train hit a tank at 175mph the train would come off worse. Tanks are much denser, and are also designed to take a large amount of beating, because they are war machines. The train would bounce off in all directions, the tank would be bounced about too, but I'd wager you'd get the engine started and it it might even drive off provided you could get in it and if the tracks didn't take a direct hit, and the train would most likely go up and over the tank so the tank's drive train might get away with it.

The metal of an aircraft is designed specifically to bend, to just the right amount to absorb the tortional effects of the forces applied to the body without causing too much tension in the material, balancing resistance to deformity with resistance to stress fractures.

Interestingly trains are built in exactly the same way. And cars. And skyscrapers. Everything actually. (soft top versions of cars have their suspension adjusted due to the decreased rigidity in tortional stiffness of the body)

As I've said before, you've got to let go of this concept that strength is directly linked to weight. You are in effect saying that you understand mechanics better than the designers and engineers of these trains, and the evidence you provide is pictures of the inside of planes and some confused concepts.

Meanwhile the actual trains in Japan continue to transport millions of people and killing absolutely none of them.

I feel that you cling on to your concepts of rail safety despite all of the arguments presented to you over the years merely because you want to believe it.


----------



## K_

Jay said:


> Aircraft have extremely strong metal compared to most machines so they just don't fall apart in air.


Actually they do sometimes "just fall apart in the air". Not as much as they used to, but it is still possible for a pilot to get his plane to break up if he forgets his maneuvering speed.


----------



## Jay

makita09 said:


> But you previously said an aircraft is better built than a train.
> 
> Anyway, if a train hit a tank at 175mph the train would come off worse. Tanks are much denser, and are also designed to take a large amount of beating, because they are war machines. The train would bounce off in all directions, the tank would be bounced about too, but I'd wager you'd get the engine started and it it might even drive off provided you could get in it and if the tracks didn't take a direct hit, and the train would most likely go up and over the tank so the tank's drive train might get away with it.
> 
> The metal of an aircraft is designed specifically to bend, to just the right amount to absorb the tortional effects of the forces applied to the body without causing too much tension in the material, balancing resistance to deformity with resistance to stress fractures.
> 
> Interestingly trains are built in exactly the same way. And cars. And skyscrapers. Everything actually. (soft top versions of cars have their suspension adjusted due to the decreased rigidity in tortional stiffness of the body)
> 
> As I've said before, you've got to let go of this concept that strength is directly linked to weight. You are in effect saying that you understand mechanics better than the designers and engineers of these trains, and the evidence you provide is pictures of the inside of planes and some confused concepts.
> 
> Meanwhile the actual trains in Japan continue to transport millions of people and killing absolutely none of them.
> 
> I feel that you cling on to your concepts of rail safety despite all of the arguments presented to you over the years merely because you want to believe it.


I'm not confusing the concepts, I'm just saying it's better safe than sorry. You say Shinkansen can never have a crash but it definitely can, even a Maglev train crashed in Germany and many people died. You would have never thought that could happen, but it did. I never said strength was directly linked to weight, it's just part of it, I said you need a balance. Obviously you can build light and strong structures like an aircraft or railroad car. 

Don't think you would be able to drive anything away from anything after a collision of such huge machines at 175 mph. The train would come off worse but anything it hit would still be a goner, trains can rip steel bridges in half. If a tank was rightside up after the collision maybe you could drive it away provided that the treads were not ripped off, however any occupant of even that war machine would be dead. The train wouldn't have to suffer as much if the entire structure, all hundreds of tons, took the load of the impact together, rather than just the front car. Trains do that to some extent yet not all the way. 

TGV is a good example of a train that does well in crashes because it can't jackknife, at least not easily. Look at TGV crashes, one time the TGV hit an 80 ton asphalt paving machine and no one died because the cars cannot jackknife due to the fact that the cars are permanently connected. That is the most intelligent way to design a train. 

EMD locomotives foot per foot are about as dense as tanks, and they can often move pretty fast too, sometimes as fast as 100+ mph. however the right structural engineering could make even light trains this strong. The metal should bend and twist you're right, however the train car should not be able to rip open or be easily (relatively) destroyed.


----------



## DiggerD21

I took nighttrains only twice so far. The first experience was a school trip to Padova in the middle of the 90's. We took a nightrain from Hamburg to Munich with the cheapest possible category. Retrospectively it was not a pleasant trip as it was loud and uncomfortable.

The second experience from Hannover to Basel 3 years ago was the complete opposite when I moved to Italy for a job. I was unfit for flying and had about 60 Kg of luggage. I booked a single bed in a economy class 4-bed cabin for 100 € one-way. Luckily I was the only one in the cabin.  The bed was comfortable and the train was driving very smooth. So I had no problem to fall asleep. The next morning I got a small breakfast and had the possibility for hygiene (no shower tough). Finally the train arrived punctually in Basel.


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

First DB train at St Pancras, as French protests grow

THE first foreign train was due to arrive in London at about 02.00 today, in preparation for a formal reception ceremony which will be attended by the transport minister Theresa Villiers. The Deutsche Bahn ICE set travelled through the Channel Tunnel after several tests, including a full-scale evacuation on Sunday, but was expected to be hauled powerless to London by Eurotunnel locomotives.

Its arrival will be welcomed by some, including DB chief executive Rüdiger Grube, but the event will also be accompanied by high-level controversy.

The French government and train-builder Alstom have launched a vigorous campaign of opposition to the use of Siemens-built ICEs in the Channel Tunnel, and their anger has been heightened by the decision of the Eurostar board earlier this month to proceed with the acquisition of ten German-built Siemens Velaro-D sets for new routes from 2014.

Eurostar is planning to run beyond its present main termini in Paris and Brussels to Amsterdam, Geneva and Lyon, and destinations in other countries, including Germany, are not being ruled out.

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/10/19-london-receives-first-german-train.html


----------



## woutero

A bit more on-topic: Deutsche Bahn has announced they want to start running ICE trains through the Channel Tunnel from London to Frankfurt and from London to Amsterdam.

Se this article on the BBC news website. It has maps, graphics, etc.

It shows: 
- Brussels being 2 hrs from London (London - Brussels is now 2h 4 mins with Eurostar)
- Rotterdam as 3 hrs from London (Brussels - Rotterdam is currently 1h 12 mins with Thalys - with the short stretch from Antwerpen to Brussels taking 42 mins!)
- Amsterdam as 4 hrs from London (Rotterdam - Amsterdam will be 35 mins, or even 28 when it terminates in Amsterdam-Zuid).


----------



## K_

woutero said:


> A bit more on-topic: Deutsche Bahn has announced they want to start running ICE trains through the Channel Tunnel from London to Frankfurt and from London to Amsterdam.
> 
> Se this article on the BBC news website. It has maps, graphics, etc.
> 
> It shows:
> - Brussels being 2 hrs from London (London - Brussels is now 2h 4 mins with Eurostar)
> - Rotterdam as 3 hrs from London (Brussels - Rotterdam is currently 1h 12 mins with Thalys - with the short stretch from Antwerpen to Brussels taking 42 mins!)
> - Amsterdam as 4 hrs from London (Rotterdam - Amsterdam will be 35 mins, or even 28 when it terminates in Amsterdam-Zuid).


Actually the fastest timetabled Brussel - London service currently takes 1h51. That is without calling at Lille Europe. So if DB chooses to go non stop from Brussel to London too, they ought to be able to do it in that time too.
Brussel - Rotterdam is currently 1h12, but DB could opt not to call at Antwerpen (saveing a few minutes) plus in 2013 the new line from Mechelen to Brussel will probably be ready, cutting time further, so an hour could be doable. 
So Amsterdam - London in under four hours is possible.
Question is what will happen with the security check. Will DB be able to do away with it?


----------



## Slagathor

K_ said:


> new line from Mechelen to Brussel will probably be ready


What? What line is that?


----------



## K_

Slagathor said:


> What? What line is that?


Infrabel, the Belgian infrastructure operator is currently building a new line from Mechelen to Brussel on the median of the Antwerpen - Brussel motorway. This line will als connect with the airport. You can read more about it here:

http://www.infrabel.be/portal/page/portal/pgr_inf2_e_internet/mobility_project/le_projet_diabolo
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoorlijn_25N

This is a conventional fast line. But it will speed up travel time for the high speed trains. One of the current issues with the Antweerpen - Brussels railway is that the "fast" tracks are connected to the eastern tracks through the North-South railway in Brussel. The high speed terminal in Brussel Zuid however uses the Western tracks. This means that either the high speed trains have to cross a lot of tracks to get to the western side (leading to a lot of conflicting movements and delays) or that they have to use the slow tracks, which is what they as far as I know now do...
The new line now being build will allow high speed trains from Antwerpen and beyond to get to the Brussel Zuid high speed tracks without conflicting any other train movements, and it will allow for a higher speed. It will also make it possible for many IC services to stop at the airport.


----------



## Slagathor

So it's supposed to be a noticeable improvement? Without touching the Mechelen-Antwerp part? That seems... utopian.


----------



## K_

Slagathor said:


> So it's supposed to be a noticeable improvement? Without touching the Mechelen-Antwerp part? That seems... utopian.


Not utopian. As I explained, the problem is one of capacity and movement conflicts, not speed. The line solves that.


----------



## pietje01

Slagathor said:


> So it's supposed to be a noticeable improvement? Without touching the Mechelen-Antwerp part? That seems... utopian.


Of course it will improve travel time, ont he current line speed is limited to 140 km/h with a further speed limit at some stations (now 100km/h or even less).

The new line will also include a bypass of Mechelen station, so it will definatly save some minutes, but this part will only be ready in 2015.

There are also improvements underway near Duffel, where the speed will be upgraded from 90 to 160 km/h so that the entire line from Schaarbeek (near Brussels) to Kontich (near Antwerp) will be 160 km/h.


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

*ICE3 in London!*


----------



## ArthurK

Will Brussels Airport (Zaventem) also be a stop for the high speed trains, or just for domestic trains? And maybe the Fyra?


----------



## K_

ArthurK said:


> Will Brussels Airport (Zaventem) also be a stop for the high speed trains, or just for domestic trains? And maybe the Fyra?


Nothing is known yet. What would make sense in my opinion would be domestic IC services Antwerpen - Mechelen - Airport - Leuven, and an airport stop for the Fyra services that then also could serve as a Schiphol - Zaventem shuttle. The airport station could also be used as an origin for some TGV services. And of course lots of local services, part of the proposed Brussels suburban network wil call there.


----------



## NCT

I actually saw the ICE parked in St Pancras in the flesh on Wednesday evening as I got off the train from Nottingham - looked very fresh amongst the standard Eurostar stock. Such a shame when I went back the next day it had gone 

Then of course an article in the FT about opposition to Valero order and DB operation by Alstom and the French government was a rather amusing read.


----------



## Gadiri

The new TGV Duplex of 400meters "unbreakable" should have be a better solution for passengers increase. The safety specifications will have been respected.


----------



## sotavento

JustinB said:


> The Velaro D was specifically designed for international services. The older models do not meet the Tunnel rule of being able to split a train in the tunnel. One of the reasons the Eurostars are so long.
> From what I read, there was a review that recommended changing the rules to allow non-splittable trains to use the channel. Hopefully the rules will be changed.
> 
> I know one great feature of the Siemens train sets are the glass operator doors that allow a driver's eye view. Do TGV's have this feature too?


Two notes here:


I just hope they also change the humans rights rules ... I 'd Luv to see mass murderings everywhere ... just a hint of what it would meant _"changing the rules"_ about passenger travell in the eurotunnel. :cheers:

And no ... aparently glass window was not preserved in any of the newer Velaro trains sold by siemens ... much less it would be advisable in a Velaro going in the eurotunnel.


The rules for SAFETY are there for a reason in large tunnel crossings ... namely passenger safety. :bash: 



AlexNL said:


> TGVs do not have that feature, as the first and the last car of a TGV trainset are its locomotives. The current Eurostar trainsets are TGVs as well so the same applies.
> 
> Up until recently, several rules were placed upon passenger trains wanting to go through the tunnel:
> * The train should be able to be split in the middle
> * The minimum length should be 400 meters so there is always a door opposite or close to an emergency exit, 2 doors if the driver stops his train well
> * The train manager should be a certified train driver who resides in the other cab car during the tunnel crossing, so that in case of an emergency he can drive the splitted part back to where they came from
> 
> Because in 15 years of operating the Channel Tunnel none of these measures have ever been required, most of them are being looked into and altered or dropped. The 400 meter length is likely to stay, but the splitting rule is to be dropped.
> 
> I am not quite sure what restrictions would be in place which would make the E320 unsuited for the Channel Tunnel. I guess it's French protectionism.


Not entirelly correct:



> At the end of 2009, extensive fire-proofing requirements were dropped and Deutsche Bahn received permission to run German Intercity-Express (ICE) trains through the Channel Tunnel in the future. On 19 October 2010 Deutsche Bahn ran the first ICE train through the channel tunnel arriving in St. Pancras after evacuation tests in the tunnel were a success.


So fireproofing is no longer a limitation but the train reversinon is still a very important one (?) as we can see by the previous cases:



> There have been three fires in the Channel Tunnel that were significant enough to close the tunnel—all on the heavy goods vehicle (HGV) shuttles—and other more minor incidents.
> 
> During an "invitation only" testing phase on 9 December 1994, a fire broke out in a Ford Escort car whilst its owner had been loading it on to the upper deck of a tourist shuttle. The fire started at approximately 10:00 with the shuttle train stationary in the Folkestone terminal and was extinguished around 40 minutes later with no passenger injuries.[82]
> 
> On 18 November 1996, a fire broke out on a heavy goods vehicle shuttle wagon in the tunnel but nobody was seriously hurt. The exact cause is unknown,[83] although it was not a Eurotunnel equipment or rolling stock problem; it may have been due to arson of a heavy goods vehicle. It is estimated that the heart of the fire reached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F), with the tunnel severely damaged over 46 metres (151 ft), with some 500 metres (1,640 ft) affected to some extent. Full operation recommenced six months after the fire.[84]
> 
> The tunnel was closed for several hours on 21 August 2006, when a truck on an HGV shuttle train caught fire.[85][86] On 11 September 2008, a fire occurred in the Channel Tunnel at 13:57 GMT. The incident started on a freight-carrying vehicle train travelling towards France.[87] The event occurred 11 kilometres (6.8 mi) from the French entrance to the tunnel. No one was killed but several people were taken to hospitals suffering from smoke inhalation, and minor cuts and bruises. The tunnel was closed to all traffic, with the undamaged South Tunnel reopening for limited services two days later.[88] Full service resumed on 9 February 2009[89] after repairs costing €60 million.


The actuall train erupting in flames needs those closeness to the doors rules ... headng in the tail of another train who itself caught fire needs a rapid reversing rule ... let's hope that ICE trains don't start to get themselves _immulated_ inside the tunnel in the next years. :nuts:


Looking back ... the ideal trains for the tunnel would be some ICE1/2 or even something like the danish IC3 with groups of 4 car trains heading each to a different destination as soon as they passed Lille or London. :cheers:


----------



## K_

sotavento said:


> The rules for SAFETY are there for a reason in large tunnel crossings ... namely passenger safety. :bash:


Actually many safety rules are there for another reason: Ass covering. The current airport security theatre is a goog example.
When the rules for Eurotunnel were drawn up there were little precedents to draw from. After 20 years of operation we now know what worked and what didn't in real emergencies, so the rules can be adapted. With passenger safety in mind, true. But rules that have so far shown not to contribute to safety can be changed or dropped.

We now know for example that the biggest risk in the tunnel are the Lorry shuttles...



> So fireproofing is no longer a limitation but the train reversinon is still a very important one (?) as we can see by the previous cases:


Reversing is not a problem with the E320 sets. You can solve the need to reverse rapidly in different ways. 
The Swiss Alpine tunnels (Lötschberg and soon Gotthard) also have the requirement that a train should be able to reverse rapidly.
The way they solved it is have a modification to the ETCS signallin system that allows a train to be driven "backwards" blind at full speed, where the driver gets the signals as seen at (now) head of the train mirrored to his cab at the (now) back. In the first year of the operation of the Lötschberg tunnel however this ETCS feature was not yet fully debugged, so the SBB ran trains with an extra driver in the rear cabin for a while. Just as Eurostar does now. Just as DB could do. 
This way a train can stop and immediately depart in the other direction if needed.


----------



## Maarten Otto

You could always train a guard/train manager to do it.


----------



## Maarten Otto

K_ said:


> Nothing is known yet. What would make sense in my opinion would be domestic IC services Antwerpen - Mechelen - Airport - Leuven, and an airport stop for the Fyra services that then also could serve as a Schiphol - Zaventem shuttle. The airport station could also be used as an origin for some TGV services. And of course lots of local services, part of the proposed Brussels suburban network wil call there.


Short answer... NO.

There is simply no capacity at the station to do the required "security" checks or border control. Besides... it would take another 11 or 20 minutes and that is exactly what you don't want if your in competition with easyJet or Ryanair.


----------



## sotavento

K_ said:


> Actually many safety rules are there for another reason: Ass covering. The current airport security theatre is a goog example.
> When the rules for Eurotunnel were drawn up there were little precedents to draw from. After 20 years of operation we now know what worked and what didn't in real emergencies, so the rules can be adapted. With passenger safety in mind, true. But rules that have so far shown not to contribute to safety can be changed or dropped.
> 
> We now know for example that the biggest risk in the tunnel are the Lorry shuttles...
> 
> 
> 
> Reversing is not a problem with the E320 sets. You can solve the need to reverse rapidly in different ways.
> The Swiss Alpine tunnels (Lötschberg and soon Gotthard) also have the requirement that a train should be able to reverse rapidly.
> The way they solved it is have a modification to the ETCS signallin system that allows a train to be driven "backwards" blind at full speed, where the driver gets the signals as seen at (now) head of the train mirrored to his cab at the (now) back. In the first year of the operation of the Lötschberg tunnel however this ETCS feature was not yet fully debugged, so the SBB ran trains with an extra driver in the rear cabin for a while. Just as Eurostar does now. Just as DB could do.
> This way a train can stop and immediately depart in the other direction if needed.


Everyone must follow the same rules (namelly the rules wich aply at the time of it's introduction in service)

Some 10 years ago the 1st car in a HST was still mandatorily devoid of passengers ... it took a big fight for Virgin to manage to put passengers in the Pendolinos and DB also had to shuffle a little weight with the ICE2 ... nowadays it's a given that 1st coaches can carry passengers in ultra hgh speed trains.

The teory that each and every restrictive (or should we say over-zealous?) rule is a BAD rule usually leads to a large period of prestine safety records ... then the usual process is to over deregulate and create a couple of unseeen grave safety traps ... in time it usually leads to a series of accidents ocurring preciselly because the true availability of those prestine conditions ceased to exist the same day the BAD rules were overuled. :cheers:

About the Velaro Trains ... any as in ANY train that meets the Eurotunnel safety dictatorial/draconian rules can pass there ... so if DB/Eurotunel (or whatever) complies to the standards there is nothing barring them from using such trains there. :dunno:


Those TGV vs "true HST" discussions (or japanese vs. european HST , or even MAglev vs. HST) always seem so paranoid and devoid of any technical credibility. :bash:


----------



## sotavento

Maarten Otto said:


> You could always train a guard/train manager to do it.


Since the tunnel crossing sit's in the middle of the trip you could as easily send an engineer to man the end CAB and at the destination it would replace the 1st one (wich would became the end CAB engineer) ... a 6h or 7h trip could then be handled by both without needing a second BASE. hno:


----------



## K_

Maarten Otto said:


> And again, with just three trains a day in both directions, you can hardly call is a "good" service for air passengers. For point to point journeys it's perfect, but not if it includes a change from air.


Depends. There are destinations from Schiphol with only one flight a day. I don't see why three trains a day to London would be useless. Even to airline passengers. Just co-ordinate with the airlines and you can tap in to the huge market of people who once flew through Heathrow...


----------



## AlexNL

If DB plans on an initial 3 trains a day, and Eurostar's new trains come into service they might also plan a few trains a day. In the end this might lead to 6 or 8 trains a day from London or Amsterdam and vice versa, which isn't bad even when the services are carried out by two different companies.


----------



## Maarten Otto

AlexNL said:


> If DB plans on an initial 3 trains a day, and Eurostar's new trains come into service they might also plan a few trains a day. In the end this might lead to 6 or 8 trains a day from London or Amsterdam and vice versa, which isn't bad even when the services are carried out by two different companies.


And at that point you might do what airlines do for many years... a code share.


----------



## K_

Maarten Otto said:


> And at that point you might do what airlines do for many years... a code share.


And something railways also have been doing for many years... Just book Swiss Flight LX7403 from ZDH and see what vehicle you end up on


----------



## 33Hz

This 400m thing is silly. Imagine an emergency situation today where the front half of the 400m Eurostar train stops just past an escape door. A fire has started just before the middle of train break point in first class (coach 9). Now, all the people in the front half of the train can't walk backwards because of the fire, so they have to exit from the front of the train and walk 200m along the tunnel to the next escape door. What is the difference between that and the "double ICE3" scenario?


By the way, I liked this picture.




From the associated article:



> *The EU Takes Sides*
> 
> None of this has stopped French Transport Minister Dominique Bussereau from intervening on Alstom's behalf. French state-owned railway SNCF owns 55 percent of Eurostar and, even before the test, Bussereau had called its planned contract with Siemens "null and void."
> 
> But German Transport Minister Peter Ramsauer doesn't see things that way. "I am sure that the French side wouldn't have had any objections if Alstom emerged as the preferred provider," Ramsauer has said. He also says that he has "no doubt that everything about the awarding of the contract was legal," adding that Michel Barnier, the French European Union commissioner for internal market and services, has also confirmed to him that this is the case.
> Germany is counting on the assistance of the European Commission in the case. Since liberalizing European railway traffic at the beginning of the year, the Commission has been keeping a very close eye on making sure that no one puts the brakes on new competitors.
> 
> Already on Oct. 8, a high-ranking EU official assured Siemens that it would be given energetic support in its battle over the major contract. In a letter to the company, the official told Siemens to "immediately contact" the Commission if anything having to do with the order is "changed or cancelled."


----------



## endrity

Today a court in London decided to back Siemens, and award no injunction to Alstom on their claim that the contract is void. Seems like this issue is close being finished, I feel bad that it was ever opened to begin with.


----------



## 33Hz

Alstom are trying to spin it another way:

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101029-715840.html

They have one more chance to hold things up (at least, using this method)

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/35ca33ec-e370-11df-8ad3-00144feabdc0.html


Expect the battle to move here next:



> French official ousted amid Eurostar row
> By Robert Wright in London
> 
> Published: October 20 2010 20:15 | Last updated: October 20 2010 20:15
> 
> France’s top adviser on Channel tunnel safety has lost her job after only four months. Her departure comes after the French government criticised rule changes that would allow German-built trains to use the tunnel.
> 
> Françoise Deygout has been replaced by Michel Aymeric, formerly an official at France’s national rail safety regulator, as head of the French delegation to the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority, people involved said.


----------



## endrity

This is pretty pathetic to be honest.


----------



## G5man

In the United States, this would be considered a huge conflict of interest. Eurostar should have the right to negotiate with whomever they wish in order to obtain the best price for equipment. On second thought, this happens all the time with "Buy American" regulations. Still, if Alstom cannot produce a product and bid better to Siemens, then Alstom needs to step up its game versus handing them a blank check in order to keep the dollars in France.

I am just curious to know how the heck is Eurostar strucutred. Is it a for profit? Who has majority ownership?


----------



## 33Hz

http://www.eurostar.com/UK/uk/leisure/about_eurostar/company_information/ownership_structure.jsp



> On 1 September 2010, Eurostar completed the legal transformation of its business from a joint venture to Eurostar International, a single, unified standalone business owned by three shareholders: [France] SNCF (55%), [Belgium] SNCB (5%) and [UK] LCR (40%).


----------



## Artemix

*I'm not speak english*



endrity said:


> This is pretty pathetic to be honest.


Alstom a offert une solution technique plus adaptee que son concurrent, a prix egal il doit remporter la commande. Par ces temps difficiles une commande de ce montant est trop importante pour echapper a l'industrie francaise. Peu importe les considerations philophiques des uns et des autres dont le salarie francais n'a rien a faire...il a besoin de travailler! Les allemands ne se posent pas autant de questions que nous, ils exportent a tour de bras. Et puis les allemands preferent rouler en audi ou bmw qu'en renault ou fiat. Pourquoi la police Allemande ne roule qu'en voitures fabriquees en Allemagne quand la police francaise roule ford, subaru ou autres? La SNCF n'a pas joue sont role d'actionnaire principal, tout comme l'etat qui aurait du discretement mettre son veto. Ok pour la libre concurrence, mais dans les deux sens, quand la Deutsch Bahn passera-t-elle commande de trains a Alstom?


----------



## stingstingsting

Hi Artemix.

Appreciate your reply, but maybe for the benefit of other non-French speaking readers, just a suggestion that you might wanna use http://translate.google.com/

Works pretty well 


Also, what I am curious to know is more about EMUs versus the front-end power aspect of the Velaro versus the current Eurostar sets. Would this affect in any way the Channel Tunnel operations? I'm not sure if there has ever been EMUs operating in it, or whetehr its a non-issue anyhow.


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

Artemix said:


> Alstom a offert une solution technique plus adaptee que son concurrent, a prix egal il doit remporter la commande. Par ces temps difficiles une commande de ce montant est trop importante pour echapper a l'industrie francaise. Peu importe les considerations philophiques des uns et des autres dont le salarie francais n'a rien a faire...il a besoin de travailler! Les allemands ne se posent pas autant de questions que nous, ils exportent a tour de bras. Et puis les allemands preferent rouler en audi ou bmw qu'en renault ou fiat. Pourquoi la police Allemande ne roule qu'en voitures fabriquees en Allemagne quand la police francaise roule ford, subaru ou autres? La SNCF n'a pas joue sont role d'actionnaire principal, tout comme l'etat qui aurait du discretement mettre son veto. Ok pour la libre concurrence, mais dans les deux sens, quand la Deutsch Bahn passera-t-elle commande de trains a Alstom?


le marché en Italie, Allemagne et Angleterre est ouvert depuis 1994

-->*keolis Allemagne *(100% SNCF) 
http://www.keolis.com/fr/groupe/imp...onal/allemagne-le-train-en-mode-europeen.html

--> ÖBB-DB Italie
http://www.obb-italia.com/
services:
DB-ÖBB EuroCity
ÖBB Intercitybus
ÖBB night trains








^^


--> *LGV EN ITALIE* --->*NTV (20% SNCF)*
http://www.ntvspa.it/
25 rames AGV 








^^


Arriva UK (DB)
http://www.arriva.co.uk/ 
Virgintrains UK
http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/
Etc.


----------



## caserass

Artemix said:


> Alstom a offert une solution technique plus adaptee que son concurrent, a prix egal il doit remporter la commande. Par ces temps difficiles une commande de ce montant est trop importante pour echapper a l'industrie francaise. Peu importe les considerations philophiques des uns et des autres dont le salarie francais n'a rien a faire...il a besoin de travailler! Les allemands ne se posent pas autant de questions que nous, ils exportent a tour de bras. Et puis les allemands preferent rouler en audi ou bmw qu'en renault ou fiat. Pourquoi la police Allemande ne roule qu'en voitures fabriquees en Allemagne quand la police francaise roule ford, subaru ou autres? La SNCF n'a pas joue sont role d'actionnaire principal, tout comme l'etat qui aurait du discretement mettre son veto. Ok pour la libre concurrence, mais dans les deux sens, quand la Deutsch Bahn passera-t-elle commande de trains a Alstom?





> *Translation *: Alstom offered a better technical solution than its competitor, at the same price, Alstom has to win the contract. With things as they are, an order of this amount cannot get away from the french industry. The fench worker is not interested by the philosophical considerations. He just needs to work. The German people doesn't do some soul searching neither, they export everywhere. And the German people still prefer to drive an audi or a bmw than a renault or a fiat. Why the German police drive only cars built in Germany while the French police uses Ford, Subaru and others ? The SNCF didn't play its role of majority shareholder, as the French state who should veto . Ok for the free play of competition but in both ways, when will Deutsch Bahn order alstom trains ?
> 
> 
> PS : *I'm not a translator I just tried to follow all his ideas*



I have to say he makes a point here, Deutsch Bahn has never ordered anything else than German trains, and what he said about the police is also true for the entire German administration.


----------



## caserass

Marie-Joseph-Paul said:


> le marché en Italie, Allemagne et Angleterre est ouvert depuis 1994
> 
> -->*keolis Allemagne *(100% SNCF)
> http://www.keolis.com/fr/groupe/imp...onal/allemagne-le-train-en-mode-europeen.html
> 
> --> ÖBB-DB Italie
> http://www.obb-italia.com/
> services:
> DB-ÖBB EuroCity
> ÖBB Intercitybus
> ÖBB night trains
> 
> ^^
> 
> 
> --> *LGV EN ITALIE* --->*NTV (20% SNCF)*
> http://www.ntvspa.it/
> 
> 
> 25 rames AGV
> 
> ^^
> 
> 
> Arriva UK
> http://www.arriva.co.uk/ (DB)
> Virgintrains UK
> http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/
> Etc.


I'm afraid it wasn't the point, the national german company Deutsch Bahn never buy anything else than german product. The Eurotunnel is a franco english construction where I believe the german never gave anything.
IMO, your example with Keolis has nothing to do with the situation of eurotunnel.

If Eurotunnel was following the same policy than Deutsch Bahn it should have bought french trains.


----------



## caserass

Ariel74 said:


> Alstom.... well, what can I say, outdated technology, a CEO who cares more about his ego than about the public relations of his firm, ... Short Alstom if you can.


I really would like to see the demonstration of how the alstom technology is outdated .... First do you know Alstom makes something else than TGV ? 

IMO you know nothing about the topic....


----------



## endrity

caserass said:


> I have to say he makes a point here, Deutsch Bahn has never ordered anything else than German trains, and what he said about the police is also true for the entire German administration.


Eurostar is a private entity! Private! For the French this might be a bit weird to understand but it has a right to do, buy, sell whatever they want. If they decided on Siemens there must be a reason. 

He would have somewhat of a point if the French government bought these trains, and Germany never buys anything other than German. Which is of course far from the truth, the French government has been accused of protectionism more than any other government of a highly developed country. 

But there is a reason why Eurostar bought these trains! Eurostar has claimed that by buying Siemens trains they can operate in the near future in Germany before DB starts competing against them in the Channel Tunnel. There were technical reasons why Siemens trains are better

p.s First Alstom complained that the Siemens trains were unsafe. Then it was revealed that technically the AGV and the Velaro are similar. So now it has switched his argument to unfair competition. The suggest that the Velaro is inferior, yet it is becoming one of the most sought after trains in the world, whereas the AGV has yet to sell anywhere except France and Italy.


----------



## endrity

caserass said:


> I'm afraid it wasn't the point, the national german company Deutsch Bahn never buy anything else than german product. The Eurotunnel is a franco english construction where I believe the german never gave anything.
> IMO, your example with Keolis has nothing to do with the situation of eurotunnel.
> 
> If Eurotunnel was following the same policy than Deutsch Bahn it should have bought french trains.


The Eurotunnel is a franco-english infrastructure, whose benefits are shared only by the French and English authorities. Buying Siemens trains doesn't mean that the German government get to benefit from fees on the tunnel. By expanding their business and allowing DB to run in the tunnel, the governments of both countries will have more revenues from the tunnel.


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

caserass said:


> I'm afraid it wasn't the point, the national german company Deutsch Bahn never buy anything else than german product. The Eurotunnel is a franco english construction where I believe the german never gave anything.
> IMO, your example with Keolis has nothing to do with the situation of eurotunnel.
> 
> If Eurotunnel was following the same policy than Deutsch Bahn it should have bought french trains.


You're confusing the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority with the French National Railway (SNCF).


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> I have to say he makes a point here, Deutsch Bahn has never ordered anything else than German trains, and what he said about the police is also true for the entire German administration.


That is actually not true. 
DB (and other German operators) have quite a few Alstom build trains on their roster. That Germany railway operators only buy German has been a thing of the past for quite some time. "Buying german" is not as widespread in Germany is "buying french" is in France. French companies can (and do) operate train services in Germany.
That the German police only buys german build cars is also not true...


----------



## thun

Exactly. E. g. some Länder polices run Harley Davidson, Yamaha and Honda motorcycles and Japanese 4x4s if I'm not wrong.

DBs series 640, 648 (Coradia LINT) and 440 (Coradia Continental) are buildt by Alsthom Deutschland (formerly LHB), to name a few. DB even operated a EMD loco (DB series 258/british class 59)


----------



## K_

thun said:


> Exactly. E. g. some Länder polices run Harley Davidson, Yamaha and Honda motorcycles and Japanese 4x4s if I'm not wrong.


I've even seen Renault and Fiat police vans in Germany.



> DBs series 640, 648 (Coradia LINT) and 440 (Coradia Continental) are buildt by Alsthom Deutschland (formerly LHB), to name a few. DB even operated a EMD loco (DB series 258/british class 59)


And Stadler (from, Switzerland) has also delivered quite a few trains to Germany.

But it also true that when DB bought a few TGVs for the Köln - Paris Thalys service these trains were registered with the NMBS, as at that time it was indeed unthinkable for DB to own a French train.
However in Germany that's a thing of the past. In France it might become a thing of the past too, but don't hold your breath...


----------



## AlexNL

I think SNCF is making a wise choice here by not using it's veto right (as a 55% shareholder I am pretty sure they have one)... SNCF knows very well that if the tender process has been done well (i.e. according to the rules) they don't stand a chance on veto'ing the decision of Eurostar, while a veto would seriously affect Eurostar business (more specific: delay expansion into NL and Germany) and might even affect SNCF itself in future tenders for public transport.

Velaro has at least one benefit over whatever the AGV might offer: its predecessor is already admitted in the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Germany, while the Alstom product still has to get admission for all of these countries. Velaro D is an evolution of the ICE-3M(F), which would make it easier to get the trains admitted for each country. AGV is a revolution when compared to TGV: different propulsion systems, distributed and no longer two strong power cars, etc.


----------



## caserass

endrity said:


> Eurostar is a private entity! Private! For the French this might be a bit weird to understand but it has a right to do, buy, sell whatever they want. If they decided on Siemens there must be a reason.


Since SNCF owns 55 % of Eurostar and SNCF being a public company Eurostar is not so private. Furthermore, the deficit of eurostar has been financed by the states and this company exists thanks to the taxes paid by the french and english people, so no, this is maybe not so private.




> He would have somewhat of a point if the French government bought these trains, and Germany never buys anything other than German. Which is of course far from the truth, the French government has been accused of protectionism more than any other government of a highly developed country.


France is often accused of protectionnism and it is true to say it, nethertheless, I think the french gvt is right.... sometimes 




> But there is a reason why Eurostar bought these trains! Eurostar has claimed that by buying Siemens trains they can operate in the near future in Germany before DB starts competing against them in the Channel Tunnel. There were technical reasons why Siemens trains are better


ok why not, just show me that, coz it seems to me that when the judge gave its decision he said that Alstom had strong argument about the security and the way how the offer has been evaluate, but I can be wrong.



> p.s First Alstom complained that the Siemens trains were unsafe. Then it was revealed that technically the AGV and the Velaro are similar.
> So now it has switched his argument to unfair competition. The suggest that the Velaro is inferior, yet it is becoming one of the most sought after trains in the world, whereas the AGV has yet to sell anywhere except France and Italy.


No, from the beginning Alstom says two things : first the siemens trains are unsafe, second the condition of the offer hasn't been respected by siemens and of course eurotunnel. 
As far as I know, the english judge has said that he cannont judge this case but the arguments of Alstom were strong and should be send in another court.




endrity said:


> The Eurotunnel is a franco-english infrastructure, whose benefits are shared only by the French and English authorities. Buying Siemens trains doesn't mean that the German government get to benefit from fees on the tunnel.


We are talking about an order of 600 millions €. It's not the point, even if you're right here.


----------



## caserass

Frankly guys, I'm sure sometimes you can see a polizeiwagen which is not a german car, but be honest it's rare, very very rare. Most of them are Opel, VW, Audi and Mercedes.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> No, from the beginning Alstom says two things : first the siemens trains are unsafe,


Alsthom says that the Siemens trains don't meet the current tunnel safety standards. That is something completely different. It doesn't mean the trains are unsafe...


----------



## makita09

The argument over whether Alstom's safety concerns are valid does not answer why they themselves proposed a train that didn't deal with the safety concerns Alstom and the French govt are now invoking.

For that reason alone, regardless of how valid Alstom is/was, they and the French govt are trying to pull one over, simple as that. Thats like attmepting to shoot someone, then claiming the moral high ground just because someone else shot the target before you did.


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> Alsthom says that the Siemens trains don't meet the current tunnel safety standards. That is something completely different. It doesn't mean the trains are unsafe...


You're right it's completely different, my mistake, actually I was responding to endrity and I took the same words : 



endrity said:


> p.s *First Alstom complained that the Siemens trains were unsafe*. Then it was revealed that technically the AGV and the Velaro are similar. So now it has switched his argument to unfair competition. The suggest that the Velaro is inferior, yet it is becoming one of the most sought after trains in the world, whereas the AGV has yet to sell anywhere except France and Italy.


----------



## 33Hz

K_ said:


> Alsthom says that the Siemens trains don't meet the current tunnel safety standards. That is something completely different. It doesn't mean the trains are unsafe...


The Velaro D variant that Eurostar has ordered does meet the March 2010 safety standards, but the remaining hurdle is that it hasn't yet been certified.


----------



## caserass

makita09 said:


> The argument over whether Alstom's safety concerns are valid does not answer why they themselves proposed a train that didn't deal with the safety concerns Alstom and the French govt are now invoking.


hno: that's not true at all. The criterias are very clear and the alstom TGV using the tunnel follow the rules, which is not the case of the ICE.
The lenght of the train has to be 400 meters minimum.
the trains must have locomotives, the motors being present at the begining and at the end of the trains. Actually, several motors increase the danger, and frankly ICE is not very well-know for its reliability.
The trains have to be undividable.

Again, I can be wrong but show me where.



> For that reason alone, regardless of how valid Alstom is/was, they and the French govt are trying to pull one over, simple as that. Thats like attmepting to shoot someone, then claiming the moral high ground just because someone else shot the target before you did.


The french gvt acts Just like Merkel did when DB wanted to buy TGV instead of ICE, as simple as that. Whereas Alstom had won the offer they never send any TGV to DB....


----------



## caserass

33Hz said:


> The Velaro D variant that Eurostar has ordered does meet the March 2010 safety standards, but the remaining hurdle is that it hasn't yet been certified.


There is no MARCH 2010 SAFETY STANDARDS, this standards didn't recieve any kind of validation.... and that's the problem actually, and that's the reason why Alstom will win.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> hno: that's not true at all. The criterias are very clear and the alstom TGV using the tunnel follow the rules, which is not the case of the ICE.
> The lenght of the train has to be 400 meters minimum.


The train does not have to be 400 meters minimum. The curent eurostar sets are 394m, and the regional eurostars are were even shorter. Longer than 400m would be problematic, as 400m is the maximum length for a passenger train under the TSI norms.



> the trains must have locomotives, the motors being present at the begining and at the end of the trains. Actually, several motors increase the danger, and frankly ICE is not very well-know for its reliability.


Remember last winter? The problems were due to a fundamental design flaw that all current TGV derivatives (and quite a few french loco's) suffer from.
The Velaro-D has proven to be reliable, and is a significantly different design than the ICE-3.



> The trains have to be undividable.


You mean dividable, right?



> The french gvt acts Just like Merkel did when DB wanted to buy TGV instead of ICE, as simple as that. Whereas Alstom had won the offer they never send any TGV to DB....


Can you give me more info about that? You appear to claim that Alsthom actually won the offer to supply DB with new high speed trains, but that the Government interfered? I have not heard anything about such a thing.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> There is no MARCH 2010 SAFETY STANDARDS, this standards didn't recieve any kind of validation.... and that's the problem actually, and that's the reason why Alstom will win.


You can find the network statement for Eurotunnel here:

http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcFreight/ukcRail/ukprail

It says amongst other things:

"The criteria set out in the section apply to all passenger-carrying train compositions.* Trains may be composed of vehicles hauled by locomotives positioned at either end or be formed from motor sets. There must be a driving position at each end of the train*."

and 

"The availability of emergency exits every 375m into the protected environment of the service tunnel is a main feature of the safety arrangements for occupants of the Channel Tunnel. One of the pre-conditions for efficient and safe evacuation of passengers in an emergency is to stop the train, and more specifically a coach carrying passengers or directly accessible by passengers, alongside an emergency exit. In order for this condition to be systematically achieved, irrespective of stopping conditions in particular, passenger *trains are normally required to be at least 375m long (excluding power cars*, unless passengers can easily evacuate from them) and passengers have to be able to pass from one end to the other. This base configuration provides the optimum conditions of safety if evacuation is necessary."

So the E320 sets could indeed meet the required safety standards, as they are of sufficient length, and distributed power is allowed. The wording however suggest that the requirement for a minimum length of 375m is not set in stone.

Incidently: The eurostar sets also have distributed power (as there are powered bogies on passenger cars) and are shorter than the minimum length of 375 if one excludes the power cars. Also the NOL sets are only 320m long, and they used to be cleared for the tunnel also.


----------



## makita09

caserass said:


> the trains must have locomotives, the motors being present at the begining and at the end of the trains. Actually, several motors increase the danger, and frankly ICE is not very well-know for its reliability.
> The trains have to be undividable.
> 
> Again, I can be wrong but show me where.


K has answered the other points, but with respect to this one Alstom did not tender a locomotive + trailer package. That is my point. They are complaining that Eurostar opted for distributed power, when this is what they themselves proposed. As the entire tendering process was not done in the normal fasion the details of Alstom's proposal are not available AFAIK, but Roger Ford's informed sources in Modern Railways magazine says that Alstom tendered a distributed power unit, and this is why there is such a fuss about the mess within the industry at the moment.

The trains do not have to be undividable. The existing Eurostar trainsets ARE dividable, in the middle, this is why the middle two trailer cars are not articulated.


----------



## joseph1951

caserass said:


> *I have to say he makes a point here, Deutsch Bahn has never ordered anything else than German trains, and what he said about the police is also true for the entire German administration*.


So?
At best this proves that the German companies buy German.


----------



## AlexNL

joseph1951 said:


> So?
> At best this proves that the German companies buy German.


Which is like saying that American citizens prefer buying American cars because they're American. It doesn't say anything about the quality of the other cars.

I am not so sure about whether or not Alstom will 'win' this. There are no winners in this case... maybe except for Alstom if they do win. Then Eurostar will lose on it, Siemens loses on it, and the whole privatization and open inner borders thinking which is behind the EU will lose because of it.


----------



## Axelferis

they started to advert in st pancras! i saw the ads this week end! Siemens dressed yellow habits for traditional eurostar!


----------



## 33Hz

caserass said:


> There is no MARCH 2010 SAFETY STANDARDS, this standards didn't recieve any kind of validation.... and that's the problem actually, and that's the reason why Alstom will win.


http://m.ft.com/cms/s/0/559848ea-d307-11df-9ae9-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss




> Richard Clifton, head of the UK delegation to the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority, said no party had raised serious concerns during a consultation launched in July last year about allowing trains with distributed power – motors distributed throughout the train – use the tunnel.
> 
> "During the consultation exercise, no serious opposition to trains with distributed power running into the tunnel was raised by any consultees," Mr Clifton said. "Certainly, Alstom, in the submission that they made, raised no concerns about distributed power."
> 
> The safety authority's consultation on the tunnel safety rules culminated in the issuing of a letter on March 31 this year by the Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission setting out the review's conclusions. The letter, which was sent to Alstom, says the IGC has accepted the principle of allowing trains with distributed power to use the tunnel.


----------



## joseph1951

AlexNL said:


> 1-
> Which is like saying that American citizens prefer buying American cars because they're American. It doesn't say anything about the quality of the other cars.
> 2-
> I am not so sure about whether or not Alstom will 'win' this. There are no winners in this case... maybe except for Alstom if they do win. Then Eurostar will lose on it, Siemens loses on it, and the whole privatization and open inner borders thinking which is behind the EU will lose because of it.


1-Yes.
2-
No, Alstom will not win,..probabily, and if it "wins" it will be a very Pyrric victory, that is to say a Victory which as suour as a defeat. 
a)
Eurotunnel owned by French, (55%?) British (40%?) and Belgian? (5%?) Railways and:
b)
Eurotunel is a company, which operates independently from either SNCF, BR (or whatever .) and Belgian state owned railways. 
As such Eurotunnel has it own legal standing and the decision to buy a modified ICE 4 version was made by the Eurotunnel Board of Directors.
b)
Alstom partecipated to the bidding with the AGV, an articulated train, which for the time being exists only as a prototype, while Siemens suggested its version of a train already tested and sold worldwide.
c)
The tunnel safety rules have changed, or are about to change. 
d)
A British Judge has rejected the application lodged by Alston.
e)
Clearly the French transport Minister has complained, and a few heads have fallen, but this is just normal smoke, made both to save face and to force Eurotunnel to buy either some AGV or some Speedelia trains.


----------



## Gag Halfrunt

^^ You mean Eurostar. Eurotunnel, which owns the Channel Tunnel, is an entirely different company.


----------



## K_

Gag Halfrunt said:


> ^^ You mean Eurostar. Eurotunnel, which owns the Channel Tunnel, is an entirely different company.


And the safety certificates are handed out by yet another organisation, the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority. And in that body the Brits have equal say, and we know that the UK would love to see more operators through the Chunnel.


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

caserass said:


> France is often accused of protectionnism and it is true to say it, nethertheless, I think the french gvt is right.... sometimes


hno:


----------



## sotavento

K_ said:


> That is actually not true.
> DB (and other German operators) have quite a few Alstom build trains on their roster. That Germany railway operators only buy German has been a thing of the past for quite some time. "Buying german" is not as widespread in Germany is "buying french" is in France. French companies can (and do) operate train services in Germany.
> That the German police only buys german build cars is also not true...



People usually make a rather simple mistake.


Buying french usually means buying alstom for the last decades or so


buying german usually means buying either Siemens or Bombardier (or any of their previous inumerous consolidated companies such as K-M , ABB , Asea , LHB ,and such) 

Buying british on the other hand has no real meaning nowadays :dunno:

^^ A lot of new trains in france are actually from Bombardier ... one must remember that. :cheers:


----------



## sotavento

joseph1951 said:


> So?
> At best this proves that the German companies buy German.


The french industry designed the TGV for HS in SNCF routes 

The german industry designed the ICE1/2/3/VT for the german HS routes 


Siemens and Bombardier seem to had much more focus on the goal than alstom when it cames to suplying the german market.

On the other hand ... french are really protectionists ... probably that's why the french TGV trainsts are forbiden to go into HSL Koln-Frankfurt ... oh ... wait... 


:lol:


----------



## K_

sotavento said:


> On the other hand ... french are really protectionists ... probably that's why the french TGV trainsts are forbiden to go into HSL Koln-Frankfurt ... oh ... wait...


French TGV trainsets are not a priori forbidden to go on to the HSL Köln Frankfurt. SNCF just never asked for their trains to be certified for that route as they have no interest in it. German ICE-1 and 2 trains aren't allowed on that route as well btw, and it is possible that an unmodified French TGV would not achieve certification for this route either. It's mostly a matter of technical standards. Magnetic rail brakes are required on the Köln Frankfurt HSL, on French HSLs they are forbidden...
The ICE-3 had to be modified to be allowed on French HSLs. If SNCF were to procure a train from any manufacturer, and get it certified for the HSL Köln - Frankfurt it would be permitted to run on it.


----------



## caserass

33Hz said:


> http://m.ft.com/cms/s/0/559848ea-d307-11df-9ae9-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss


you should read the letter then : COMMISSION INTERGOUVERNEMENTALE AU TUNNEL SOUS LA MANCHE CHANNEL TUNNEL INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMISSION

here is the introduction of this letter


> The objective of this letter is to advise you of the conclusions reached by the Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission (IGC) on its review of the unified safety rules relating to the Channel Tunnel, on which it initially wrote to consultees on 21 July 2009. The IGC later placed the letter on its website and, ultimately, responses were received from a wide variety of organisations. The conclusions have been reached after considering the results of consultation, including at consultation meetings held in London on 16 November 2009 and 26 February 2010, and advice from the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority (CTSA). *The conclusions will be further discussed with the Concessionaires with a view to introducing any new operating rules necessary to implement them.*
> The conclusions are set out below in the order raised in the original consultation letter.


The problem has nothing to do with the quality or the security in itself, it's just about law and rules. The order has been based on new criterias who weren't validated, I tend to believe than Alstom will be able to break the order.


----------



## caserass

Marie-Joseph-Paul said:


> hno:


this kind of answer : hno: is pretty pathetic you know.

If you have something to say, say it.


----------



## AlexNL

> Eurostar : Alstom's statement
> 
> 11 November 2010
> 
> Alstom has proceeded with legal action at the High Court in London on the merits of the case questioning the fairness of the tender for Eurostar high speed trains. During the preliminary hearing on 10 November, the court set the calendar of the procedure, fixed the date of the trial for October 2011 and ordered Eurostar to disclose the documents relating to the evaluation of the offers, which it failed to hand over during the previous injunction proceedings.
> 
> Press Contact
> Stéphane Farhi - Tel +33 1 41 49 33 08
> [email protected]


Source: Alstom.com


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

caserass said:


> France is often accused of protectionnism and it is true to say it, nethertheless, I think the french gvt is right.... sometimes







caserass said:


> this kind of answer : hno: is pretty pathetic you know.
> 
> If you have something to say, say it.


Do you think that economic protectionism is a good policy?


----------



## 33Hz

AlexNL said:


> Source: Alstom.com


So Alstom are suing their existing customer and hoping to delay the order by setting court cases a year in the future.

Meanwhile, DB will push on with getting access to London and get an even bigger head start on the same markets.


Do Alstom really think this is going to endear them to other operators around the world?


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

sotavento said:


> ^^ A lot of new trains in france are actually from Bombardier ... one must remember that. :cheers:


A lot of new trains in France are actually from .........*Bombardier Transport France S.A.S.* :lol:
http://www.bombardier.com/en/corporate/about-us/worldwide-presence/france?docID=0901260d80017172#
Usines---->Crespin, Caen, Paris
Le site BOMBARDIER Transport de Crespin (Nord), anciennement ANF Industrie, emploie plus de 1600 employés. Il produit des métros, tramways, trams sur pneus, trains urbains et régionaux, automotrices et rames TGV. Les principaux contrats sont le TGV Duplex, le TER2N NG et le ZTER pour la SNCF, le MI2N et le MF 2000 pour la RATP et l’AGC, pour les régions Françaises. L’établissement de Crespin comporte également un Centre d’Expertise Bogies.
http://www.grrt.fr/html/grrt/adherents.php?id_adherent=45

http://www.bombardier.com/en/corporate/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID=0901260d800f835b


----------



## 33Hz

caserass said:


> you should read the letter then : COMMISSION INTERGOUVERNEMENTALE AU TUNNEL SOUS LA MANCHE CHANNEL TUNNEL INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMISSION
> 
> here is the introduction of this letter
> 
> 
> The problem has nothing to do with the quality or the security in itself, it's just about law and rules. The order has been based on new criterias who weren't validated, I tend to believe than Alstom will be able to break the order.



The rest of the letter is very telling. Especially section III.


----------



## caserass

33Hz said:


> The rest of the letter is very telling. Especially section III.


yes it is true, but as i said the criterias in the letter to let the new trains go through the tunnel hasn't been validated, at least not yet.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> The problem has nothing to do with the quality or the security in itself, it's just about law and rules. The order has been based on new criterias who weren't validated, I tend to believe than Alstom will be able to break the order.



The important point here is that Alstom itself also proposed a train with distributed traction, so they obviously assumed that such a train was acceptable, or would become acceptable. Offering a product compliant with a future set of requirements is not bad practice. 
Alstom can't just argue that the competing product disqualifies because it uses distributed traction, as it offered such a product itself.


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> The important point here is that Alstom itself also proposed a train with distributed traction, so they obviously assumed that such a train was acceptable, or would become acceptable. Offering a product compliant with a future set of requirements is not bad practice.
> Alstom can't just argue that the competing product disqualifies because it uses distributed traction, as it offered such a product itself.


Unfortunately, the law is the law and even if Alstom proposed a new train it doesn't change the fact that maybe the bid request wasn't legal. I guess they made this proposal because they were sure they would win the order.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> Unfortunately, the law is the law and even if Alstom proposed a new train it doesn't change the fact that maybe the bid request wasn't legal. I guess they made this proposal because they were sure they would win the order.


The law is the law, but there is nothing illegal in proposing a product that does not comply with current requirements, but that anticipates complying with future requirements.
The bidding process Eurostar used needs to be open and transparent, that is the law. Only if Alstom can prove that the choice was not made according to the a priori published criteria do they have a case.


----------



## caserass

Marie-Joseph-Paul said:


> Do you think that economic protectionism is a good policy?


all the countries in the world with few exceptions follow a policy of protectionism and I can tell you the european countries (and France of course) aren't the worst about that.

For example, the custom duties is a mean often used by the countries following a protectionism policy and AFAIK France is clearly open in the contrary countries like Japan or US are finally very protectionnist. It is just an example but protectionism is not just fighting on one contract or fighting for just one company as it has been done by France in the past.

Also, I would say seeing the result of a free trade world and the consequences on Africa and some other parts in the world, so yes my conclusion is sometimes protectionnism can be a good thing and seeing the result the french have had with their public companies, I'm sorry but I cannot see any good reason to stop fighting for them.


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> The law is the law, but there is nothing illegal in proposing a product that does not comply with current requirements, but that anticipates complying with future requirements.


It seems you don't understand very well, in regards of the law there is not future requirements since the future requirements haven't been validated. That's the point.



> The bidding process Eurostar used needs to be open and transparent, that is the law. Only if Alstom can prove that the choice was not made according to the a priori published criteria do they have a case.


No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.


----------



## Sopomon

caserass said:


> It seems you don't understand very well, in regards of the law there is not future requirements since the future requirements haven't been validated. That's the point.
> 
> 
> 
> No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.


How can you be sure? What in the literature of this case have read that tells you this is illegal? Otherwise, it's too early to jump to conclusions such as that. 
Secondly, on such a valuable order, it's highly unlikely that illegal practices would have occurred, there's simply too much risk of said order becoming null and void.

In the end, it seems that Alstom has provided an inferior product, and Eurostar simply chose the rolling stock that would serve the company best. Alstom (and to an extent the French Government) are probably simply trying to make a show of their displeasure, to appease the French population, and they'll eventually let this event fade away and concentrate their efforts on producing a better product for the next time.


----------



## sotavento

K_ said:


> French TGV trainsets are not a priori forbidden to go on to the HSL Köln Frankfurt. SNCF just never asked for their trains to be certified for that route as they have no interest in it. German ICE-1 and 2 trains aren't allowed on that route as well btw, and it is possible that an unmodified French TGV would not achieve certification for this route either. It's mostly a matter of technical standards. Magnetic rail brakes are required on the Köln Frankfurt HSL, on French HSLs they are forbidden...
> The ICE-3 had to be modified to be allowed on French HSLs. If SNCF were to procure a train from any manufacturer, and get it certified for the HSL Köln - Frankfurt it would be permitted to run on it.


It was meant to be a joke ... as in _since french were protectionists they proibited their tgv trainsets from entering german HS_L. :cheers:


----------



## sotavento

Marie-Joseph-Paul said:


> A lot of new trains in France are actually from .........*Bombardier Transport France S.A.S.* :lol:
> http://www.bombardier.com/en/corporate/about-us/worldwide-presence/france?docID=0901260d80017172#
> Usines---->Crespin, Caen, Paris
> Le site BOMBARDIER Transport de Crespin (Nord), anciennement ANF Industrie, emploie plus de 1600 employés. Il produit des métros, tramways, trams sur pneus, trains urbains et régionaux, automotrices et rames TGV. Les principaux contrats sont le TGV Duplex, le TER2N NG et le ZTER pour la SNCF, le MI2N et le MF 2000 pour la RATP et l’AGC, pour les régions Françaises. L’établissement de Crespin comporte également un Centre d’Expertise Bogies.
> http://www.grrt.fr/html/grrt/adherents.php?id_adherent=45
> 
> http://www.bombardier.com/en/corporate/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID=0901260d800f835b


Oui biensur messieur. :lol:


----------



## sotavento

K_ said:


> The law is the law, but there is nothing illegal in proposing a product that does not comply with current requirements, but that anticipates complying with future requirements.
> The bidding process Eurostar used needs to be open and transparent, that is the law. Only if Alstom can prove that the choice was not made according to the a priori published criteria do they have a case.


Each and every time that such p+roposals are made we get the usual winner of the 1st proposal to be refused in any given railway procurement inquiry.


If it's off the specks then it's simply refused ... no further apeals can put it back into the race. :bash:


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

sotavento said:


> Oui biensur messieur. :lol:


 :lol:
http://www.ces.fas.harvard.edu/publications/docs/pdfs/Meunier.pdf


----------



## pietje01

caserass said:


> No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.


But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.

They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> all the countries in the world with few exceptions follow a policy of protectionism and I can tell you the european countries (and France of course) aren't the worst about that.


protectionism is generally bad for the country that is protectionist. The US is a nice example: They could have far better passenger rail if they allowed European off the shelf equioemnt.



> Also, I would say seeing the result of a free trade world and the consequences on Africa and some other parts in the world, so yes my conclusion is sometimes protectionnism can be a good thing and seeing the result the french have had with their public companies, I'm sorry but I cannot see any good reason to stop fighting for them.


Actually the "results of a free trade world" is an unprecedented reduction in poverty and misery in the world, so it's a good thing. It's the countries that participated most in world trade that have made the biggest advancements here. The misery you see in some parts of Africa is not due to increased free trade, as these countries have actually reduced trading with the rest of the world...

And I wouldn't claim that the French public companies are that good. SNCF for example is good at running trains very fast, but not so good at transporting passengers in a convenient way.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> It seems you don't understand very well, in regards of the law there is not future requirements since the future requirements haven't been validated. That's the point.


If I read all the documents correctly trains are validated on a case by case basis. It's not requirements that need to be validated, it's rolling stock. 
In order for a company to run through channel tunnel is needs to get a safety certificate for the rolling stock it uses. In order to get that certificate it needs to demonstrate the train can run safely.
There has in fact never been a "a priori" ban on the use of distributed traction. (If there was, than the current Eurostar sets would not comply either).
Both Siemens and Alstom assumed that a train with distributed traction could get a safety certificate. But the safety certificate will only be given to the train once it's build. I suppose the contract Eurostar intends to sign with it's supplier would include a cancellation clause if the trains don't pass their certification.



> No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.


The bidding was not illegal. My conclusion from this story is that Alstom is just behaving like a bad loser.


----------



## 33Hz

People are talking about protectionism as if it's ok or understandable, but the reality is this deal was taking place in the EU between companies in three EU countries. There is no point in having the EU if it's members don't respect what it means.


----------



## caserass

pietje01 said:


> But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.
> 
> They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.


:lol:

guess who will have to pay if Eurostar get bankrupt ?


----------



## caserass

Sopomon said:


> How can you be sure? What in the literature of this case have read that tells you this is illegal?


The trains made by siemens doesn't follow the security rules.




> Otherwise, it's too early to jump to conclusions such as that.
> Secondly, on such a valuable order, it's highly unlikely that illegal practices would have occurred, there's simply too much risk of said order becoming null and void.


:lol: IMO i think you have no idea how it is hard to fulfill all the requirements in this kind of order, If I say that 90% of this kind of order could be null and void it's not an exageration at all.




> In the end, it seems that Alstom has provided an inferior product,


not really, actually Alstom has provided a superior product but by far more expensive, plus I tend to believe that eurostar is trying to change the security rules in the tunnel to increase their margin.



> and Eurostar simply chose the rolling stock that would serve the company best.


The company, yes, the owner of the tunnel not really, as for the consummer.... it would be largely exagerated to say the futur consumer in the train of siemens jeopardize his life but the risk would be certainly higher. The thing is the french state gave its agreement to examine the new criterias of the trains but it seems they did it a bit too fast and didn't expect siemens would be able to provide a trains fulfilling the requirements.




> Alstom (and to an extent the French Government) are probably simply trying to make a show of their displeasure, to appease the French population,


no actually the french population doesn't care about this story. I think it's really a probem of money and reputation.




> and they'll eventually let this event fade away and concentrate their efforts on producing a better product for the next time.


That's not the problem.

As you can see, you already think the ICE is better than the AGV, as I said a problem of reputation....


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> Actually the "results of a free trade world" is an unprecedented reduction in poverty and misery in the world, so it's a good thing. It's the countries that participated most in world trade that have made the biggest advancements here. The misery you see in some parts of Africa is not due to increased free trade, as these countries have actually reduced trading with the rest of the world...


Actually, this point is always brought by the liberal, but when you are looking at the economy of countries well behind you'll see that the free trade is never made for them and cost more than it brings.

The free trade world is certainly the best solution but it's not the only solution. As I said sometimes a bit of protectionnism can be good. Of course I talk about the free trade world of 2010 not the one knew by grand daddy in the 50 and 60. The advancements made by the poorer are peanuts compared to the one made by countries like France, UK or US and you still have famine everywhere in Africa despites 60 years of free trade. Of course there's more than that, and you could find more arguments to show me how I'm wrong about that, but we are off topic, so if you want to discuss about that with me you can PM me.




> And I wouldn't claim that the French public companies are that good. SNCF for example is good at running trains very fast, but not so good at transporting passengers in a convenient way.


you focus on train, but the support of big companies in France are paying, France has got more multinational than any other country in europe. Among them there are a lot of number one.


----------



## pietje01

caserass said:


> guess who will have to pay if Eurostar get bankrupt ?


Like always with a bankrupcy: the creditors


----------



## Sopomon

caserass said:


> The trains made by siemens doesn't follow the security rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lol: IMO i think you have no idea how it is hard to fulfill all the requirements in this kind of order, If I say that 90% of this kind of order could be null and void it's not an exageration at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not really, actually Alstom has provided a superior product but by far more expensive, plus I tend to believe that eurostar is trying to change the security rules in the tunnel to increase their margin.
> 
> 
> 
> The company, yes, the owner of the tunnel not really, as for the consummer.... it would be largely exagerated to say the futur consumer in the train of siemens jeopardize his life but the risk would be certainly higher. The thing is the french state gave its agreement to examine the new criterias of the trains but it seems they did it a bit too fast and didn't expect siemens would be able to provide a trains fulfilling the requirements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no actually the french population doesn't care about this story. I think it's really a probem of money and reputation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not the problem.
> 
> As you can see, you already think the ICE is better than the AGV, as I said a problem of reputation....


Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway.

Firstly, the trains made by Siemens don't follow the current security rules, that's probably true, but neither do the current trains, nor do what Alsthom was planning on supplying. (Current trains aren't 400m long)

Secondly. if Siemens have it 90% null and void, then Alsthom would have probably ended up with a contract that was 90% null and void as well, as they were both offering very similar products, and going by your arguement, Alsthom wouls have also found it exceptionally difficult to fulfil all criteria.

Thridly, that is a moot point, as Eurostar would have chosen that which would have been the best product in many categories, for example; Reliability, Running Costs, Total Passenger Number, *and* that it's have to pass all saftey regulations. Eurostar wouldn't have signed the deal if it felt that it would get no return from the trainsets due to them being forbidden from running through the tunnel. Also, what is a margin? You can't have a margin just by itself, what are you trying to say? Marginal productivity? Marginal costs? Marginal Revenue? You're not really making sense there.

Your point about the safety doesn't make much sense, could you clarify, please?

I personally am neutral on the issue, and simply claiming that I have bias for a particular rolling stock manufacturer is no way to make a point, I simply felt I had to counter your views wich were largely baseless and more opinion than fact.


----------



## Maarten Otto

For what I understand in this matter is that Eurostar used a very odd, "through the back door" construction for their procurement. This contruction was set up many years ago. Both Alstom and Siemens are in this odd construction of rail equipment and rolling stock procurement since day one.
It has something to to with options to scout market conditions and possibilities without any need to announce it to the public or rail industry. 

Eurostar just asked both manufactuers what they could do without any obligation to buy or announce anything. In the end they were satisfied by the Siemens offer.... and bought it.

As this is a solely British construction that both Eurostar, Siemens and Alstom are part of, the Court decided that this construction was valid (all parties involved knew of it's existence). 

Eurotunnel safety certification has nothing to do with a rolling stock procurement. If Eurostar says "we can do this" then they must prove their new trains are indeed safe enough for the tunnel.
And last month ICE 3 tests in the tunnel (by DB) is proving that it might work.

Indeed Alstom is a bad loser.


----------



## caserass

Sopomon said:


> Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway.


I'm sure it will be very funny !  of course beginning with a sentence like "not sure you know what you're talking about " means you know a lot of things but you are a bit rude or arrogant... 



> Firstly, the trains made by Siemens don't follow the current security rules, that's probably true, but neither do the current trains, nor do what Alsthom was planning on supplying. (Current trains aren't 400m long)


Read the question, you will maybe understand the answer. 



> Secondly. if Siemens have it 90% null and void, then Alsthom would have probably ended up with a contract that was 90% null and void as well, as they were both offering very similar products, and going by your arguement, Alsthom wouls have also found it exceptionally difficult to fulfil all criteria.


Great! excepted I didn't talk about that at all. I said "kind of order" not THIS ORDER.




> Thridly, that is a moot point, as Eurostar would have chosen that which would have been the best product in many categories, for example; Reliability, Running Costs, Total Passenger Number, *and* that it's have to pass all saftey regulations. Eurostar wouldn't have signed the deal if it felt that it would get no return from the trainsets due to them being forbidden from running through the tunnel.


what you say is logic, unfortunately, I think I'm going to use your introduction to respond you : "Not sure you know what you're talking about"




> Also, what is a margin? You can't have a margin just by itself, what are you trying to say? Marginal productivity? Marginal costs? Marginal Revenue? You're not really making sense there.


oh come on, when you use the word margin all alone it's commercial margin. BTW since we are talking about that, you should re-read your post for a start.




> Your point about the safety doesn't make much sense, could you clarify, please?


it's not my point, there are safety criterias who are not followed by the siemens or the alstom train. That's all. 





> I personally am neutral on the issue, and simply claiming that I have bias for a particular rolling stock manufacturer is no way to make a point, I simply felt I had to counter your views wich were largely baseless and more opinion than fact.


no no, I have no views as you say, I just say Alstom will win the trial and will break the order. That's it, I do not say the alstom train is better than the siemens one, frankly I don't care, First people here was thinking the new safety criterias were applied in the tunnel ( letter of the 31march 2010) I put the letter of the 31th march 2010 on the thread to show them these criterias weren't validated, and thus the order (the order doesn't mean the siemens trains) is null and void. Now they want to change my opinon about that, unfortunately I have no opinon, the most of the time I REPEAT AGAIN it's almost impossible to fulfill all the requirements put in an invitation to tender and the most of the time the order is broken.

Some people here really seems to have some problems of comprehension it's forbidden in UK and in France to order something who doens't fulffil the security rules. As I said the law is the law, and I'm pretty well informed about the invitation to tender, now people are pushing me to change my view, unfortunately it's not a VIEW. 

I have to say that I'm a bit tired to talk about that with some people who don't want to understand that even if the siemens train is good even if the alstom train doens't follow the requirements of the invitation to tender it doesnt mean the order will be validated.


BTW you didn't "clear things up " in your post, you just put some questions and you were very critical about my post being supposedly baseless, excuse me to tell you this, but where are your arguments and your sources to back up any of your claims ??? :bash:


----------



## caserass

Maarten Otto said:


> As this is a solely British construction that both Eurostar, Siemens and Alstom are part of, the Court decided that this construction was valid (all parties involved knew of it's existence).


Not sure to understand what you say here ? 



> Eurotunnel safety certification has nothing to do with a rolling stock procurement. If Eurostar says "we can do this" then they must prove their new trains are indeed safe enough for the tunnel.
> And last month ICE 3 tests in the tunnel (by DB) is proving that it might work.


lol any train can go through the tunnel.... now to meet the safety criterias that's the problems, as long as you have no problem any train is ok.

Eurostar will have the worst difficulties to prove to eurotunnel their siemens trains are safe for the tunnel, mark my word.


----------



## caserass

pietje01 said:


> Like always with a bankrupcy: the creditors


:? 

No, the one who will have to pay the creditors are not the creditors. if tommorrow eurostar get bankrupt the ones who will have to pay are : 

SNCF (69 %) : french state, in other words, french people
LCR
SNCB


----------



## K_

pietje01 said:


> But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.
> 
> They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.


Eurostar will have been clever enough to put a clause in the purchase contract voiding it if the trains don't pass certification. It thus becomes a problem for Siemens...


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> :?
> 
> No, the one who will have to pay the creditors are not the creditors. if tommorrow eurostar get bankrupt the ones who will have to pay are :
> 
> SNCF (69 %) : french state, in other words, french people
> LCR
> SNCB


They will not have to "pay". When a company goes bankrupt the following happens:
- The shareholders see the value of their shares drop, or even disappear altogether.
- Creditors will not get all the money they lend out back. 

But the French state will not have to "pay" more. It has already paid for it's share of Eurostar. The French state might have to write off Eurostar, but that's a different thing.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> Eurostar will have the worst difficulties to prove to eurotunnel their siemens trains are safe for the tunnel, mark my word.


They have allies however.
Their first ally is be Deutsche Bahn, which wants their Velaro sets to run through to London too. 
Their second ally is the British government, which would like to see more trains through the Channel tunnel.
The third ally is Eurotunnel, which would like to earn more money.

DB certainly seems to expect that its Velaro D sets will get a safety certificate for the Channel tunnel in due time. So I suppose the E320 sets will get certified in due time too.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> it's not my point, there are safety criterias who are not followed by the siemens or the alstom train. That's all.


So neither Alstom, nor Siemens offered a train that met current safety standards according to you. 
But how can then Alstom contest granting the contract to Siemens on the basis that the Siemens train doesn't meet current standards as you keep insisting?

And anyway, I have not seen any evidence that the current standards a priori prohibit both the AGV or the Velaro from running through the tunnel.


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> Some people here really seems to have some problems of comprehension it's forbidden in UK and in France to order something who doens't fulffil the security rules. As I said the law is the law, and I'm pretty well informed about the invitation to tender, now people are pushing me to change my view, unfortunately it's not a VIEW.


There is a problem with your statement however.
If it is true that you say, than it is impossible to buy trains to a new, yet unbuild design in France or the UK. 
Since SNCF however does buy trains to new designs I can only conclude that your statement must be false.


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> So neither Alstom, nor Siemens offered a train that met current safety standards according to you.


yes, the main point being the type of motorisation and the lenght of the train.



> But how can then Alstom contest granting the contract to Siemens on the basis that the Siemens train doesn't meet current standards as you keep insisting?


I repeat it again, they can because even if their offer didn't fulfill the requirements of the invitation to tender it's not the train provided by siemens they will attack but the invitation to tender itself.



> And anyway, I have not seen any evidence that the current standards a priori prohibit both the AGV or the Velaro from running through the tunnel.


the current standards of what ? safety ?


----------



## caserass

K_ said:


> There is a problem with your statement however.
> If it is true that you say, than it is impossible to buy trains to a new, yet unbuild design in France or the UK.
> Since SNCF however does buy trains to new designs I can only conclude that your statement must be false.



no, it's not what I say whatsoever, I say an invitation to tender has to take into account the safety rules applied into the country who is concerned, in this case France and UK, it is clear that eurostar asked a new designs who didn't fit with the safety rules.


----------



## Sopomon

caserass said:


> I'm sure it will be very funny !  of course beginning with a sentence like "not sure you know what you're talking about " means you know a lot of things but you are a bit rude or arrogant...
> 
> 
> 
> Read the question, you will maybe understand the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Great! excepted I didn't talk about that at all. I said "kind of order" not THIS ORDER.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what you say is logic, unfortunately, I think I'm going to use your introduction to respond you : "Not sure you know what you're talking about"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh come on, when you use the word margin all alone it's commercial margin. BTW since we are talking about that, you should re-read your post for a start.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's not my point, there are safety criterias who are not followed by the siemens or the alstom train. That's all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no no, I have no views as you say, I just say Alstom will win the trial and will break the order. That's it, I do not say the alstom train is better than the siemens one, frankly I don't care, First people here was thinking the new safety criterias were applied in the tunnel ( letter of the 31march 2010) I put the letter of the 31th march 2010 on the thread to show them these criterias weren't validated, and thus the order (the order doesn't mean the siemens trains) is null and void. Now they want to change my opinon about that, unfortunately I have no opinon, the most of the time I REPEAT AGAIN it's almost impossible to fulfill all the requirements put in an invitation to tender and the most of the time the order is broken.
> 
> Some people here really seems to have some problems of comprehension it's forbidden in UK and in France to order something who doens't fulffil the security rules. As I said the law is the law, and I'm pretty well informed about the invitation to tender, now people are pushing me to change my view, unfortunately it's not a VIEW.
> 
> I have to say that I'm a bit tired to talk about that with some people who don't want to understand that even if the siemens train is good even if the alstom train doens't follow the requirements of the invitation to tender it doesnt mean the order will be validated.
> 
> 
> BTW you didn't "clear things up " in your post, you just put some questions and you were very critical about my post being supposedly baseless, excuse me to tell you this, but where are your arguments and your sources to back up any of your claims ??? :bash:


I haven't made any claims per se. I'm not the one making these sweeping statements about the future of this contract. I haven't resorted to petty ad hominem arguements. Anyway...

On what conditions then is Alsthom trying to argue that the order must be broken? The UK high courts are highly unlikely to rule in Alsthom's favour in any condition, due to the obvious protectionism that the French State and to an extent, Alsthom are excercising.

Your other points continued to make little sense, so I haven't bothered to counter them.


----------



## caserass

Sopomon said:


> I haven't made any claims per se. I'm not the one making these sweeping statements about the future of this contract. I haven't resorted to petty ad hominem arguements. Anyway...


what ? you started by "Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway."

you came here to lecture me and now you say you hadn't any claims ! so finally if you haven't anything to say, just shut up.



> On what conditions then is Alsthom trying to argue that the order must be broken? The UK high courts are highly unlikely to rule in Alsthom's favour in any condition, due to the obvious protectionism that the French State and to an extent, Alsthom are excercising.


that's just bla bla bla, you have to be very young to think that a judge will be influenced by something else than a law... hno:



> Your other points continued to make little sense, so I haven't bothered to counter them.


good riddance !


----------



## Maxx☢Power

caserass said:


> no, it's not what I say whatsoever, I say an invitation to tender has to take into account the safety rules applied into the country who is concerned, in this case France and UK, it is clear that eurostar asked a new designs who didn't fit with the safety rules.


Do you have anything to back this claim? It's certainly illegal to run a train that isn't certified through the tunnel, but is it illegal for a company to buy a train that isn't certified for the tunnel? Seems very unlikely..


----------



## Sopomon

caserass said:


> what ? you started by "Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway."
> 
> you came here to lecture me and now you say you hadn't any claims ! so finally if you haven't anything to say, just shut up.
> 
> 
> 
> that's just bla bla bla, you have to be very young to think that a judge will be influenced by something else than a law... hno:
> 
> 
> 
> good riddance !


No need to get angry now, please learn the definition of the word "claim". I stated a fact, which was; "I'm not sure what you're talking about". It is a fact that by my own judgement, I had reason to believe that you didn't have sufficient knowledge on this matter. Anyway, back onto topic:

Judges can be influenced by pervious cases, it's common knowledge in the legal industry. Simply because many laws are very vague once you get to the finer details, it's the Judge's decision on how to interpret those laws as relevant to the case, leading to the distinct possibility of the Judge using the outcome and how the outcome was reached from a similar previous case as a "case-study" that they'd use as a guideline on how they ought to conduct future similar cases. For example, in this case: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11521949
"It is likely to have a knock-on effect to similar policies in other countries." (Although, I admit, it isn't the best example, it's the most usefeul I could find to illustrate my point in this short time)


----------



## K_

caserass said:


> no, it's not what I say whatsoever, I say an invitation to tender has to take into account the safety rules applied into the country who is concerned, in this case France and UK, it is clear that eurostar asked a new designs who didn't fit with the safety rules.


It is absolutely _not_ clear that Eurostar asked for a new design that didn't fit with the safety rules. I have so far not seen a single item of evidence that gives credibility to your statement that the e320 could never get a safety certificate under the current regime.
A train only gets a safety certificate after it has been build and tested. In order for the Velaro to get a Eurotunnel safety certificate it has to demonstrate that it can operate safely in the tunnel, and meets the safety requirement. It's for this reason that DB actually did some tests in the tunnel recently. There are a lot of requirements the train has to meet, but apparently both Siemens and Deutsche bahn seem to think that Velaro can meet them.
An Alstom AVG would have to demonstrate safe operation in the tunnel too.

When writing out a call for offers Eurostar naturally would have included the requirement that the train offered gets a safety certificate. That is not unusual. It also sometimes does indeed happen that a train fails to get that certificate, leading to problems for the company ordering the trains, and the supplier having to pay fines. One recent example is the ETR610 for SBB, which still doesn't have a safety certificate for high speed running on the Gotthard route because Alstom build the trains heavier than specified. 

But that is normally a problem for the supplier. It's not Eurostar that has to make sure that the new trains get a safety certificate. That's up to Siemens.


----------



## Marie-Joseph-Paul

caserass said:


> yes my conclusion is sometimes protectionnism can be a good thing and seeing the result the french have had with their public companies, I'm sorry but I cannot see any good reason to stop fighting for them.


La question du protectionnisme en Europe 
Je crois que l'UE dispose de règles spécifiques que chacun doit suivre scrupuleusement 
Ces règles doivent être respectées par toutes les entreprises y compris les SNCF Sinon, je crois que le corporatisme et le nationalisme peut affecter le processus d'intégration economique et infrastructurelle entre les Etats membres de l'UE...
l'Europe risque d'un processus de concentration par lequel les gouvernements ont le pouvoir de créer une forte pression politique pour aider à protéger intérêts industriels nationaux  surtout dans le monopole naturel Le processus de concentration peut conduire à de fortes "asymétries" dans les domaines économique, industrielle et infrastructurelle entre les différents pays européens.


----------



## Dase

^ Please write in frog-language in the french forums only. This is international, thus english speaking. Thanks.


----------



## Andres_Low

Marie-Joseph-Paul said:


> La question du protectionnisme en Europe
> Je crois que l'UE dispose de règles spécifiques que chacun doit suivre scrupuleusement
> Ces règles doivent être respectées par toutes les entreprises y compris les SNCF Sinon, je crois que le corporatisme et le nationalisme peut affecter le processus d'intégration economique et infrastructurelle entre les Etats membres de l'UE...
> l'Europe risque d'un processus de concentration par lequel les gouvernements ont le pouvoir de créer une forte pression politique pour aider à protéger intérêts industriels nationaux  surtout dans le monopole naturel Le processus de concentration peut conduire à de fortes "asymétries" dans les domaines économique, industrielle et infrastructurelle entre les différents pays européens.


totally agree with that, that is why we need European regulations now. National certifications are only a tool to control foreign products to become real competitors.


----------



## Rational Plan

Details in Modern Rail for DB's proposed rail service. 

It will launch in December 2013, with three 400m(two 200 m Valero units) trains a day to Brussels Midi, where the service will split. Half the train will go to Rotterdam and Amsterdam and the other half to Cologne and Frankfurt. This will be an initial service there may be additional stops at Ebbsfleet/Ashford and Liege/Aachen. If the numbers stack up, additional services would be added. Security requirements limit the number of stops that can be served and services will be 100% reservation to comply with Immigration and security checks.


----------



## Suburbanist

Rational Plan said:


> Details in Modern Rail for DB's proposed rail service.
> 
> It will launch in December 2013, with three 400m(two 200 m Valero units) trains a day to Brussels Midi, where the service will split. Half the train will go to Rotterdam and Amsterdam and the other half to Cologne and Frankfurt. This will be an initial service there may be additional stops at Ebbsfleet/Ashford and Liege/Aachen. If the numbers stack up, additional services would be added. Security requirements limit the number of stops that can be served and services will be 100% reservation to comply with Immigration and security checks.


Good to know they are not planning to allow non-reserved seats to be used on such routes, though it has nothing to do, necessarily, with immigration requirements (you could still book last-minute and pay a fortune for the privilege of travelling on the spur of the moment).

I only hoped they adopted this scheme to all their international IC trains, dropping the possibility of travelling without reservation.


----------



## AlexNL

Why? You want to make rail travel even more unattractive? Without the right tools and web sites it can already be a pain to book a trip by train from a website, which is possible with airlines. I can go to any airline site and get a ticket from Amsterdam to Atlanta to Hawaii and then back to Amsterdam, but I can't easily seem to book train tickets for Amsterdam - Rome - Madrid - Amsterdam.

And you want to make international train travel even more unattractive?


----------



## G5man

AlexNL said:


> Why? You want to make rail travel even more unattractive? Without the right tools and web sites it can already be a pain to book a trip by train from a website, which is possible with airlines. I can go to any airline site and get a ticket from Amsterdam to Atlanta to Hawaii and then back to Amsterdam, but I can't easily seem to book train tickets for Amsterdam - Rome - Madrid - Amsterdam.
> 
> And you want to make international train travel even more unattractive?


We may never know. If we have a resource, we should make it more efficient, not unatttractive.


----------



## K_

Rational Plan said:


> Details in Modern Rail for DB's proposed rail service.
> 
> It will launch in December 2013, with three 400m(two 200 m Valero units) trains a day to Brussels Midi, where the service will split. Half the train will go to Rotterdam and Amsterdam and the other half to Cologne and Frankfurt. This will be an initial service there may be additional stops at Ebbsfleet/Ashford and Liege/Aachen. If the numbers stack up, additional services would be added. Security requirements limit the number of stops that can be served and services will be 100% reservation to comply with Immigration and security checks.


I asume they will be 100% reservation between London and Brussels. I asume DB will allow less restrictions on the Brussels - Amsterdam and Brussels - Frankfurt sections. I asume that the immigration check will be done in Brussels South while the train is standing there. 

There are currently three trains per day from Frankfurt to Brussel, next year there will be four. I could imagine that DB timetables these trains in such a way as to give a two-hourly service on Frankfurt - Brussel (and thus, together with Thalys an hourly service on Köln - Brussel) and these London bound trains will be open to Brussel (and Liège and Aachen) bound passengers.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I only hoped they adopted this scheme to all their international IC trains, dropping the possibility of travelling without reservation.


So you are hoping that a company that wants to make money would voluntarily make their product less attractive? 
Do you understand anything about the "free market economy" you seem to be such a defender of?


----------



## Rational Plan

K_ said:


> I asume they will be 100% reservation between London and Brussels. I asume DB will allow less restrictions on the Brussels - Amsterdam and Brussels - Frankfurt sections. I asume that the immigration check will be done in Brussels South while the train is standing there.
> 
> There are currently three trains per day from Frankfurt to Brussel, next year there will be four. I could imagine that DB timetables these trains in such a way as to give a two-hourly service on Frankfurt - Brussel (and thus, together with Thalys an hourly service on Köln - Brussel) and these London bound trains will be open to Brussel (and Liège and Aachen) bound passengers.


I don't think so. They assume some form of customs facilities at each of these stops. Which is why they said there won't be many stops on these services. Plus they announced they were going to sell their 10% share of Thalys and were ending their relationship with them.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> So you are hoping that a company that wants to make money would voluntarily make their product less attractive?
> Do you understand anything about the "free market economy" you seem to be such a defender of?


I didn't say they should be obliged to do that, just that I hoped it happened. Optional reservation trains have the disadvantage of creating some conflicts when the train is full and some passengers refuse to shop around for free seats (or no seats at ll) to give up their place to the one who reserved the seats.


----------



## K_

Rational Plan said:


> I don't think so. They assume some form of customs facilities at each of these stops.


Neither Amsterdam, nor Rotterdam have the facilities for this, nor is it possible to provide them.



> Which is why they said there won't be many stops on these services. Plus they announced they were going to sell their 10% share of Thalys and were ending their relationship with them.


It they intend to compete with Thalys on the Köln - Brussel route it's only logical to open the Frankfurt - London trains to passengers for Frankfurt or Köln to Brussel.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I didn't say they should be obliged to do that, just that I hoped it happened. Optional reservation trains have the disadvantage of creating some conflicts when the train is full and some passengers refuse to shop around for free seats (or no seats at ll) to give up their place to the one who reserved the seats.


The potential for conflicts is however rather low. Normally it is visible at the seat if it is reserved (and from where) and I have never had a problem getting my reserved seat, nor have I had witnesses someone else having this problem.

Allowing passengers without reservations on the train has the advantage of making more money for the railway company, as it increases the value of the more expensive flexible tickets, so passengers are more likely to buy them.


----------



## Rational Plan

K_ said:


> Neither Amsterdam, nor Rotterdam have the facilities for this, nor is it possible to provide them.
> 
> 
> 
> It they intend to compete with Thalys on the Köln - Brussel route it's only logical to open the Frankfurt - London trains to passengers for Frankfurt or Köln to Brussel.


Well take it up with DB then.


----------



## K_

Rational Plan said:


> Well take it up with DB then.


Well, DB will first have to take it up with ProRail. I don't see how they will be able to get exclusive access to a platform in Rotterdam or Amsterdam for long enough that watertight passenger screening can be set up.


----------



## pietje01

Suburbanist said:


> I didn't say they should be obliged to do that, just that I hoped it happened. Optional reservation trains have the disadvantage of creating some conflicts when the train is full and some passengers refuse to shop around for free seats (or no seats at ll) to give up their place to the one who reserved the seats.


Those conflicts also happen when a train is all reservational.
Some passengers are stupid and don't read their ticket properly and so they just take a seat where they want.
I had this once on a Eurostar.


----------



## Coccodrillo

I have read of passengers choosing the right seat number but the wrong carriage; or passengers choosing the right seat number and the right coach but...on the train of the following day


----------



## Suburbanist

Maybe Pro-Rail could negotiate with DB and/or HSA and build some underground platforms in Rotterdam. Or they could make a stop in the middle of nowhere where passengers would be unloaded, processed and then boarded to England.


----------



## goschio

Suburbanist said:


> Good to know they are not planning to allow non-reserved seats to be used on such routes, though it has nothing to do, necessarily, with immigration requirements (you could still book last-minute and pay a fortune for the privilege of travelling on the spur of the moment).
> 
> I only hoped they adopted this scheme to all their international IC trains, dropping the possibility of travelling without reservation.


WTF, thats on the the biggest advanatges of intercity rail travel. You can just show up at the rail station and take the next train. If you missed the train because you wanted to have lunch then just take the next one.


----------



## Suburbanist

goschio said:


> WTF, thats on the the biggest advanatges of intercity rail travel. You can just show up at the rail station and take the next train. If you missed the train because you wanted to have lunch then just take the next one.


One thing doesn't preclude the other. With automated ticket machines, you can change your ticket in 30 seconds - paying the change penalty if your ticket was an advanced-purchase discount or so.

In any case, London-Frankfurt services will not be commuter services, but indeed long-distance services that might be used by some as commuter solutions, more or less like air shuttle operations. Without compulsory reservations, you could end up with a situation in which someone has to travel standing in the aisle for 3 hours. Worse, you could have passengers sneaking into 1st class with 2nd class tickets because 2nd class is full.

Full flexibility exists only with private vehicles, be it a car, a private jet or an yacht


----------



## NCT

Yep, free marketeer manipulates the market to suit his own dogma.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Ultimately I'd like to see a pre-registration system for anyone boarding trains to/from outside Schengen area, more or less like we have such systems for UK-bound or US-bound planes: without previous (harmless, 3 minutes) registration (that will be cross-checked with terrorism international database), you just can't board a plane to these countries, and I think it should be the same for trains UK-bound.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Suburbanist said:


> ...and I think it should be the same for trains UK-bound.


It's already the case.


----------



## Glodenox

Coccodrillo said:


> I have read of passengers choosing the right seat number but the wrong carriage; or passengers choosing the right seat number and the right coach but...on the train of the following day


I've seen the first happen quite a lot to people. In the four times I've used the Eurostar, I've already had about 8 people who asked me whether they were in the correct carriage... Usually they weren't.

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ Ultimately I'd like to see a pre-registration system for anyone boarding trains to/from outside Schengen area, more or less like we have such systems for UK-bound or US-bound planes: without previous (harmless, 3 minutes) registration (that will be cross-checked with terrorism international database), you just can't board a plane to these countries, and I think it should be the same for trains UK-bound.


Of course sanity could break out in the UK, and the security theater dropped.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Maybe Pro-Rail could negotiate with DB and/or HSA and build some underground platforms in Rotterdam.


Underground platforms for a handful of trains a day? They'll be laughing for days if you suggest that. Prorail doesn't build any infrastructure unless it's going to be used by at least a train per hour.


----------



## K_

Glodenox said:


> I've seen the first happen quite a lot to people. In the four times I've used the Eurostar, I've already had about 8 people who asked me whether they were in the correct carriage... Usually they weren't.


The problem is that some people aren't used to paying attention to the carriage numbers while on the platform.
Maybe it would be better to do away with assigned seats, and just do as some low cost arilines do: You just take a seat you fancy. As long as you don't board more passengers as there are seats that is not really a problem.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> In any case, London-Frankfurt services will not be commuter services, but indeed long-distance services that might be used by some as commuter solutions, more or less like air shuttle operations. Without compulsory reservations, you could end up with a situation in which someone has to travel standing in the aisle for 3 hours. Worse, you could have passengers sneaking into 1st class with 2nd class tickets because 2nd class is full.


The thing is that if DB wants to have a chance of making money on these trains they have to carry enough passengers. So they will integrate these trains in their domestic network and also carry Frankfurt - Köln or Köln - Aachen passengers on them. On these routes you can't work with compulsory reservations. Not if you want customers.


----------



## rheintram

I hate the way the French behave in this matter:

- First they offer AGV
- They lose against Velaro
- Then suddenly they claim only their 20 y.o. TGV fulfills the safety standards

Oh, wait a minute, why did you offer your AGV then, which according to your very own claim, doesn't fulfill the standards either?


----------



## Sopomon

rheintram said:


> I hate the way the French behave in this matter:
> 
> - First they offer AGV
> - They lose against Velaro
> - Then suddenly they claim only their 20 y.o. TGV fulfills the safety standards
> 
> Oh, wait a minute, why did you offer your AGV then, which according to your very own claim, doesn't fulfill the standards either?


Hear, hear, my sentiments exactly


----------



## Stainless

K_ said:


> The problem is that some people aren't used to paying attention to the carriage numbers while on the platform.
> Maybe it would be better to do away with assigned seats, and just do as some low cost arilines do: You just take a seat you fancy. As long as you don't board more passengers as there are seats that is not really a problem.


This would be good, I had difficult last year seating myself next to someone as we had to buy different tickets (I needed a combined ticket to bristol, he just wanted london to brussels). In the end we had to buy them simultaneously on different computers asking for adjacent seats.:nuts:


----------



## 33Hz

There are two separate issues really. One is passport checks, the other x-ray machines.

The x-ray machines are supposedly there to check for bombs. Yet, for what? If anyone wanted to bomb the Channel Tunnel they could just take one through in a car. If they wanted to bomb the London tunnels, they could take one on an HS1 domestic service. They offer no value - yet if they must be used, the Spanish have managed to show how it can be done on any platform with a portable machine.

The question of passports is not going to go away, but one could ask why it has to be done on leaving countries in the Schengen area? It has been suggested that St Pancras is designed for passport checks upon arrival as well as departure. This seems a far more sensible approach and is - after all - the way it is done with air travel.

That's the only way I see Eurostar's mainline European destinations expanding.


----------



## Pansori

How a 40+ year old technology (TGV) is possible not to be behind a 10 year old technology (e.g. Velaro, ICE)? Had it not been behind and obsolete, then why would everyone buy German and Japanese trains and not French ones? So what are the reasons of using locomotives anyway apart from delaying a development of a newer technology?

They delayed the development of a new generation train and therefore are behind. Safety record itself and success in other areas does not explain or justify that.


----------



## AlexNL

I don't think Alstom is outdated or irrelevant at all. They have the people, they have the knowledge, and they have a very good name when it comes to safety. If the locomotive-based TGV is so far behind, then why did ONCF recently purchase a set of TGV Duplex-based trainsets? Why have Korea copied the TGV-design and not the Velaro design?

Of course, trains with distributed power have certain advantages which Alstom is very well aware of. That's why they also switched to distributed traction for their AGV and Speedelia platforms, while retaining other selling points of their trains such as the articulated design. Because of the articulated design, a jacknifing situation (like what happened at Eschede) is very, very unlikely to occur, as has been proven in an accident in England involving a Pendolino train.


----------



## Pansori

The reality is that locomotive-pulled trains is the past while the present and the future is about distributed motors throughout the train. Alstom is late with it at least a decade. In fact they are now developing their own trains using distributed motors which kinda makes your logic eat itself because this is a clear indicator that Alstom was simply lagging behind and now tries to correct the situation and catch up.

And as to why Moroccans are buying an obsolete technology and why Koreans have copied it? I have no idea and I don't see how is that an indicator that Alstom is not relying on old technology.


----------



## makita09

AlexNL said:


> while retaining other selling points of their trains such as the articulated design. Because of the articulated design, a jacknifing situation (like what happened at Eschede) is very, very unlikely to occur, as has been proven in an accident in England involving a Pendolino train.


I am unsure of your point here, the pendolinos are not articulated, so how does an accident with one prove anything about articulated train's safety?


----------



## caserass

Pansori said:


> I don't know if that has anythign to do with coaches but the core issue is technology of HSR. Siemens has been boasting to be "10 years ahead [of the French]" and rightly so. Because Jepanese and Germans have pursued the new generation trains (with traction motors throughout the train as opposed just the locos as in TGVs) for a while now while Alsthom is just going to release their first such train (AGV)... a decade or so behind Siemens and perhaps even more behind the Japanese? They are losers and it looks even more sad when they try to employ politics and protectionism.


not really all the trains made by Siemens aren't really reliable
A series of defects

How Can Germany's High-Speed Trains Get Back on Track?

When you win a contract, the most of the time it's because you are cheaper or because you are making more promises than your competitor, in the case of the Eurostar deal, it's not about technology....


----------



## Zero Gravity

makita09 said:


> I am unsure of your point here, the pendolinos are not articulated, so how does an accident with one prove anything about articulated train's safety?


moreover it's simply unfair to bring in Eschede. This happened due to completely different reasons and had in fact nothing to do with the non-articulated design of the ICE 1



caserass said:


> not really all the trains made by Siemens aren't really reliable
> A series of defects
> 
> How Can Germany's High-Speed Trains Get Back on Track?
> 
> When you win a contract, the most of the time it's because you are cheaper or because you are making more promises than your competitor, in the case of the Eurostar deal, it's not about technology....


Wrong; I don't think this has anything to do with Siemens themselves, but with the Deutsche Bahn that - for some reason (*hint*MONEY*hint*) - doesn't give a damn about maintenance and repair. This is not about weak design done by Siemens, but rather about a non-funtioning railway network operated by a reckless company. The tracks are old and overcrowded, signaling is often obsolete and all this creates a situation like this.


----------



## Sopomon

Zero Gravity said:


> moreover it's simply unfair to bring in Eschede. This happened due to completely different reasons and had in fact nothing to do with the non-articulated design of the ICE 1
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong; I don't think this has anything to do with Siemens themselves, but with the Deutsche Bahn that - for some reason (*hint*MONEY*hint*) - doesn't give a damn about maintenance and repair. This is not about weak design done by Siemens, but rather about a non-funtioning railway network operated by a reckless company. The tracks are old and overcrowded, signaling is often obsolete and all this creates a situation like this.



That is the truth to some extent, however, as shown previously, I think Caserass enjoys twisting the words of arguements to suit his own ends and means, he seems to have a very pro-alsthom bias.

I have heard rumours that DB do as you have said, though from my experience thaty have been fine, I simply have not, however, used DB enough to form any strong opinion for or against them.

As a contrasting point to that, the Desiro trainsets used by my local commuter rail provider (South West Trains) have been absolutely fine with only one breakdown affecting my travels the entirety of my use with them, and even then it was only a 5 minute stoppage.

Whether that was due to SWT's good maintenance or the quality of the desiro build remains yet to be seen.


----------



## Zero Gravity

^^
I browsed aroung a bit and read a bunch of articles about the ICE and to me it seems Caserass is partially right. The whole ICE family has in fact had many problems and often saving cost lead to poor design.


Nonetheless I think the Deutsche Bahn is still the main culprit when it comes down to actual schedule disruptions. I read an article from Der Spiegel that stated that it became clear this fall already that the DB would have severe Problems this winter. 
The major problems they have are not coming from the quality of the trains (like last year) but rather the quantity. The DB has absolutely no reserve at all for "special events"(=winter) as they call it. 
When winter hit and a lot of airplanes were grounded many people tried to get on the train but there aren't enough trains. Especially in winter there is a lot more maintenance to be done and so DB had to cancel a bunch of trains and unsurprisingly there are loads of overcrowded trains, schedule disruptions and unhappy citizens.


----------



## Sopomon

Zero Gravity said:


> ^^
> I browsed aroung a bit and read a bunch of articles about the ICE and to me it seems Caserass is partially right. The whole ICE family has in fact had many problems and often saving cost lead to poor design.
> 
> 
> Nonetheless I think the Deutsche Bahn is still the main culprit when it comes down to actual schedule disruptions. I read an article from Der Spiegel that stated that it became clear this fall already that the DB would have severe Problems this winter.
> The major problems they have are not coming from the quality of the trains (like last year) but rather the quantity. The DB has absolutely no reserve at all for "special events"(=winter) as they call it.
> When winter hit and a lot of airplanes were grounded many people tried to get on the train but there aren't enough trains. Especially in winter there is a lot more maintenance to be done and so DB had to cancel a bunch of trains and unsurprisingly there are loads of overcrowded trains, schedule disruptions and unhappy citizens.


True, but then when you consider it, nearly every new trainset that is brought out today seems to have multiple malfunctions, such as the Finnish pendolino, which kept breaking down in the snow (It couldn't handle the Finnish winters), or the Ansaldo Breda V250 which is absolutely riddled with various major issues. 
Of course, nearly every european country has been having snow problems this winter, with exceptionally cold weather affecring so much of europe, it's probably safe to say that most rail operators were rather unprepared, though I have head that DB made an awful mess of things, with delays and cancellations plaguing the services, which cannot be so easily excused.


----------



## makita09

Sopomon said:


> Whether that was due to SWT's good maintenance or the quality of the desiro build remains yet to be seen.


Both.


----------



## K_

Sopomon said:


> True, but then when you consider it, nearly every new trainset that is brought out today seems to have multiple malfunctions, such as the Finnish pendolino, which kept breaking down in the snow (It couldn't handle the Finnish winters), or the Ansaldo Breda V250 which is absolutely riddled with various major issues.


"nearly every train". But with a few notable exception. The Stadler Flirt trainsets delivered to Helsinki had an availability of 100% in their first year, and that despite Finland experiencing one of the coldest winters in decades...


----------



## Sopomon

K_ said:


> "nearly every train". But with a few notable exception. The Stadler Flirt trainsets delivered to Helsinki had an availability of 100% in their first year, and that despite Finland experiencing one of the coldest winters in decades...


Truly? I didn't know that, that's very surprising


----------



## Pansori

caserass said:


> not really all the trains made by Siemens aren't really reliable
> A series of defects
> 
> How Can Germany's High-Speed Trains Get Back on Track?
> 
> When you win a contract, the most of the time it's because you are cheaper or because you are making more promises than your competitor, in the case of the Eurostar deal, it's not about technology....


They must be fools to "not care" about technology then because obtaining a 20 year old technology (the "latest" generation of TGVs) instead of a 10 year old one would be somewhat foolish, I think. Even if this is not the only reason it must be one of the major points.


----------



## Gadiri

> *Allegro launch cuts Helsinki - St Petersburg journey times​
> 13 December 2010 *
> 
> EUROPE: *Helsinki - St Petersburg passenger services were relaunched with the December 12 timetable change, with journey times cut by 2 h to 3½ h following the introduction of Alstom dual-voltage New Pendolino tilting trainsets, infrastructure upgrades to permit running at 220 km/h in Finland and 200 km/h in Russia, and border formalities being undertaken on the move*.
> 
> ​
> *Infrastructure work to be completed in 2011 will cut another 30 min from the end-to-end timings*.
> 
> The upgraded service is operated jointly by Russian Railways and its Finnish counterpart VR under the 'Allegro' brand, replacing *their daily Sibelius and Repin locomotive hauled trains. The Tolstoi overnight service from Helsinki to Moscow has been retained*.
> 
> Finnish President Tarja Halonen joined RZD President Vladimir Yakunin on the inaugural departure from Helsinki at 12.15 on December 12, and public services followed with the 15.00 train.
> 
> The initial two daily return services will increase to four in May 2011. Traffic *is expected to reach 250 000 passengers in 2011, and the operators aim to triple traffic within 10 years*.
> 
> Tickets are priced below air fares, and the train avoids the inconvenience of St Petersburg airport. RZD and the Finnish authorities are keen to persuade the Russian government to waive the expensive visa requirements for short trips to the former imperial capital, which they believe would then become a popular and lucrative destination for city breaks
> 
> In addition to the four Pendolino trains ordered by the Karelian Trains joint venture of RZD and VR, the project has involved infrastructure upgrades on both sides of the border. Read the full story in the January 2011 issue of Railway Gazette International


http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/ne...uts-helsinki-st-petersburg-journey-times.html

This is not a picture of the New Pendolino.


----------



## Pansori

What is the fastest average speed of Helsinki-St.Petersburg train? If the distance is something around 400km and it takes 3 hours (after upgrade in 2011) it should be somewhere in the range of 130km/h which doesn't sound like much.


----------



## AlexisMD

Gadiri said:


> [/url]
> This is not a picture of the New Pendolino.


yes, they are running older version, which is good for start


----------



## Coccodrillo

^^ It's a New Pendolino, but with the old design.


----------



## Gadiri

Coccodrillo said:


> ^^ It's a New Pendolino, but with the old design.


It really doesn't look like the New Pendolino :


----------



## AlexNL

This is a photo of the New Pendolino as it was on display during InnoTrans 2010 in Berlin, back in september last year. I snapped this pic myself. This train doesn't look much like the New Pendolino, but it doesn't look much like the Virgin Pendolino's either. It looks more like the ICN.

Virgin Pendolino:








(Source: Wikipedia)

ICN:








(Source: Wikipedia)


----------



## rheintram

ICN isn't a Pendolino!

Btw. the Penolinos are horrible trains! both ETR 47 and ETR 610 only cause problems in Switzerland.


----------



## AlexNL

Why? The Channel Tunnel safety rules haven't done much about the possible dangers in a tunnel, such as fires or trains stranding due to snow. 

I can see Alstom's point of view in the row. It's a 600 million euros contract, which is a *lot* of money. If they think they can make a case, and the government supports them, why not take the chance?


----------



## Coccodrillo

Eurotunnel's safety rules are sometimes non applicable. To cite two examples, the 400 m minimum length of passenger trains is explained with the need to have at least a door near a cross-tunnel linking the three tubes when actually it's impossible to evacuate hundreds of people in panic guiding them to that particular exit; and the need to have a locomotive at each end and the train divisible in two, when in case of fire it's possible that once the train ged stopped and splitted in two the overhead line is already damaged and unusable. The new Gotthard tunnel instead has two emergency stations equipepd with fire-extinguishing equipment, wide sidewalks and frequent cross-tunnels (every 50 m); trains are built to resist at least 15 minutes on fire so as tor each one of these stations or the outside. This is considered a good solution considering that all new long tunnels (at least in Europe) will use it, even the Eurotunnel which is being adapted with the construction of two (in each tube) similar stations (but I suppose without new cross-tunnels).

Still better that the Seikan (54 km) and other long Japanese tunnels, or the existing tunnels built in the XIX century, that do not have any of these safety equipment and still bear dozen or hundred years without accidents.


----------



## Sopomon

Suburbanist said:


> Maybe the Gotthard tunnel should have its safety requirements improved... not the Eurotunnel have its safety standards downgraded.


The safety requirements are not necessarily being downgraded, more "changed", because it was seen that they hadn't helped as much as they infact hindered the provision of a service on the line.


----------



## makita09

Suburbanist said:


> Maybe the Gotthard tunnel should have its safety requirements improved... not the Eurotunnel have its safety standards downgraded.


Missing the point again...


----------



## Gadiri

> *Bientôt un train direct Paris – Moscou
> 
> 06/04/2011*
> 
> *Après le Moscou – Nice lancé *en septembre dernier, RZD annonce la mise en circulation d’un train reliant *Moscou à Paris en 41 heures *à compter de décembre prochain. C’est Mikhaïl Akoulov, son vice-président qui vient de l’annoncer dans le quotidien La Pravda. *Depuis trois ans, il est possible de relier Paris à Moscou en 49 heures*, mais une seule voiture part de Paris pour être rattachée au train Berlin – Moscou à l’arrivée dans la capitale allemande. Il *s’agira cette fois d’un train entier, qui circulera via Berlin au « minimum trois fois par semaine, et cinq fois maximum »*, a précisé Mikhaïl Akoulov*. A terme*, la liaison sera assurée par des* trains neufs, issus des usines de Siemens et de Tver Carriage Works*.


http://www.ville-rail-transports.com/content/15715-bientôt-un-train-direct-paris-–-moscou




> *Soon a direct train Paris - Moscow
> 
> 06/04/2011*
> 
> *After Moscow - Nice launched last September*, RZD announces the release of a train from *Moscow to Paris in 41 hours from December*. It Akoulov Mikhail, vice-president who just announced in the newspaper Pravda. *For three years, it is possible to link Paris to Moscow in 49 hours*, but only one car from Paris to be attached to the train Berlin - Moscow on arrival in the German capital. *This time an entire train, which will travel via Berlin to the "minimum of three times per week and maximum of five times,"*said Mikhail Akoulov. *Eventually, the route will be serviced by trains new, from the Siemens factory and Tver Carriage Works*.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Why would anyone board such a train? 41h? No-sense as transportation. It is like more a touristic trip, like a Danube boat cruise wold be for river transportation.


----------



## Hubert Pollak

Gadiri said:


> http://www.ville-rail-transports.com/content/15715-bientôt-un-train-direct-paris-–-moscou


I hope that it would be possible to buy ticket Paris- Warsaw and Paris - Berlin. Now the polish railways don't want to sell tickets for Russian trains crossing Warsaw to different cities in the west. Imagine that we have direct train Warsaw - Nice going from Moscow and we can't buy ticket for it!


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ Why would anyone board such a train? 41h? No-sense as transportation. It is like more a touristic trip, like a Danube boat cruise wold be for river transportation.


Because there are people who still make a difference between travelling and
merely displacing themselves ? A trip is not always just something you do to
get moved from A to B. You can actually enjoy it !

Besides that, RZD already operates a Nice-Moscow train, and dozen of other
long-distance trains in Eastern Russia and ex-CEI republics. They have quite
some experience in doing that, and certainly have a positive business case
for all new trains they start running.

Trains like Moscow-Vladivostok and Moscow-Pekin run jammed to capacity in
the summer and are impossible to board if you did not reserve tickets months
in advance. The whole journey takes between 5 and 7 days. 

Was that a genuine question or pure provocation again ?


----------



## Suburbanist

Hubert Pollak said:


> I hope that it would be possible to buy ticket Paris- Warsaw and Paris - Berlin. Now the polish railways don't want to sell tickets for Russian trains crossing Warsaw to different cities in the west. Imagine that we have direct train Warsaw - Nice going from Moscow and we can't buy ticket for it!


It is not that the Polish doesn't want to sell the tickets, is that (likely) Russians don't allow foreign companies to sell intra-Russia tickets, or - say - a Polish railway selling tickets from Russia to Belarus.

Without reciprocity, it makes sense for a country to ban through traffic collecting passengers. In any case, it is better to keep the Russians out of intra-EU rail market.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Russians don't want to transport people outside their network, but to transport people (mainly toursists) from Russia to western europe.

That's why they don't sell tickets like Paris-Warsaw. I doubt it's because of some law regarding reciprocity, as these trains are hauled by western railway companeis, and are not in open access.


----------



## Gadiri

*Paris-Amsterdam en 3 H 18 min*


----------



## Atmosphere

^^ Awesome! I love such non-stop travel clips. Do you have more?


----------



## Gadiri

Atmosphere said:


> ^^ Awesome! I love such non-stop travel clips. Do you have more?


You make me the idea to create a dedicated thread :MISC | Trains Time Lapse Videos kay:


----------



## Silly_Walks

Gadiri said:


> *Paris-Amsterdam en 3 H 18 min*


Not Paris-Amsterdam, though.


----------



## Gadiri

Silly_Walks said:


> Not Paris-Amsterdam, though.


01:00 min


----------



## AlexNL

The video originates from the Thalys website, it was used in the 2009 advertising campaign, "Thalys goes faster", because Thalys uses the HSL-Zuid in the Netherlands and Belgium since December 13th, 2009. 

The video was shot from the rear cabin of a Thalys train and then played back in reverse, which you can see by looking at the headlight of oncoming trains and the signals passed - everything's red!


----------



## K_

AlexNL said:


> The video originates from the Thalys website, it was used in the 2009 advertising campaign, "Thalys goes faster", because Thalys uses the HSL-Zuid in the Netherlands and Belgium since December 13th, 2009.
> 
> The video was shot from the rear cabin of a Thalys train and then played back in reverse, which you can see by looking at the headlight of oncoming trains and the signals passed - everything's red!


What also gives it away is that the train runs on the right in the video. In Belgium and France trains run on the left, as on the HSL Zuid until Rotterdam Zuid...


----------



## Silly_Walks

Gadiri said:


> 01:00 min



Yes, it says that's Brussels, not Amsterdam. The video is called Paris -> Amsterdam, but there's no Amsterdam.


----------



## AAPMBerlin

Silly_Walks said:


> Yes, it says that's Brussels, not Amsterdam. The video is called Paris -> Amsterdam, but there's no Amsterdam.


...please see de video till the end!!!!!!:bash::bash::bash:


----------



## Slagathor

AAPMBerlin said:


> ...please see de video till the end!!!!!!:bash::bash::bash:


I did and the train doesn't even reach Antwerp, let alone Rotterdam or Amsterdam.


----------



## 3737

In the video you see 2 time lapses.
From Paris-Brussels and Cologne-Liege guillemins
When the train enters the tunnel and it magically gets teleported to the collonge-Liege line because the train stops at liege guillemins not AMsterdam Central station.


----------



## Silly_Walks

AAPMBerlin said:


> ...please see de video till the end!!!!!!:bash::bash::bash:


I did. Once again, the video is called "Paris-Amsterdam en 3 H 18 min".

Now, unless Amsterdam means something else in Spanish, the name of the video is just wrong. The train in the video does not reach Amsterdam.


Ugh... if we can't even agree on simple FACTS, let alone the more ambiguous things in life, it's no wonder there's so many problems.


----------



## Glodenox

True, there was no Antwerp nor any line between Brussels and Antwerp involved here, so unless they used a detour through Maastricht for some weird reason, there was no Amsterdam involved here. Seems like a train that started from Liege-Guillemins (Belgium) and then went to Paris (and then got played backwards).

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## AAPMBerlin

Silly_Walks said:


> I did. Once again, the video is called "Paris-Amsterdam en 3 H 18 min".
> 
> Now, unless Amsterdam means something else in Spanish, the name of the video is just wrong. The train in the video does not reach Amsterdam.
> 
> 
> Ugh... if we can't even agree on simple FACTS, let alone the more ambiguous things in life, it's no wonder there's so many problems.


:angel: ok...


----------



## DarkLoki

Atmosphere said:


> ^^ Awesome! I love such non-stop travel clips. Do you have more?


Well it's not inter-country but it it is part of the trajectory of the Paris-Amsterdam line; the HSL-zuid; and a cool video:






The title of the song means something like "get out of the way".


----------



## AlexNL

Fun fact: that video was made by a member of SkyScraperCity.


----------



## PortoNuts

> *Holiday weekends boost Eurostar*
> 
> *London-based Channel Tunnel high-speed train company Eurostar has reported a surge in Easter and royal wedding weekend passengers. The firm will be carrying 8% more passengers from the UK to Europe this Easter than it did last Easter, it was announced. And inbound bookings are also going well for the royal wedding next week.*
> 
> Eurostar commercial director Nick Mercer said: "We're expecting this to be our busiest Easter weekend for years. At the same time we're equally seeing a surge in bookings to London for the royal wedding weekend." Travel website lowcostholidays.com said Easter weekend bookings were 70% up on the same weekend last year. It said the Spanish island of Majorca was the top Easter destination for Britons, with the Canary Islands, the Portuguese Algarve and Egypt also popular.
> 
> Lowcostholidays.com product director Matt Hall said: "Many holidaymakers are planning to watch the royal wedding from their holiday while others are hoping to escape from the wedding fever."
> 
> The AA warned that drivers should be aware of just which parking controls are in operation on bank holidays. AA public affairs head Paul Watters said: "There is a mistaken belief that all parking restrictions are lifted over a bank holiday. Variations in enforcement and level of signing between local authorities can turn parking into a nightmare.
> 
> "The AA asks councils to operate enforcement with reasonable discretion, particularly if the visitor is clearly from outside the area - after all, one assumes a council would like them to come back next year and support local business."
> 
> A survey by motorway service operator Roadchef revealed that 54% of drivers admitted getting sleepy at the wheel, relying on caffeine, fresh air, loud music and conversation to keep them alert. Yet only 18% said they would stop for a nap in a bid to combat their exhaustion.
> 
> The poll of 1,000 drivers also showed that men were more careless than women in allowing tiredness to take over at the wheel.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/uk...KMClulNgi47wOQ?docId=B39647761303206831A00000



> *Eurostar boosted by Easter and royals*
> 
> *Croydon-based Eurostar has reported an 8 per cent surge in passengers for the Easter and royal wedding bank holidays.*
> 
> Eurostar, the passenger service between the UK and mainland Europe, said thousands of people from across the UK are expected to travel with Eurostar over the Easter weekend. Destinations for UK passengers include France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany.
> 
> However, while Brits are heading abroad, there has also been a surge in inbound bookings to London for the royal wedding. Eurostar said these two factors had created a "honeymoon period for the travel industry". Nick Mercer, commercial director for Eurostar, said: "We’re expecting this to be our busiest Easter weekend for years with tens of thousands of people travelling on Eurostar for a weekend away.
> 
> "At the same time we’re equally seeing a surge in bookings to London for the royal wedding weekend. We’re expecting thousands of Europeans to travel to London with Eurostar to see Prince William and Kate Middleton tie the knot, as London prepares for royal wedding fever."


http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/south-east/51247-/


----------



## MarcVD

Glodenox said:


> True, there was no Antwerp nor any line between Brussels and Antwerp involved here, so unless they used a detour through Maastricht for some weird reason, there was no Amsterdam involved here. Seems like a train that started from Liege-Guillemins (Belgium) and then went to Paris (and then got played backwards).
> 
> Greetings,
> Glodenox


The tracks that are shown on the second part of the movie are the ones
of the classical line between Liege Guillemins and Aachen. One can very
distinctively recognize the station of Verviers (the one with the building
above the tracks). Then just a few seconds before the end, the north 
entrance of the station Liege Guillemins is briefly shown. There is no display
of the line to Antwerp and the Netherlands, and it only shows belgian tracks,
no border is ever reached.


----------



## webeagle12

Found this link

http://www.swisstrains.ch/

live tracking of trains in switzerland , pretty cool


----------



## Coccodrillo

I think it shows the locations based on the timetable, not the real locations of the trains (even if usually they are the same thing...).


----------



## mgk920

Coccodrillo said:


> I think it shows the locations based on the timetable, not the real locations of the trains (even if usually they are the same thing...).


Neat site!

:yes:

Am I correct in that it is only showing passenger train traffic?

Mike


----------



## Coccodrillo

Yes, it shows only the planned position of passenger trains. Delays and current location of passenger trains can be found here: http://prosurf.sbb.ch/

The trains with higher delays are EC CIS (train numbers between 12 and 57, not all used).

This website doesn't show the exact location, but the last station where a train stopped, so on "long" trips without stop (Zürich-Bern, Arth Goldau-Bellinzona) the position cannot be supposed with precision.


----------



## K_

webeagle12 said:


> Found this link
> 
> http://www.swisstrains.ch/
> 
> live tracking of trains in switzerland , pretty cool


It's not live. It's based on the published timetable. And it contains lots of mistakes too. It shows ICs to Bern on the old route, and not the new HSL, and Gotthard passengers trains over the Sihltalbahn amongst other glaring errors.


----------



## Glodenox

In Belgium there's a similar map available: http://www.railtime.be/website/traffic-trains

It doesn't really show the exact positions of the trains, but it does have a nice animation once the location of a train gets updated (could be a station, but sometimes there are other detection points on lines). It doesn't include freight trains, but it does keep into account any delays that trains may have.

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## MarcVD

Glodenox said:


> In Belgium there's a similar map available: http://www.railtime.be/website/traffic-trains
> 
> It doesn't really show the exact positions of the trains, but it does have a nice animation once the location of a train gets updated (could be a station, but sometimes there are other detection points on lines). It doesn't include freight trains, but it does keep into account any delays that trains may have.
> 
> Greetings,
> Glodenox


It's nice, but not as good as that. There are indeed places (lines, stations)
where train positions are reported automatically, but it's not the case 
everywhere. Where there is no automatic position reporting, train moves
are shown on a timetable basis. And there are definitely cases where they
switch to a pure timetable basis, for example when there is a serious incident.
I have no proof af that, but witnessed it several times. For example, during
the last strikes 2-3 weeks ago, trains were reported as running normally
even on the lines where there was no service at all.


----------



## Glodenox

Ah, I haven't experienced that yet. I remember that last time there were strikes on my line, trains weren't moving at all. But it's very possible that they haven't connected the detection mechanisms yet with the map for some lines.

Do you happen to remember whether railtime itself showed correct information or was also displaying everything as if trains were running normally?

Greetings,
Glodenox


----------



## trainrover

and Inter-country Railways

^^ why "Inter-country" over I-N-T-E-R-N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L?


----------



## NiGhtPiSH

This is the Optima Express train which runs from Villach, Austria to Edirne, Turkey. It's a fairly regular service and runs every week with sleeper coaches WLABm and automotive wagons on the back. The coaches are ex-BDZh (Bulgarian State Railways) and are maintained in the Dryanovo railcar factory. During the summer there is also a board restaurant WRmz and the trains can be quite long. The picture itself was taken at Sofia Central after an inspection stop.


----------



## krulstaartje

Just a list I was compiling on long-distance routes that are now just not doable (>10 hours) that will be opening up as feasible services (<10 hours) within the next 10 years. This is a time not directly competitive with air, but something many are willing to take regularly. Especially compared to driving 10hrs+ for holidays which many European families do every summer, these are quite significant links that are being built. Compare it to the Ski Eurostar which takes 8h20 and is almost always fully booked. Also, note that these are all ridiculously long trips. Part of the trip is easy to figure out if you know the regular travel times on your route of interest.

None of this is new btw, but I thought it'd make for an interesting overview, as you often see close connection travel improvements listed, but not often the longer distance implications. Especially when considering multiple projects along the same route.

*Barcelona - Frankfurt*
2011: 13h30 (if someone would run a direct train, 11h)
2025: 7h00 (Barcelona - Figueres AVE, Nimes - Montpeiller LGV, Montpeiller - Perpignan LGV, LGV Rhin - Rhone)

*Cologne - Milan*
2011: 8h37 (fastest via bahn.de)
2020: 6h50 (Gotthard Base Tunnel projects, Neubaustrecke Frankfurt - Mannheim, Neubaustrecke Karlsruhe - Basel.)

*Paris - Vienna*
2011: 11h20 (if someone would run a direct train, 10h30)
2020: 8h00 (LGV Est Phase II, Neubaustrecke Stuttgart-Augsburg, Westbahn upgrade, possibly down to 7h30 if Munich-Salzburg upgrade is decided upon and finished within this time, not unlikely.)

*Berlin - Rome*
2011: 15h30 (let's imagine the connection in Munich is good)
2020: 9h00 (Neubaustrecke Halle-Erfurt, Neubaustrecke Erfurt-Nuremberg, Neue Unterinntalbahn, Brenner Base Tunnel, Italian speed upgrade)

*Frankfurt - Stockholm*
2011: 15h00
2025: 9:30 (Fehrman link + associated upgrades in Germany, Y-Trasse Hannover–Hamburg, Sweden getting its act together)


----------



## Suburbanist

krulstaartje said:


> Just a list I was compiling on long-distance routes that are now just not doable (>10 hours) that will be opening up as feasible services (<10 hours) within the next 10 years. This is a time not directly competitive with air, but something many are willing to take regularly. Especially compared to driving 10hrs+ for holidays which many European families do every summer, these are quite significant links that are being built. Compare it to the Ski Eurostar which takes 8h20 and is almost always fully booked. Also, note that these are all ridiculously long trips. Part of the trip is easy to figure out if you know the regular travel times on your route of interest.


High-speed long-distance travel is a competitor to air, not to family car holidays. When somebody is willing to drive long distances, sometimes multi-day (with overnight layovers), there are other factors affecting that decision.

In the case of families traveling with kids, together, there are some reasons by which many of them choose the car: it is cheap, compared to any combination of 4 round-trip fares. It provides convenience in hauling a lot of luggage and holiday gear (surf boards, bikes etc). Very importantly, it provides a one-way solution to get you from your house to your resort destination - you haul everything in your car, and go all the way to your destination.

High-speed travel has never been a domain of the holiday masses, it is an upscale product for certain distances.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> In the case of families traveling with kids, together, there are some reasons by which many of them choose the car: it is cheap, compared to any combination of 4 round-trip fares. It provides convenience in hauling a lot of luggage and holiday gear (surf boards, bikes etc). Very importantly, it provides a one-way solution to get you from your house to your resort destination - you haul everything in your car, and go all the way to your destination.


You don't have kids obviously.



> High-speed travel has never been a domain of the holiday masses, it is an upscale product for certain distances.


The domain of the "holiday masses" is currently low cost airlines. However I doubt that this will remain the case. Oil will eventually become to expensive to be used as a fuel.

And there is no reason not to use a HSL that was build for medium distance services for trips that are longer. As already pointed out: The Ski Eurostar and Thalys services are very popular. If the Geneva - Barcelona - Madrid train starts running somewhere in the next couple of years I expect it to sell out solid most days.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> And there is no reason not to use a HSL that was build for medium distance services for trips that are longer. As already pointed out: The Ski Eurostar and Thalys services are very popular. If the Geneva - Barcelona - Madrid train starts running somewhere in the next couple of years I expect it to sell out solid most days.


Genève-Madrid services need to wait the completion of a bunch of high-speed links between Barcelona and Pepingran.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Genève-Madrid services need to wait the completion of a bunch of high-speed links between Barcelona and Pepingran.


These links are almost completed. TGVs already go as far as Figueres at the moment. There are currently two train pairs a day doing Paris - Figueres, and SNCF and RENFE plan to increase the number of services once the line extends to Barcelona. SNCF has ordered a whole bunch of TGV Dasye sets for these services. The plan is to have 17 train pairs a day. 
Currently the line goes to Figueres. It is expected to open to Girona in 2012, and to Barcelona (including a connection with the line to Madrid) in 2014.


----------



## Koen Acacia

krulstaartje said:


> Just a list I was compiling on long-distance routes that are now just not doable (>10 hours) that will be opening up as feasible services (<10 hours) within the next 10 years. This is a time not directly competitive with air, but something many are willing to take regularly. Especially compared to driving 10hrs+ for holidays which many European families do every summer, these are quite significant links that are being built. Compare it to the Ski Eurostar which takes 8h20 and is almost always fully booked. Also, note that these are all ridiculously long trips. Part of the trip is easy to figure out if you know the regular travel times on your route of interest.
> 
> None of this is new btw, but I thought it'd make for an interesting overview, as you often see close connection travel improvements listed, but not often the longer distance implications. Especially when considering multiple projects along the same route.
> 
> *Barcelona - Frankfurt*
> 2011: 13h30 (if someone would run a direct train, 11h)
> 2025: 7h00 (Barcelona - Figueres AVE, Nimes - Montpeiller LGV, Montpeiller - Perpignan LGV, LGV Rhin - Rhone)
> 
> *Cologne - Milan*
> 2011: 8h37 (fastest via bahn.de)
> 2020: 6h50 (Gotthard Base Tunnel projects, Neubaustrecke Frankfurt - Mannheim, Neubaustrecke Karlsruhe - Basel.)
> 
> *Paris - Vienna*
> 2011: 11h20 (if someone would run a direct train, 10h30)
> 2020: 8h00 (LGV Est Phase II, Neubaustrecke Stuttgart-Augsburg, Westbahn upgrade, possibly down to 7h30 if Munich-Salzburg upgrade is decided upon and finished within this time, not unlikely.)
> 
> *Berlin - Rome*
> 2011: 15h30 (let's imagine the connection in Munich is good)
> 2020: 9h00 (Neubaustrecke Halle-Erfurt, Neubaustrecke Erfurt-Nuremberg, Neue Unterinntalbahn, Brenner Base Tunnel, Italian speed upgrade)
> 
> *Frankfurt - Stockholm*
> 2011: 15h00
> 2025: 9:30 (Fehrman link + associated upgrades in Germany, Y-Trasse Hannover–Hamburg, Sweden getting its act together)


Fun list. So in the longer term, it might make some business sense to run a Barcelona - Stockholm train. The number of people who make the *entire* trip is going to be extremely limited of course, but as long as there's good traffic between the stops along that route....


----------



## krulstaartje

You're right that it could make business sense to run extreme long distance (>10h) services for a lot of reasons. The big reason longer services with lots of intermediate stops do not happen even in those cases where it makes business sense is that it is very hard to run on time.The probability of delay happening is a function of total km travelled in general, in most countries long-distance services perform worse compared to regional services. E.g. 20% of DB Fernferkehr trains are delayed more than five minutes compared to 14% of all trains. With extreme long distance this rises even further.

More specifically, the only very long distance high-speed services I can currently think of are holiday trains (Eurostar Ski Train as mentioned above, but also Amsterdam - Marseille holiday train) with few (if any) intermediate stops where delays do not matter that much as they do with a lot of stops on the way.

The few examples I know of long distance trains with a lot of intermediate stops all have, without fail, absolutely horrific punctuality records. CNL in general, Amsterdam - Basel direct ICE, Trans-Siberia, etc.

This is another reason why the coming into service of a lot of new sections of track is good; even if a lot of them have marginal speed improvements of less than 30 minutes (a lot of the German ones), running trains on their own high-speed right of way dramatically reduces the chance of delay** and makes more long-distance connections viable in that way.

So, executive summary, I still don't see many services >10h duration happening. That's why pushing distances below that treshold is so important 

**Unless you're in Holland, where the High Speed Line sucks so much the delays there are much worse than on the over-filled, over-congested multi-use (goods+long distance+short distance) conventional rail.


----------



## Koen Acacia

krulstaartje said:


> You're right that it could make business sense to run extreme long distance (>10h) services for a lot of reasons. The big reason longer services with lots of intermediate stops do not happen even in those cases where it makes business sense is that it is very hard to run on time.The probability of delay happening is a function of total km travelled in general, in most countries long-distance services perform worse compared to regional services. E.g. 20% of DB Fernferkehr trains are delayed more than five minutes compared to 14% of all trains. With extreme long distance this rises even further.


Good point, using the same physical train for the entire distance probably isn't going to win the war so to speak.
What you're describing is still a case for something like a pan-European timetable or so, where decent integration of those different lines happens.


----------



## K_

Koen Acacia said:


> Fun list. So in the longer term, it might make some business sense to run a Barcelona - Stockholm train. The number of people who make the *entire* trip is going to be extremely limited of course, but as long as there's good traffic between the stops along that route....


The problem with extreme long runs is logistics. I think that for that kind of markets it's more suitable to have a good system of frequent trains between major hubs with short transfer times.


----------



## K_

Koen Acacia said:


> Good point, using the same physical train for the entire distance probably isn't going to win the war so to speak.
> What you're describing is still a case for something like a pan-European timetable or so, where decent integration of those different lines happens.


Yep. they should draw up something like the SBB's system of hubs where all long distance trains arrive/leave at the same time, but then europe wide for a selection of major hubs.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> These links are almost completed. TGVs already go as far as Figueres at the moment. There are currently two train pairs a day doing Paris - Figueres, and SNCF and RENFE plan to increase the number of services once the line extends to Barcelona. SNCF has ordered a whole bunch of TGV Dasye sets for these services. The plan is to have 17 train pairs a day.
> Currently the line goes to Figueres. It is expected to open to Girona in 2012, and to Barcelona (including a connection with the line to Madrid) in 2014.


But what about the break-of-gauge between the already completed HSR in Spain and French border?


----------



## Coccodrillo

Today there are two separate services Paris-Figueres Vilaflant (it's not the station of the original line) and Figueres Vilaflant-Girona-Barcelona connecting to each other. I suppose the transhipment will moved to Girona, if this part of the HSL open first. But I doubt it will happen, Girona north tunnel boring has commenced only a few weeks ago.


----------



## AlexNL

Suburbanist said:


> But what about the break-of-gauge between the already completed HSR in Spain and French border?


All high speed rail networks in Spain are built according to the European standard gauge (1435mm) so there will be no problems.


----------



## earthJoker

Suburbanist said:


> But what about the break-of-gauge between the already completed HSR in Spain and French border?


Isn't that what he speaks about? It will be closed in 2014.


----------



## Dakkus

A few pages before there was a conversation regarding the different Finnish Pendolinos.
The Sm6 used on the Allegro services is technically based on the new Pendolino, but they made it look like the old Pendolino so that the different trains would look more similar.

A faw of the differences:
The tilting technology is (luckily...) completely different from what was used in Sm3.
Using anything that existed in Sm3 would be stupid, because those trains are constantly failing in deepest winter because it's too cold for them, in summer because it's too hot for them and when it's around 0°C, the snow is too wet for them. I once had a quarrel with an ex, because I hadn't told her I'm arriving by a Pendolino and therefore she couldn't take into account that I will be late. And then she caught cold waiting at the platform..
Another problem has beenthat the data transmission between two units is done with an error-prone serial connection in Sm3, whereas Sm6 uses a faster and more reliable parallel connection.

Of course also most of the electrical parts are different etc., etc., etc.


----------



## 33Hz

krulstaartje said:


> Just a list I was compiling on long-distance routes that are now just not doable (>10 hours) that will be opening up as feasible services (<10 hours) within the next 10 years. This is a time not directly competitive with air, but something many are willing to take regularly. Especially compared to driving 10hrs+ for holidays which many European families do every summer, these are quite significant links that are being built. Compare it to the Ski Eurostar which takes 8h20 and is almost always fully booked. Also, note that these are all ridiculously long trips. Part of the trip is easy to figure out if you know the regular travel times on your route of interest.
> 
> None of this is new btw, but I thought it'd make for an interesting overview, as you often see close connection travel improvements listed, but not often the longer distance implications. Especially when considering multiple projects along the same route.
> 
> *Barcelona - Frankfurt*
> 2011: 13h30 (if someone would run a direct train, 11h)
> 2025: 7h00 (Barcelona - Figueres AVE, Nimes - Montpeiller LGV, Montpeiller - Perpignan LGV, LGV Rhin - Rhone)
> 
> *Cologne - Milan*
> 2011: 8h37 (fastest via bahn.de)
> 2020: 6h50 (Gotthard Base Tunnel projects, Neubaustrecke Frankfurt - Mannheim, Neubaustrecke Karlsruhe - Basel.)
> 
> *Paris - Vienna*
> 2011: 11h20 (if someone would run a direct train, 10h30)
> 2020: 8h00 (LGV Est Phase II, Neubaustrecke Stuttgart-Augsburg, Westbahn upgrade, possibly down to 7h30 if Munich-Salzburg upgrade is decided upon and finished within this time, not unlikely.)
> 
> *Berlin - Rome*
> 2011: 15h30 (let's imagine the connection in Munich is good)
> 2020: 9h00 (Neubaustrecke Halle-Erfurt, Neubaustrecke Erfurt-Nuremberg, Neue Unterinntalbahn, Brenner Base Tunnel, Italian speed upgrade)
> 
> *Frankfurt - Stockholm*
> 2011: 15h00
> 2025: 9:30 (Fehrman link + associated upgrades in Germany, Y-Trasse Hannover–Hamburg, Sweden getting its act together)



I think London to just about anywhere could make sense, especially overnight to Mediterranean destinations.


----------



## Suburbanist

33Hz said:


> I think London to just about anywhere could make sense, especially overnight to Mediterranean destinations.


No way. To keep daytime services reliability above 99% without buffed up schedules to make up for delay, HSR lines need to be closed at night for maintenance. And overnight trains are outdated, a thing of the 70s.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> No way. To keep daytime services reliability above 99% without buffed up schedules to make up for delay, HSR lines need to be closed at night for maintenance. And overnight trains are outdated, a thing of the 70s.


First argument - is valid, but the second isn't. Sleeper's are still good, when you don't want to waste your daytime...


----------



## 33Hz

Suburbanist said:


> And overnight trains are outdated, a thing of the 70s.


That's why Elipsos has average occupancy ~90%...


----------



## Coccodrillo

Even more than that, it's hard to find free places and trains are often fully booked (from leaning seats to cabins with private bathroom).


----------



## Suburbanist

Maybe there is a niche market of people wanting to pay €200 for 14h travelling from Barcelona to Milano. However, the number of night trains operating in Europe and the negligible amount of passengers carried by them makes them just a weird product/activity.


----------



## 33Hz

Must be like those weirdos who pay €200 to stay in a hotel for a night, you know...sleeping.

The price of air fares is only going to go one way.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> Such tunnels already exist. They are called the RER...
> No, a better solution is what SNCF is actually currently working on: Get the intersector TGVs (the ones running from somewhere not Paris to somewhere else not Paris) in one integrated schedule with convenient interchange points. Then the Paris terminals would mostly only serve people going to Paris. People arriving on Eurostar going to other places in France would for example change in Lille, passengers from Switzerland for other places would change in Dijon or Lyon etc...


When these tunnels are opened, such problems would be minimized.



K_ said:


> Someone used to travel by train will arrange his luggage to be easily moved through public transport. Or do you really think that everyone arriving at st. Pancras needs to be within a few blocks of that station? No, taking an underground or commuter train is part of most Eurostar or TGV trips. So it should not be a surprise that hving a underground or commuter trains between to HST trips is not a problem for most travellers.
> Having a through ticket also places the risk of missed connections on the railways, not on the traveller.


I might be wrong, but I'd bet that on routes like Eurostar Paris-London, or Köln-Paris, or Barcelona-Madrid, the share of passengers on the trains that also own a car and don't use transit on a daily basis is far higher than in your average Intercity trip, in the same pattern by which many of airplane passengers don't use PT to get to the airport, but taxis, car transfers, spouse/relative picking you up etc. 

Some airports like Frankfurt-am-Main or Schiphol, despite having high-speed train stations well integrated with its terminal facilities, still have a large share of passengers arriving by road in private/rented cars.

I think high-speed trains probably attract a sizable portion of former air traffic in routes like London-Paris, Milano-Roma and so. High-speed trains are above a certain comfort threshold that local transit might not be, so these people would take a taxi to the airport, now they take a taxi to the train station (and not a subway or a commuter train).

In Italy that is certainly the case. Many passengers using the "Freccia" will not venture on local commuter trains, Milano or Roma metro, or local buses, but take the trains substituting for the flight, and for the flight only.


----------



## mcarling

sekelsenmat said:


> The obvious solution would be to make a rail tunel from Gare d'Lyon to somewhere between Gare Nord and Gare d'Est, and make an underground station there connected to those two other ones. And a similar tunel for that other Gare to the west. No plans for that?


In my opinion, the best long-term solution would be to build a new deep underground TGV station somewhere in central Paris with tunnels exiting the platforms in both directions and connecting to all the LGV lines. Then all TGV services in Paris should be transferred to the new station. There would be no need for separate trains to Paris versus bypassing Paris, which would increase schedule convenience for everyone.

Republique would be central enough and has excellent Metro connections. Excavation would be easier than in most places in Paris, but it would still be extremely expensive.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Suburbanist said:


> In Italy that is certainly the case. Many passengers using the "Freccia" will not venture on local commuter trains, Milano or Roma metro, or local buses, but take the trains substituting for the flight, and for the flight only.


That's would not be surprising, as trains often don't connect to each other :nuts:


----------



## Suburbanist

Coccodrillo said:


> That's would not be surprising, as trains often don't connect to each other :nuts:


Not true. There are 2 subway lines with direct access to Milano Centrale, 2 with direct access to Roma Termini, the tramway of Firenze has a station integrated with Firenze S.M.N. etc. Commuter rail is accessible in Milano via subway + underground walkway to Porta Garibaldi. Napoli and Bologna also have connections with their main HSR stations.

What more would one wish for? A Frecciarossa with through cars Roma Termini - Sondrio :nuts:?


----------



## Coccodrillo

Suburbanist said:


> What more would one wish for? A Frecciarossa with through cars Roma Termini - Sondrio :nuts:?


An example for Sundays:

Cuneo 5.00-Torino Porta Nuova 6.25 (regional)
Cuneo 7.10-Torino Porta Nuova 8.30 (regional)

Torino Porta Nuova 8.25-Milano Porta Garibaldi 9.19-Roma 12.55 (high speed)
Torino Porta Nuova 8.25-Piacenza-Bologna-Ancona (intercity)


----------



## Suburbanist

Coccodrillo said:


> An example for Sundays:
> 
> Cuneo 5.00-Torino Porta Nuova 6.25 (regional)
> Cuneo 7.10-Torino Porta Nuova 8.30 (regional)
> 
> Torino Porta Nuova 8.25-Milano Porta Garibaldi 9.19-Roma 12.55 (high speed)
> Torino Porta Nuova 8.25-Piacenza-Bologna-Ancona (intercity)


So what? A minor Piemontese line arrives 2h before departure or the Frecciarossa... Should every minor line coming to Torino from the mountains of Piemonte to be timed with national HSR, like there were a huge number of people travelling from Cuneo or other villages to Roma or to Ancona?


----------



## Coccodrillo

This reply clearly shows that you are not an economist as you pretend to be, but just one of many ideologists.

Any real competent manager would quickly realise that, as all these trains have to run anyway, scheduling them in a logic way would lead to an increase in ridership with a low expense. There are dozen of similar examples in Italy, where a lot of possible passengers (and revenue) are lost without any significant saving of money just because of incompetence.


----------



## hhouse

Suburbanist said:


> So what? A minor Piemontese line arrives 2h before departure or the Frecciarossa... Should every minor line coming to Torino from the mountains of Piemonte to be timed with national HSR, like there were a huge number of people travelling from Cuneo or other villages to Roma or to Ancona?


Unbelieveable that someone like you has a PhD (or maybe still under development?) hno: Over 6500 posts and most of them (at least in the Railways and Urban Transport Sections) are bullshit.

But okay, your old signature "highways for progress" says everything.


----------



## Suburbanist

Calm down people. Here is my reasoning:

- we'll see more and more private competitors, like Nuovo Transporto Viaggiatori

- these new competitors are now setting up a new network, but operating in only a few routes, which the can easily skim for the money

- because of that, established competitors in the European market will have to either build their own competitiveness making their whole service network spotless, modern (no 1970s rolling stock...) or to care less about minor routes and focus on where the "beef and milk" is, the mains routes, so they don't lag behind new competitors. 



We cannot evaluate the efficiency (or lack thereof) of one system based merely on the fact trains from a (relatively) small Italian city don't reach a connection hub in time for passengers to catch a high-speed service. Maybe there are no platforms available. Maybe there are problems with junctions and interference with other services. Maybe that train departure is matched to the arrival of a train from Ventemiglia... The whole Torino node is being reconstructed and improved in progressive phases.

In the context of international rail travelling in Europe, these issues are relevant. Some people seem to feed on hope that we'll see the major players like DB, SBB, Trenilatia, Renfe, SNCF gathering together to divide the market and operate in collusion with each other, like the national European airlines did up to the late 1980s. Some people would throw away any free market principle for the sake for having "integrated services" like it were the most important thing in the World. But that is not going to happen, hopefully.


----------



## mcarling

Suburbanist said:


> Some people seem to feed on hope that we'll see the major players like DB, SBB, Trenilatia, Renfe, SNCF gathering together to divide the market and operate in collusion with each other, like the national European airlines did up to the late 1980s. Some people would throw away any free market principle for the sake for having "integrated services" like it were the most important thing in the World. But that is not going to happen, hopefully.


That would be prohibited by Article 101 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union.


----------



## kerouac1848

> The problem of transferring in Paris (or London, for that matter) is not about ticketing, is about comfort. Eurostar, TGV, Thalys all make a case for their superior level of comfort, and like to brand themselves as competitors for airplanes, but more reliable, with bigger seats and so. Then, you have to add a commuter journey to change trains in Paris or London in routes like Orleans-London or Paris-Birmingham.


I'm not that familiar with the situation in Paris, but in London it is actually not that bad.

The way Britain's geography is means that the major cities and vast majority of the UK's population outside London are north of it. There are only 2 major cities west (Cardiff and Bristol) and a few mid-size towns south or east, which i doubt the overwhelming majority of people want to visit alone. As a result, transfer from Eurostar, even today, is not that bad.

The Kings Cross St/ Pancras hub at which Eurostar trains arrives is also the terminus for trains to Scotland (incl. Glasgow and E'burgh), Newcastle, Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham and others. It's a few mins walk from platform-to-platform.

A few hundred metres west of KXSP is Euston, home to trains going to B'ham, Manchester, Liverpool and other major destinations. It will also be home to HS1 whenever that comes. It is just one stop on the tube, but in fact you can walk there in a few minutes, which is actually what you'll see business people doing quite a bit. The streets aren't busy and quite wide. 

Even though building a short tunnel between Euston and KXSP (so creating a kind of 'W' junction instead of 'Y' one) would be ideal, it is unlikely to happen, straight away at least, because of the cost and the fact the stations are so close. There has been talk of building a short airport-style transfer unit (elevated or underground), travelator (it's that close) or just establishing a proper surface level link away from the main road. 

Either way, i don't think the change is that big a problem on the London side. It just needs improving (personally, I think Euston-KXSP should be treated as one train hub, with the three stations as terminals, like at airports)


----------



## KingNick

Are there any updates regarding the ICE running to London?


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> We cannot evaluate the efficiency (or lack thereof) of one system based merely on the fact trains from a (relatively) small Italian city don't reach a connection hub in time for passengers to catch a high-speed service.


Well, the example I gave was of trains from said small Italian city that do reach a connuction hub in time for passengers to catch a high-speed service, where the operating company however for some weird reason refuses to sell tickets to them, thus forgoing an option of making more money by selling a better product.
I call that stupid and incompetent.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> So what? A minor Piemontese line arrives 2h before departure or the Frecciarossa... Should every minor line coming to Torino from the mountains of Piemonte to be timed with national HSR, like there were a huge number of people travelling from Cuneo or other villages to Roma or to Ancona?


In any network with a proper hierarchy the minor lines do indeed coordinate with the major lines.
If for example at Torino the HSR leaves every two hour, it is logical to schedule the regional trains so that they optimally connect, to use them as feeders, in order to make them earn more money.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I might be wrong, but I'd bet that on routes like Eurostar Paris-London, or Köln-Paris, or Barcelona-Madrid, the share of passengers on the trains that also own a car and don't use transit on a daily basis is far higher than in your average Intercity trip, in the same pattern by which many of airplane passengers don't use PT to get to the airport, but taxis, car transfers, spouse/relative picking you up etc.


You know, on most trains the people you see on them do have cars...

However, most people arriving in Paris on a HST do continue by metro or RER. And very few people have a spouse at each end to pick them up...



> Some airports like Frankfurt-am-Main or Schiphol, despite having high-speed train stations well integrated with its terminal facilities, still have a large share of passengers arriving by road in private/rented cars.


Actually there are quite a few airports where more passengers arrive by PT than by car. Schiphol is one of them. Zürich is another. In Switzerland it is quite common for people who otherwhise rarerly use trains to take the train to the airport when flying. In my case I would not even dream of going by car, since if something happens en route and I miss my flight my travel insurance will not reimburse the costs I will incur as a consequence. 



> In Italy that is certainly the case. Many passengers using the "Freccia" will not venture on local commuter trains, Milano or Roma metro, or local buses, but take the trains substituting for the flight, and for the flight only.


that is because services aren't well integrated, and as a result Trenitalia makes less money than they would otherwise.


----------



## trainrover

It seems the only way sleepers could work would be to pack in folks into drawers lined with beds, like I hear the Japanese've been known to do in (tiny?) hotels, no?


----------



## Gadiri

Big difficulties to found money for the exploratory tunnel of Lyon-Turin HSR :



> *Lyon - Turin : maintenant ou jamais ?​
> 20/06/2011*
> 
> 
> Encore une fois, la LGV Lyon - Turin joue avec le feu. *Malgré les menaces de l’Europe, le chantier de la galerie de reconnaissance de la Maddalena (7,5 km, 143 millions d’euros) n’avait toujours pas commencé *à l’heure de notre bouclage. Début juin, Siim Kallas, le commissaire européen en charge des transports, a pourtant fait savoir qu’il donnait jusqu’à la fin du mois à la France et l’Italie pour honorer leurs engagements pris en mars. *S’ils ne veulent pas perdre 9 millions d’euros de financements européens, les deux pays doivent signer l’avenant au traité fondateur de la partie transfrontalière, approuver le projet préliminaire de la portion italienne de la partie transfrontalière et lancer les premiers travaux dans la Botte, ceux de la galerie de reconnaissance de la Maddalena. *Si ces engagements ne sont pas respectés, des fonds seront supprimés « et peut-être tout le projet », s’est alarmé le quotidien turinois La Stampa. Depuis plusieurs semaines, les manifestations d’opposants au projet se sont multipliées sur le site de la Maddalena. Cette mobilisation inquiète, alors qu’en 2005 des manifestations avaient conduit à l’annulation du chantier et à l’élaboration d’un nouveau tracé. A ce problème, s’ajoute le fait que – selon la presse italienne – *la Botte réclame désormais une répartition des coûts 50-50 pour la partie transfrontalière (pour l’instant, elle devait être financée à 30 % par l’UE, le reste étant divisé ainsi : 63 % Italie, 37 % France).* La signature de l’avenant au traité pourrait donc être retardée par des tractations.


http://www.ville-rail-transports.com/content/16104-lyon-turin-maintenant-ou-jamais


----------



## rheintram

Suburbanist said:


> In the context of international rail travelling in Europe, these issues are relevant. Some people seem to feed on hope that we'll see the major players like DB, SBB, Trenilatia, Renfe, SNCF gathering together to divide the market and operate in collusion with each other, like the national European airlines did up to the late 1980s. Some people would throw away any free market principle for the sake for having "integrated services" like it were the most important thing in the World. But that is not going to happen, hopefully.


SBB is not and won't be a major European player, thanks to the Swiss policy of deliberately weakening SBB in favor of regional companies.


----------



## Coccodrillo

^^ I don't think that's a bad thing.


----------



## nachalnik

XAN_ said:


> BTW, RZD seems to be enthusiastic about launching Moscow-Minsk-Warsaw-Berlin night train. It already has one conventional, but it takes 24 hours because of a) need of bogie replacement at Brest b) low speed limitations trough Belarus, which is crappy.


The train speed through Belarus is already quite OK, usually 140 km/h. Tracks are in a quite cood condition there.

Time is lost during stops at the stations.


----------



## XAN_

nachalnik said:


> The train speed through Belarus is already quite OK, usually 140 km/h. Tracks are in a quite cood condition there.
> 
> Time is lost during stops at the stations.


 Well, AFAIK Moscow-Minsk-Brest is 120 km\h with very little 160 portion.

013 train have only 3 stops in Belarus, that aren't many, but 2 hour 15 minute stop in Brest for bogies and couplings change is evil.


----------



## sekelsenmat

nachalnik said:


> The train speed through Belarus is already quite OK, usually 140 km/h. Tracks are in a quite cood condition there.
> 
> Time is lost during stops at the stations.


That's a very strange discussion, because there already exists a night train with sleep vagons doing Moscow-Varsaw-Berlin-Amsterdam (I saw it myself 1 week ago), so I don't understand how they could be planning a Moscow-Berlin link when it already exists... what I read previously was that they planned a new line Moscow-Varsaw-Berlin-Paris, and that would be something new.


----------



## XAN_

sekelsenmat said:


> That's a very strange discussion, because there already exists a night train with sleep vagons doing Moscow-Varsaw-Berlin-Amsterdam (I saw it myself 1 week ago), so I don't understand how they could be planning a Moscow-Berlin link when it already exists... what I read previously was that they planned a new line Moscow-Varsaw-Berlin-Paris, and that would be something new.


Well it's a conventional one (160 and require external locomotive), while RZD have signed a memorandum with a spanish Talgo for their hi-speed (220 on broad gauge, 250 on standard) train with automatic gauge change. That would allow to cut times (2 hours in Brest for bogie change, and god knows how much on speeding it up).

Memorandum doesn't mean that they already have secured money for that purchase, but seems it's rather gonna happen, than not.

Moscow-Paris already exist, but it a single car that stay in Berlin something like 12 hours (you a free to spend that time in Berlin), totalling 52 hours (!). RZD also wants 1 or 2 new shiny Talgos here, but I'm not sure if it make any sense - it gonna be 24 hours at least, I believe, so unless russians know how to wake up Eyjafjallajokull...


----------



## sekelsenmat

XAN_ said:


> Well it's a conventional one (160 and require external locomotive), while RZD have signed a memorandum with a spanish Talgo for their hi-speed (220 on broad gauge, 250 on standard) train with automatic gauge change. That would allow to cut times (2 hours in Brest for bogie change, and god knows how much on speeding it up).


Aha, now I see. But still, the polish section of this connection is for 160km/h. There are plans for a new fast connection, but it makes a detour, so I'm not sure it will actually save much time at 250km/h .... so basically if they want to save time in the polish section by using a faster car, I don't see that working.

Most likely the bielorussian and russian sections also weren't built for more then 160km/h, so where exactly would this train reach it's max speeds? I doubt bielorussia is going to build faster railways with their current financial problems.


----------



## XAN_

Found an English version of press-release:

http://eng.rzd.ru/isvp/public/rzdeng?STRUCTURE_ID=15&layer_id=4839&refererLayerId=4530&id=105731



> Federal Passenger Company and PATENTES TALGO S.L. sign contract to design and supply passenger trains
> 
> The Federal Passenger Company, a subsidiary of Russian Railways, and the Spanish company PATENTES TALGO S.L. have signed a contract to design and supply passenger trains.
> 
> The document was signed by Mikhail Akulov, Vice-President of Russian Railways and Managing Director of the Federal Passenger Company, and Carlos-Maria de Palacio Oriol, Chairman of the Board of PATENTES TALGO S.L., at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on 18 June 2011 in the presence of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Spanish Prime Minister Rodriguez Zapatero.
> 
> According to the contract, PATENTES TALGO S.L. will supply the Federal Passenger Company with 7 trains with twenty wagons equipped with automatic gauge adjustment for use on both narrow and broad-gauge track.
> 
> The contract was drawn up pursuant to an agreement on concluding contracts for the delivery and maintenance of passenger carriages manufactured by PATENTES TALGO S.L., which was signed between Russian Railways and the Spanish rolling stock producer on 25 February 2011.
> 
> The Talgo trains are scheduled to enter service between Moscow - Kiev and Moscow - Berlin.
> 
> It is expected that the use of the Talgo will significantly reduce travel time from 13 hours to 7 hours between Moscow – Kiev and from 27 hours to 18 hours between Moscow - Berlin.
> 
> This faster travel time will result partly from carrying out border and customs procedures on board while the train is in motion, partly from the Talgo’s advanced technical features.
> 
> The Talgo features a mechanism to change the gauge of its bogies automatically from the Russian national broad-gauge standard of 1520 mm to the European narrow-gauge width of 1435 mm, as well as a coach-tilting system, which allows greater speeds through tight bends, cutting the time for their negotiation by 20-30%.


It's intresting, why Moscow-Kyiv? There is no damned brake of gauge there...


----------



## tompaw

Hey Guys. Last week I took an Autozug from Berlin to Narbonne. It was a part of my car ride from Krakow to Marbella.

I must say so far this is my favorite way of traveling! The comfort is amazing, you have your own car, you can drink wine and enjoy the views. However, the current map of Autozug international routes is not really breathtaking. I wonder if they are planning to expand and include other countries.

If they had an Autozug directly to Malaga or London or Split, I would be a regular. Not to mention a terminal somewhere in Poland... (but it's not that bad, as Krakow<>Berlin is only like 3-4h ride).

BTW - Unloading in Narbonne was more painful than a root canale.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Those services cost too much and they require quite long trains. There used to be more routes in the past, SNCF put a bunch of them operating in the 1970s.

As for a network to Malaga: not happening anytime soon, because of break of gauge.


----------



## tompaw

^^ I thought the longer the train, the more economical a service is. According to wikipedia, high speed network in Spain uses standard 1,4m gauge.

Anyway, too bad. I really never had so much fun traveling across Europe.


----------



## thun

No, of course not. Profits rise with the operating grade of a train as it doesn't earn money to move around only steel (and I mean the train, not the cars that might be on it).

With rising petrol costs, car trains could become a more attractive alternative for travellers despite the fact that they aren't cheap either.

Regarding an expansion of the network: Expanding into Spain is problematic, as there's the gauge change (and RENFE wouldn't let run those trains on the HSLs). The main problem is, that on most routes occupation heavily depends on the season (as the typic user would be people going to summer holidays). It's not that easy to run such services economical during the winter season, and introducing special winter services (e. g. to ski resorts in the Alps) isn't a perfect option because those routes would be too short to compete with the car.


----------



## K_

thun said:


> No, of course not. Profits rise with the operating grade of a train as it doesn't earn money to move around only steel (and I mean the train, not the cars that might be on it).
> 
> With rising petrol costs, car trains could become a more attractive alternative for travellers despite the fact that they aren't cheap either.
> 
> Regarding an expansion of the network: Expanding into Spain is problematic, as there's the gauge change (and RENFE wouldn't let run those trains on the HSLs). The main problem is, that on most routes occupation heavily depends on the season (as the typic user would be people going to summer holidays). It's not that easy to run such services economical during the winter season, and introducing special winter services (e. g. to ski resorts in the Alps) isn't a perfect option because those routes would be too short to compete with the car.


The biggest problem however is a rolling stock tax France recently introduced that makes seasonal services impossible to run profitable.


----------



## 437.001

Hi there, the tunnel-boging machine that is boring the tunnel under Girona fro the HLS Barcelona-Girona-Figueres-Perpignan will finish its job on Tuesday.

Works for the new HST station in Girona will start, then.
The HST tunnel under Barcerlona is rather advanced too, but works in Barcelona-Sants station will be rather heavy and complex, and might involve cuts in the rail service.

I don´t know about the other tunnel, the one between Montcada and Trinitat in northern suburban Barcelona.

It looks though, that the HSL will be finished in time (this time! ).


----------



## NordikNerd

I recently travelled the night train Hamburg-Basel with CNL. It's a rather slow night train, it stops several times in the night probably because they want to give people a chance to sleep.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ CNL is a substandard travel service IMO. But it has its fans. It shuffles cars a lot overnight, resembling an operational paradigm that was abandoned in favor of connections in comfortable stations.


----------



## hoosier

thun said:


> Regarding an expansion of the network: Expanding into Spain is problematic, as there's the gauge change


That problem doesn't exist on the new Perpignan-Figueres HSL that will open soon. Both the AVE and TGV run on the same gauge tracks.


----------



## Suburbanist

thun said:


> The main problem is, that on most routes occupation heavily depends on the season (as the typic user would be people going to summer holidays). It's not that easy to run such services economical during the winter season, and introducing special winter services (e. g. to ski resorts in the Alps) isn't a perfect option because those routes would be too short to compete with the car.


The transporting cars are not that expensive. HEre in Netherlands, they sit idle on 's-Hertogenbosch 8 months per year at an open depot.


----------



## sekelsenmat

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ CNL is a substandard travel service IMO. But it has its fans. It shuffles cars a lot overnight, resembling an operational paradigm that was abandoned in favor of connections in comfortable stations.


How do you propose that I sleep the entire route if I have to make a connection in the middle?


----------



## Gadiri

> *Demonstration high speed freight train links Lyon and London​
> 21 March 2012 *
> 
> *EUROPE: The vision of a network of high speed freight trains carrying express parcels and other premium consignments across Europe moved a step closer on March 21, when a demonstration train from Lyon Saint-Exupéry and Paris Charles-de-Gaulle airports arrived at London's St Pancras International station*.
> 
> The trial run was *organised by members of the EuroCarex consortium, which includes SNCF, Eurotunnel, Air France, the French post office La Poste, FedEx and airport operators in Paris, Amsterdam, Liège and Lyon*. The UK element was co-ordinated by Eurotunnel subsidiary GB Railfreight and High Speed 1 Ltd, which holds the concession to operate the high speed line between London and the Channel Tunnel. Loading and unloading was handled by SNCF Geodis subsidiary Geoparts Rail Solutions.
> 
> *The aim is to start commercial services in 2017, with a London terminal probably located near Barking. Discussions are underway with Alstom and Siemens for a fleet of 25 trainsets*.
> 
> *Operations would start with premium express traffic, but the consortium envisages that it could be expanded to handle more traditional freight in future*.
> 
> The original Cargo Rail Express project was launched in 2006, following a UIC-led study into the European express freight market. In 2008 the reformed EuroCarex consortium signed a memorandum of agreement aiming to start commercial services in March 2012, and opened negotiations to acquire an initial fleet of eight dedicated high speed freight trains at a cost of €625m. These were to be designed to carry modular loads similar to airfreight containers, but the project was delayed by the economic downturn.
> 
> *In the absence of dedicated rolling stock, the demonstration run to London was operated by set 951, one of the three dedicated TGV trainsets which La Poste has been using to carry mail between Paris, Mâcon and Cavaillon since 1984. This has a capacity for 120 tonnes of parcels, equivalent to seven articulated lorries or seven Boeing 737 aircraft*.
> 
> *The train left Lyon Saint-Exupéry at 16.42 on March 20, arriving at St Pancras the next morning following a stop to load extra cargo at Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle*.
> 
> Greeting the arrival of the train in London, French MP and EuroCarex Chairman Yanick Paternotte said 'I am delighted that today's test over the European high speed rail network clearly shows the interest which strategic players in the logistics field - airports as well as rail operators - have in linking their infrastructures to key European economic centres.'
> 
> EuroCarex believes that its Express Rail network of high speed freight trains could provide next-day delivery between European hubs with a carbon footprint lower than the current mix of air and road, offering a viable alternative to rising fuel prices and the environmental constraints which limit the number of night flights.


http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/ne...peed-freight-train-links-lyon-and-london.html


----------



## KingNick

Pointless. It doesn't matter if it takes a parcel 2 or 5 hours from A to B.


----------



## krnboy1009

^Yea, and long haul mails are sent by planes anyway.


----------



## KingNick

krnboy1009 said:


> ^Yea, and long haul mails are sent by planes anyway.


Exactly. Freight trains are not long and slow for no reason.


----------



## 33Hz

If Siemens needs to order additional components for the Velaro D to make it compatible with the Channel Tunnel regulations, then surely the same components will be needed for the Eurostar Velaros? So how are they still on target for a year earlier?

And is there really a market for direct, 400m, 900 seat trains from London to Geneva? It's a trip I've done, but it's a real slog and even with the Paris bypass would be 5 hours.


----------



## AlexNL

To my knowledge, Deutsche Bahn initially ordered the Velaro D trains without the additional components needed for the UK and the Chunnel. Eurostar immediately ordered the trains for cross channel operation into NL, BE, FR, DE, UK and CH, so including the components needed (think of mounting some antennas and adding some chips) . 

For the e320, the installation of these components is part of the assembly line. For the Velaro D the assembly line was already in place, modification of an operational assembly lie is virtually impossible as it would mean introducing differences between trains that are supposed to come off the same assembly line. Therefore, these components need to be retrofitted onto the trains.

The question: is there a market? Appearantly, Eurostar thinks there is. If the seats are comfortable enough, the service level is adequate, the service is reliable (i.e. good punctuality scores) and the internet connection is fast enough (the trains will be fitted with Wi-Fi), passengers might be tempted to choose Eurostar as opposed to the aircraft for a trip to London. Think of it: most airports aren't located conventiently near cities (exception being Amsterdam Airport Schiphol), so time is lost during travel to the airport. Park the car or leave the train, walk towards the check-in gates, drop off your bags, wait, wait, board, taxi, fly, land, wait, wait, collect bags, head from the airport back to the city centre. Usually a lot of time is lost during waiting at the airport and travelling through and from the airport.

A train is more convenient as it brings you straight into the heart of the city. This saves a lot of time... from the railway station it's usually a short ride (by public transport, taxi, or getting picked-up by a friend) to the final destination. Meanwhile, people can relax, or remain productive throughout their trip.


----------



## 33Hz

But a 2 year delay just to retrofit a few sets? It seems like something else is going on.

Or are all the Velaro Ds late? I read somewhere they have started to go into service.


----------



## AlexNL

All Velaro D trains are delivered late because of supply issues at Siemens. This is independent of the plans for London.


----------



## Coccodrillo

AlexNL said:


> However, minimum train length is still set to be 375 metres [...]


So how it is possible that the Eurostar NOL (North of London) sets were shorter?


----------



## XAN_

Coccodrillo said:


> So how it is possible that the Eurostar NOL (North of London) sets were shorter?


Maybe they were designed to proceed the tunnel in pairs, than to decouple in London and finally to proceed to he north to separate destinations?


----------



## Coccodrillo

No, as two Eurostar NOL sets would be too long (550 to 600 m I guess).


----------



## NordikNerd

In june I travelled the international train from Copenhagen, Denmark to Flensburg, Germany.

The international feel is quite absent though. I dare to say that 90 % of the passengers are danish, I saw a few germans entering the train at Kolding though. After Tinglev there were few passengers left.



This dieseltrain is actually a slow regional train with many stops at small stations like Vojens, Lunderskov, Tinglev.



X2000-The swedish express train. This type of trainset was tested on the US. East Coast in 1993
But Amtrak decided to choose the Acela instead.
P6152003 by







[/url]
*Copenhagen Main Station*-The second busiest in Denmark



*Slagelse*



*Flensburg, Germany close to the DK-border*


----------



## derUlukai

i don`t like those massive thread-mergers in this sub-forum at all, and especially this one, merging eurostar-news with chunnel-operator-news and conventional inter-country-railways news and travel reports, so i have not read all 68 pages to see if the pictures of the final e320 trainsets have already been posted here.
i have to say that the mockup`s design they presented about 2years ago in london was far more appealing to me. the final design looks much more conventional and dull while the mockup had a really striking color scheme.









(c)www.railvolution.net / günther barths









(c)www.railvolution.net / güntherbarths

for comparison, the mockup:








(c)wikipedia photographer Panhard


----------



## joseph1951

derUlukai said:


> i don`t like those massive thread-mergers in this sub-forum at all, and especially this one, merging eurostar-news with chunnel-operator-news and conventional inter-country-railways news and travel reports, so i have not read all 68 pages to see if the pictures of the final e320 trainsets have already been posted here.
> i have to say that the mockup`s design they presented about 2years ago in london was far more appealing to me. the final design looks much more conventional and dull while the mockup had a really striking color scheme.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (c)www.railvolution.net / günther barths
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (c)www.railvolution.net / güntherbarths
> 
> for comparison, the mockup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (c)wikipedia photographer Panhard


The real train looks identical to the mockup and the final colour scheme can be changed easily.

Liveries can dramatically change the shape of a train, so let's not not confuse the train perfomance for a leak of paint.


----------



## derUlukai

ok, sry, maybe my post was a bit confusing. i was only complaining about the livery/colour scheme of the train. the (standard-velaro-)design looks as fine as ever.


----------



## inanutshell

joseph1951 said:


> The real train looks identical to the mockup and the final colour scheme can be changed easily.
> 
> Liveries can dramatically change the shape of a train, so let's not not confuse the train perfomance for a leak of paint.


I'm pretty sure the op meant the livery. I always suspected that they'd have to change it (off-white + black window band, hellooo DB lawsuit - whether they'd win it or not).

But the shape of that dark blue area is just ugly. I hope they change it.


----------



## makita09

Lick of paint. Anyway, it won't be paint, but transfers.


----------



## Silly_Walks

I totally agree with derUlukai.


----------



## Sopomon

^^ As do I.
At least they could have used that gunmetal grey instead of that awkward blue colour.


----------



## Silly_Walks

Now it looks like the Dutch SprinterLightTrain with the blue, white and yellow:


----------



## joseph1951

derUlukai said:


> ok, sry, maybe my post was a bit confusing. i was only complaining about the livery/colour scheme of the train. the (standard-velaro-)design looks as fine as ever.


Yes, I know.


----------



## joseph1951

makita09 said:


> Lick of* paint*. Anyway, it won't be paint, but transfers.


Yes, I just used a "popular" expression. 

However, I was trying to point out that, it comes to train performace and comfort, it is important not to confuse the "packaging" with the "content".

In any case, transfers can be applied very easily and quickly.. and more tha once.


----------



## cle

AlexNL said:


> However, minimum train length is still set to be 375 metres, that's why DB plans on coupling the trains: one half going to Frankfurt, the other to Amsterdam. Eurostar will send their 400 meter long e320 trains to Amsterdam or Geneva.


Is Geneva confirmed? Won't the journey times be a bit lopsided, compared to Amsterdam? Lyon seems more balanced. Geneva is about an hour more. 

And what is the platform situation at Amsterdam? Will it be Centraal or Zuid? If both DB and e* are planning three trains per day, that's quite a lot of dwell. Especially as they'd probably want similar times of day.


----------



## Momo1435

The longest platform at Amsterdam Centraal is 685m, Amsterdam Zuid currently has platforms that are 395m and 430m long. Both stations are able to accommodate the long trains. But I haven't seen any information about the station they will be using.


----------



## cle

Momo1435 said:


> The longest platform at Amsterdam Centraal is 685m, Amsterdam Zuid currently has platforms that are 395m and 430m long. Both stations are able to accommodate the long trains. But I haven't seen any information about the station they will be using.


I didn't mean length-wise, but more in terms of the capacity for the train being able to dwell for 45 mins or however long it needs. And there could be a e* and a DB train both wanting the same time slot.

The higher numbered platforms at Centraal seem likely. I wonder if two trains could sit in the same platform at A and B ends- if they're both divided to be 200m each. Might be confusing with two London trains in the same platform - but if they could consolidate passport and security in bursts, it might make sense. 

Would six departures a day justify the cost? I hope so, I can't wait!


----------



## makita09

joseph1951 said:


> Yes, I just used a "popular" expression.
> 
> However, I was trying to point out that, it comes to train performace and comfort, it is important not to confuse the "packaging" with the "content".
> 
> In any case, transfers can be applied very easily and quickly.. and more tha once.


No you didn't use a popular expression, you said *leak* of paint. As you are no fun here is a picture to illustrate.


----------



## K_

cle said:


> Is Geneva confirmed? Won't the journey times be a bit lopsided, compared to Amsterdam? Lyon seems more balanced. Geneva is about an hour more.


Travel times don't need to be "balanced". I see a lot of potential for a Geneva - London. (I'm sure going to make good use of it)


----------



## joseph1951

makita09 said:


> *No you didn't use a popular expression*, you said *leak* of paint. As you are no fun here is a picture to illustrate.


nice..."burst pipe".

.


----------



## Momo1435

cle said:


> I didn't mean length-wise, but more in terms of the capacity for the train being able to dwell for 45 mins or however long it needs. And there could be a e* and a DB train both wanting the same time slot.
> 
> The higher numbered platforms at Centraal seem likely. I wonder if two trains could sit in the same platform at A and B ends- if they're both divided to be 200m each. Might be confusing with two London trains in the same platform - but if they could consolidate passport and security in bursts, it might make sense.
> 
> Would six departures a day justify the cost? I hope so, I can't wait!


Centraal should have the capacity, although I don't think that 2 trains at the same time will be possible. But I don't think that will happen anyway since they have to coordinate the available slots on the HSL Zuid anyway.

Amsterdam Zuid doesn't allow for longer dwelling times, it only got 2 platform tracks in both directions and both are needed for the regular NS timetable. It will become an option in the future when another platform is constructed, but that depends on a much bigger plans concerning not just the railway line but the whole area surrounding the station.


----------



## K_

Momo1435 said:


> Centraal should have the capacity, although I don't think that 2 trains at the same time will be possible. But I don't think that will happen anyway since they have to coordinate the available slots on the HSL Zuid anyway.


I think the furthest platform (Ij side) is currently used for the Thalys service. I suppose Fyra to Brussel will use that too. That means that Prorail /HSA could plan a half hourly path from that platform to the HSL Zuid and Belgium. One 250 kph every hour, that Fyra uses, and one hourly 300 kph one, that can be used by Thalys - Eurostar - DB.
Would give each train a long enough dwell time.


----------



## cle

K_ said:


> Travel times don't need to be "balanced". I see a lot of potential for a Geneva - London. (I'm sure going to make good use of it)


They will need to synchronise journey times and dwells so that the return journey portions can re-attach in Lille, or wherever and head through the tunnel.


----------



## K_

cle said:


> They will need to synchronise journey times and dwells so that the return journey portions can re-attach in Lille, or wherever and head through the tunnel.


The service to Geneva is going to be a Eurostar service, not a DB service. Eurostar has ordered 400m long Velaro D trains, and does not intend to split/join trains en route like DB does.

So they don't have this issue. They do have another issue though: How to fill a 400m long train in Geneva... 
Eurostar could add stops at CDG and Lille, and try to get some of the Switzerland - Belgium traffic too.


----------



## China Hand

ssiguy2 said:


> I f France can outwit the British, more power to em. Thats what happens when Britain becomes a little America.


I do believe it is the obverse, as it was the British who were copied by the USA. My first language isn't English because the American Empire conquered Britain in the 17th C...


----------



## cle

K_ said:


> The service to Geneva is going to be a Eurostar service, not a DB service. Eurostar has ordered 400m long Velaro D trains, and does not intend to split/join trains en route like DB does.
> 
> So they don't have this issue. They do have another issue though: How to fill a 400m long train in Geneva...
> Eurostar could add stops at CDG and Lille, and try to get some of the Switzerland - Belgium traffic too.


Good point, my bad. DB will need to balance Amsterdam and Cologne/Frankfurt.

I think Geneva seems an obvious one to merge with the Disney service as an extension. Mopping up a Lille stop is another purpose - and there may be also potential on the Lille-Geneva market which isn't served directly except for the odd ski night train.


----------



## K_

cle said:


> Good point, my bad. DB will need to balance Amsterdam and Cologne/Frankfurt.


It is on hour more from Brussel to Frankfurt then from Brussel to Amsterdam... What DB could however do is put Amsterdam - Frankfurt trains in the same vehicle pool. That would enable them to avoid long idle times. And it would avoid empty moves to get the Amsterdam -London trains back to Germany for maintenance.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> It is on hour more from Brussel to Frankfurt then from Brussel to Amsterdam... What DB could however do is put Amsterdam - Frankfurt trains in the same vehicle pool. That would enable them to avoid long idle times. And it would avoid empty moves to get the Amsterdam -London trains back to Germany for maintenance.


Most train sets used on Amsterdam-Frankfurt-(Basel) service belong to HSA/NS, not to DB.


----------



## 33Hz

K_ said:


> It is on hour more from Brussel to Frankfurt then from Brussel to Amsterdam... What DB could however do is put Amsterdam - Frankfurt trains in the same vehicle pool. That would enable them to avoid long idle times. And it would avoid empty moves to get the Amsterdam -London trains back to Germany for maintenance.


Was thinking exactly this, but will the loons at UK Border Control allow a train that was originally a Frankfurt - Amsterdam service then become an Amsterdam - London service?


----------



## AlexNL

Suburbanist said:


> Most train sets used on Amsterdam-Frankfurt-(Basel) service belong to HSA/NS, not to DB.


NS owns only 4 train sets. Most are DB-owned.


----------



## Momo1435

According to Wikipedia NS now owns just 3 sets after they sold 1 to DB last year.

And even though the 3 are owned by the NS they are practically DB sets. They are maintained by the DB and can be used freely by the DB on any of their ICE 3 services, as long as they provide enough ICE 3Ms for the Amsterdam - Frankfurt service. 

As for the ICE 3 Velaro D for the London services, we could see them every know and then on the Amsterdam - Frankfurt services. But it doesn't have to be necessary to prevent empty rides to and from Germany. They could easily change the direction of the trains in London, I mean that the train from Frankfurt to London will go back from London to Amsterdam and vice versa.


----------



## AlexNL

Oh that's right, NS sold the remains of the set that crashed at Zevenaar back to DB. DB used those remains with the remains of another crashed set to form a new ICE-3.


----------



## Suburbanist

AlexNL said:


> NS owns only 4 train sets. Most are DB-owned.


I thjought it were 6...


----------



## K_

Momo1435 said:


> And even though the 3 are owned by the NS they are practically DB sets. They are maintained by the DB and can be used freely by the DB on any of their ICE 3 services, as long as they provide enough ICE 3Ms for the Amsterdam - Frankfurt service.


The NS sets are regularly used on Frankfurt Brussel services too.


----------



## Gadiri

> *Eurotunnel tests Alstom Prima II locomotive in Channel Tunnel​ 3 October 2012 *
> 
> Eurotunnel has conducted a trial run of the Alstom Prima II locomotive in the Channel Tunnel to check its compatibility and safety standards before it is used on freight trains.
> 
> *The tests are part of a plan to standardise locomotives on rail freight services between the UK and Europe.*
> 
> TSI-compliant Prima II locomotives were used in standard configuration for the tests, *hauling wagons with a total weight of 950t*.
> 
> *The freight trains are being hauled by Class 92 locomotives, built for use through the tunnel, however the trains are not approved for use on the French Rail Network (RFF).*
> 
> Groupe Eurotunnel chairman and chief executive officer Jacques Gounon said: "Gaining authorisation for new rolling stock is an essential part in the development of the open access approach implemented by Eurotunnel."
> 
> Eurotunnel is seeking to encourage open access and, in July 2012, obtained an agreement from the Intergovernmental Commission Safety Authority that technical specifications for interoperability should be applied to freight trains running through the Channel Tunnel.
> 
> *Alstom Prima II locomotives are also compatible with both ERTMS and ETCS and able to travel using four different power supplies, including 25kV, 15kV, 1500V and 3,000V.*


http://www.railway-technology.com/n...sts-alstom-prima-ii-locomotive-channel-tunnel


----------



## M-NL

These announcements only raises questions for me:
Wasn't there a rule that both ends of the train must be manned in case of emergency? So did they use 2 locomotives for this test (One at either end of the train)?
What difference does this make? A Prima II will probably be to big for UK loading gauge, so you still need to change traction to get anywhere in the UK. This is just like a class 92 that isn't allowed on Frances rail network, because it doesn't have KVB.


----------



## makita09

No rule about both ends being manned afaik. And all the rules have been reviewed recently anyway, so what was the case isn't necessarily now the case.

I believe all freight trains stop a Dollands Moor anyway, so change of traction can happen there - but this won't be necessary if the trains are using HS1 to (eg) Ford's Dagenham plant.

Loading guage will restrict the Prima II from using much of the UK railway network, but the fact that it isn't equipped for UK signalling, and it isn't certified to run anywhere on Network Rail, will prevent it from being used anywhere at all.


----------



## Momo1435

With the Prima II any operator from France can run trains straight into the GB where it can use the HS1 to reach London or have a loco change. There will be no need to use the Eurotunnel or DB Schenker UK owned class 92 loco anymore, just for the tunnel. This makes it easier for other British and European operators to run trains through the tunnel.

If for example Freightliner Group wants to run a train to France it can run the train with it's own locomotive from any place in the UK to Dollands Moor, there it can change locomotives to a Prima II that is operated by let's say NMBS Logistics to run the train to it's destination in Belgium.


----------



## M-NL

I see a potential market for multi-system locomotives built for UK loading gauge equipped with ETCS and STM's for several countries. 

If properly organised it would be very difficult to compete with a freight train that goes straight from Italy to the UK. Just change drivers somewhere along the way.


----------



## 33Hz

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...-new-eurostar-trains/archiv/2012/oktober.html


----------



## Momo1435

^^ Video from the news article.


----------



## 33Hz

Another year delay

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-germany-rail-idUKBRE8AL0GJ20121122


----------



## AlexNL

They should've bought French instead...

Joking aside: it's a shame that Siemens is seemingly unable to deliver those Velaro's... they've been presented to the public over two years ago (at InnoTrans 2010) and still haven't entered domestic services - let alone international. Very unfortunate for Deutsche Bahn's customers.


----------



## 33Hz

It does seem amazing that something can double the delivery time on a known quantity like a train.

DB sounds very annoyed. Eurostar are quiet. Alstom are probably saying 'told you so'.


----------



## Sopomon

33Hz said:


> Another year delay
> 
> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-germany-rail-idUKBRE8AL0GJ20121122


Not another, the actual further delay was unspecified. The trains which were meant to be delivered next month have been held up for some time longer, but we don't know how much.

Although a poor showing from Siemens, it's probably better if they sort out the technical issues themselves, rather than how AB handled the Danish IC4 debacle (not to mention Fyra).


----------



## cle

Lyon and Aix this year:

http://www.eurostar.com/UK/uk/leisu...urostar_trials_direct_service_to_provence.jsp


----------



## groentje

Test rides for Eurostar's and DB's Velaro's would start later this year, with testing in Belgium this summer.


----------



## K_

cle said:


> Lyon and Aix this year:
> 
> http://www.eurostar.com/UK/uk/leisu...urostar_trials_direct_service_to_provence.jsp


Passengers will have to debark in Lille however, and go through security with their luggage and then reboard the train, thus completely negating the advantage of a direct connection. You'd be faster taking a later train from Lyon to Lille, and transferring to the same Eurostar...

I hope however that this silliness does get a lot of bad press... I would hand out standard complaint letters to all the passengers that they can sign and send to parliament.


----------



## Coccodrillo

^^ What about if were British citizens to want these stricts controls?


----------



## 1772

33Hz said:


> Was thinking exactly this, but will the loons at UK Border Control allow a train that was originally a Frankfurt - Amsterdam service then become an Amsterdam - London service?


How is it loony to want to control it's borders?


----------



## K_

1772 said:


> How is it loony to want to control it's borders?


We did quite well without border controls for a long time in Europe. And most of continental Europe does well without border controls right now.
But even then, what's impossible about just checking passengers on the train? 
And why should British border control care if a train that does Amsterdam London did a Frankfurt - Amsterdam service before that? Other than out of lunatic paranoia, that is. So yes, if they care about that they are loonies.


----------



## makita09

^^ UK Border controls have been purely down to politics and nothing to do with reality since forever. So yes, the result is loony. Daily Mail + Tory rightwingers = no sensible discussion whatsoever.


----------



## Theijs

Weird: when I leave the UK by Eurostar to enter Schengenarea (continental Europe), the customs check is in London. Why no arrival check over there?


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Because entry and exit checks are both made at the same time (embarkation).


----------



## Stainless

Theijs said:


> Weird: when I leave the UK by Eurostar to enter Schengenarea (continental Europe), the customs check is in London. Why no arrival check over there?


Because they fear the train will be full of asylum seekers demanding free council houses the moment they step off the train:nuts:. All ways of entering the UK except air travel involve pre clearance to avoid this. Instead of adding destinations with this convoluted process in Lille, they should run more services to Avignon than one a week. I looked at doing this a while ago and even their website gave lower prices for a TGV-Eurostar combination on the same day. If they have the customs facilities then they might as well use them. I doubt many British customs officers would complain about being stationed in the south of France all summer.


----------



## K_

Stainless said:


> Because they fear the train will be full of asylum seekers demanding free council houses the moment they step off the train:nuts:


You know, you can just send them back...


----------



## China Hand

K_ said:


> We did quite well without border controls for a long time in Europe. And most of continental Europe does well without border controls right now.
> But even then, what's impossible about just checking passengers on the train?
> And why should British border control care if a train that does Amsterdam London did a Frankfurt - Amsterdam service before that? Other than out of lunatic paranoia, that is. So yes, if they care about that they are loonies.


They are a sovereign nation and they can and should do as they please and ignore being told what to do by other nations on another continent.

Sovereignty, is the concept.


----------



## K_

China Hand said:


> They are a sovereign nation and they can and should do as they please and ignore being told what to do by other nations on another continent.
> 
> Sovereignty, is the concept.


Sure. And in the late 19th century the nations of Europe were a lot more sovereign then they are now, and did a lot more as they pleased as they do now.
And they let people move across borders largely unchecked. You didn't need to carry passport or id papers in most of Europe then. 

So yes, the're sovereign. They're also being stupid. 
Are they entitled to stupidity? Yes. 
Am I allowed to point out their silliness? Ditto...


----------



## Slartibartfas

China Hand said:


> They are a sovereign nation and they can and should do as they please and ignore being told what to do by other nations on another continent.
> 
> Sovereignty, is the concept.


Foreign continent? :nuts:



>


from wikipedia.com

Sure its the British Islands but obviously they are commonly considered to be part of Europe in geographic as well as political terms. London is 1 and a half hours away from Brussels - by train! Its not much longer to Paris and there are decent connections to Amsterdam, Frankfurt and even Zürich, all by train. By plane you'd reach any European city in no time anyway. 

Britons might wish to leave the Union and to go towards splendid isolation in Europe, but they can't change geographic facts. They are part of Europe and they have to live with it, maybe they want a political divorce but Europe will never be a foreign continent.


And those people who still believe in the fairy tale of absolute sovereignty, should wake up and face reality, even if there were no EU at all it would not exist.


----------



## China Hand

Slartibartfas said:


> Foreign continent?
> 
> Sure its the British Islands but obviously they are commonly considered to be part of Europe in geographic as well as political terms.


People from The UK, routinely refer to Europe in these terms:

"I am going to Europe for my holiday."
"My brother got back from Europe and we..."
"Yeah, Europeans they..."

The mindset of those from the UK is that Europe is some other place than the UK. You cannot go someplace if you are already there. That's like saying I am going to China when I am sitting in Beijing.

Politically the UK has always been distinct from Europe and many wars have been fought to maintain this distinction.

The UK has the pound sterling, not the Euro. And so on.



> And those people who still believe in the fairy tale of absolute sovereignty, should wake up and face reality, even if there were no EU at all it would not exist.


People like you are why sovereignty exists. When you begin telling others what to do in their country, issues begin to occur as Europe is realizing. So someone like you works in Brussels, and then those who prefer sovereignty riot in Greece and Spain.


----------



## China Hand

K_ said:


> So yes, the're sovereign. They're also being stupid.
> Are they entitled to stupidity? Yes.
> Am I allowed to point out their silliness? Ditto...


Yes you are. As am I when I point out that you and Slartibartfas are Authoritarians who want to remove state sovereignty because you think you know better.


----------



## Slartibartfas

China Hand said:


> People from The UK, routinely refer to Europe in these terms:
> 
> "I am going to Europe for my holiday."
> "My brother got back from Europe and we..."
> "Yeah, Europeans they..."
> 
> The mindset of those from the UK is that Europe is some other place than the UK. You cannot go someplace if you are already there. That's like saying I am going to China when I am sitting in Beijing.
> 
> Politically the UK has always been distinct from Europe and many wars have been fought to maintain this distinction.
> 
> The UK has the pound sterling, not the Euro. And so on.


All of which changes nothing about the reality that the UK is part of Europe. 

In London people also tend to say, that they just came back from "the City" when they arrive at their home which is located somewhere in London. That does not mean that their flat is not in London. Same is the case in Vienna btw. We are also driving "in die Stadt", even when we are already in it and just are on the way to the first district. Obviously your logic is flawed on this one. 

Every European nation loves to uphold its supposed exceptionalism and there are indeed aspects unique to all nations, some of them have more of that some have less but all of them undeniably root solidly in common European traditions and cultural/political/scientific movements. That is of course also true for the UK as for other European countries. For goodness sake, the British ruling dynasty is German and you know why? Because only a century or two ago, European countries were ruled by pan-European elites where almost any ruler was in one way or another related to the other rulers. 



> People like you are why sovereignty exists. When you begin telling others what to do in their country, issues begin to occur as Europe is realizing. So someone like you works in Brussels, and then those who prefer sovereignty riot in Greece and Spain.


Sovereignty in its absolute form, as you apparently believe in does NOT exist, with me or without me. Its a myth. No European country can do whatever it likes, none. All of them experience very real limitations to their sovereignty and they also would if Europe would be a harbour of proud totally (supposedly) independent fatherlands as you probably would like them to be. Endless sovereignty, even if it could exist, would not help Greece or Spain to get out of their severe economic malaise either. Only painful reforms will do so, and if they were not part of the EU, that would be no different.


----------



## China Hand

Slartibartfas said:


> All of which changes nothing about the reality that the UK is part of Europe.


Incorrect. Britons and those in the UK, on the main, do not think of themselves as Europeans.



> all of them undeniably root solidly in common European traditions and cultural/political/scientific movements. That is of course also true for the UK as for other European countries.


Perhaps you and I read different history books. Mine do not have a chapter on the rise of UK Fascism and the subsequent attempted invasion of Europe. Maybe yours has this missing chapter.

Whether you wish to admit it or not, the UK has different values than Europe.



> Endless sovereignty, even if it could exist, would not help Greece or Spain to get out of their severe economic malaise either. Only painful reforms will do so, and if they were not part of the EU, that would be no different.


If Greece and Spain had not entered the EU and the monetary union their economies would not have experienced the gross distortions that now must be repaid. Without the promise of endless Euros from the North, they would not have gotten into such dire straits.


----------



## NordikNerd

China Hand said:


> People from The UK, routinely refer to Europe in these terms:
> 
> "I am going to Europe for my holiday."
> "My brother got back from Europe and we..."
> "Yeah, Europeans they..."
> 
> The mindset of those from the UK is that Europe is some other place than the UK. You cannot go someplace if you are already there. That's like saying I am going to China when I am sitting in Beijing.
> 
> Politically the UK has always been distinct from Europe and many wars have been fought to maintain this distinction.
> 
> The UK has the pound sterling, not the Euro. And so on.
> 
> 
> 
> People like you are why sovereignty exists. When you begin telling others what to do in their country, issues begin to occur as Europe is realizing. So someone like you works in Brussels, and then those who prefer sovereignty riot in Greece and Spain.


Exactly the same talk in Sweden and Scandinavia. Very few people refer to themselves and their country as european. Europe is the countries on the continent. Theres a gap inbetween Sweden and the continent both geographically and politically. 

Europe and it's currency the euro is only a lifebuoy for poor countries in south and eastern europe, they gain in joining the EU & EMU, while the other ones who have managed their budget right have to pay for them.


----------



## Slartibartfas

China Hand said:


> Incorrect. Britons and those in the UK, on the main, do not think of themselves as Europeans.


Even if you were right and they'd think to be something entirely else than European (which I challenge), my above arguments would still stand. You can't deny geographic and cultural realities. The British nation belongs to the European civilization, denying that is ridiculous. 



> Perhaps you and I read different history books. Mine do not have a chapter on the rise of UK Fascism and the subsequent attempted invasion of Europe. Maybe yours has this missing chapter.
> 
> Whether you wish to admit it or not, the UK has different values than Europe.


Not every movement was equally successful in every part of Europe (I never pretended that and you implicitly claiming otherwise is showing bad debating style). That is also the case within nation states btw. Protestantism hardly was equally successful all over Germany for example. The UK saw its own fascist movement, but like the Communist movement in Austria it never managed its break through. And even today, it has its mainstream far right populism similar to what many other European countries. UKIP and BNP use it and even the Tories are trying their luck with some moderate form of it, like other conservative European parties. 

You should however have some more looks in some history books. Or do you seriously believe eg gothic architecture is a British national invention? Or what about Renaissance? The hell, even romanticism and nationalism have a larger European dimension. Cultural, religious and scientific elites have closely cooperated and interacted all across Europe since the Roman Empire. 




> If Greece and Spain had not entered the EU and the monetary union their economies would not have experienced the gross distortions that now must be repaid. Without the promise of endless Euros from the North, they would not have gotten into such dire straits.


Without entering the EU... is pure speculation but if I were to speculate, than both countries would not have stayed democratic but fallen back into dictatorships, or Putin style autocracies at least. They had remained isolated peripheries and would be much poorer than even today after years of crises. 

But his speculation is meaningless as it can't be proven one way or another. It is however a matter of fact that distortions can be as easily created without being member of the EU or the Euro. Continuous currency devaluation can also lead to a big bang when an artificially maintained inequilibrium can not be maintained any longer and everything implodes. Bubbles can form in any situation and when they burst it will be always disastrous. Or what about all these economic disasters when Europe was still the glorious home of (supposedly) independent fatherlands?


----------



## Slartibartfas

NordikNerd said:


> Exactly the same talk in Sweden and Scandinavia. Very few people refer to themselves and their country as european. Europe is the countries on the continent. Theres a gap inbetween Sweden and the continent both geographically and politically.
> 
> Europe and it's currency the euro is only a lifebuoy for poor countries in south and eastern europe, they gain in joining the EU & EMU, while the other ones who have managed their budget right have to pay for them.


Yeah, but are they denying being part of the European cultural and political sphere? I have yet to meet some in person who would do so. Sure there is a European core and a periphery and boh the UK and Scandinavia might be more of the latter than the former but that does not address my question. 

You are just straight wrong about the EU however. Nordic countries also profit a lot from the single market, especially as their location is the European periphery. And it should be obvious that a common budget profits the poorer members more than the richer ones. Everything else would be madness only found in colonial empires.


----------



## K_

China Hand said:


> Whether you wish to admit it or not, the UK has different values than Europe.


Can you give us an example?


----------



## :jax:

I don't think you could find many Britons or Scandinavians in America, Asia, or Africa who would not consider themselves European. The differences across continents dwarf the ones within them (at least a homogenous one like Europe). Being European doesn't prevent you from bad-mouthing the French or the Germans, after all most Europeans do.


----------



## Sunfuns

NordikNerd said:


> Exactly the same talk in Sweden and Scandinavia. Very few people refer to themselves and their country as european. Europe is the countries on the continent. Theres a gap inbetween Sweden and the continent both geographically and politically.
> 
> Europe and it's currency the euro is only a lifebuoy for poor countries in south and eastern europe, they gain in joining the EU & EMU, while the other ones who have managed their budget right have to pay for them.


Oh please. Germany and to a lesser extent France are the main beneficiaries of the currency union. Germany in particular wouldn't be doing as well as it is now without it.


----------



## MarcVD

China Hand said:


> Incorrect. Britons and those in the UK, on the main, do not think of themselves as Europeans.


Absolutely right. That's why we should never have left this country enter the
EU, which they did only to be able to sabotage it from inside. EU would be
much better off with UK out of it. The sooner they leave, happier I'm.

UK is just either the 53rd state of the US or the only unsinkable aircraft
carrier of the american navy.


----------



## 437.001

*ENOUGH!!* :rant:

This thread is about railways, not the DLM nor any Skybar!!


----------



## flierfy

Sunfuns said:


> Oh please. Germany and to a lesser extent France are the main beneficiaries of the currency union. Germany in particular wouldn't be doing as well as it is now without it.


Suppressed wages and negative real interest rates does well for whom exactly? Certainly not for the German people.


----------



## :jax:

437.001 said:


> *ENOUGH!!* :rant:
> 
> This thread is about railways, not the DLM nor any Skybar!!


You are right. Sorry. This discussion belongs elsewhere. Customs/migration control is an unfortunate aspect of international train travel, even parts of the EU, but this brawl is DLM material. Back to trains.


----------



## Slartibartfas

437.001 said:


> *ENOUGH!!* :rant:


Sorry, your totally right. If anyone wants to add more to this off topic debate, there is plenty of space in the DLM for doing so. 

I don't know if the "Railjet" fits to this thread. Its a system run by the Austrian railways (ÖBB) but connecting 4 countries with a network centered around Vienna, connecting to Munich, Zürich, Graz, Carinthia and Budapest. In 2 years or so it will be 5 countries with the new Prague destination (There will be Austrian as well as Czech run Railjets on that route). It is not really high speed but on large parts of the main axis it reaches speeds of up to 230 km per hour. For the rest, its more of an improvement of the offered quality of transportation.


----------



## Sunfuns

Ok, back to the topic! 

Anyone know what is the longest regular passenger service in Europe? I know there is Basel-Moscow service, albeit only one carriage attached to Copenhagen train. Anything significantly longer than that?


----------



## Momo1435

^^ I doubt that there is anything longer then the Moscow - Nice service.


----------



## KingNick

For sure not, but I'd rather know the longest service running on a at least daily basis and not just every now and then.


----------



## sotavento

KingNick said:


> For sure not, but I'd rather know the longest service running on a at least daily basis and not just every now and then.



Lisboa-Paris sudexpresso daily =1700km

1000km in a talgo in PT/ES 
+
700km in a TGV in FR


----------



## 437.001

But you have to change at Hendaye.


----------



## MarcVD

KingNick said:


> For sure not, but I'd rather know the longest service running on a at least daily basis and not just every now and then.


Nice-Moscow is not daily, for sure, but it's not "every now and then" either : it's once a week, all year long, as far as I know.

There is now a Paris-Moscow too, whose frequency varies with the period of the week, but which is never less than weekly either.

On a daily basis, what about the new Thello service Paris-Rome ?


----------



## Sunfuns

Basel-Copenhagen and Basel-Warsaw is a daily service.


----------



## sotavento

437.001 said:


> But you have to change at Hendaye.


That's the problem with HSR nowadays ... :dunno:


----------



## NordikNerd

Sunfuns said:


> Ok, back to the topic!
> 
> Anyone know what is the longest regular passenger service in Europe? I know there is Basel-Moscow service, albeit only one carriage attached to Copenhagen train. Anything significantly longer than that?


In 2009 I saw an international train in Cologne with one waggon destined for Moscow Bielorusskaja. Also saw a russian waggon on the Basel-Copenhagen train when boarding in Mannheim in 2011. I think they detach the waggon in Hannover where it is attached to the Paris-Berlin night train.

There is (or used to be) a direct train Nice-Moscow.

The longest I have travelled continuously by train (with changes) is Linköping-Porto Maurizio & Jekaterinburg-Moscow. 

This was very wearisome. Also rode the Copenhagen-Basel service which is the longest I have travelled continuously with train without feeling fed up with it.


----------



## rheintram

Moscow - Nice is still running once a week. It departs in Moscow on Thursday noon and arrives in Nice on Saturday noon. The opposite train leaves Nice on Saturday evening and arrives at its destination on Monday late at night.


----------



## hans280

Coccodrillo said:


> ^^ What about if were British citizens to want these stricts controls?


I have no doubt that most of them do. (I work with quite a few Brits - in Paris, mind you - who consider the tight controls to board a Eurostar train as a sign of superiority over the silly "continentals".) However, one cannot deny that it chips away at the competitiveness of HS-rail over air traffic. The reason that scores of Parisians take the TGV to various destination in western Switzerland and the Thalys to Amsterdam, although the transport time, at 3 to 3 1/2 hours, is way longer than a plane is that you don't have to waste time in an airport. You can walk straight into the train, your luggage in hand, 2 minutes before departure. 

Eurostar does actually ask passengers to show up for check-in at least half an hour prior to departure. Now, 30 minutes are not the end of the world, but it does make the train service less attractive.


----------



## parcdesprinces

rheintram said:


> Moscow - Nice is still running once a week.


Indeed the "new" _Riviera Express_ is once a week, but I heard that they planned to make it a twice-a-week service during summer in the near future.

Its route is 3318 km long, and it serves (among others): Nice-Ville, Monaco - Monte-Carlo, Milan, Vienna, Warsaw, Minsk and Moscow-Belorussky.



And since late 2011, there's the "even newer" _Trans-European Moscow Express_ which is a three-times-a-week service during winter, and a five-times-a-week service during summer.

Its route is 3177 km long, and it serves (among others): Paris-Est, Metz, Frankfurt (am Main), Berlin, Warsaw, Brest (Litovsk), Minsk and Moscow-Belorussky.


----------



## makita09

hans280 said:


> (I work with quite a few Brits - in Paris, mind you - who consider the tight controls to board a Eurostar train as a sign of superiority over the silly "continentals".)


Lol, I sense someone missed the underlying sarcasm there.


----------



## NordikNerd

hans280 said:


> I have no doubt that most of them do. (I work with quite a few Brits - in Paris, mind you - who consider the tight controls to board a Eurostar train as a sign of superiority over the silly "continentals".)
> Eurostar does actually ask passengers to show up for check-in at least half an hour prior to departure. Now, 30 minutes are not the end of the world, but it does make the train service less attractive.


Maybe the tight control is because of the chunnel, you don't want terrorists on that train.

Travelling the eurostar feels very much like checking in to an airport. I was surprised to find this scrutiny on the 2nd floor of the Gare du Nord.

I did not know about it and almost was late for my train because of it.

About long distance trains. There is the Orient Express chartered train London-Istanbul. Check Ameropa for tickets.


----------



## K_

NordikNerd said:


> Maybe the tight control is because of the chunnel, you don't want terrorists on that train.


Which begs the question: Why only on that train?


----------



## Verso

NordikNerd said:


> About long distance trains. There is the Orient Express chartered train *London*-Istanbul. Check Ameropa for tickets.


Isn't it Paris - Istanbul?


----------



## Suburbanist

Aren't all tracks west of Istanbul being under major reconstruction?


----------



## Coccodrillo

Verso said:


> Isn't it Paris - Istanbul?


It's London-Folkestone by train, Folkestone-Calais by bus and the Eurotunnel, Calais-Istambul by another train.



Suburbanist said:


> Aren't all tracks west of Istanbul being under major reconstruction?


Yes, all long distance trains now ends outside Istambul, if not even at the Turkish border (even in the mdidle of the night, if the trains happened to cross it at that time).


----------



## MarcVD

Coccodrillo said:


> Yes, all long distance trains now ends outside Istambul, if not even at the Turkish border (even in the mdidle of the night, if the trains happened to cross it at that time).


For the time being, trains go all the way to Istanbul Sirkeci again. But that's
just because works are stopped for the winter season. In March or April,
trains will once again be stopped at the turkish border (Kapikule) and replaced
by a bus for the final leg into Istanbul.

This is because of the installation of the approaches of the Bosphorus
tunnel, which will most likely (not 100% sure yet) cause the closure of the
two Istanbul historic stations. There isn't really a station outside Istanbul
where they can organise the transfer, I presume... A big inconvenience,
since the bus transfer takes place in the middle of the night, around 2AM
or so.

For my part, i'll wait until those works are completed before travelling this
way again...


----------



## Stainless

Coccodrillo said:


> It's London-Folkstone by train, Folkestone-Calais by bus and the Eurotunnel, Calais-Istanbul by another train.


Not was I would call a luxury experience. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to charter a Eurostar to Calais or Lille, then transfer across from there.

Is it that difficult to get passenger carriages approved for the tunnel? If they did that could open up all sorts of options.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Stainless said:


> Is it that difficult to get passenger carriages approved for the tunnel?


Yes!

After nearly 20 years from the opening of the Chunnel, there is only one kind of passenger train approved (the TGV Transmanche, but soon the Velaro e320 will also be approved) and even only one kind of freight locomotive (the Class 92). Then there is a single type of EuroShuttle locomotives and some types of flat wagons and passenger cars for the shuttles, but these cannot run outside EuroTunnel tracks.

Things might change in the future if in the EuroTunnel the TSI specifications will be applied one day (in the alpine base tunnels and in the Seikan tunnel basically any kind of train is allowed, so I don't see why the EuroTunnel should be an exception*).

Being a touristic service I would however bring the passengers by ferry.

*the only problem I am aware of is that the overhead line in the Chunnel is higher than in the rest of Europe so that locomotives have to have special pantographs


----------



## chornedsnorkack

There are just 38 Eurostar sets - but this seems to be in excess of requirements, because the six and half North of London Eurostars and also 3 of the 31 Three Capitals Eurostars are now used in French domestic routes.

What are the technical limitations of these 9 and half surplus trains - could they be used to expand services from Great Britain to beyond France?


----------



## makita09

NordikNerd said:


> The eurostar does stop at Ashford, are there the same type of passport and luggage checks there ?


Yes, with less added queueing.


----------



## MarcVD

If what this press article says (in french) is true :

http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises...rrence-frontale-avec-thalys-sncf-en-2016.html

DB would be planning (in 2016) to exit from Thalys and launch its own service
between Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam and Köln.

It will be nice to see some competition on this service, which is for the time
being a real milk cow but with not much effort in terms of price and comfort.
Hopefully the competition between Thalys and DB will bring some progress...


----------



## jonasry

MarcVD said:


> If what this press article says (in french) is true :
> 
> http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises...rrence-frontale-avec-thalys-sncf-en-2016.html
> 
> DB would be planning (in 2016) to exit from Thalys and launch its own service
> between Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam and Köln.
> 
> It will be nice to see some competition on this service, which is for the time
> being a real milk cow but with not much effort in terms of price and comfort.
> Hopefully the competition between Thalys and DB will bring some progress...


Well, the service was first announced as launching in 2013 so this is quite disappointing.


----------



## AlexNL

jonasry said:


> Well, the service was first announced as launching in 2013 so this is quite disappointing.


What was announced for 'launching in 2013' is the ICE from Frankfurt and Amsterdam to London. It's uncertain when that service will start, this is due to the heavy delay of the Velaro D.


----------



## Axelferis

Galactic said:


> Thanks for your input and the link to that detailed official map. I updated my map accordingly.


The so called HSR in britain is 'poor' when i compare to some european countries.

I didn't expect to be so disapointing with this :blahblah: "revolutionnary"british network.
Everytime i read HSR2 HSR2 HSR2 and i notice that the network is very poor.


----------



## Cherguevara

Axelferis said:


> The so called HSR in britain is 'poor' when i compare to some european countries.
> 
> I didn't expect to be so disapointing with this :blahblah: "revolutionnary"british network.
> Everytime i read HSR2 HSR2 HSR2 and i notice that the network is very poor.


That's the existing network. HS2 is the planned one.


----------



## sotavento

Axelferis said:


> The so called HSR in britain is 'poor' when i compare to some european countries.
> 
> I didn't expect to be so disapointing with this :blahblah: "revolutionnary"british network.
> Everytime i read HSR2 HSR2 HSR2 and i notice that the network is very poor.


Not quite correct.


There are GAPS in the french TGV network BIGGER than the entire great britain. 
And one must check the FREQUENCY of services on those few yellow routes in the UK ... :cheers: :dunno:

Sidenote: jn the portuguese section of the map it should be orange almost instead of yellow (224km/h) and ALL the 30.000+ cities are already served by HSR over here (Alfa Pendular 224km/h / Intercity 200km/h)


----------



## Nexis

sotavento said:


> Not quite correct.
> 
> 
> There are GAPS in the french TGV network BIGGER than the entire great britain.
> And one must check the FREQUENCY of services on those few yellow routes in the UK ... :cheers: :dunno:
> 
> Sidenote: jn the portuguese section of the map it should be orange almost instead of yellow (224km/h) and ALL the 30.000+ cities are already served by HSR over here (Alfa Pendular 224km/h / Intercity 200km/h)


What are the black lines ?


----------



## kramer81

below 200km/h


----------



## timo9

sotavento said:


> Not quite correct.
> 
> 
> There are GAPS in the french TGV network BIGGER than the entire great britain.
> And one must check the FREQUENCY of services on those few yellow routes in the UK ... :cheers: :dunno:
> 
> Sidenote: jn the portuguese section of the map it should be orange almost instead of yellow (224km/h) and ALL the 30.000+ cities are already served by HSR over here (Alfa Pendular 224km/h / Intercity 200km/h)


Btw Tangier and Kenitra (the moroccan network) the speed is up to 320km/h, and btw Kenitra and Casablanca the speed limit is 220km/h


----------



## Alexriga

I think there are some 200 km/h railways in Poland. Not long parts but still.


----------



## markfos

Yes, but most of them will be opened next year between Gdańsk, Warsaw and Kraków.


----------



## Iwan

Alexriga said:


> I think there are some 200 km/h railways in Poland. Not long parts but still.


Central Rail Line (CMK) completed in 1977 was designed for speeds up to 250 km/h. Line is 224 km long. Regular services are limited to 160km/h. The line is being prepared to upgrade speed up to 200(230)km/h - it's equipped with new ETCS L1, overhead contact system, power supply. PKP Intercity obtained 20 ETR610 EMUs - first will arrive Poland in summer this year.

Some videos I've made during tests on CMK:

















200km/h is also planned on line Warszawa - Gdynia.


----------



## makita09

Alexriga said:


> I think there are some 200 km/h railways in Poland. Not long parts but still.


Further to what Markfos said, this map only shows operational service speeds. So any line capable of, but not actually used, above 200km/h, is not shown.


----------



## Alexriga

makita09 said:


> Further to what Markfos said, this map only shows operational service speeds. So any line capable of, but not actually used, above 200km/h, is not shown.


I see. Any map of 200+ km/h railroads U/C?


----------



## :jax:

For those of you who are interested, there is a parallel discussion on the Asian high-speed lines in these threads: 

*ASIA | Pan Asian Railway*
CHINA | High Speed Rail

Also I started a thread on making maps, Presenting maps and geographical information — tips and best practices

The East Asian High-Speed map in Wikipedia...











... is modelled upon the European High-Speed map in Wikipedia...










... and those two maps (and any future maps) should be consistent with each other.


----------



## solchante

^^
are both up to date??


----------



## :jax:

They are mostly up to date. At the time of this writing it marks the Harbin-Dalian line as under construction while it has actually been running for several months. I think the Europe map is up to date, but at least for the Bothnia link there is a discrepancy. The map says 250 km/h. It is supposed to be operational speed, not design speed, but according to the article:


> The Bothnia Line (Swedish: Botniabanan) is a high-speed railway line in northern Sweden. The 190 km (120 mi) long route, from Kramfors airport via Örnsköldsvik to Umeå, was opened in 2010 and trains are allowed to travel at speeds up to 250 km/h (160 mph) (although no train capable of more than 200 km/h (120 mph) uses the railway as of 2013).


Thus the operational speed should be below 200 km/h if the paranthesis is right, or the article should be updated if not.


----------



## AlexNL

Construction of the Perpignan - Barcelona high speed railway has finished, too. There are already some Spanish AVE trains running from Figueres Vilafant, in the near future international TGV services will use the line as well.


----------



## Sunfuns

The Asian map doesn't show any of the Japanese lines under construction (Hokuriku and Hokkaido shinkansen). That's a major omission. European map is mostly right, but also some small mistakes like non-existant construction projects in Italy.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> I think that it´s feasible even with the boarding check.


But it would mean stationing British Border Police in Barcelona just for one train. That is not doable.



> I don´t think so. I think a London to Barcelona non-stop could fill the train.
> The same way tan a Paris to Barcelona certainly would.
> Travel time would be shorter than by calling here and there.


But several trains spread over the day, with several stops, are more usefull than one non stop train.
In fact, I wouldn't run a Barcelona - London. The vest thing to do is have a few Barcelona - Lille trains, where connections to London and Brussels and beyond exist. Have these trains also call at Perpignan, Montpellier, Lyon and CDG and if you time them cleverly you can offer a whole slew of destinations involving just one change...



> I think this doesn´t matter that much.
> If the British want to do it this way, they´re in their right, and I´m ok with it.
> I don´t think it´s that important.


They're in their right, but it's still stupid. And the irrational security regime of the Channel Tunnel has made it impossible to get more international trains running through it, which does affect me.


----------



## bagus70

Hi I wonder if Europass ticket still available?


----------



## AlexNL

bagus70 said:


> Hi I wonder if Europass ticket still available?


Yes, it is! If you're a EU citizen, InterRail is for you. If you live outside of the EU, you should have a look at EURail.


----------



## bagus70

^^ Ah...thanks. Do you know the address of their website? I'm thinking about going around Europe in the near future.


----------



## AlexNL

I'm guessing that you live in the UK, so InterRail should be appropriate for you. You can find all the information you'll need on their website: www.interrail.eu. Another website that can be very useful is www.raildude.com, which provides a lot of information about trips and connections for rail travel in the European Union.

Please note: some private operators do not (yet) accept InterRail passes, for example NTV (Italy) and WESTbahn (Austria). Others do accept the InterRail pass but may require you to buy a supplement (Dutch domestic Fyra services, for example). For trains that require a reservation (such as Thalys, Eurostar, TGV and AVE) you will need to purchase a reservation, which sometimes might be more expensive than buying a full "supersaver" ticket (this is the case with Eurostar).


----------



## bagus70

AlexNL said:


> *I'm guessing that you live in the UK*, so InterRail should be appropriate for you. You can find all the information you'll need on their website: www.interrail.eu. Another website that can be very useful is www.raildude.com, which provides a lot of information about trips and connections for rail travel in the European Union.
> 
> Please note: some private operators do not (yet) accept InterRail passes, for example NTV (Italy) and WESTbahn (Austria). Others do accept the InterRail pass but may require you to buy a supplement (Dutch domestic Fyra services, for example). For trains that require a reservation (such as Thalys, Eurostar, TGV and AVE) you will need to purchase a reservation, which sometimes might be more expensive than buying a full "supersaver" ticket (this is the case with Eurostar).


I live in Netherlands East Indies (now: Indonesia :banana :lol::lol:

Thanks a lot for your information. I think that's worth a lot


----------



## :jax:

K_ said:


> You should not be allowed to operate a motor vehicle.


Similar trips are a matter of course in Scandinavia, usually with two drivers alternating between driving and sleeping, with short rests every 300-400 km or so, usually for a refill. A single driver is supposed to have a rest half-way to sleep, but sometimes people are in a hurry. 

A friend of mine once went almost from Narvik, North Norway, to Brno, Czech Republic, with some hours of sleep outside Oslo. That's about 50 hours of driving, rather excessive and not very sound. Sure, by comparison 10 hours in a train is not so bad, though people who do that kind of driving need not just to move themselves but also their cars to their destination. 

A 10 hour day trip is about the limit beyond which the travel will ruin not just the day, but the following day as well. For 24 hour trips I count one full day of travel and one full day of rest. When you go past 5 hours travel gets really uncompetitive with air travel, but if comfortable, productive (internet and electricity), and hassle-free (no connecting trains, good information, easy to get tickets) I think trains can still compete if a couple hours above that.


----------



## AlexNL

bagus70 said:


> I live in Netherlands East Indies (now: Indonesia :banana :lol::lol:
> 
> Thanks a lot for your information. I think that's worth a lot


Aha! In that case EURail is more appropriate for you, I think. See http://www.eurail.com


----------



## 437.001

At the very least till August the 25th... 



> *Technical issues delay Paris – Barcelona TGVs*
> 
> FRENCH National Railways (SNCF) and Renfe have postponed the launch of direct TGV services between Paris due to delays in completing certification of TGV Dasye sets for operation on the Figueres – Barcelona high-speed line.
> 
> The twice-daily Paris – Figueres TGVs were initially due to be extended to Barcelona at the end of this month, with Renfe launching a new Barcelona – Toulouse service at the same time.
> 
> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...al+problems+delay+Paris++Barcelona+TGV+launch


----------



## Bannor

:jax: said:


> ... and those two maps (and any future maps) should be consistent with each other.


This european map is lacking heavily on dutch rail at least.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Baanvaksnelheden.png

My point is that most intercity lines in the netherlands and germany too to some degree is infact hsr. The speeds can be over 200km/h. I just took the train from Amsterdam to Groningen two days ago, and it went over 200km/h. As you can see on this map, the section between Lelystad and Zwolle is at 200km/h. And from my own memory on that line, it went faster than 140km/h south of Lelystad and north of Zwolle as well. Though I suppose it may have been upgraded in recent years...


----------



## K_

Bannor said:


> My point is that most intercity lines in the netherlands and germany too to some degree is infact hsr. The speeds can be over 200km/h. I just took the train from Amsterdam to Groningen two days ago, and it went over 200km/h. As you can see on this map, the section between Lelystad and Zwolle is at 200km/h. And from my own memory on that line, it went faster than 140km/h south of Lelystad and north of Zwolle as well. Though I suppose it may have been upgraded in recent years...


This is not correct. In fact not a single NS IC train goes faster than 140 kph. The Fyra goes as fast as 160 kph, and the international Thalys service does reach 300 kph. But your train from Amsterdam to Groningen never went above 140kph.
The section from Lelystad to Zwolle does allow for 200kph, but that is because it is a new line, and was build to enable high speeds in the future. Currently no services on that line go faster. 
The problem NS has is that ATB, their train control system doesn't allow for speeds above 140kph. So while on some lines higher speeds could be possible, it is currently not used. 
In the future the train protection system will be upgraded to ETCS, and some lines (Amsterdam - Zwolle via Lelystad and Amsterdam Eindhoven via Utrecht might see 200 kph trains, as well as Amsterdam - Breda via the HSL.

(And the map is quite correct concerning Germany too. Some conventional IC services do run 200 kph, but that is what you are seeing: This is basically the ICE/IC map).


----------



## bagus70

Hi, I would like to know whether if a direct train service between Milan and Nice or Marseille exist?


----------



## K_

bagus70 said:


> Hi, I would like to know whether if a direct train service between Milan and Nice or Marseille exist?


Not at the moment. Anyway, answers to questions like that can be found using the trip planner of the German Railways (which covers most of Europe). -> www.bahn.de

There were direct trains at one time. They were cancelled as Trenitalia is no longer cooperating with most of it's neighbours railways. There are rumors Trenitalia might reinstate them, running in open access in France.
In the mean time you can still travel that route. Just take any Milano - Ventimiglia train, and change for one of the frequent trains running along the Med to Nice and beyond.


----------



## AlexNL

I think the Hanzelijn should be added to the map, as the infrastructure is definitely ready for 200 km/h. During testing, an ICE 3 trainset has reached 200 km/h on the Hanzelijn.


----------



## Suburbanist

AlexNL said:


> I think the Hanzelijn should be added to the map, as the infrastructure is definitely ready for 200 km/h. During testing, an ICE 3 trainset has reached 200 km/h on the Hanzelijn.


And so should Amsterdam Biljmer Arena - utrecht.


----------



## Sunfuns

This map is supposed to show lines with a real service at 200 kph or above not including stretches where it is theoretically allowed but there is no such service.


----------



## asahi

Sunfuns said:


> This map is supposed to show lines with a real service at 200 kph or above not including stretches where it is theoretically allowed but there is no such service.


Is there any 250 km/h service to Umea in Sweden? I don't think so, SJ don't even have fast enough trains, afaik. Yet, that stretch is marked on the map...


----------



## Suburbanist

Sunfuns said:


> This map is supposed to show lines with a real service at 200 kph or above not including stretches where it is theoretically allowed but there is no such service.


Is it a map of services or a map of infrastructure capabilities after all?


----------



## AlexNL

asahi said:


> Is there any 250 km/h service to Umea in Sweden? I don't think so, SJ don't even have fast enough trains, afaik. Yet, that stretch is marked on the map...


SJ have the X55 which is capable of speeds up to 250 km/h.


----------



## KingNick

Constant 250 km/h with an power output of 3.18 MW? Seems a little underpowered.


----------



## SAS 16

Suburbanist said:


> It is okay not to like the experience of riding a particular mode of transportation, but that doesn't change facts:
> 
> - airplanes have much more double- or triple-fail safety systems than trains (and they must to)
> 
> - actually, cruising accidents are extremely rare in aviation. 90% of air travel deaths historically happened on take-off, landing, climbing or approach. High-altitude accidents are so rare in commercial aviation you can count them on a single page list.
> 
> - trains are subject to interference with ROW and foreing objects. Actually, I hope they can come up with a system whereas whole railways have infra-red sensors that sound alarms if there is an object on tracks.


^^ Spain has object detectors in all the crucial points that is likely to happen in the HSLs and they have been activated couple of times if im not wrong


----------



## Rayancito

NordikNerd said:


> Green light for DB-trains to St Pancras this Friday. SNCF used to have monopoly on this branch.
> 
> Frankfurt-London in 5 hours, but not until 2016


 There is a huge differentce between a Plane and a train, the trains stops in intermediate stations. Many of the internal transits will have a extremely competitive time, this line will be a huge success. The train will be pretty full, but not necessarily of people travelling from Frankfurt to London.


----------



## Pansori

I think there's no need to absolutize the advantages/disadvantages of train vs. plane travel. Both will be used and utilized to the full. One thing that WILL happen is that it will become cheaper for everyone due to competiotion which is good.

Train has the following advantages:

- much more space and legroom (regardless of the class). I haven't been on an ICE3 but I've been on a CRH380B which is identical to ICE3 in terms of major design elements. I could fit a LARGE suitcase in front of me and still have plenty of legroom in 2nd class despite being 190cm tall. Enough said;
- mobile phone reception and internet connectivity onboard (very important if you have to stay connected as more and more people do need these days);
- it is usually more convenient to get to railway stations than airports due to their central location and more transport links from various locations;
- less hassle with security checks;
- restaurant car (there surely will be one);
- all in all trains are MUCH more comfortable than planes.

Train, however, has the following disadvantages:
- it will take more time (albeit the overall loss will be somewhat marginal or at least not something that should be a deciding factor).

All in all I would say train travel in 5 hours from London to Frankfurt is more than just 'competitive'. I think we're talking of inevitably decreasing flight fares with BA and Lufthansa on this route. Precisely what happened in China upon launching CRH services between some major cities (such as Beijing-Shanghai) in the recent years.

The launch of this route is a very, VERY good news for everyone be it a tourist or a business traveller.


----------



## Axelferis

sorry but 5 hours isn't a commercial advantage .
4 hours could but 5h not!
i don't see business travellers prefer to make 5 hours to join London.Because the market targeted is the business customers.

I bet this line will be a commercial disaster because plane will compete it better.


----------



## Pansori

^^
Are you drunk or what? :|


----------



## 437.001

Axelferis said:


> sorry but 5 hours isn't a commercial advantage .
> 4 hours could but 5h not!
> i don't see business travellers prefer to make 5 hours to join London.Because the market targeted is the business customers.
> 
> I bet this line will be a commercial disaster because plane will compete it better.


Then why the TGV Paris-Barcelona? :dunno:

Not to talk about TGV services like Paris-Munich, Paris-Tarbes, Paris-Nice, Paris-Monaco-Menton-Ventimiglia or Paris-Milan, all of them beyond 5 hours.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> This, specifically, is not a valid argument. The rate of deaths for airplane travel in the developed World are much lower than those of any other mode of transportation.


Except for trains...


----------



## K_

Axelferis said:


> sorry but 5 hours isn't a commercial advantage .
> 4 hours could but 5h not!
> i don't see business travellers prefer to make 5 hours to join London.Because the market targeted is the business customers.
> 
> I bet this line will be a commercial disaster because plane will compete it better.


How much are you willing to bet?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Let's sum this up and not repeat the same arguments over and over.
- Airplanes and trains are both very safe modes of travel when compared to cars.
- Subjective comfort and safety feeling of the passengers cannot be universalized. People will have personal preferences, but this is overall a category where trains could have some advantage over planes.
- Time advantage: it is wrong to believe that nobody will take a train for more than 3 hours. A majority of riders will choose the train over the plane if there is a direct city center to center ride in less than 3 hours. It will still look fairly good with a 4 hours ride. With 5 hours, the train will loose dramatically, and for a 12 hour ride the vast majority will choose a 2 hour flight instead.
- The time factor is not absolute: the other question is prices: are there easy to find affordable prices for the connections? How many people will travel for business and how many for tourism on a route? Do ticketing and the schedule allow for flexibility?
- Another advantage of the train is the option of multi-stop without (unlike with flights) considerably lengthening travel time. If the train is well integrated into the schedules and fares of the countries it passes, as international TGV and ICE are, it does not matter if nobody travels Frankfurt-London on them. It is enough if people travel Frankfüurt-Brussels and Cologne-London on them.
- People do not like changing trains. While the vast majority of business travelers on the route London-Brussels take the train, hardly anyone goes from London to Cologne nowadays that way. The main problem is not the less than extra 2 hours, but the hassle of changing between non-integrated train systems.
- Unfortunately, UK border paranoia is the most serious danger to the success of Eurostar or DB services from London to places beyond present destinations. The UK has announced that it would not erect extra border checks at other foreign train stations, nor would it condescend to making their officials get up and do the ckecks on board (heaven forbid, one of them might have a heart attack from too much movement). Thus all passengers will have to disembark in Lille, go through inspection there, then reboard the train. This destroys the time advantage and the comfort advantage. 
But we are living in a time of increased paranoia where the UK and Denmark (as in the racist profiling incident describe above) and many others want to turn this continent back into a collections of small states in paranoid fear of each other, so I am pessimistic as to the future of international rail. People at airports are so easy to control, the seemingly chaotic movements of people at train stations make governments afraid.


----------



## Axelferis

+1
eurostar frankfurt/london is a commercial joke



437.001 said:


> Then why the TGV Paris-Barcelona? :dunno:
> 
> Not to talk about TGV services like Paris-Munich, Paris-Tarbes, Paris-Nice, Paris-Monaco-Menton-Ventimiglia or Paris-Milan, all of them beyond 5 hours.


how much you bet that People prefer 1h paris/barcelona by plane?
myself prefer to pay less and go fast like it's the case with this line by plane.

i repeat but 5h is too much when you pay less and go faster by plane.
I bet you that it will be a commercial fail this frankfurt/london eurostar


----------



## Groningen NL

Axelferis said:


> +1
> eurostar frankfurt/london is a commercial joke
> 
> 
> 
> how much you bet that People prefer 1h paris/barcelona by plane?
> myself prefer to pay less and go fast like it's the case with this line by plane.
> 
> i repeat but 5h is too much when you pay less and go faster by plane.
> I bet you that it will be a commercial fail this frankfurt/london eurostar


I'ts obviously not 'a commercial joke', since DB didn't decide to start this international connection for fun, they came up wih this because there is a big market there. Like said so many times already in this thread, you have to compare the total travel time. You cannot travel from Barcelona to Paris in one hour, you know that. And yes, taking the plane is still faster, but since taking the train is more convenient for most people, there is still a big enough market there to fill the trains.


----------



## Think

Axelferis said:


> World record is french not german


I don't know if you understand how much detestable is that "country vs country" attitude and how much it can ruin a valuable thread. Stop it.


----------



## [email protected]

Pansori said:


> All in all I would say train travel in 5 hours from London to Frankfurt is more than just 'competitive'.


No it isn't. You have to remember that the majority of travellers on this route are business travellers who happen to be time sensitive.

Let's see:

Train: 5 hours

Air travel:
Frankfurt city center -> Frankfurt airport: 15 minutes
Arrival at the airport before departure of flight: 45 minutes (definitely sufficient when you check in online and have no check-in luggage)
Flight time: 1h 15min
Time from landing at LHR until you can leave the airport: 30 minutes
Heathrow airport -> London city center: 45 minutes

= 3 hours 30 minutes

So not only is flying usually cheaper, but it is also faster.


----------



## Proterra

I can talk from my own perspective: I need to travel often to Echt in the Netherlands. There are direct flights from Kraków to Eindhoven, Dusseldorf, and Amsterdam, of which Eindhoven is the closest (50 kilometres) and the others are 100 and 175 kilometres away. So there are plenty of possibilities to get there.

Okay, provided I have no traffic jams on my way to the airport, I depart as late as possible, step on it on my way to Balice, don't bother with finding cheap parking, but put it right in the (expensive) garage, and public transportation upon arrival runs perfectly without any delays or such, it would take me the following (And let's take the sunday flight to ensure everything goes as smooth as humanly possible):

Departure from home (Nowy Targ): 11:45
Arrival Balice: 12:35
Get rid of car: 12:45
Pass through security: 13:15
Board flight: 13:45
Arrive Eindhoven: 15:45
Run out of airport with only carry-on: 15:55
Board bus to station: 16:05
Arrive station: 16:40
Buy tickets to train: 16:45
Run to and board train: 16:46
Arrive Echt: 17:46
Arrive where I need to be: 18:15

That is 6,5 hours in total, filled with speeding down Zakopianka, parking in an expensive garage on Balice, only taking 10 kg. carry-on to save time, nearly missing check-in, running out of the airport to catch a bus, running through a railway station to catch a train which I nearly miss, and arriving exhausted. I know because I've done it once like that before.

And the actual flight will only last 2 hours.

Now, provided I take my time, have a leisurely drive down Zakopianka where I abide to the speed limit, it'll take me 75 minutes to Balice instead of 50. Say, I don't want to pay XXX PLN for the parking, add another 30. Provided I wish to take luggage, add another 30-60. All together, doing it a pleasant way, it'll take me 8-9 hours flying into Eindhoven, and 9-10 into any other airport. And still, the flight will only take me 2 hours (Ryanair to EIN or Lufthansa to DUS, or 2:30, EuroLOT to AMS).

Now, I do what I usually do, I drive. 

Leave Nowy Targ around 8:00, get to the A4 around 9:00, and usually I'll stop in Zgorzelec for fuel, a piss break, and to stretch my legs a bit, say 12:00 to 12:30. Then Leipzig (14:00), Kassel (16:00), Dortmund (17:30). Arrive in Echte somewhere around 19:00. That's 11 hours, where I drive leisurely (140-150 in PL, 150-160 in DE), stop a few times, listen to music, smoke a cigarette, maybe even stop somewhere for a quick and decent lunch. 11 hours of relaxation against 7 hours of stress or 9 hours of still too much bother. 

Say there would be a quick train connection between Kraków and Dusseldorf (I know, science-fiction), which would only stop in Katowice, Gliwice, Wrocław, Dresden, Leipzig, Kassel, Dortmund and Essen along the way, and travelling with an average speed of 230 km/h, it would take five hours to get to Dusseldorf from Kraków, compared to around 1:45 by plane. But instead of going from Balice to almost Duisburg, it'll go centre to centre. Even along such a distance, travel time from city centre to city centre would be comparable to flying, without all the hassle. And it would pick up passengers along the way, and drop off passengers along the way. I for one, would rather take a leisurely 5-hour train ride over a 1:45 flight where not only you need to go to and from the airport, but deal with security, stand in lines constantly, not even being allowed to take a bottle of water onto the plane.


----------



## SAS 16

^^ cannot express it better.:master: You are even mssing the point when most of the flights arrive with delay (even of 2-3 hours sometimes)
Madrid budapest takes 3 hours flight but total time of the journey can be around 7 hours (without delays)


----------



## K_

Proterra said:


> That's 11 hours, where I drive leisurely (140-150 in PL, 150-160 in DE), stop a few times, listen to music, smoke a cigarette, maybe even stop somewhere for a quick and decent lunch. 11 hours of relaxation against 7 hours of stress or 9 hours of still too much bother.


11 hours of driving? To each his own, but for me that would be horror. Anyway, for me that's not an option as I don't have a car (I prefer to be rich in stead...)


----------



## joseph1951

Axelferis said:


> sorry but 5 hours isn't a commercial advantage .
> 4 hours could but 5h not!
> i don't see business travellers prefer to make 5 hours to join London.Because the market targeted is the business customers.
> 
> I bet this line will be a commercial disaster because plane will compete it better.


That's ok if you live in London, but non in Kent ,and you have to go to Heathrow, or to Gatwick, or to Stanstead to catch the plane to Frankfurt.

Also not all "travellers" are businessmen.


----------



## 437.001

Axelferis said:


> +1
> eurostar frankfurt/london is a commercial joke


Not if the Cologne, Liège and Frankfurt stops are included.
Not everybody will do Frankfurt-London by train, but many might do Cologne-London, Liège-London or of course Brussels-London.

Intermediate stops in long distance trains count very much indeed.

A train such as Frankfurt-London can be full every day, but quite possibly, only a small part of the passengers in it will do the whole Frankfurt to London trip.



> how much you bet that People prefer 1h paris/barcelona by plane?
> myself prefer to pay less and go fast like it's the case with this line by plane.
> 
> i repeat but 5h is too much when you pay less and go faster by plane.
> I bet you that it will be a commercial fail this frankfurt/london eurostar


I don´t deny it, but like I said before, intermediate stops DO count a lot in such services.

And then there´s also something you missed: the people who are afraid of traveling by plane (there´s more than you could imagine, and I am one of them).


----------



## Proterra

[email protected] said:


> No it isn't. You have to remember that the majority of travellers on this route are business travellers who happen to be time sensitive.
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> Train: 5 hours
> 
> Air travel:
> Frankfurt city center -> Frankfurt airport: 15 minutes
> Arrival at the airport before departure of flight: 45 minutes (definitely sufficient when you check in online and have no check-in luggage)
> Flight time: 1h 15min
> Time from landing at LHR until you can leave the airport: 30 minutes
> Heathrow airport -> London city center: 45 minutes
> 
> = 3 hours 30 minutes
> 
> So not only is flying usually cheaper, but it is also faster.


45 minutes from the moment you step off of the train at Flughafen Frankfurt Fernbahnhof until you're taxiing down the taxiway? Maybe. 

If you know your gate, run for it, and only carry a briefcase and you're lucky at the security checkpoint. But one family of six in front of you, just flying back home to some third-world country after visiting relatives in Germany not understanding the security rules, and *you're done*. Or someone pulls the emergency brake on your train for fun, and it stops at Niederrad for 10 minutes... Again, *you're done*.

Most business travelers will want to arrive at least one hour before departure at the airport, and will leave Hbf preferably around 90 minutes before departure. Because their boss (who's paying for their ticket) would normally not look kindly upon wasting a ticket due to cutting corners with time.

So, by the time your plane starts taxiing, if you would've taken the train, you would've been halfway between Cologne and Aachen. By the time your plane lands at LHR, the train would've been somewhere near Lille. 

30 minutes clearing the airport, again, being hopeful. The British Isles aren't part of Schengen, and I've waited far more than that once in Edinburgh because a flight from the US had just landed and there were plenty of people in the EU line that didn't belong there. If you're unlucky, count 60 minutes until you're on the tube. 

By that time, your train is probably already near Maidstone...

Most likely, you arrive roughly at the same time at your destination as you would've done while traveling by train. But instead of spending 50% of your time standing in one line or another, you can actually spend this time productive, getting work done... 

And that is FRA-LHR... Don't even try arriving one hour before your flight at AMS, one of the other cities which will be served by this connection. Flying back home from FAR last March (FAR-MSP-AMS-WAW-KRK), I spent two hours going through security (they probably believe the TSA doesn't do their job) unpacking every single bit of electronics out of my carry-on and placing it in separate bins. Unfortunately the 25 people in front of me in that line had to do the same, so it took me about an hour by itself getting through the security between the non-Schengen airside and the Schengen airside...

Or maybe put it differently, do you really think Eurostar would've been so opposed to DB starting this service if it would've been not commercially viable?


----------



## K_

[email protected] said:


> No it isn't. You have to remember that the majority of travellers on this route are business travellers who happen to be time sensitive.


I just travelled back to Switzerland from München, by train. The München - Zürich train is actually not a particularly fast one, but it was quite full, and about half the passengers boarding in München stayed on the train till at least st. Margarethen in Switzerland. There was a man sitting oposite me who was on a business trip. To Lugano. There are still people travelling by train, even long distance. 



> Let's see:
> 
> Train: 5 hours
> 
> Air travel:
> Frankfurt city center -> Frankfurt airport: 15 minutes
> Arrival at the airport before departure of flight: 45 minutes (definitely sufficient when you check in online and have no check-in luggage)
> Flight time: 1h 15min
> Time from landing at LHR until you can leave the airport: 30 minutes
> Heathrow airport -> London city center: 45 minutes
> 
> = 3 hours 30 minutes
> 
> So not only is flying usually cheaper, but it is also faster.


But the difference is not that big. 

A few weeks ago I had to travel Bern - Southampton. I did it by train. It was about 100 CHF cheaper, and about 4 hours longer. So one way to look at it is that I made about 25 CHF/hour while playing computer games and reading...


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Not if the Cologne, Liège and Frankfurt stops are included.
> Not everybody will do Frankfurt-London by train, but many might do Cologne-London, Liège-London or of course Brussels-London.
> 
> Intermediate stops in long distance trains count very much indeed.


But allowing intra-Schengen travel on a Frankfurt - London service does require that the UK accept that the train remains "in Schengen" till st. Pancras, where border checks then take place.
And the silly security theatre must go too.




> And then there´s also something you missed: the people who are afraid of traveling by plane (there´s more than you could imagine, and I am one of them).


There is a growing group of people are starting to get downright disgusted with what plane travel has become. These people don't mind travelling a few hours longer in order to do it in more comfort and style.


----------



## joseph1951

[email protected] said:


> No it isn't. You have to remember that the majority of travellers on this route are business travellers who happen to be time sensitive.
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> Train: 5 hours
> 
> Air travel:
> Frankfurt city center -> Frankfurt airport: 15 minutes
> Arrival at the airport before departure of flight: 45 minutes (definitely sufficient when you check in online and have no check-in luggage)
> Flight time: 1h 15min
> Time from landing at LHR until you can leave the airport: 30 minutes
> Heathrow airport -> London city center: 45 minutes
> 
> = 3 hours 30 minutes
> 
> So not only is flying usually cheaper, but it is also faster.


You have also to consider the total travelling time from your home your final destination, and the time necessary to collect the luggage. 

Not evrybody lives five minutes from Paddington station, therefore the travelling time from London to Heathrow to can be greater that thone one you have specified.

Not everybody travels with cabine luggage only. A businessman travelling from London to Frankfurt might have to stay there several days, therefore he/she might have to travel with more luggage, on top of the cabin one.

You also have to consider delays in changing means of trasportation, delays on the road, bus, on missing an airport shuttle, and you have to take into account these factors.

So your travelling time can be feasible in some journeys, if everything goes smoolthly, but not in others. More realistically, I would consider to reckon a total travelling times around 4h 30 ~ 5h 30'.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> But allowing intra-Schengen travel on a Frankfurt - London service does require that the UK accept that the train remains "in Schengen" till st. Pancras, where border checks then take place.
> And the silly security theatre must go too.


Be aware that trains could also call at Ashford (Kent) or Ebbsfleet (Kent).
Britain is not just London.

I didn´t necessarily mean that every passenger boarding the train would go to London. Passengers on the route could do Frankfurt-Lille, for instance.
The essential of such services is to keep the train full during all the trip.

As for the UK border control, they´re in their right of doing it, they´re not doing anything illegal, and I don´t think we´d be more democratic if we forced them to cancel the controls (as if they would allow it, anyway... :|). 

And still, the political situation matters in this case. 

If ever the UK held a referendum about staying or leaving in the EU, and the "leave" option would win, what could we continentals do about it? I´m afraid that we could just watch... and the border controls then, if anything, would increase even more... :dunno: 

Not that I want them to leave, in fact I´d be delighted if they entered the Schengen area and the eurozone, but... it´s their choice, we can´t force them.



> There is a growing group of people are starting to get downright disgusted with what plane travel has become. These people don't mind travelling a few hours longer in order to do it in more comfort and style.


I was speaking strictly of people who are afraid of flying, not of people who are tired of flying.

Someone who just doesn´t like it can bear it if need be.

But someone who is afraid of it, I mean, why would I need taking any pills to travel, if I have other options?


----------



## joseph1951

Proterra said:


> 45 minutes from the moment you step off of the train at Flughafen Frankfurt Fernbahnhof until you're taxiing down the taxiway? Maybe.
> 
> If you know your gate, run for it, and only carry a briefcase and you're lucky at the security checkpoint. But one family of six in front of you, just flying back home to some third-world country after visiting relatives in Germany not understanding the security rules, and *you're done*. Or someone pulls the emergency brake on your train for fun, and it stops at Niederrad for 10 minutes... Again, *you're done*.
> 
> Most business travelers will want to arrive at least one hour before departure at the airport, and will leave Hbf preferably around 90 minutes before departure. Because their boss (who's paying for their ticket) would normally not look kindly upon wasting a ticket due to cutting corners with time.
> 
> So, by the time your plane starts taxiing, if you would've taken the train, you would've been halfway between Cologne and Aachen. By the time your plane lands at LHR, the train would've been somewhere near Lille.
> 
> 30 minutes clearing the airport, again, being hopeful. The British Isles aren't part of Schengen, and I've waited far more than that once in Edinburgh because a flight from the US had just landed and there were plenty of people in the EU line that didn't belong there. If you're unlucky, count 60 minutes until you're on the tube.
> 
> By that time, your train is probably already near Maidstone...
> 
> Most likely, you arrive roughly at the same time at your destination as you would've done while traveling by train. But instead of spending 50% of your time standing in one line or another, you can actually spend this time productive, getting work done...
> 
> And that is FRA-LHR... Don't even try arriving one hour before your flight at AMS, one of the other cities which will be served by this connection. Flying back home from FAR last March (FAR-MSP-AMS-WAW-KRK), I spent two hours going through security (they probably believe the TSA doesn't do their job) unpacking every single bit of electronics out of my carry-on and placing it in separate bins. Unfortunately the 25 people in front of me in that line had to do the same, so it took me about an hour by itself getting through the security between the non-Schengen airside and the Schengen airside...
> 
> Or maybe put it differently, do you really think Eurostar would've been so opposed to DB starting this service if it would've been not commercially viable?


^^
Quote


----------



## Proterra

K_ said:


> 11 hours of driving? To each his own, but for me that would be horror. Anyway, for me that's not an option as I don't have a car (I prefer to be rich in stead...)


Spending 11 hours in a car, enjoying my favourite music at a volume level of my choosing, or even singing along if I feel like it, while smoking a cigarette from time to time, and stopping for food whenever I feel like it is in my opinion far superior to spending most of my time in queues between hundreds of other stressed out passengers, or running from plane to bus and from bus to train, stressing even more about whether I'll make my connection or not.

But then again, I drive 50,000 kilometres a year, and find driving honestly quite relaxing. The only mode of transportation superior to driving is in my opinion high-speed rail, and if I had to choose between spending 2 hours on a plane, and 4 hours getting to the airport and from the airport, while dealing with all kinds of security rules and queues for checkpoints and whatever, or even 8 hours on a train, or say 10 hours in my car, I'd take the train over the car, and the car over the plane. 

But that's my point of view, I travel a lot, and I prefer to do it as comfortably possible unless the travel time really start outweighing the comfort. 

Say, Berlin-Paris, 8 hours by train, 6 hours by plane centre to centre. I think the 2 hours extra on the train still outweighs the hassle of flying (especially into CDG)

Warszawa-London, 16 hours by train, or 7,5 hours by plane centre to centre, here the plane is definitely the better option.


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

I will use this connection just for fun as a tourist. It isn´t so important for people like me how long the journey takes but it´s very entertaining to travel with a high-speed train through different European countries and see the countryside. 
From a plane you don´t see much down below and driving a car isn´t so relaxing like riding a train.


----------



## Pansori

[email protected] said:


> No it isn't. You have to remember that the majority of travellers on this route are business travellers who happen to be time sensitive.
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> Train: 5 hours
> 
> Air travel:
> Frankfurt city center -> Frankfurt airport: 15 minutes
> Arrival at the airport before departure of flight: 45 minutes (definitely sufficient when you check in online and have no check-in luggage)
> Flight time: 1h 15min
> Time from landing at LHR until you can leave the airport: 30 minutes
> Heathrow airport -> London city center: 45 minutes
> 
> = 3 hours 30 minutes
> 
> So not only is flying usually cheaper, but it is also faster.


What about internet and mobile connectivity? Isn't that important for business travellers?


----------



## Axelferis

@437.001-> ok but i don't understand: 5 hours is non stop or with stop?
because it makes a great difference.
If the travel between cologne/Liège could take a lot of passengers i don't see why people from frankfurt will want to take this train which stop several times.

I if you have 2 stops it could not be a problem but if you add some others i don't see the viability


----------



## Proterra

Axelferis said:


> @437.001-> ok but i don't understand: 5 hours is non stop or with stop?
> because it makes a great difference.
> If the travel between cologne/Liège could take a lot of passengers i don't see why people from frankfurt will want to take this train which stop several times.
> 
> I if you have 2 stops it could not be a problem but if you add some others i don't see the viability


It'll probably stop in Cologne, Liege, Brussels and Lille along the way. Maybe also in Aachen and Ashford, but these stops aren't that necessary.

Either way, stopping once an hour will in my opinion vastly increase the profitability, because the train will also serve folks doing Cologne-London or Frankfurt-Lille, as well as allowing a fast connection for the likes of Dusseldorf or Essen to London, through Cologne, Maastricht through Liege, and in Brussels it will be combined with another trainset serving Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Antwerp. 

I personally think that this train will be very viable, economically speaking. It might even become a major cash cow for DB. And honestly, if it wouldn't have been such a viable connection, I'm sure Eurostar wouldn't have been so much against it, because it's always nice to see your competitor screw up...


----------



## ArtManDoo

There is definitely market for Frankfurt - London. 

For example there are three pairs of Berlin - Warszawa express trains(business class included) every day, time about 5h 20min. And of course lot's of other similar connections. 

If I am going to conference starting at 11:00
I'll take the train from Frankfurt, leaving at 05:00 and arriving to London at 10:30. I can have three hours non stop sleep(instead of check in and trip to airport) on train and I have also time to have some breakfast and think my day or prepare for conference or whatsoever.

Let's say that the plain takes off at 7:00 and arrives to London at 8:15 not 9:15 as would be ideal. It means I have to go about 5:50 from Frankfurt city center getting some 2hrs morning hassle for full money. It's not just some things, there are lot's of things that matter. I won't say that all people go by train but definitely there will be enough for starting a train service.


----------



## Suburbanist

Right now, DB offers a special ticket for Berlin-London (or return) tickets on one specific trip, starting from 59 Euro (one-way).

These are the trips offered each day for which through tickets are sold.

Berlin-London:


Code:


Berlin Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	06:49 	 13 D - G	ICE 654	 Intercity-Express
Köln Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 11:09 	 6

 Transfer time 34 min.
Köln Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	11:43 	 5	ICE 16	 Intercity-Express
Bruxelles-Midi	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 13:35 	 4

transfer  45 min. 
Please observe check-in times

Bruxelles-Midi EST	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	14:56	  	EST 9141	 EUROSTAR
Subject to compulsory reservation,
Special ticket or supplement required,
Please observe check-in times
London St. Pancras International	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 16:10


London-Berlin


Code:


London St. Pancras International	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	06:50	  	EST 9110	 EUROSTAR
Subject to compulsory reservation,
Special ticket or supplement required,
Please observe check-in times
Bruxelles-Midi Eurostar	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 10:07	  

transfer  17 min.
Bruxelles-Midi	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	10:25 	 5	ICE 15	 Intercity-Express
Köln Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 12:15 	 5

 Transfer time 33 min.
Köln Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 dep	12:48 	 2	ICE 559	 Intercity-Express
Berlin Hbf	 Th, 12.09.13	 arr	 17:08 	 11 D - G

It would be interesting to see how many Berlin-London tickets do they sell for what are 10h26 (westbound) or 9h18 (eastbound) trips.

Maybe a hypothetical direct non-stop Berlin-London train would be able to complete this journey in less than 7h, and a train calling only at Hannover, Koln, Bruxelles would compelte it in less than 7h40 yet. Problem is: would UK Home OFfice fit all these stations wiht border agents?


----------



## K_

Proterra said:


> Spending 11 hours in a car, enjoying my favourite music at a volume level of my choosing, or even singing along if I feel like it, while smoking a cigarette from time to time, and stopping for food whenever I feel like it is in my opinion far superior to spending most of my time in queues between hundreds of other stressed out passengers, or running from plane to bus and from bus to train, stressing even more about whether I'll make my connection or not.


If you think that you can maintain the necessary level of concentration needed for operating a car safely for 11 hours then I hope the ambulance will be quick when reality catches up with you.


----------



## Sunfuns

To each his/her own. For me more than 5 h a day in a car is horrible. I think I've done more less than 10 times and always with multiple drivers. Of course the same time in a plane is even worse, but there is no other option for intercontinental travel.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Be aware that trains could also call at Ashford (Kent) or Ebbsfleet (Kent).
> Britain is not just London.


Ebbsfleet and Ashford have border police too, so that is not so big an issue...

The point is that installing UK border police in, for example Geneve, for only a couple of trains a day is never going to make sense. So the border formalities must be done in the UK.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> Ebbsfleet and Ashford have border police too, so that is not so big an issue...
> 
> The point is that installing UK border police in, for example Geneve, for only a couple of trains a day is never going to make sense. So the border formalities must be done in the UK.


What Brits are afraid off is that if the border controls are done inside UK those trains will be full of illegal immigrants, asylum seekers etc. and once they are on UK soil it won't be possible to get them out again. And it is true that UK attracts more of those individuals due to English being a nearly universal language now and UK being particularly generous with social benefits. Border control for EU citizens is just a formality. Last time I was in Heathrow the border agent looked at my passport for maybe 5 sec and asked no questions.


----------



## volodaaaa

Sorry for the interuption, but is there any web-application to calculate the price for ticket on inernational journeys? 

If I plan to travel within Germany, the DB site displays me the price for particullar relation. The same goes for Slovakia and ZSSK, for Czech republic and CD, Hungary and MÁV, etc.

But if I plan to travel across at least two different countries, none of the sites displays me the exact price. What I have to do is to visit the nearest train-station and ask a saleslady. Since the nearest station is not just around a corner, it is pretty much annoying to plan a cross-border railway trip. 

(E.g. now I'm looking for Bratislava - Berlin relation by train "EN Metropol". Obviously, no results on the internet).


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Ticketing is one of the most serious disadvantages of international train relations. Except for a few select destinations, there are no easy internet prices. a survey in Germany also found that 55 % of sales staff at stations could not find out the cheapest price for international connections. The best option is to go to travel agencies specialized on international train travel such bahnagentur schöneberg or kopfbahnhof (also reachable by email or phone) in Berlin. Calculating the best ticket price can take up to an hour and you will most likely end up with about ten tickets instead of one, but you will probably save alot.


----------



## XAN_

Baron Hirsch said:


> Ticketing is one of the most serious disadvantages of international train relations. Except for a few select destinations, there are no easy internet prices. a survey in Germany also found that 55 % of sales staff at stations could not find out the cheapest price for international connections. The best option is to go to travel agencies specialized on international train travel such bahnagentur schöneberg or kopfbahnhof (also reachable by email or phone) in Berlin. Calculating the best ticket price can take up to an hour and you will most likely end up with about ten tickets instead of one, but you will probably save alot.


Actually, there some forums on internet, where you can get a free advise about international routes and ticketing. For example, after a brief talk at such forum, I managed to make-up 45 Euro Kyiv-Prague one way, while default route (1 change) cost something about 100 euro one way hno:


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> What Brits are afraid off is that if the border controls are done inside UK those trains will be full of illegal immigrants, asylum seekers etc. and once they are on UK soil it won't be possible to get them out again.


That is actually not true. Any person refused entry at st. Pancras will be transported back to France or Belgium. Not only that, he/she wil also be handed over to the authorities in those countries, meaning that the Eurostar is actually not a convenient route for illegal immigrants. The chance of being able to slip in to the country unnoticed via that route is currently virtually nil. 
Currently passengers from trains from Brussels do pass through immigration at st. Pancras. There is no reason why this can't be done for other trains.


----------



## K_

volodaaaa said:


> Sorry for the interuption, but is there any web-application to calculate the price for ticket on inernational journeys?
> 
> If I plan to travel within Germany, the DB site displays me the price for particullar relation. The same goes for Slovakia and ZSSK, for Czech republic and CD, Hungary and MÁV, etc.
> 
> But if I plan to travel across at least two different countries, none of the sites displays me the exact price. What I have to do is to visit the nearest train-station and ask a saleslady. Since the nearest station is not just around a corner, it is pretty much annoying to plan a cross-border railway trip.
> 
> (E.g. now I'm looking for Bratislava - Berlin relation by train "EN Metropol". Obviously, no results on the internet).


Deutsche Bahn actually does give price for a lot of international trains to/from Germany. You can book the Bratislava - Berlin train on their website. And they will show you the cheapest prices (eg. 49,- euro in a couchette)

Generally speaking for international tickets go to the website of one of the countries involved. That usually works. I book most of my international trips on-line nowadays.


----------



## Minato ku

AlexNL said:


> Thalys and ICE are much better than a Eurostar, its interior looks somewhat old, outdated and feels a bit cramped.


Eurostar trains are almost twenty years old and they were built for the small British loading gauge.
You shouldn't forget that for years, the Eurostar used old railway tracks to London before the opening high speed rail in UK side and Saint-Pancras.


----------



## pai nosso

K_ said:


> Hasn't this train been running for a while? It was running last year in september when I was there.


Yes it was!!


The all story is like this:

the previous version of this conection was operated exclusively by CP (portuguese state railroad company) where the portuguese ticket employee na train driver would get out in Tui (spanish border town) and will enter the spanish counterpart (RENFE»spanish state railroad company). The previous connection also took about 3 hours and stoped at several portuguese and spanish stations. 


Some problems: 

the conection was supported exclusively by CP, between Porto and Valença (portuguese border town) there was a employee of CP that colected the correspondent ticket in portuguese territory but the spanish counterpart most of the times wouldn`t appear to colect the correspondect ticket in spanish soil.


Initially CP ask RENFE to support part of the costs, but RENFE refused and CP wanted to ended the conection. The North Atlantic Axis (Galician and northwest portuguese towns ) intervene and on the Portuguese-Spanish Summit between the central governments thas was decided that there will be this new conection and that in a long term there would be done some upgrades on the tracks on the portuguese side.


----------



## 437.001

pai nosso said:


> Yes it was!!
> 
> 
> The all story is like this:
> 
> the previous version of this conection was operated exclusively by CP (portuguese state railroad company) where the portuguese ticket employee na train driver would get out in Tui (spanish border town) and will enter the spanish counterpart (RENFE»spanish state railroad company). The previous connection also took about 3 hours and stoped at several portuguese and spanish stations.
> 
> 
> Some problems:
> 
> the conection was supported exclusively by CP, between Porto and Valença (portuguese border town) there was a employee of CP that colected the correspondent ticket in portuguese territory but the spanish counterpart most of the times wouldn`t appear to colect the correspondect ticket in spanish soil.
> 
> 
> Initially CP ask RENFE to support part of the costs, but RENFE refused and CP wanted to ended the conection. The North Atlantic Axis (Galician and northwest portuguese towns ) intervene and on the Portuguese-Spanish Summit between the central governments thas was decided that there will be this new conection and that in a long term there would be done some upgrades on the tracks on the portuguese side.


By the way: two Regional Express trains Vigo Guixar-Valença are created to take over the old services Vigo Guixar-Porto Campanhâ calling at nearly all stations. 
I don´t know which trains do the new Vigo Guixar-Valença services (Renfe S-592 DMUs, maybe?).
From Vigo to Valença, they call at Redondela, Porriño, Guillarei (novelty, Guillarei was by-passed for many years), and Tui. 

The Celta services are done by the CP S-592 DMUs (ex-Renfe). They call at Vigo Guixar and Porto Campanhâ only. 
I wonder why they don´t call at Viana do Castelo, Barcelos, Nine and Trofa too. 
That would improve connectivity a lot, especially the stops at Nine (change for Braga) and Trofa (change for Guimaraês). 

But at least, the travel time between Vigo and Porto is much better now, and it also improves the travel time to Lisbon (through a change at Porto Campanhâ).


----------



## Suburbanist

Do they have any plans for a day-time Spain-Portugal train connection near Badajoz?


----------



## pai nosso

437.001 said:


> By the way: two Regional Express trains Vigo Guixar-Valença are created to take over the old services Vigo Guixar-Porto Campanhâ calling at nearly all stations.
> I don´t know which trains do the new Vigo Guixar-Valença services (Renfe S-592 DMUs, maybe?).
> From Vigo to Valença, they call at Redondela, Porriño, Guillarei (novelty, Guillarei was by-passed for many years), and Tui.
> 
> The Celta services are done by the CP S-592 DMUs (ex-Renfe). They call at Vigo Guixar and Porto Campanhâ only.
> I wonder why they don´t call at Viana do Castelo, Barcelos, Nine and Trofa too.
> That would improve connectivity a lot, especially the stops at Nine (change for Braga) and Trofa (change for Guimaraês).
> 
> But at least, the travel time between Vigo and Porto is much better now, and it also improves the travel time to Lisbon (through a change at Porto Campanhâ).



Thanks for the information 437.001!!!





Suburbanist said:


> Do they have any plans for a day-time Spain-Portugal train connection near Badajoz?


No!!

There are only 3 conections Portugal-Spain:

» Train Celta: Porto-Vigo by Valença and Tui;

» Train Lusitânia Hotel: Lisbon-Madrid by Vilar Formoso and Fuentes de Oñoro;

» Train Sud-Express: Lisbon»Hendaye»Paris by Vilar Formoso and Fuentes de Oñoro.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Until a decade ago or so there was a Lisbon-Madrid day train, and until 2 or 3 years ago some Portuguese regional trains reached Badajoz. The plan for a Madrid-Lisbon HSL has basically being dropped. As far I know, that's all.


----------



## 437.001

pai nosso said:


> No!!
> 
> There are only 3 conections Portugal-Spain:
> 
> » Train Celta: Porto-Vigo by Valença and Tui;
> 
> » Train Lusitânia Hotel: Lisbon-Madrid by Vilar Formoso and Fuentes de Oñoro;
> 
> » Train Sud-Express: Lisbon»Hendaye»Paris by Vilar Formoso and Fuentes de Oñoro.


Lusitania and Sud-Expresso are night trains.

The only daytime rail services are the Porto-Vigo regional services.

Spain and Portugal don´t have a very deep relationship. We ignore each other a lot.


----------



## 437.001

*Important news!!* :siren::siren::siren::siren::siren::siren:

According to this Spanish website (in Spanish): http://www.altavelocidad.org/index....l-despliegue-de-los-servicios-internacionales

-one AVE Barcelona Sants-Toulouse Matabiau and vv
-one AVE Barcelona Sants-Lyon (Perrache? Part-Dieu?) and vv
-one AVE Madrid Atocha-Barcelona Sants-Marseille St Charles and vv
-two TGV Paris Gare de Lyon-Barcelona Sants and vv
-night trains Trenhotel _Joan Miró_ Barcelona Estació de França-Paris Austerlitz, and Trenhotel _Francisco de Goya_ Madrid Chamartín-Paris-Austerlitz will be discontinued.
-Talgo _Mare Nostrum_ Lorca/Cartagena-Barcelona Sants-Montpellier St Roch will be shortened to Lorca/Cartagena-Barcelona Sants, travellers for all stations beyond Barcelona toward Girona and France will have to change to the AVE Barcelona Sants-Lyon instead.

*It will be in October*. :|

All of this might or might not happen in the end. :naughty:


----------



## Rayancito

437.001 said:


> *Important news!!* :siren::siren::siren::siren::siren::siren:
> 
> According to this Spanish website (in Spanish): http://www.altavelocidad.org/index....l-despliegue-de-los-servicios-internacionales
> 
> -one AVE Barcelona Sants-Toulouse Matabiau and vv
> -one AVE Barcelona Sants-Lyon (Perrache? Part-Dieu?) and vv
> -one AVE Madrid Atocha-Barcelona Sants-Marseille St Charles and vv
> -two TGV Paris Gare de Lyon-Barcelona Sants and vv
> -night trains Trenhotel _Joan Miró_ Barcelona Estació de França-Paris Austerlitz, and Trenhotel _Francisco de Goya_ Madrid Chamartín-Paris-Austerlitz will be discontinued.
> -Talgo _Mare Nostrum_ Lorca/Cartagena-Barcelona Sants-Montpellier St Roch will be shortened to Lorca/Cartagena-Barcelona Sants, travellers for all stations beyond Barcelona toward Girona and France will have to change to the AVE Barcelona Sants-Lyon instead.
> 
> *It will be in October*. :|
> 
> All of this might or might not happen in the end. :naughty:


 While it seems reasonable to use TGV duplex for Barcelona Paris, because to use the HSL between Lyon and Paris must be done on a big train, due to the congestion of the line a couple of things need to be clarified:

- If the trains will make stops within the two countries and will serve internal journeys, Lyrias do not, for example. It seems that between Madrid and Barcelona to serve Marseille they will, but it is not really clear.

-I do not see 20 trains there, as far as i know France provided 10 trains and Spain another 10 trains. What happened?


----------



## makita09

Rayancito said:


> It seems that between Madrid and Barcelona to serve Marseille they will, but it is not really clear.


Can't decipher this sentence.....?


----------



## Rayancito

makita09 said:


> Can't decipher this sentence.....?


 one AVE Madrid Atocha-*Barcelona* Sants-Marseille St Charles and vv

S_eems_ to indicate that it will stop in Barcelona, and Madrid Barcelona is an Spanish internal journey, bear in mind that Lyria (moving trains from France to Switzerland), as an example, does not sell tickets within the same country, only for international trips. International passenger trains are liberalized, while internal trips are not, therefore the company that operates the trains, in the case between Spain and France is Elipso (a Renfe and Sncf company), needs government aproval to sell tickets within Spain or France, and it is not clear that they will, no news about it. If they can sell internal tickets then a Barcelona Montpellier Lyon is feasible, in the opposite case only Barcelona Lyon non stop, as this just another example.

Hope it is more clear, now.


----------



## Verso

Motorail (car on train) service has been established between 's-Hertogenbosch (Den Bosch), Netherlands and Koper, Slovenia.

http://www.autoslaaptrein.nl/


----------



## Suburbanist

Prices are very expensive though










A family of four traveling on a sleeper with a regular car would spend: 
- € 329 for the car
- € 498 for the travel compartment for 4 persons
- € 52 for insurance of a medium-value car

That means € 879, one way, without including food and other incidental expenses.

That is more than enough for pay for a one-way driving trip to Slovenia from Netherlands + one night roadside 2* hotel. 

I live not far from the depot and embarkation point of those trains. Once I saw such Austoslaap train in formation, and also watched a couple Youtube videos. It appears that the majority of cars there were expensive ones, or some old/classic/vintage cars that owners probably didn't want to put through 1000-1400km of highway driving.


----------



## Verso

^^ Such services are always abnormally expensive.


----------



## Rayancito

There is something strange with Lyria, in the map of the lines we can see a direct connection from Dijon through Dole and Frasne towards Neuchatel and Berne, but when you request the trip it is not actually taking that line, it goes through Bale, very strange!

http://www.tgv-lyria.com/main/FCK/File/site_fr/network_map/carte_reseau.asp


----------



## Suburbanist

Rayancito said:


> There is something strange with Lyria, in the map of the lines we can see a direct connection from Dijon through Dole and Frasne towards Neuchatel and Berne, but when you request the trip it is not actually taking that line, it goes through Bale, very strange!
> 
> http://www.tgv-lyria.com/main/FCK/File/site_fr/network_map/carte_reseau.asp


That is due to what is written on their own website 



> Afin d’améliorer l’infrastructure ferroviaire, des travaux sont programmés dans le périmètre de Dijon et de Dôle tout au long de l’année 2013.


----------



## Suburbanist

double posting


----------



## Rayancito

Suburbanist said:


> That is due to what is written on their own website


 Thank you! Do you know what they will do? The max speed is already 160 Km h, will it be increased?


----------



## darekj

437.001 said:


> Lusitania and Sud-Expresso are night trains.
> 
> .


Actually we can speak about one pair of train crossing the border, both are coupled /decupled in Medina Del Campo ...

darek


----------



## K_

Rayancito said:


> ..., bear in mind that Lyria (moving trains from France to Switzerland), as an example, does not sell tickets within the same country, only for international trips.


That is incorrect. Lyria trains can be used for domestic trips. Within Switzerland even with normal Swiss tickets.

I expect the same for the France - Spain TGVs.


----------



## volodaaaa

Baron Hirsch said:


> Just checked it on bahn.de . A seat reservation is 5 Euros. However usually the best bet foe this train is to get db's "Globalpreis" (ticket and reservation for a particular connection).


Thank you very much. I am planning the trip to Berlin by EuroNight Metropol and just realised the prices even for private sleeper compartment for two people aren't so expensive. But on every provider's site I have browsed on, there was a note about that compartments are divided by sex to male's and female's. What can I do if I want to travel with my fiancée? :lol:


----------



## MarcVD

volodaaaa said:


> Thank you very much. I am planning the trip to Berlin by EuroNight Metropol and just realised the prices even for private sleeper compartment for two people aren't so expensive. But on every provider's site I have browsed on, there was a note about that compartments are divided by sex to male's and female's. What can I do if I want to travel with my fiancée? :lol:


If you reserve the whole compartment - which is what you intend to do if
I understand well - then you have no problem. It's only when you do not
reserve the whole compartment that they won't mix male and female. The
goal is to avoid mixing people of different sex who do not know each other.


----------



## Silly_Walks

MarcVD said:


> The
> goal is to avoid mixing people of different sex who do not know each other.




But that's the best way of picking up some strange!




:lol:


----------



## bozata90

^^ Go to Russia, they do not separate compartments


----------



## XAN_

bozata90 said:


> ^^ Go to Russia, they do not separate compartments


Compartments are for weak.
Only open layout sleaper, only hardcore :lol:


----------



## Suburbanist

OPen layout sleepers are third-world-ish. They should be abolished by any respectable railway.


----------



## eu01

Suburbanist said:


> OPen layout sleepers are third-world-ish. They should be abolished by any respectable railway.


Well, let's consider something quite opposite. Did anybody try to introduce any "sleeping capsules"? Not luxurious, but pleasant enough inside (warm, soft, air-conditioned, silent) for passenger to have a nap during the night travel. Even if the word "coffin" comes to mind :lol: - it could be a viable option, also in railway cars without separate departments...

Just a thought...


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ That would resemble some train carrying prisoners on the Soviet Union.

No, thanks.

I actually think night trains are a tiny niche. Long trips should be done by airplanes or daytime-configured high-speed trains if available.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ That would resemble some train carrying prisoners on the Soviet Union.
> 
> No, thanks.
> 
> I actually think night trains are a tiny niche. Long trips should be done by airplanes or daytime-configured high-speed trains if available.


Well, it may be now, but I believe that in 20 or so years we would see a lot of night trains due fact that liquid fuels prices are growing quicker, than prices of electricity.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> OPen layout sleepers are third-world-ish. They should be abolished by any respectable railway.


Well, as a regular (well, not like every week, but regular enough) user of both open layout and compartments, I could state, that once you are asleep - there is no great difference.
And from position of personal security open layout have advantage of so called communal security - you can end up in a compartment with a bad company of 3 pals, who can do something bad to you (but that is really rare in real life anyway), but ending up in car where 51 persons are all in some kind of plot to rob (kill/have sexual abuse/do whatever you fear) you - that's just don't happen.


----------



## Harrys

XAN_ said:


> Well, as a regular (well, not like every week, but regular enough) user of both open layout and compartments, I could state, that once you are asleep - there is no great difference.
> And from position of personal security open layout have advantage of so called communal security - you can end up in a compartment with a bad company of 3 pals, who can do something bad to you (but that is really rare in real life anyway), but ending up in car where 51 persons are all in some kind of plot to rob (kill/have sexual abuse/do whatever you fear) you - that's just don't happen.


Wow stop watching Horror movies


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> OPen layout sleepers are third-world-ish. They should be abolished by any respectable railway.


Like the open layout sleepers on air planes know as "Business Class". Should they e abolished too?


----------



## XAN_

Harrys said:


> Wow stop watching Horror movies


Well, for last 15 years or so I have read 2 or 3 realistic stories about "3 people came into compartment, drank all night and then started act weirdly/or aggressively". And 0 stories about "30...50 people came into open layout car, drank (or smth) all night and started acting weird"...


----------



## chornedsnorkack

Stories are anecdotal evidence. What are the official data for reported crimes on moving trains?


----------



## XAN_

chornedsnorkack said:


> Stories are anecdotal evidence. What are the official data for reported crimes on moving trains?


No, I'm only counted proofed stories.


----------



## K_

chornedsnorkack said:


> Stories are anecdotal evidence. What are the official data for reported crimes on moving trains?


Very low. The only real concern is luggage theft in stations. You can protect yourself against that with a simple cable lock. The stories of people getting robbed in their sleep, or even gassed are urban legends.


----------



## M-NL

Suburbanist said:


> I actually think night trains are a tiny niche. Long trips should be done by airplanes or daytime-configured high-speed trains if available.


Compare to daytime travel, yes, it's a tiny niche, but the interesting contradiction seems to be that at this moment there is more demand than supply.

In Japan long distance night trains like the Sunrise Izumo/Seto are popular as ever, despite the excellent high speed network and available air routes. Especially the more luxury cabins are sold out well in advance.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Tickets on transatlantic cruise ships sell out months in advance. That doesn't mean there is a large market for cruise ship travel between North America and Europe.


----------



## volodaaaa

Recently, I have first time travelled by EuroNight train (EN Metropol). I had expected Eurocity trains to be most comfortable and luxurious (especially if we are talking about night trains). Can't even describe my disappointment. The train was dirty, the carriages doesn't have air condition, the ventilation was not working. I would not like to describe how toilet looked and stink like. Each compartment has a window with negligible opening part. The whole train looked like low-grade passanger train between third world's capital and surroundings.


----------



## Silly_Walks

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ Tickets on transatlantic cruise ships sell out months in advance. That doesn't mean there is a large market for cruise ship travel between North America and Europe.


But apparently there is money to be made... I thought that would be enough for you?


----------



## NordikNerd

volodaaaa said:


> Recently, I have first time travelled by EuroNight train (EN Metropol). I had expected Eurocity trains to be most comfortable and luxurious (especially if we are talking about night trains).


Did you buy a 1st class ticket? . Then you have your own compartment and shower, clean linens.

I have travelled the CNL nighttrains such as Copenhagen-Basel, Hamburg-Zurich, Munich-Florence in both 4 and 6 compartments. No dirt, but slow, shaky and noisy. Still better than flying.


----------



## Think

Some years ago Spain ordered a new night train series, designed to avoid the _third-world-image_ that the sleeper trains have. It didn't have open sleepers, it was composed by double rooms with TV and shower like any hotel room, and they cannot be shared with unknows. The general service includes dinner and breakfast in the restaurant car.

This is a two person cabin in day configuration:










They also exist seated places, whith seats that have been copied from long-haul planes:










This series is a total economical disaster. 10 trains were ordered and only the half are in use. Each time that this train runs makes Renfe to loss money, because it spends more money than it earns. The one-way ticket for a cabin cost ~200 €, plus breakfast and dinner.


----------



## volodaaaa

NordikNerd said:


> Did you buy a 1st class ticket? . Then you have your own compartment and shower, clean linens.
> 
> I have travelled the CNL nighttrains such as Copenhagen-Basel, Hamburg-Zurich, Munich-Florence in both 4 and 6 compartments. No dirt, but slow, shaky and noisy. Still better than flying.


No i did not. I was travelling just for 2 hours and booked a common seat in compartment aligned carriage. There were only two 2nd class carriages of this type (no 1st class). But as I have told you, it was in horrible condition.


----------



## K_

Think said:


> This series is a total economical disaster. 10 trains were ordered and only the half are in use. Each time that this train runs makes Renfe to loss money, because it spends more money than it earns. The one-way ticket for a cabin cost ~200 €, plus breakfast and dinner.


You could probably give the most profitable railway line in the world to RENFE and they would manage to make it in to a money pit in no time. RENFE is good at running trains. Very good even. But they fail when it comes to selling tickets.

I traveled on the night train from A Coruna to Barcelona, and it was a great experience. Exactly how a night train should be. I traveled in the seats btw (as I was alone).
However, I had to find this train myself. If you go to www.renfe.es and try to book a trip between two random places in Spain in many cases you will come up empty. This is because RENFE seems to be completely unaware that the strength of a railway lies in the potential for huge network effects. Local trains feed passengers to long distance trains, which then change for another local train when they get off. However, buy wrongly assuming that train passengers won't change trains, and marketing a train only to the inhabitants of the towns it serves you miss huge opportunities. 
The RENFE planner will however not offer you travel solutions involving a change, unless there is no option, in which case it will only look for solutions with one change. If getting from A to B involves more then on change RENFE thinks this is not doable...

RENFE actually has a good network, that has improved a lot in recent years. They go to extraordinary lengths to make sure no-one finds this out.


----------



## K_

volodaaaa said:


> No i did not. I was travelling just for 2 hours and booked a common seat in compartment aligned carriage. There were only two 2nd class carriages of this type (no 1st class). But as I have told you, it was in horrible condition.


So you were not in a "night train" as such, just in a train at night. This doesn't really allow you to form an opinion how travel in a sleeping car is.

The main reason for 2nd class seating cars to be attached to such trains is to allow the train to double as a night time local service along the route it serves. These seating cars are never a great place to travel in.


----------



## volodaaaa

K_ said:


> So you were not in a "night train" as such, just in a train at night. This doesn't really allow you to form an opinion how travel in a sleeping car is.
> 
> The main reason for 2nd class seating cars to be attached to such trains is to allow the train to double as a night time local service along the route it serves. These seating cars are never a great place to travel in.


It was a night train (special category called EuroNight derived from EuroCity). EC and EN train have to guarantee some features such as multi-language speaking train conductor, air-condition in each carriage, etc. None of that was followed. 

I know, that couchette and sleeper carriages may have looked much better, but I think, the standards should be respected in each carriage.


----------



## jonasry

volodaaaa said:


> It was a night train (special category called EuroNight derived from EuroCity). EC and EN train have to guarantee some features such as multi-language speaking train conductor, air-condition in each carriage, etc. None of that was followed.
> 
> I know, that couchette and sleeper carriages may have looked much better, but I think, the standards should be respected in each carriage.


Well, the point is that it's cheap, cheap and cheap. You can't expect something brand new for €29. Atleast not with the current market model. However, of course it would be great if many of the old carriages were refurbished.

Usually the couchettes and sleepers are well-cared of. Atleast in western and central Europe. I took the night train from Belgrade to Ljubljana two years ago and ended up in a compartment that had a large part of it's interior ceiling ripped out.


----------



## volodaaaa

jonasry said:


> Well, the point is that it's cheap, cheap and cheap. You can't expect something brand new for €29. Atleast not with the current market model. However, of course it would be great if many of the old carriages were refurbished.
> 
> Usually the couchettes and sleepers are well-cared of. Atleast in western and central Europe. I took the night train from Belgrade to Ljubljana two years ago and ended up in a compartment that had a large part of it's interior ceiling ripped out.


So it may differ from train to train, right? Because I've travelled by EC Hungaria before my experience with EN metropol and the compartment was really well-cared of, air condition was working properly and train conductor spoke fluently in three languages. Therefore I was a bit surprised on my way back wit that EN train.


----------



## Rayancito

K_ said:


> You could probably give the most profitable railway line in the world to RENFE and they would manage to make it in to a money pit in no time. RENFE is good at running trains. Very good even. But they fail when it comes to selling tickets.
> 
> I traveled on the night train from A Coruna to Barcelona, and it was a great experience. Exactly how a night train should be. I traveled in the seats btw (as I was alone).
> However, I had to find this train myself. If you go to www.renfe.es and try to book a trip between two random places in Spain in many cases you will come up empty. This is because RENFE seems to be completely unaware that the strength of a railway lies in the potential for huge network effects. Local trains feed passengers to long distance trains, which then change for another local train when they get off. However, buy wrongly assuming that train passengers won't change trains, and marketing a train only to the inhabitants of the towns it serves you miss huge opportunities.
> The RENFE planner will however not offer you travel solutions involving a change, unless there is no option, in which case it will only look for solutions with one change. If getting from A to B involves more then on change RENFE thinks this is not doable...
> 
> RENFE actually has a good network, that has improved a lot in recent years. They go to extraordinary lengths to make sure no-one finds this out.


 You are right, but to say the truth they improved a lot this year by selling in the net the so called ¨combined tickets¨, with this tickets you have to change trains. On the other hand they are promoting a lot transversal trains, that will go from north to south/east/west of the country, passengers don´t have to change trains. Those are normally trains that can change the gauge, because Madrid has not a UIC line to Conect Atocha and Chamartin. The only exception is Malaga/Sevilla Barcelona that do not enter in Madrid, in fact Malaga Barcelona is 1.121 Km long, almost a chinese kind of high speed trip......

In a couple of years (maybe 3) there will be a UIC tunnel in Madrid and this estrategy could then be pushed to the limit, probably then to buy a ticket in the internet from most places in the country to any other destination within will be very easy and times will be convinient also because ohter high speed lines will be finished (Murcia, Zamora, Pedralba, Leon, Cadiz, Granada and Burgos).


----------



## K_

Rayancito said:


> You are right, but to say the truth they improved a lot this year by selling in the net the so called ¨combined tickets¨, with this tickets you have to change trains. On the other hand they are promoting a lot transversal trains, that will go from north to south/east/west of the country, passengers don´t have to change trains.


Such long distance transversal trains are not such a good idea. RENFE should concentrate on creating a good integrated network, with hubs where passengers can change trains. Such a network can offer a lot more travel options without the railway needing to run more trains.

The whole idea that a trip where you have to change trains can be considered as something special really bogles the mind. What drugs are those RENFE managers on?

Where I live, in Switzerland, trips where passengers have to change multiple times are the norm. And nobody finds that odd, or thinks that those require special tickets...


----------



## Think

^^The problem of train changes for Renfe (I don't justify it, I just explain what they say) is that if a train arrives late, it isn't easy to relocate the passengers in some trains, specially when a lot of routes in Spain have only 1, 2 or 3 trips per day. They preffer not to sell tickets with a change instead of relocating passengers.

The combined tickets of Renfe are established in certains routes were a train waits the other if it arrives late, avoiding the relocation of passengers. Renfe is forced to make a tradicional tain tranfer in Figueras-Vilafant with the TGVs, some days ago I read that a TGV arrived 45 minutes late to Figueres-Vilafant, so the AVE left before the TGV arrived. 200 passengers had to be located in the next AVE and other trains and that, what is very usual in any other company, was a total nightmare for Renfe.


----------



## derUlukai

i`m curious whether the eurostar velaros are in service before the DB velaros..
does anyone know WHY they changed their color sheme?


----------



## Rayancito

K_ said:


> Such long distance transversal trains are not such a good idea. RENFE should concentrate on creating a good integrated network, with hubs where passengers can change trains. Such a network can offer a lot more travel options without the railway needing to run more trains.


 You don´t understand, Bilbao Madrid + Madrid Malaga = Bilbao Madrid Malaga. No more trains are needed, just the change of a train is no longer needed, the overall occupation of both services grows, because some people do not like to change trains, specially old people.


----------



## DiggerD21

volodaaaa said:


> So it may differ from train to train, right? Because I've travelled by EC Hungaria before my experience with EN metropol and the compartment was really well-cared of, air condition was working properly and train conductor spoke fluently in three languages. Therefore I was a bit surprised on my way back wit that EN train.


It maybe might differ from carriage to carriage. I was recently taking the night train Budapest - Katowice in a sleeper carriage (6 beds per compartment). The train was 12 carriages long, of which 4 were from hungarian railways (on the way to Berlin), 4 from Czech railways (on the way to Prague) and 4 from polish railways (on the way to Warsaw). Obviously I was in a polish sleeper carriage, and was positively surprised. It was like a proper small bed with linen and cover. Good enough for me to have some hours of sleep without interruption by the train conductor.


----------



## Fan Railer

First video of the Class 374 (e320 Velaro) under it's own power:


----------



## Fan Railer

Not exactly in real life, but still worth sharing for those of you simulator junkies. Here are a variety of Siemens Velaro trains for OpenBVE, with upgraded sounds and physics from the original ICE 3:
If any of you are curious about OpenBVE, proceed here:
http://obts.wikia.com/wiki/OBTS_Wiki




Siemens Velaro Pack - Version 1.9
Download here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/o9w0h26g8lhvk5w/Siemens_Velaro_V1.9.rar
Routes to run on:
http://www.mediafire.com/download/9r6tfx0zx8xxikm/Maastricht_Route_Pack.rar
http://downloads.bvefrance.fr/swade/LGV_OpenBVE.rar
http://www.mediafire.com/download/7fr33wsz3zsugqb/Shinkansen_Route_Pack.rar
V1.9 pack includes the following:
German DB 403 (ICE 3); 8 car and 16 car versions - 330 km/h - 370 km/h
German DB 406 (ICE 3MF); 8 car and 16 car versions - 330 km/h - 370 km/h
Spanish Renfe AVE-103 (Velaro E); 8 car and 16 car versions - 350 km/h - 400 km/h
Russian Sapsan (Velaro RUS); two 10 car versions (EVS1 and EVS2) - 250 km/h - 290 km/h
Chinese CRH380BL (CRH3C); 8 car and two 16 car versions- 380 km/h - 480 km/h

Updated propulsion sounds, acceleration physics, and carriage spacing. Also fixed tractive effort meter to display only tractive effort, and not acceleration. 
Includes coupler setup for "double" train sets, courtesy of "Quork."
Now also includes the addition of 1st class and 2nd class coaches for AVE stock, updated exterior textures with final livery updates, and HVAC units on all cars.
Also has an accurate bistro car for the CRH3C (CRH380B), which in real life, has no doors.

The final update, V2.0, will feature passenger compartments with seats, and a 3D cab.

Original train is by Manuel Mejias
http://www.trenesvenezolanos.blogspot.com
http://hstopenbve.blogspot.com/p/db-ice.html


----------



## Verso

Next summer there will be a direct train between Moscow and Koper on the Slovenian coast (like between Moscow and Nice). Estimated travel time is ~45 hours and it will run at least once a week.

http://www.siol.net/novice/gospodarstvo/2013/08/vlak_koper_moskva.aspx


----------



## XAN_

Well, all that 1520 <-> 1435 trains are rediculoisly expensive. Making transfers at borders can be cheaper up to 4 *times* hno:


----------



## city_thing

I'm heading to Europe later in the year and I just did a ticket search on the DB website for a train from Berlin to Copenhagen. I found a great one that goes through Hamburg, but it looks like the train goes onto a boat between Fehmarn and Rodbyhavn! Is this true, or does it mean I get off the train, catch a ferry, then get on another train in Denmark...?

Meanwhile, SSC is so handy for organising holidays. You guys know everything. Can't wait to get back to Germany! :cheers:


----------



## KingNick




----------



## city_thing

That's crazy. Love the ICE train too. Can't wait!

Thanks for your answer KingNick.


----------



## Silly_Walks

A diesel ICE no less. Enjoy that, since they'll probably disappear soon


----------



## 33Hz

Eurostar CEO on expansion plans...

http://edition.cnn.com/video/standa...3/07/25/spc-mpe-eurostar-nicolas-petrovic.cnn


...summary: We're getting new trains but we haven't quite worked out where we're going with them yet.


----------



## Suburbanist

33Hz said:


> ...summary: We're getting new trains but we haven't quite worked out where we're going with them yet.


Makes sense. ORdering and having delivered tunnel-fit trains is more difficult and time-consuming than setting up new routes. 

Maybe they could operate a handful of daily direct trains to Lyon, Dijon, Strasbourg, Orleans, Tours.


----------



## KingNick

Or Frankfurt and show this one to DB before they make it to London:










:happy:


----------



## 33Hz

Suburbanist said:


> Makes sense. ORdering and having delivered tunnel-fit trains is more difficult and time-consuming than setting up new routes.
> 
> Maybe they could operate a handful of daily direct trains to Lyon, Dijon, Strasbourg, Orleans, Tours.


I would expect a fully developed business plan before spending a billion dollars on new equipment but maybe he is keeping his cards close to his chest.


----------



## XAN_

city_thing said:


> I'm heading to Europe later in the year and I just did a ticket search on the DB website for a train from Berlin to Copenhagen. I found a great one that goes through Hamburg, but it looks like the train goes onto a boat between Fehmarn and Rodbyhavn! Is this true, or does it mean I get off the train, catch a ferry, then get on another train in Denmark...?
> 
> Meanwhile, SSC is so handy for organising holidays. You guys know everything. Can't wait to get back to Germany! :cheers:


You stay in train, while it's stationed on ferry:


----------



## DiggerD21

And after the train is loaded onto the ferry, you can get out of the train and enjoy the upper decks on the ship for about 20-30 minutes.


----------



## Stainless

DiggerD21 said:


> And after the train is loaded onto the ferry, you can get out of the train and enjoy the upper decks on the ship for about 20-30 minutes.


I do think it is bit of a waste getting the train on to the ferry, when everyone is getting out anyway. Why not get them to walk on to the ferry and have another train on the other side, saves having to carry a few hundred tonnes of train back and forth. That is what they do on Pembroke-Rosslare but there is also a gauge change and much lower traffic.

I took the train-ferry to Hainan island a few years ago and they don't let you off. I wandered up and down the carriages and only one spot let you see out, it was quite claustrophobic and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a tragedy there someday as there is no escape route.


----------



## NordikNerd

Silly_Walks said:


> A diesel ICE no less. Enjoy that, since they'll probably disappear soon


It´s called InterCityExpress but it takes 4,5 hours from Copenhagen-Hamburg. The ferry takes 45 minutes. The attendant is usually stressed out when the train enters the ferry and all passengers must leave the wagon immediately , so there is not much time thinking about what to bring with you up on the deck.


----------



## 437.001

Good news: the EPSF (Établissement Public de Securité Ferroviaire) has authorized the class 100 AVE trains to run on the Perpignan-Figueres HSL and on classic French lines under 1.5 kV.

(in French) http://www.securite-ferroviaire.fr/fr/index.php?mod=1&id=193


----------



## 437.001

Looks like Sncf and TP Ferro have been testing an 860 m long push-pull freight train between Perpignan and Llers, near Figueres, end of the TP Ferro-owned section.

It´s related to what´s called in Spanish and French "the rail motorway".


----------



## bongo-anders

NordikNerd said:


> It´s called InterCityExpress but it takes 4,5 hours from Copenhagen-Hamburg. The ferry takes 45 minutes. The attendant is usually stressed out when the train enters the ferry and all passengers must leave the wagon immediately , so there is not much time thinking about what to bring with you up on the deck.


Stressed out???,

The times I have taken the train to Hamburg the procedure has been very relaxing.

But it is for safety reasons that no one can be on the cardeck (well train deck in this case) during the crossing.


----------



## 437.001

New international TGV service between France and Germany:



> *TGV Rhine-Rhône – new TGV Paris-Freiburg high speed link*
> 
> *From 26 August 2013, SNCF will operate a new international service linking Paris to Freiburg im Breisgau (Germany).*
> 
> The new Paris-Freiburg route will mark the expansion of the TGV Rhine-Rhône service to European destinations.
> 
> The present Paris-Mulhouse daily return journey will thus be extended to Freiburg im Breisgau from 26 August 2013. This new route has been open to reservations since 16 July and complements the connecting TGV/TER service which has operated since the reopening of the Mulhouse-Mulheim line in December 2012.
> 
> http://www.uic.org/com/article/france-switzerland-tgv-rhine-rhone?page=thickbox_enews


----------



## 33Hz

What's the latest news on start date for the Paris - Barcelona TGV? At the moment I can't seem to book even Figueres past Oct 15th. Is that a hint?


----------



## 437.001

33Hz said:


> What's the latest news on start date for the Paris - Barcelona TGV? At the moment I can't seem to book even Figueres past Oct 15th. Is that a hint?


It seems so. 
Apart from that (and before I check a post), no news.


----------



## 33Hz

Quick question: Does anyone know if there is a fixed direction for the ICE from Brussels to Cologne/Frankfurt? In other words, is first class always in front (in the Frankfurt direction) or vice-versa?


----------



## thtc

Normally the first class is situated in front of the train running from Brussels to Frankfurt; but there are a lot of exceptions to this rule.


----------



## pai nosso

in "Transporte em revista" »» portuguese magazine


The block train all week part of Portugal to Germany , operated by DB Schenker and is a partnership with CP Cargo and Contren ( former MERCANCIAS Renfe ) , may be at risk of failing to accomplish. 


*When the transport magazine could ascertain , the problems at the level of infrastructure in France and Spain have taken the train to arrive sometimes in Germany with more than a week late *, a situation that has led some customers to place service concerned. Problems begin soon in Spain when the trains entering the rail terminal , managed by ADIF , the Spanish company counterpart Refer. As this train is not considered a priority and ADIF gives preference to other services , change operations traction are constantly delayed , and there is also by the Spanish infrastructure manager hourly flexibility within the terminal , to expedite the process . When it comes to France , and the resulting delay has occurred in Spain , the train of DB Schenker is faced with the lack of channel -wise to get going again , having to get systematically waiting for a new channel - time is available , a situation which may last up to several days. For some of the customers who use this service , the current transit -time is not compatible with their needs and are already considering the possibility of re-use road transport. Remember that DB Schenker has even move there about a year , with a doubling of rail service through the circulation of two trains in each direction between Portugal and Germany . However , the German company decided to end the second train, by ignoring the reasons for this having happened . Note that in the Transport Magazine tried to talk to the leaders of DB Schenker in Portugal but this was not possible .


Remember that this service started in January 2012 , following steps taken by AICEP ( Agency for Investment and Foreign Trade ) along four logistics operators , inviting them to present a solution for the railway industry exporting Portuguese where AutoEuropa included , who wanted an alternative to road transport ( the main factory suppliers are more than three thousand kilometers ) .


During the year and a half , Schenker developed the project , joining several partners , including Deutsche Bahn to terminals in Germany , the CP load to terminals in Portugal and Transfesa for wagons , boxes and mobile cranes in Irun .

Translation made by http://translate.google.pt/



P.S.: long live the European Union, Spain and France!!!hno::nuts:hno::nuts:


----------



## :jax:

A map of the Iron Silk Road (Eurasian people/cargo rail) by Theo Deutinger and Kit Chow. It seems to have missed at least the breaks of gauge between EU and CIS countries.


----------



## Suburbanist

I hope EU prohibits transportation via EU-hostile countries like Iran, since it would put European operators at a great disadvantage (Chinese trains could pass Iran, but not the other way around). The sanctions must be enhanced to cripple any possible gains Iran might make on this route.


----------



## 3737

*Eurostar confirms launch of London – Amsterdam services in December 2016*


EUROPE: Eurostar, the Dutch government and Dutch national passenger operator NS have signed an agreement for the launch of direct services between London and Amsterdam Centraal in December 2016.
This forms part of a programme to enhance services on HSL-Zuid which was announced by State Secretary for Infrastructure & the Environment Wilma Mansveld on September 27.
The agreement has been submitted to the Dutch parliament for ratification, a process which a Eurostar expects to be completed within the next few months.
Two services a day would be operated using Eurostar's new Siemens Velaro e320 trains, the first of which is now on test. The journey time will be around 4 h, with stops at Brussels, Antwerpen, Rotterdam and Schiphol airport.
A Eurostar spokesman told Railway Gazette International that details of the immigration and baggage screening procedures for UK-bound journeys were still to be worked out. The agreement sets a date for the launch of services, but it is 'very much the first step' and there is still 'a lot of work to do before 2016'.
Announcing the agreement, Eurostar said that since becoming a standalone corporate entity in September 2010 it has 'had clear ambitions to expand its business beyond its existing destinations and to encourage passengers to choose high speed rail over plane for short haul European travel', and a direct high-speed rail service between London and Amsterdam would offer 'an attractive, convenient alternative to the airlines'.
'We have long been ambitious for expansion to new destinations, so today's announcement marks a major advance in our growth plans', said Eurostar Chief Executive Nicolas Petrovic. 'With over three million passengers travelling by air between London and Amsterdam, this is one of Europe's most popular routes. Our fast, comfortable, point-to-point service will greatly enhance the links between the UK and the near Continent, revolutionising travel between these important financial and tourist hubs.'

Source: Railway Gazette


----------



## Silly_Walks

^^

Does anyone know why this could not be done in 2015 already?


----------



## AlexNL

Availability of rolling stock certified for 4 countries and the channel tunnel.


----------



## :jax:

Suburbanist said:


> I hope EU prohibits transportation via EU-hostile countries like Iran, since it would put European operators at a great disadvantage (Chinese trains could pass Iran, but not the other way around). The sanctions must be enhanced to cripple any possible gains Iran might make on this route.


I don't know. When you look at maps like these you realise how easy after all international train travel is in Europe. Apart from the relative absence of Asian railroad, traditional and high-speed, East Asia excepted, there are so many political and technical barriers. Particularly whoever can make what is marked as the Southern Corridor run deserves a Nobel peace prize, transport prize, or some such. Basically every country on that route is engaged in hate thy neighbour. 

The Central Asian route, also passing through Iran, would be somewhat less challenging, but still at major achievement. If you want to boicott it would be better to do so after the infrastructure is built rather than before. Anyway the European operators would not lose from better (technical, political) infrastructure, and long-term it would give them, and Iran, profitable opportunities.


----------



## 33Hz

thtc said:


> Normally the first class is situated in front of the train running from Brussels to Frankfurt; but there are a lot of exceptions to this rule.


This was correct both ways, and I managed to sit in the front seat on the return - however the driver refused to clear the glass


----------



## Suburbanist

New ICEs will no longer feature these panorama lounges AFAIK.


----------



## K_

3737 said:


> A Eurostar spokesman told Railway Gazette International that details of the immigration and baggage screening procedures for UK-bound journeys were still to be worked out.


Lets hope that this means that a) the baggage screening is ditched and b) immigration is moved to London for those trains.


----------



## 33Hz

The baggage screening is a bit of a joke.

In the last month I've had a couple of trips from Brussels to London. Both stopped at Lille.

The first was early on a weekday. Usual stamp on the ticket at Brussels, then nothing. Not a single immigration officer on duty at London.

The second was late on a Saturday. Stamp on a ticket at Brussels (how easy is this to fake?), then a ticket check on the train after Lille (by Securitas staff) and more immigration staff in London than I have ever seen - 5 checking and then about 15 standing around at the back.

So clearly illegal immigrants don't get up early and only travel on the weekends... :nuts:


And yes, if we must continue this charade, then hopefully it will move to London / UK only. I hope DB and Eurostar will collaborate to make this happen.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> Lets hope that this means that a) the baggage screening is ditched and b) immigration is moved to London for those trains.


Do they have enough space on St. Pancras to process all passengers on a regular basis?


----------



## 33Hz

Yes the arrivals room is quite large.


----------



## Sunfuns

What about passengers traveling in the opposite direction? Would those be checked in London too?


----------



## 33Hz

Yes. Make all the silly UK requirements happen on the UK side. Check inbound tickets on the train - for those in violation there was a cell on the existing trains I believe.

In many ways it's just the same as leaving/arriving in Switzerland.


----------



## Sunfuns

33Hz said:


> In many ways it's just the same as leaving/arriving in Switzerland.


Ten years ago maybe. There are no regular passport checks on trains entering or leaving Switzerland any more. I've crossed the Swiss borders on a train dozens of times and never been approached by the seldom seen border guards or customs agents.


----------



## 33Hz

I've had passport checks in Geneva station, but it's little more than cursory. London could be the same.


----------



## 33Hz

By the way, why is the ICE3M limited to 250 km/h in Belgium whereas the Thalys goes 300?


----------



## pietje01

^^ It has to do with the ICE3M sucking up ballast between the sleepers.
Thalys has a smoother surface on the underside, so it doesn't have this problem.

In Germany it isn't a problem because the 300 km/h sections are completely ballast free


----------



## K_

pietje01 said:


> ^^ It has to do with the ICE3M sucking up ballast between the sleepers.


AFAIK this problem has been solved, and ICE3M can now also travel at 300kph in Belgium.


----------



## 33Hz

The ICE3M I was on in Belgium never went above 250 km/h this last trip - but yes, the ballast problem was solved as it does 320 km/h on the LGV Est.


----------



## KingNick

Fancy fix


----------



## Suburbanist

Ballast on high(er) speed tracks is so yesterday... railways at this point should be aiming to convert their tracks to ballastless tracks. Those sleek concrete bases with rails make for so much better quality...


----------



## rheintram

yet another of your ridiculous statements.


----------



## 437.001

rheintram said:


> yet another of your ridiculous statements.


More than ridiculous... expensive. :sly:


----------



## Dzwonsson

3737 said:


> *Eurostar confirms launch of London – Amsterdam services in December 2016*
> 
> Source: Railway Gazette


I love the news, but the question is, how are they going to attract more tavellers if KLM/BA remain the cheaper way to get to London?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

4 hours of travel time city center to center I find will not completely do away with the airline competition, but will get rail a fair share of the market. 
By the way, I would recommend you not to participate in an international discussion forum with a poem as motto that could be understood as irredentist.


----------



## TedStriker

Baron Hirsch said:


> By the way, I would recommend you not to participate in an international discussion forum with a poem as motto that could be understood as irredentist.


Out of curiosity I just put that poem into Google translate...and it makes no sense to me at all. 

What's it about please?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

The poem is written from the perspective of a German inhabitant of Silesia in 1945 who deplores that the German "fatherland lies bleeding from a thousand wounds." The narrator is speechless due to the fact that (s)he has been deported from the province of Silesia (annexed by Poland) to a more Western part of Germany.
While one should not belittle the trauma of deportation to ethnic Germans after WWII, it is of questionable taste to portray this without the wider context of German aggression and crimes against the people of Eastern Europe.


----------



## TedStriker

Baron Hirsch said:


> While one should not belittle the trauma of deportation to ethnic Germans after WWII, it is of questionable taste to portray this without the wider context of German aggression and crimes against the people of Eastern Europe.


Yep, I can totally see now why such a poem is a little bit out of place on this thread...


----------



## K_

Dzwonsson said:


> I love the news, but the question is, how are they going to attract more tavellers if KLM/BA remain the cheaper way to get to London?


Eurostar already offers 99,- UKP returns from London to Amsterdam.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> Eurostar already offers 99,- UKP returns from London to Amsterdam.


Eurostar + Thalys or Eurostar + crappy 1980s IC train?


----------



## 437.001

A forumer just posted this in the Spanish forum.
I wonder what it means:



carlesnuc said:


>


----------



## AlexNL

Looks like we now have a date for the direct TGV services between France and Spain :banana:


----------



## Vaud

And best! it's free!! :banana:


----------



## Suburbanist

*Thello trains reduce services*

Thello night trains between Paris and Roma will be cancelled this December due to low ridership.


----------



## NordikNerd

This December The Berlin-Moscow service will be canceled due to poor demand. 

The Train No. 23/24 Paris-Moscow 39 hours service will still run. It stops in Berlin. New modern coaches and specially trained staff will make this a good option for long distance travellers that dislike flying (like me). Have in mind that a train passenger can bring a lot more luggage onto the train compared to the airplane.


----------



## Road_UK

You can bring as much crap as you like on the plane. You only pay a bit more. Also, the train isn't that much cheaper and takes a hell of a lot longer. Returns from Munich to Moscow or St Petersburg on a plane costs as little as 180€.


----------



## NordikNerd

Road_UK said:


> You can bring as much crap as you like on the plane. You only pay a bit more. Also, the train isn't that much cheaper and takes a hell of a lot longer. Returns from Munich to Moscow or St Petersburg on a plane costs as little as 180€.


Long distance train travel will never be entirely outcompeted by airlines. There will always be a demand for it for several reasons. 

*Luggage:* no check in and you can carry as heavy bags as you're capable of. 

*Comfort:* Plenty of space. Get some fresh air at the platforms during the stops. No turbulence, no shaky take offs/landings.

*Access:* You arrive in central Paris/Moscow not 15km outside the city centre.

*Environmental friendly* Zero pollution

*Scenery:* See the changing landscape or the bland clouds.

*Options:* If you change your mind you can exit at any station.

Many people travel long distance trains because they simply dont like to fly. Who wants to be trapped in a metalcylinder 10000m up in the sky?


----------



## Sunfuns

It's a niche service and yes the demand won't go completely to zero, however railways aren't making much of a profit from such services therefore they are liable to be shifted aside when capacity issues arise.

There is still one coach a day going from Basel to Moscow and one to Minsk.


----------



## Road_UK

NordikNerd said:


> Long distance train travel will never be entirely outcompeted by airlines. There will always be a demand for it for several reasons.
> 
> Luggage: no check in and you can carry as heavy bags as you're capable of.
> 
> Comfort: Plenty of space. Get some fresh air at the platforms during the stops. No turbulence, no shaky take offs/landings.
> 
> Access: You arrive in central Paris/Moscow not 15km outside the city centre.
> 
> Environmental friendly Zero pollution
> 
> Scenery: See the changing landscape or the bland clouds.
> 
> Options: If you change your mind you can exit at any station.
> 
> Many people travel long distance trains because they simply dont like to fly. Who wants to be trapped in a metalcylinder 10000m up in the sky?


I do. It's only for a couple of hours, it's cheaper and better than being cooked up on a train for two days. And yes, long distance train services are being cancelled because it's so much quicker and often cheaper to fly. But around Europe I usually drive anyway. I use the plane a lot when I've got urgent matters to sort out in Holland or the UK.


----------



## Sunfuns

I've never used a train service longer than one night, but I imagine it must be incredibly boring to have to spend an entire day in one small room with several other people. 

Road_UK: Of course most people prefer flying on such routes, but there is still 5-10% who'd rather take a train even if it means a travel time five times as long.


----------



## 437.001

Slartibartfas said:


> The distance is hardly worth mentioning, if it were not water
> According to google maps the distance by ferry is 88 km.
> 
> Of course for a bridge or tunnel project this is a are rather epic distance.


I knew, I was actually thinking about a Vilnius-Riga-Tallinn-Helsinki train, with trains by ferry between Estonia and Finland, just as it´s done between Germany and Sweden or Denmark, if I´m not mistaken.


----------



## dj4life

437.001 said:


> I knew, I was actually thinking about a Vilnius-Riga-Tallinn-Helsinki train, with trains by ferry between Estonia and Finland, just as it´s done between Germany and Sweden or Denmark, if I´m not mistaken.


There are two options: Germany-Denmark-(Öresund bridge)-Sweden or Germany-(Ferry)-Sweden (may be replaced by a 90 km. long bridge (planned)).


----------



## Verso

Pansori said:


> What do you mean? The map clearly shows that you can go from Vilnius to Riga and all the way to Tallinn if you wish. The route is not very straight but the trains could run on it and, in fact, they did as late as in 1992.


I meant trains, I know there are railways between all of them. There seems to be no connection Vilnius-Riga, Latvia-Estonia, Lithuania-Poland, and Poland-Kaliningrad. It sounds stupid to me, but since Italians scrapped all trains to Slovenia in 2011, nothing surprises me any more.


----------



## ArtManDoo

Pansori said:


> The actual fast Rail Baltica link has been under planning for the past 20 years and probably will be for another 20 before anything goes ahead.
> 
> Although the existing connection from Poland to Lithuania is being converted into standard gauge right now. Only problem it will be too slow (120km/h) for decent international passenger services. Still good for freight though.


I think there have been "tea parties" about Rail Baltica for last ten years but not real planning stages, but now hopefully things will move on as there are public discussions within local municipailites which RB would gross through.


----------



## ArtManDoo

XAN_ said:


> You a quite right, but my point that it's Baltic countries, who benefits from 1520 mm network more than Russia - because it's Baltic countries who gets money from freight transit to ports/Kaliningrad, it's Baltic states who impose rules and get revenue from passenger transit from and to Kaliningrad.
> Russia is the loosing side in this situation, and not some plotting monster that tries control Baltic states via 1520 railways (they do do plotting thing, but via other tools, like energy supply and import regulations)


Transit cargo from Russia and Rail Baltica are different things that shoudn't be opposed. Baltic countries have access to 1520 network but not 1435, Lithuania is happy to get some very soon when 1435 arrives to Kaunas. 1435 Rail Baltica gives a huge potential to go nearly as far as the network goes. Baltic and Finland will be able to send goods and get goods to/from any place in Europe, it gives a huge part that don't exist now and thus is defenetely a smart thing to do.


----------



## Road_UK

437.001 said:


> I knew, I was actually thinking about a Vilnius-Riga-Tallinn-Helsinki train, with trains by ferry between Estonia and Finland, just as it´s done between Germany and Sweden or Denmark, if I´m not mistaken.


I don't think that'd be rendabel. The nearest (and central station) in Helsinki is about a 10 minute walk from the Olympiaa terminal, where the seacat from Tallin docks, and where one of the major ferries to Stockholm goes. After Helsinki there's not really a lot there to take the train to. Not worthy to extend the railway line to the docks anyway. From Helsinki there are some local trains, the intercity up north and the 2x a day service to St Petersburg. Traffic between Estonia and Finland isn't that much apart from some tourists and freight traffic.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

dj4life said:


> There are two options: Germany-Denmark-(Öresund bridge)-Sweden or Germany-(Ferry)-Sweden (may be replaced by a 90 km. long bridge (planned)).


Correction: the plan is for a 90 km long tunnel between southern Sweden and Northeastern Germany. It seems quite utopian, some Swedish investors apparently have too much money on their hands. I would not hold my breath waiting for that one, for now the privately operated train on ferry is still operating Berlin-Sassnitz-Malmö, but naturally is under quite some pressure.


----------



## NordikNerd

Baron Hirsch said:


> Correction: the plan is for a 90 km long tunnel between southern Sweden and Northeastern Germany. It seems quite utopian, some Swedish investors apparently have too much money on their hands. I would not hold my breath waiting for that one, for now the privately operated train on ferry is still operating Berlin-Sassnitz-Malmö, but naturally is under quite some pressure.


This proposed tunnel may be a reality in the year of 2525. 

For now we are very priviliged to have one only direct train connection to continental europe even if it includes a 4h ferry. The Malmö-Berlin connection opened in 1909. 

This route was canceled by the state railways in june 2011 and taken over by VEOLIA. Remember that it's only seasonal june 23rd - august 17th. 

I'm afraid that this service is not profitable enough not even in the summer.


----------



## Sunfuns

Problem with trains between Riga and Tallinn/Vilnius is that it's hard to make them competitive with buses/cars. It takes about 3 /2 h to drive to Vilnius and about 4 h to Tallinn. I don't remember exactly how long it took with a train in the early 90-ties, but I think at least double...

I've heard nothing about the Southern direction, but there is some talk about re-introducing Riga-Tallinn service after the current speed upgrade in Latvia is finished. Estonian railways at least would be interested, because they recently bought some new trains and are investing in their rail network (Estonia is the richest of the three countries). Latvians are still using the old Soviet junk even if manufactured in Riga...


----------



## Pansori

Sunfuns said:


> Problem with trains between Riga and Tallinn/Vilnius is that it's hard to make them competitive with buses/cars.
> 
> It takes about 3 /2 h to drive to Vilnius and about 4 h to Tallinn. I don't remember exactly how long it took with a train in the early 90-ties, but I think at least double...


At the present a train between Vilnius and Siauliai (the city in the north of Lithuania) takes 2:33 hours. About the same time it takes to drive if you're not a speed freak. The distance is 212km. The route is popular.

Even the Vilnius-Klaipeda which is 376km long and takes 4:40 hours is very popular despite the fact that buses run faster due to shorter distance on the motorway (300km).

The distance between Vilnius and Riga on a railway is about 335km and if we assume that the train will go at an average speed of just over 80km/h (which is the speed of Vilnius-Klaipeda route) it will take approximately 4:15 hours. However with some infrastructure upgrades and new rolling stock it could be cut to 4 hours without any problem.

Sure driving can be a bit faster but 4 hours between Vilnius and Riga is in principle competitive due to some other advantages of traveling by train.


----------



## Sunfuns

Is there a good train connection between Vilnius and Kaunas? Information about Lithuanian railways on these board is pretty much non-existant...

Maybe connection to Vilnius is easier, I'm more familiar with the route(s) to Estonia. Are there rails on the route Siauliai-Joniskis-Jelgava? From Jelgava there is a decent electrified route further to Riga.


----------



## Pansori

Sunfuns said:


> Is there a good train connection between Vilnius and Kaunas? Information about Lithuanian railways on these board is pretty much non-existant...
> 
> Maybe connection to Vilnius is easier, I'm more familiar with the route(s) to Estonia. Are there rails on the route Siauliai-Joniskis-Jelgava? From Jelgava there is a decent electrified route further to Riga.


Connection between Vilnius and Kaunas is good and trains go at an average speed of 100km/h. The line is electrified and passengers are carried using double-decker EMUs.


----------



## AlexNL

AlexNL said:


> Looks like we now have a date for the direct TGV services between France and Spain :banana:


Looks like I spoke a bit too soon, Voyages-SNCF just showed me this:



















So that means there will be no direct TGV service, but the direct Elipsos night train is axed anyway. Passengers will have to take a French overnight train and change in Port Bou.


----------



## Reivajar

^^ You can always take the TGV service from Paris to Figueres-Vilafant, and then swicth to the AVE service to Barcelona.

It is the quickest option till now.


----------



## ArtManDoo

Pansori said:


> Connection between Vilnius and Kaunas is good and trains go at an average speed of 100km/h. The line is electrified and passengers are carried using double-decker EMUs.


Vilnius Kaunas service has the highest average speed in Baltics and the EJ is very good Train for that distance.

Let's see what happens when new Tallinn - Tartu will schedules will be introduced but it will be diesel and it's hard to give better times than electric.


----------



## ArtManDoo

Pansori said:


> At the present a train between Vilnius and Siauliai (the city in the north of Lithuania) takes 2:33 hours. About the same time it takes to drive if you're not a speed freak. The distance is 212km. The route is popular.
> 
> Even the Vilnius-Klaipeda which is 376km long and takes 4:40 hours is very popular despite the fact that buses run faster due to shorter distance on the motorway (300km).
> 
> The distance between Vilnius and Riga on a railway is about 335km and if we assume that the train will go at an average speed of just over 80km/h (which is the speed of Vilnius-Klaipeda route) it will take approximately 4:15 hours. However with some infrastructure upgrades and new rolling stock it could be cut to 4 hours without any problem.
> 
> Sure driving can be a bit faster but 4 hours between Vilnius and Riga is in principle competitive due to some other advantages of traveling by train.


Totally agree Vilnius - Riga 4hrs is more than possible and would find use by people for sure. It should be national/international fast Train, what I mean is that prices for national connections as Vilnius - Siauliai or Jelgava - Riga should be about the same as for national trains.

The other thing is that the railway between Jonava and Siauliai is quite straight and Lithuanian Railways should introduce 140km/h there, as in Finland where many single track lines see speeds 140km/h. I am quite sure that the trailtrack already allows 140 and Level crossings are also not problem maybe some signalling improvements are needed. Both Vilnius - Klaipeda and Vilnius - Riga services would benefit.


----------



## 437.001

*Internacional services Spain-France*

 Rumour has it that the Trenhotel (Talgo night trains) between Spain and France will survive in a way or another, after the arrival of the direct TGV from Paris-Gare de Lyon to Barcelona-Sants. The paths are reserved. And Portugal seems to be part of the story...  
More details (if there should be any, which is unclear) as soon as we know them.


----------



## Road_UK

Rumours are also circulating that the German national railway company are going to set up a high speed connection between Amsterdam and Brussels. Something the Dutch and Belgians have been unable to do after numerous attempts...


----------



## 437.001

:crazy: :lol:


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> Rumours are also circulating that the German national railway company are going to set up a high speed connection between Amsterdam and Brussels. Something the Dutch and Belgians have been unable to do after numerous attempts...


A high speed connection has been running between Amsterdam and Brussel for quite some time now...


----------



## Road_UK

K_ said:


> A high speed connection has been running between Amsterdam and Brussel for quite some time now...


No it hasn't. They fucked it up.


----------



## Thermo

K_ said:


> A high speed connection has been running between Amsterdam and Brussel for quite some time now...


It's called Thalys.


----------



## Road_UK

Thalys is a scheme the Dutch railway company is not involved in. They had the Fyra running for two months until the Belgian railway company pulled out due to problems with the trains they bought in Italy. They are now rusting away near Amsterdam, and they had to put the traditional train back onto Brussels, increasing journey times rather magnificently. But today the Germans have announced that they are going to put a bid into operating a new high speed service between Amsterdam and Brussels.


----------



## Reivajar

And any operator can use the Dutch and Belgian tracks? Their railway market is free already for passenger services?


----------



## Road_UK

Sure. Arriva has already taken over some of the traditional routes in the Netherlands and Germany. And also the Austrian railway company ÖBB had to face competition on one of its major routes between Salzburg and Vienna. Everything is up for scraps these days...

And Thalys is a joint venture of the French, Belgian and German railway companies. The Dutch have no shares. The only thing they've got is a stake in the ICE Frankfurt - Amsterdam line.


----------



## Reivajar

Well, Thalys is not liberalisation of railway services, but an international agreement for offering international services under an only brand shared by several national companies. That's why the reason of asking about the situation in Benelux about railway services by other companies, as the situation is quite diverse around the European Union.

Well, probably SNCF or DB could offer to the Dutch and Belgian governments trains for that service, which ar the end could be really profitable.


----------



## Sunfuns

Road_UK said:


> *Thalys is a scheme the Dutch railway company is not involved in.* They had the Fyra running for two months until the Belgian railway company pulled out due to problems with the trains they bought in Italy. They are now rusting away near Amsterdam, and they had to put the traditional train back onto Brussels, increasing journey times rather magnificently. But today the Germans have announced that they are going to put a bid into operating a new high speed service between Amsterdam and Brussels.


True, but nevertheless there is a high speed connection between Brussels and Amsterdam. By the way why wasn't Thalys interested in expanding their service to cover all the need for non-local connections between the two cities? Not enough trains perhaps?


----------



## 437.001

Road_UK said:


> And Thalys is a joint venture of the French, Belgian and German railway companies. The Dutch have no shares. The only thing they've got is a stake in the ICE Frankfurt - Amsterdam line.


I heard DB had left Thalys?


----------



## Road_UK

Have they? The Germans only had (have) a 10% stake as far as I know. Most of it is in French hands.


----------



## SAS 16

yes they are out


----------



## AlexNL

DB sold their share in Thalys to SNCB. Nowadays SNCB holds 40% of the shares in Thalys and SNCF the remaining 60%. Next year Thalys will be structured from a joint venture to a completely independent company, which will allow Thalys to operate more independently. The same has happened with Eurostar in 2010.


----------



## Reivajar

^^ But on the Thalys website they still say DB owns the 10% of the company.

Anyway, independent company means private-owned one?


----------



## 437.001

Yes and no. Like Eurostar.


----------



## Reivajar

^^ OK, I see, from joint venture to independent company but owned by the former parts of the joint venture... well, we'll see.

The shared proportion of DB in Thalys was relatively small. Probably, DB has other kind of strategy for operating international services.


----------



## Road_UK

The one they're proposing in the Netherlands and Belgium is apparently a DB/Arriva operation.


----------



## Reivajar

Road_UK said:


> Sure.* Arriva has already taken over some of the traditional routes in the Netherlands and Germany.* And also the Austrian railway company ÖBB had to face competition on one of its major routes between Salzburg and Vienna. Everything is up for scraps these days...
> 
> And Thalys is a joint venture of the French, Belgian and German railway companies. The Dutch have no shares. The only thing they've got is a stake in the ICE Frankfurt - Amsterdam line.


The fact that Arriva has taken some routes in Germany makes any difference to the DB service? At the end, I think Arriva belongs to DB too. So, it sounds like the same people, different brand.


----------



## Road_UK

Reivajar said:


> The fact that Arriva has taken some routes in Germany makes any difference to the DB service? At the end, I think Arriva belongs to DB too. So, it sounds like the same people, different brand.


I don't know about Germany, but in the Netherlands Arriva has no ties with NS.


----------



## Reivajar

Well, I am not talking directly about the Netherlands, but as Arriva is owned by DB, the fact of offering services in Germany instead of DB sounds like... strange... (or a sophisticated way of arranging operational costs for the DB group)

Edit: Now, I am reading that when Arriva was bought by DB, it was forced to sell its railway business in Germany. Now, it sounds clearer to me.


----------



## AlexNL

Arriva was an independent British company, which was acquired by DB a couple of years ago. The competition authorities agreed with the sale only if all Arriva companies within Germany would be sold off, which is what happened. Trenitalia took over those operations, Arriva Deutschland is nowadays called Netinera.


----------



## 437.001

:nuts: A bit complicated, all this... :dizzy:


----------



## MattN

Reivajar said:


> And any operator can use the Dutch and Belgian tracks? Their railway market is free already for passenger services?


No. I'm not sure of the exact situation with the High Speed Line (I think NS Hispeed won exclusive use with the exception of Thalys?) but all other lines are operated by government concessions. NS has been directly awarded the concession for the main rail network for another ten years or so (?) but an increasing number of rural branch lines are being lumped in with the regional transport concessions for local buses and such.


----------



## MarcVD

To be more precise :

The Fyra service, as initially planned, completely left out the city of The 
Hague. This city responded by wanting to put in place its own service to
Brussels. They opened a tender for this and Arriva was selected as the best
bidder. But it will not be a true high speed service, as there are many 
intermediate stops enroute foreseen. See the details on the page (in dutch)
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lage_Landen_Lijn - although the last
info I got said they could use the high speed line between Rotterdam and
Antwerp, thus no stop anymore in Dordrecht.

But in any case, the only real high speed service between A'dam and Brussels
remains Thalys. Future will tell whether Eurostar dreams will become reality.


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> Thalys is a scheme the Dutch railway company is not involved in.


Wrong. 

HSA is responsible for Thalys in The Netherlands. This is one reason that passengers with Fyra tickets could take Thalys went the Fyra got cancelled.


----------



## Road_UK

It's responsible for them running on Dutch tracks, but NS has no shares in Thalys whatsoever.


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> It's responsible for them running on Dutch tracks, but NS has no shares in Thalys whatsoever.


 But Thalys itself is only a marketing organization. Thalys does not own any trains, does not employ any drivers, does not operate any trains. ( this will change in the future) When you buy a Thalys ticket from Amsterdam to Brussel your transportation contract is with HSA, and NMBS, just as it was with Fyra tickets.


----------



## Christopher125

Road_UK said:


> Rumours are also circulating that the German national railway company are going to set up a high speed connection between Amsterdam and Brussels. Something the Dutch and Belgians have been unable to do after numerous attempts...


Arriva proposes new Amsterdam – Brussels high-speed services

*"Arriva Netherlands director Mr Anne Hettinga stated that his company has submitted an alternative plan for the operation of high-speed services from Amsterdam to Brussels via the HSL South high-speed line. These would be run in close cooperation with parent company German Rail (DB), and could be extended to serve destinations further afield. The service could be launched in December 2016 following the delivery of new high-speed trains"*

The timing of this new service appears to fit with the expected commencement of DB cross-channel services between London and Amsterdam via Brussels and Rotterdam.

Chris


----------



## Harrys

we see here the Europe of next future...with a HS services from several companies crossing countries... ^^


----------



## Reivajar

Harrys said:


> we see here the Europe of next future...with a HS services from several companies crossing countries... ^^


Well, actually Arriva is simply DB. By now, it does make a big difference: the big nationa railway companies offering international services...


----------



## phoenixboi08

Excuse my ignorance, but I've noticed something that's been vexing me: I understand that several companies operate on similar tracks, through various countries (i.e. Thalys, EuroStar, DB beginning service into London, etc), but _what_ is the best website to go to for fares and schedules?

Deutsche Bahn is okay, but they have a problem giving fares or schedules more than 45 or so days in advance. I know for regular services (e.g. non-express), that's not unusual as many people simply purchase at the ticket counter, but I will be using high speed services for much of my trip (Paris-Brussels-Amsterdam-Berlin). Anyways, I just want to be sure I can gauge what the best rates are without going through 3 or 4 different sites (which I'm doing now). I don't have a problem with it, but wanted to know if there was a better way to do it.

I hope it's not too off topic, I figure it's a question worth asking giving it is relevant for a Pan-European system, no?


----------



## Suburbanist

phoenixboi08 said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but I've noticed something that's been vexing me: I understand that several companies operate on similar tracks, through various countries (i.e. Thalys, EuroStar, DB beginning service into London, etc), but _what_ is the best website to go to for fares and schedules?


www.bahn.com has the easiest English interface to search schedules (except for certain minor operators like TreNord, NTV-Italo Treno, Westbahn). 

As for prices, you should always check the website of each rail company you intended on travelling.



> Deutsche Bahn is okay, but they have a problem giving fares or schedules more than 45 or so days in advance. I know for regular services (e.g. non-express), that's not unusual as many people simply purchase at the ticket counter, but I will be using high speed services for much of my trip (Paris-Brussels-Amsterdam-Berlin). Anyways, I just want to be sure I can gauge what the best rates are without going through 3 or 4 different sites (which I'm doing now). I don't have a problem with it, but wanted to know if there was a better way to do it.


There is no single engine for prices.

Bahn will not give prices for trains that don't start or end in Germany with few exceptions.

Some countries/rail operators open their schedule religiously 60, 90, 92 or 120 days before departure. Some are more erratic, especially around bi-annual schedule change day (2nd sunday of June and December).


----------



## AlexNL

There is no official engine for rail tickets as exists for flights, unfortunately. The EU attempted to build such a product (they even made a budget available for it) but nothing came out of it. There are some brave souls who have attempted to build such a thing, but they're depend on partnerships with the individual operators and not all of them are willing to cooperate.

Try one of these:
- www.waymate.de
- www.capitainetrain.com
- www.loco2.com


----------



## phoenixboi08

Thank you so much. I was close to pulling my hair out! 
I especially like that the www.loco2.com site tells you specifically how far in advance you can purchase tickets.


----------



## Crownsteler

AlexNL said:


> There is no official engine for rail tickets as exists for flights, unfortunately. The EU attempted to build such a product (they even made a budget available for it) but nothing came out of it. There are some brave souls who have attempted to build such a thing, but they're depend on partnerships with the individual operators and not all of them are willing to cooperate.
> 
> Try one of these:
> - www.waymate.de
> - www.capitainetrain.com
> - www.loco2.com


I think the EU tried again recently:
link


----------



## Slartibartfas

Those sites are a start but they don't allow you to take the multitude of bonus cards etc into consideration. Its almost short of a scandal that European railway companies to have not come up with a single online ordering infrastructure to this very day. It is costing them a lot of potential customers because booking international tickets is often a pain in the a** and totally intransparent. 

I know its a complex issue but the same railways were capable of creating a unified system for all possible train connections. So finding rail connections from where ever to where ever is no problem. And if you call for example the ÖBB service hotline you can even book from where ever to wherever. So if they can do it, one should think with some major effort it should be doable to create the IT infrastructure that any customer could do online.


----------



## Eiropro

Yep, I think reason why trains like Paris - Rome are cancelled is because you can't book tickets normally like for airplanes. For e.g. I'd like to ride a train from Warsaw to Lisbon but it is impossible to book tickets. Besides it is surprising that there are no night trains for Paris _ Madrid or London - Berlin. They even don't have to be high speed, for me it is cool to board train on 21.00 or 22.00 and arrive on 8.00 to destination. With good organization it means no delays, more luggage, no cancellation due to bad weather, no luggage lost, better safety, more socialization, restaurant car with beer, cool views from the window during day etc. I hate flying even I did it more than 20 times. But if I go to EU I have no choice but to fly. 

Some cities like London and Paris have excellent connection and cheap fare but mostly you have to change 2 or even 3 trains just to move between neighborhood countries.


----------



## Reivajar

Eiropro said:


> Yep, I think reason why trains like Paris - Rome are cancelled is because you can't book tickets normally like for airplanes. For e.g. I'd like to ride a train from Warsaw to Lisbon but it is impossible to book tickets. Besides it is surprising that there are no night trains for Paris _ Madrid or London - Berlin. They even don't have to be high speed, for me it is cool to board train on 21.00 or 22.00 and arrive on 8.00 to destination. With good organization it means no delays, more luggage, no cancellation due to bad weather, no luggage lost, better safety, more socialization, restaurant car with beer, cool views from the window during day etc. I hate flying even I did it more than 20 times. But if I go to EU I have no choice but to fly.
> 
> Some cities like London and Paris have excellent connection and cheap fare but mostly you have to change 2 or even 3 trains just to move between neighborhood countries.


I am not sure if I understand well your message, but currently there are direct night trains (Talgo Trenhotel type) between Madrid and Paris and between Barcelona and Paris, and as far I know they have a relatively goog occupancy rates. They are managed by a joint venture shared by Renfe and SNCF named Elipsos. As well, Elipsos offered some time ago night trains (as well Talgo Trenhotel type) from Barcelona to Zurich and Milan (and to the French Alps in winter season). Elipsos is going to be as well responsible for the new international high speed direct services between Spain and France with several TGV Euroduplex and AVE class 100 trainsets.

Elipsos services are regularly scheduled on SNCF and Renfe websites, and I think as well on the DB website, apart of the particular Elipsos website.

However, I have to admit that the existing night services are not well advertised on media, and there are lots of people who don't know you can take a direct train between Paris and Madrid and Barcelona.


----------



## Suburbanist

Night trains are a niche market.


----------



## Silly_Walks

Suburbanist said:


> Night trains are a niche market.


And you are a broken record :lol:


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> Night trains are a niche market.


I'm really intrested to meet you 15-20 years from now :lol:


----------



## :jax:

The information system has been a weakness, and has been in the 20 years person transport has been opened up (which I applaud, but the benefit won't be reaped until we have information systems that can handle it). In country after country it has been harder to find out how to get from where you are to where you want to be, and then slowly, slowly it gets better. Yes, the airlines do that best, so that is a major reason I primarily fly (that the ground transport much of the time is slower and more expensive matters as well). 

Bahn.de is best if you have decided to go by train, but not so useful if you are more concerned about getting there. If you e.g. travel in Sweden there is one integrated service for plains, trains, busses, local transport, but you won't get the prices or if there are available tickets. More open-ended questions like "what are the cheapest options for getting from here to there in this time interval" have no simple answer, but is at least feasible with air transport.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ My whole point is: most people don't consider a night on a train as the same of a night on a hotel or at their home. Therefore, the time-saving comparison doesn't hold, because the sleep is very precarious on a moving train. This is why the market share of night trains is so low, and dwindling (not expanding) in Europe. In 1990, they had 4 times more seats/beds on night trains than now... and about 60% of flight capacity.


I don't know anyone who slept on a night train so bad that he could not make full use of the next day. Do you? Ever wondered why you are apparently the only one here who supports your view on supposed lack of efficiency of night trains?

Actually taking even a short flight wears me out more than taking a night train.


----------



## Road_UK

What about Rome, Verona, Munich and the CNL to Amsterdam?


----------



## Suburbanist

Road_UK said:


> What about Rome, Verona, Munich and the CNL to Amsterdam?


There are no night trains linking Italy to Netherlands AFAIK. There used to be a night train from Milano Centrale to Amsterdam. It took 16 hours to complete the trip! Unacceptable. No wonder it was withdrawn in 2009.

Also withdrawn were night trains linking Italy and Switzerland. With high-speed trains to Milano, anyone North of Bari or Salerno can comfortable travel on a daytime train to Zurich changing in Milano.


----------



## Road_UK

No but there are regular services from Italy to Munich, and from there the CNL runs straight to Amsterdam.


----------



## Suburbanist

Road_UK said:


> No but there are regular services from Italy to Munich, and from there the CNL runs straight to Amsterdam.


Yes, but services over the Brenero are slow. It is much faster to reach Frankfurt from Bologna via Milano, Luzern, Basel and Manheim.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Suburbanist said:


> Yes, but services over the Brenero are slow. It is much faster to reach Frankfurt from Bologna via Milano, Luzern, Basel and Manheim.


The English term is Brenner, probably because thats the way locals call it, north and south of it alike. 

And yes, possibly the Swiss route is faster. Will a Brenner base tunnel change that or will the Gotthard base tunnel be the fastest route?


----------



## Road_UK

Slartibartfas said:


> The English term is Brenner, probably because thats the way locals call it, north and south of it alike.
> 
> And yes, possibly the Swiss route is faster. Will a Brenner base tunnel change that or will the Gotthard base tunnel be the fastest route?


He doesn't like using English names. Everything is Milano and München instead of Milan and Munich. And in his mind South Tyrol is fully Italian, also in language. He once said that all place names should be written in local language only. A very backward opinion if you ask me, but there you go.


----------



## Suburbanist

Slartibartfas said:


> The English term is Brenner, probably because thats the way locals call it, north and south of it alike.
> 
> And yes, possibly the Swiss route is faster. Will a Brenner base tunnel change that or will the Gotthard base tunnel be the fastest route?


Actually the fastest route to Frankfurt is via Simplon-Lötschberg tunnels. However, there are only 2 or 3 daily trains, if I'm not mistaken, that travel from Milano Centrale to Basel Hfb. via that route. Else you need to change either in Brig or somewhere between Lugano and Arth-Goldau.

A base tunnel between Austria and Italy will not change that,.


----------



## Slartibartfas

I see. The Brenner base tunnel is interesting for destinations further eastwards, for example Munich.


----------



## Road_UK

Slartibartfas said:


> I see. The Brenner base tunnel is interesting for destinations further eastwards, for example Munich.


Well, the only connections where the Brenner link serves a purpose is travel between Italy, Innsbruck and Munich.


----------



## Suburbanist

Slartibartfas said:


> I see. The Brenner base tunnel is interesting for destinations further eastwards, for example Munich.


Yes, but the Germans have to upgrade their side of the route. Moreover, the sector between the Italian portal and Trento is slow and winding. Beautiful as it follow the valley, but slow nonetheless.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ My whole point is: most people don't consider a night on a train as the same of a night on a hotel or at their home. Therefore, the time-saving comparison doesn't hold, because the sleep is very precarious on a moving train. This is why the market share of night trains is so low, and dwindling (not expanding) in Europe. In 1990, they had 4 times more seats/beds on night trains than now... and about 60% of flight capacity.


Of course, sleeping in decent hotel or home are generally batter, but sleeping in train aren't disastrous (for most people), so it's a matter of choice in each situation... No sence in taking night train if there an 2-3 hour seating alternative.
But considering growing decay of cheap liquid fuels, we are likely to see renaissance of night trains in our lifetime.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Road_UK said:


> Well, the only connections where the Brenner link serves a purpose is travel between Italy, Innsbruck and Munich.


A main purpose is freight rail anyway and there this corridor makes sense for some of the industrial hot spots of Germany, also beyond Munich. However, the track between Munich and the Austrian border needs some serious upgrade indeed.


----------



## Suburbanist

XAN_ said:


> But considering growing decay of cheap liquid fuels, we are likely to see renaissance of night trains in our lifetime.


High-speed trains, not nigh trains, pose a threat to aviation.


----------



## Slartibartfas

^^ Both can be an alternative. I can grant for that as they are alternatives for me on many trips and I do choose between those two based on different factors. I doubt I am the only person who does so.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> High-speed trains, not nigh trains, pose a threat to aviation.


Firstly, they aren't mutually exclusive - there are already low-high speed solutions for overnight, and we likely to see more and better solutions in coming years.
Secondly, on some distances (1000+ km) a decent speed (160+) sleeper can be a more attractive then a high speed trains.


----------



## hhouse

delete


----------



## :jax:

K_ said:


> This is similar to the situation that existed years ago. I travelled on that route and trains only went as far as Villa Opicina, where on transferred to a coach. Dies makes some sense as trains take quite a roundabout route to get down to Trieste.
> It would make sense for this train to continue to Venice (and maybe it will one day) and Trieste just extending the Tram to Villa Opicina all the way to the station.


This is the very thing the EU is supposed to be good for. 


:jax: said:


> A TEN-T update Full-size map


 This should include Ljubljana-Venice.


----------



## Sunfuns

Road_UK said:


> Well, the only connections where the Brenner link serves a purpose is travel between Italy, Innsbruck and Munich.





Suburbanist said:


> Yes, but the Germans have to upgrade their side of the route. Moreover, the sector between the Italian portal and Trento is slow and winding. Beautiful as it follow the valley, but slow nonetheless.





Slartibartfas said:


> A main purpose is freight rail anyway and there this corridor makes sense for some of the industrial hot spots of Germany, also beyond Munich. However, the track between Munich and the Austrian border needs some serious upgrade indeed.


Bologna-Munich is probably going to be the longest trip competitive with flying, but the route will be of great importance for all freight coming from Eastern and South Eastern Germany and any points East of it to anywhere in Italy. Assuming all the necessary track upgrades are done it will be a faster and shorter route than going via Switzerland.


----------



## Road_UK

I heard about people flying from Verona to Munich, and getting a transfer shuttle to Innsbruck... 

Sent from my HTC Desire 500 using Tapatalk


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> He doesn't like using English names. Everything is Milano and München instead of Milan and Munich. And in his mind South Tyrol is fully Italian, also in language. He once said that all place names should be written in local language only. A very backward opinion if you ask me, but there you go.


He's however not very consistent at this...


----------



## Road_UK

I haven't seen him using any names in English so far...


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> I haven't seen him using any names in English so far...


But sometimes he called places by names that weren't English, and weren't local either...


----------



## Slartibartfas

But in the language of the vast local majority that pass is called "Brenner" and not "Brennero", on both sides. ->http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...stribution_in_South_Tyrol,_Italy_2011,_de.png

Of course it is true that Italian speakers, refer to it as Brennero and the Italian speaking minority in Südtirol calls it that way as well (and the province is officiall bilingual therefore). But why would anyone who is not Italian speaking call it like that?


----------



## Road_UK

All roadsigns in Austria displaying place names in Südtirol are in German only. (signs to all other countries are displayed in the language of that particular country) however, the local ÖBB S-bahn from Innsbruck to Brenner is displayed as Brennero - Brenner.


----------



## Verso

Slartibartfas said:


> But in the language of the vast local majority that pass is called "Brenner" and not "Brennero", on both sides. ->http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...stribution_in_South_Tyrol,_Italy_2011,_de.png


Umm, what a useless debate. Would you call this municipality _Sele_ or _Zell_ in this thread?


----------



## Slartibartfas

Verso said:


> Umm, what a useless debate. Would you call this municipality _Sele_ or _Zell_ in this thread?


Possibly Zell, because my mother tongue is German. (Suburbanists mother tongue isn't Italian, is it?) But I might also call it the way the local majority calls it. I don't know. Both makes sense.


Road_UK said:


> All roadsigns in Austria displaying place names in Südtirol are in German only. (signs to all other countries are displayed in the language of that particular country) however, the local ÖBB S-bahn from Innsbruck to Brenner is displayed as Brennero - Brenner.


Because Südtirol is officially bilingual and this is a cross border service. Still, only a small minority of locals south of the Brenner will call it Brennero. 

It is most certainly not wrong it call it Brennero but it is not what the local majority would call it and it is not the proper English term either. So using it here in this context is a funny choice of words. It makes as much sense as calling it here "Prëner". But lets get back on topic again. I think I have said more about it than is reasonable.


----------



## Verso

Slartibartfas said:


> (Suburbanists mother tongue isn't Italian, is it?)


He's from many places and has sth with Italy as well, yes (but not with Austria apparently).


----------



## Sunfuns

Suburbanist is Brazilian who has lived in Italy, but now resides in Netherlands. If you check his activity ca 1/4 of his posts are in Portuguese. 

Although I think we'd be better off talking about trains :lol:


----------



## Slartibartfas

Oh, well, just forget about it. If I had known that I had never started it, I thought he was Dutch. Lets get back on topic. 

What is about railway connections between Ljubljana and Vienna btw? Those could be better, couldn't they? 6 hours doesn sound terribly fast and all I found was a single direct connection per day. What is the projected time after the Südbahn upgrades are realized and is there anything going on in Slovenia to upgrade the connections to Austria?


----------



## Road_UK

Slartibartfas said:


> Possibly Zell, because my mother tongue is German. (Suburbanists mother tongue isn't Italian, is it?) But I might also call it the way the local majority calls it. I don't know. Both makes sense.
> 
> Because Südtirol is officially bilingual and this is a cross border service. Still, only a small minority of locals south of the Brenner will call it Brennero.
> 
> It is most certainly not wrong it call it Brennero but it is not what the local majority would call it and it is not the proper English term either. So using it here in this context is a funny choice of words. It makes as much sense as calling it here "Prëner". But lets get back on topic again. I think I have said more about it than is reasonable.


I think it has more to do with the fact that the official name of that particular railway station is Brennero - Brenner.


----------



## Verso

Slartibartfas said:


> What is about railway connections between Ljubljana and Vienna btw? Those could be better, couldn't they? 6 hours doesn sound terribly fast and all I found was a single direct connection per day. What is the projected time after the Südbahn upgrades are realized and is there anything going on in Slovenia to upgrade the connections to Austria?


In short: nope. The fastest way would be to drive by Pendolino from Ljubljana to Spielfeld-Straß (doesn't drive any more, only to Maribor) and from there to Vienna by Railjet, but you'd have to change trains once. Railjet Ljubljana-Vienna would be better too.

PS: you need 10 hours from Ljubljana to Budapest.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Road_UK said:


> I think it has more to do with the fact that the official name of that particular railway station is Brennero - Brenner.


Interesting. But I think I have written already far too much on this.


----------



## AlexNL

According to this website the Paris - Barcelona TGV's will not start on December 15th, yet no other date is given.


----------



## 437.001

AlexNL said:


> According to this website the Paris - Barcelona TGV's will not start on December 15th, yet no other date is given.


The Spanish Minister for Development, Ana Pastor, has declared today that *the direct TGV Paris-Barcelona will start running on December the 15th, 2013*, as we were guessing. Tickets aren´t available yet.

Source (in Spanish): La Vanguardia

At last. :banana:


----------



## AlexNL

Woohoo! :banana:

Now to see what a ticket will cost...


----------



## 437.001

They aren´t uploaded yet, but the trains will be LOADED the weekends and school holidays, I tell you.

We still have to confirm the date for the Toulouse, Marseille and Lyon services, but it´s possible that they could start on December 15 too.

Next goals: Bordeaux, Nice, Lille, Brussels and Geneva...:yes: ... and then London, maybe? :?


----------



## Reivajar

^^ We'll see as well which one of those services are extended to Madrid


----------



## 437.001

Looks like there will be a Marseille-Madrid. To be confirmed yet.
If that were the case, it will be interesting to know wether it will call at Camp de Tarragona (for Salou, Cambrils, La Pineda & etc), and at Zaragoza (big city, pop. more than 500,000).


----------



## Sunfuns

Is it known in which French cities Barcelona-Paris TGV will have a stop?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Definitely makes sense. i remember taking that train a few years ago, to then take a local train to Bologna, to finally change unto a Frecciarossa to Rome, Naples, Salerno. Connecting directly to the main HS line in Italy with its frequent services is a totally different thing than ending in Verona.


----------



## Gadiri

*Elipsos service disappear with the new HSR between France and Spain. 


What about the 3 last trains. Will they be sold ? *


*Francisco de Goya *: *Madrid Chamartin *- Valladolid - Burgos - Vitoria-Gasteiz - Poitiers - Blois - Les Aubrais-Orléans - *Paris-Austerlitz*
*Joan Miró* :* Barcelona*-França - Gérone - Figuières - Les Aubrais-Orléans - *Paris-Austerlitz*
*Elipsos 463 *: *Montpellier* Saint Roch - Béziers - Narbonne - Perpignan - Cerbère - Portbou - Figueras - Gérone - Barcelona-França - Tarragone - Salou - Cambrils - Vinaroz - Benicarlo - Benicasim - Castellón - Valence - Xativa - Alicante - Elx - Murcie - Balsicas - Torre Pacheco - *Cartagène*


















http://www.elipsos.com/








> *La SNCF suspend Elipsos, le train de nuit franco-espagnol​*
> 
> Le mardi, 17/12/2013 07:43 | Écrit par Alex McWhirter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Le Signal service de train de nuit Elipsos disparait suite à la mise en service de la ligne TGV ParisSignal-Barcelone ce week-end...​
> LesSignal trains Elipsos manqueront sans doute à de nombreux voyageurs.
> 
> *Elipsos était en effet l’un des rares trains de nuit en EuropeSignal à proposer un service de type hôtelier.*
> 
> Les billets aux tarifs les pluis élevés permettaient de profiter d’une douche dans son compartiment ainsi que d’un wagon restaurant, ouvert durant toute la durée du voyageSignal.
> 
> Le temps de voyageSignal était par contre beaucoup plus long que le nouveau TGV: *11,5H entre Paris et Barcelone et 15,5h vers Madrid.*
> 
> Le changement d'écartement à la frontière franco-espagnole se fasait via le passage à faible vitesse de la rame dans un équipement dit Cambiador: cela était nécessaire du fait de la différence de largeur de rails entre le réseau ferroviaire français et espagnol (les lignes TGV au contraire ont le même écartement).
> 
> Elipsos ciblait un certain type de voyageur mais ce train coutait cher: son fonctionnement nécessitait plus de personnel qu'un train de jour normal.
> 
> En outre, *le train ne faisait qu’un voyage toutes les 24H quant un TGV peut en faire deux ou trois durant la même période.*
> 
> Il y avait sans doute une clientèle pour ce train: en 2009, Elipsos avait transporté 300000 passagersSignal.
> 
> Ce que je trouve ennuyeux, c'est la façon dont les compagnies ferroviaires peuvent supprimer un tel service aussi subitement à une période de l’année aussi chargée.
> 
> Il y a quelques jours quand je faisais des recherches sur la plate-forme pour février prochain, le site Elipsos n’indiquait pas que ce train de nuit allait être prochainement suspendu.
> 
> Mais quand j’ai vérifié hier, les réservations étaient redirigées vers le TGV franco-espagnol avec une annonce uniquement en français et en espagnol.
> 
> Du fait des règles du droit commercial de l’Union Européenne les compagnies aériennes doivent prévenir 14 jours à l’avance lorsqu’un service est suspendu, sinon les passagers doivent être indemnisés.
> 
> Les compagnies ferroviaires ne sont pas sujettes aux mêmes règles. Ne serait pas le temps qu’elles le soient?
> 
> www.elipsos.com
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> 
> 
> *SNCF suspend Elipsos , the night train Franco-Spanish​*
> 
> On Tuesday, 12/17/2013 7:43 | Written by Alex McWhirter
> 
> 
> 
> Signal train servic*e Elipsos night disappears after the commissioning of the TGV - ParisSignal Barcelona this weekend ...*
> 
> LesSignal Elipsos trains probably fail many travelers.
> 
> Elipsos was indeed one of the few trains in EuropeSignal to offer hotel-style service .
> 
> Tickets to the pluis high tariffs allowed to enjoy a shower compartment and a diner, open throughout the duration of voyageSignal .
> 
> VoyageSignal time was much longer against by the new TGV : *11.5 H between Paris and Barcelona and Madrid to 15.5 h .*
> 
> The gauge change to the Franco- Spanish border fasait via the passage at low speed of the train in equipment Cambiador said : this was necessary because of the difference in width between the rails of French and Spanish railway network ( lines TGV instead have the same gauge) .
> 
> Elipsos targeted a certain type of traveler but this train was expensive : its operation required more personal than being normal day.
> 
> In addition, the train did a trip every 24H on a TGV can make two or three during the same period.
> 
> There was probably a customer for this train in 2009, had carried Elipsos 300000 passagersSignal .
> 
> What I find annoying is how the railways can delete such a service as suddenly to a period of the year as charged.
> 
> There are some days when I was researching the platform for next February, the Elipsos website did not indicate that the night train would soon be suspended.
> 
> But when I checked yesterday , reservations were redirected to the Franco-Spanish TGV with an announcement only French and Spanish.
> 
> Because of commercial law EU airlines must notify 14 days in advance when service is suspended , otherwise passengers must be compensated.
> 
> The railways are not subject to the same rules . Would not be the time that they are ?


http://www.businesstravel.fr/la-sncf-suspend-elipsos-le-train-de-nuit-franco-espagnol.html


----------



## Suburbanist

*Thalys luggage rules updated*

This has been enacted couple weeks ago, but there are some crucial changes (not affecting 99% of passengers though) on luggage policies



> >You are allowed:
> * Maximum 2 suitcases meeting the following conditions per paying passenger:
> 32 kg maximum per suitcase
> 158 cm maximum (the sum of height, width and depth)
> * 1 carry-on bag
> 
> >Bulky items (bicycles, skis, musical instruments, etc.): You are allowed one bulky item on board only. In this case, you are allowed: 1 carry-on bag + 1 suitcase (32 kg max and max 158 cm (L+W+H) + 1 bulky item.
> 
> >To ensure everyone's safety, all luggage must be tagged
> 
> 
> In the event of excess luggage or failure to comply with these conditions, Passengers may be charged €30 per bag (£25 between Brussels-London) or prevented from bringing them on board the Thalys train.


----------



## 437.001

Gadiri said:


> Elipsos service disappear with the new HSR between France and Spain.


Just like the night services between Barcelona and Zurich, and Barcelona and Milan some time ago.



Gadiri said:


> What about the 3 last trains. Will they be sold ?


No, they´ll probably replace some other night trains in Spain.


----------



## Gadiri

437.001 said:


> No, they´ll probably replace some other night trains in Spain.


But with the opening of new HSR in Spain, such services will also disaper or being reduce ?


----------



## tigerleapgorge

Barcelona to Paris is only 10 euros more expansive than Barcelona to Avignon. Is it me or is the pricing just kind of bizarre considering the distance between Paris and Avignon?


----------



## Suburbanist

tigerleapgorge said:


> Barcelona to Paris is only 10 euros more expansive than Barcelona to Avignon. Is it me or is the pricing just kind of bizarre considering the distance between Paris and Avignon?


It is just market-based pricing. Paris-Barcelona has severe competition from cheap air traffic. Barcelona-Avignon has far less competition from airlines. Thus, prices can be higher on a per-km basis to Avignon than to Paris.

This is nothing new.

Often, you can find Paris-Amsterdam tickets costing the just € 5 more (and sometimes *less*) than Bruxelles-Amsterdam, even if the Paris-Amsterdam trains actually stops in Bruxelles.


----------



## Silly_Walks

Suburbanist said:


> This has been enacted couple weeks ago, but there are some crucial changes (not affecting 99% of passengers though)


This seems to affect 100% of passengers:

"To ensure everyone's safety, all luggage must be tagged"


----------



## Suburbanist

Silly_Walks said:


> This seems to affect 100% of passengers:
> 
> "To ensure everyone's safety, all luggage must be tagged"


I think it is a sensible policy, one that also makes it easier for security agents at stations to quickly ascertain whether some passenger is carrying his/her own luggage (and not a stolen one).


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I think it is a sensible policy, one that also makes it easier for security agents at stations to quickly ascertain whether some passenger is carrying his/her own luggage (and not a stolen one).


I've never seen a security agent in a station do something like that. I doubt they even have the power to do so.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> I've never seen a security agent in a station do something like that. I doubt they even have the power to do so.


If they don't they should. It would provide cause for stop and ask for ID (to match the ID of the tag on the bag) of suspicious passengers that might be stealing bags from other people.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> If they don't they should. It would provide cause for stop and ask for ID (to match the ID of the tag on the bag) of suspicious passengers that might be stealing bags from other people.


So all a thief needs to do is put a different tag on the suitcase, and he's ok...


----------



## 437.001

Gadiri said:


> But with the opening of new HSR in Spain, such services will also disaper or being reduce ?


I guess that they will tend to be reduced.

An example: right now, Tarragona to Cordoba takes 3h30min in the best of cases, 4h in most of cases, by taking an AVE. When I was a kid, that was 12h being very optimistic! There´s no point (nor enough business case) for a night train in such conditions (and Renfe ensured that there´s no possible case for that by cutting the night train from Barcelona to Cadiz).

On the other hand, there still is a night train between Barcelona and Granada, but we suspect that it will be cut as soon as the HSL between Antequera and Granada opens, since the travel time between Barcelona and Granada will be reasonably shortened.

The same applies to Barcelona-Paris (not very good for Orleans and Limoges though, they´ve lost their direct train to Barcelona).

As for Barcelona-Zurich, we guess that as soon as the reelectrification between Bellegarde and Geneva is completed, a new TGV Barcelona-Geneva will appear. 
I don´t know about the connections for Lausanne, Fribourg, Bern and Zurich though, but I assume that the Swiss will offer some kind of connection.

On the really losing side, Madrid-Hendaye-Paris, which now can only be done via a change at Hendaye.
And in particular, Barcelona-Milan, there is no direct rail connection between Spain and Italy now, and the day trains aren´t very good either (at least two changes!).

On the other hand, when the Nimes-Montpellier section of the HSL will open, travel times will improve a bit more, so maybe a direct daily TGV (not AVE) Brussels-Barcelona will be possible by then, by extending some services.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> As for Barcelona-Zurich, we guess that as soon as the reelectrification between Bellegarde and Geneva is completed, a new TGV Barcelona-Geneva will appear.
> I don´t know about the connections for Lausanne, Fribourg, Bern and Zurich though, but I assume that the Swiss will offer some kind of connection.


From Geneva you have connections to any point in Switzerland... The important thing will be for this train to arrive/leave Geneve at a usefull time,


----------



## AlexNL

Suburbanist said:


> Often, you can find Paris-Amsterdam tickets costing the just € 5 more (and sometimes *less*) than Bruxelles-Amsterdam, even if the Paris-Amsterdam trains actually stops in Bruxelles.


A while ago I saw someone complaining on Twitter that Thalys was charging him through the roof for a one-way tickets from Paris to Brussels. I advised him to look at tickets for other destinations such as Rotterdam or Lille.

He finally bought a ticket from Paris to Liège, but only planning to stay on board until Brussels. That little trick saved him € 40!


----------



## phoenixboi08

AlexNL said:


> A while ago I saw someone complaining on Twitter that Thalys was charging him through the roof for a one-way tickets from Paris to Brussels. I advised him to look at tickets for other destinations such as Rotterdam or Lille. He finally bought a ticket from Paris to Liège, but only planning to stay on board until Brussels. That little trick saved him  40!


It's probably because it's such a busy route? I just bought mine for $29 (but I was sure to book 90 days in advance, otherwise I'd be long at more than $70).


----------



## AlexNL

phoenixboi08 said:


> It's probably because it's such a busy route?


I believe he was able to book on the same train 

The yield management system employed by Thalys charges you more for popular destinations (Paris <-> Brussels is Thalys' top relation) if you don't book early. If you know how to beat the system, you can save money.



> I just bought mine for $29 (but I was sure to book 90 days in advance, otherwise I'd be long at more than $70).


$29 is a nice price.


----------



## phoenixboi08

AlexNL said:


> The yield management system employed by Thalys charges you more for popular destinations (Paris <-> Brussels is Thalys' top relation) if you don't book early. If you know how to beat the system, you can save money.


I've also come to see that it charges a bit more during busy periods: 09:00-12:00 and 16:00-19:00 (mid morning and early evening, I don't know _exact_ times, just an approximation).



AlexNL said:


> $29 is a nice price.


29 Euros :lol:
which is about $40.
Sorry!


----------



## Baron Hirsch

*Southeasteuropean International Connections to be Improved*

Because of financial and/or technical difficulties of the national rail companies and Croatia being integrated into EU rail stipulations, international rail services were severely reduced in the Balkans following the 2008 crisis. Talks are now underway for reinstating some of those services. There is nothing official at the moment, but some rail buffs with good connections to rail officials have spread the word that the following connections could be reintroduced:

334/335 Beograd - Skopje -> extension to Thessaloniki as early as Easter
258/259 Budapest-Sarajevo, looking good
314/315 Villach-Beograd as night train, looking good
210/211 Villach-Vinkovci - could be extended to Beograd, but chances are slim
1204/1205 (summer only) Budapest-Split: possible rerouting to Rijeka 
Source: http://www.drehscheibe-foren.de/foren/read.php?30,6761563,page=1


----------



## Junkie

The Balkan region is f*cked up... Sorry for my word, but we are too much behind the central European countries, not mentioning the west European countries...


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Rather not taking that seriously than having the TGVs like a pigsty. Yesterday I did a return Tarragona-Montpellier trip, and the TGV Duplex that took me back to Barcelona had the wc out of order, they were so, so dirty you could not even enter, such was the stench. Every AVE (and TGV, even if they´re not ours?) leaving Madrid or Barcelona northbound leaves the station crystal clean.


RENFE is doing a good job when it comes to running clean, punctual trains. However you will have noticed that your luggage was not scanned in Montpellier which kind of proves my point: it's just theatre, doesn't serve anything.

Operators running through the channel tunnel however currently don't have the option to just skip the luggage scan when it's impractical... That's why we won't see services like Frankfurt - London or Zürich - London anytime soon. Unless the rules change.


----------



## K_

AlexNL said:


> Eurotunnel requires luggage to be screened as part of the security protocol. Trucks and cars also go through scanners when they onboard Le Shuttle services.


Actually most cars and trucks aren't screened at all...


> Luggage screening could be done on platforms or perhaps on board of a train (using dogs).


He would it be done on the platforms? 





> The biggest problem is UK Border Control: the UK doesn't want trains that haven't been checked yet to enter their soil as High Speed 1 does not count as 'international territory' like airports. It's very hard to make sure no castaways are on board a train as they can hide nearly anywhere.


Well, they do seem to treat seem Eurostar services as "foreign" and have all passengers go through immigration on arrival. I see no reason why a train from eg. Amsterdam couldn't be handled that way as well.
But I don't see NS (or whoever owns Amsterdam Centraal nowadays) agree to dedicating a platform solely to a handful of Eurostar services...


----------



## K_

Reivajar said:


> Anyway, the luggage screening required for Eurostar in the Gare du Nord in Paris doesn't seem to be a problem either. Even if it is not that common in French stations.


Eurostar gets away with it because they operate a point-to-point service between dedicated terminals. And I'm sure they would get rid of it in a heartbeat if they were allowed to. It is seriously hampering expansion.

For longer train services to be viable they also need to serve intermediate points well. Barcelona - Paris is viable because it serves a whole corridor, not just the end points. 

But there is more. Train companies (at least competent ones) try to maximize network effects. 
For example, the Zürich - Paris TGVs have a cross platform connection with Interlaken - Bern - Basel trains in Basel. The result is that this TGV not only serves the Paris - Zürich market well, but also the Paris - Bern market, (and this so well that the single direct Bern - Paris TGV is struggling to attract enough passengers...)

The only way that a Zürich - London Eurostar would be able to be profitable would be for it to call also at Basel, Dijon, CDG and Lille at a minimum, and also transport passengers on subsegments, eg Zürich to Lille. The requirements that passengers have to submit to a strict luggage check makes this impossible.


----------



## AlexNL

K_ said:


> Actually most cars and trucks aren't screened at all...


There sure is screening, it's part of the Cyclamen programme.



> He would it be done on the platforms?


The same way do it for seasonal Eurostar services: before departure, sweep the platform clean and close entries that do not go through security and customs.



> Well, they do seem to treat seem Eurostar services as "foreign" and have all passengers go through immigration on arrival. I see no reason why a train from eg. Amsterdam couldn't be handled that way as well.


The St. Pancras checks have only started to appear lately and this is due to the "Lille loophole", whereby it was possible to bypass UK Border Control in Brussels if you hold a ticket for Brussels - Lille. By remaining seated after Lille, one could reach the UK without having gone through customs.

There's more to Eurostar on British soil than St. Pancras: some of the trains make extra stops in Ashford (?) or Ebbsfleet. Then there's also a risk that a stowaway would pull the emergency brake while on High Speed 1, would open a door using the emergency release handles, and flee.

Yet, despite the measures, sometimes people still manage to reach the UK.



> But I don't see NS (or whoever owns Amsterdam Centraal nowadays) agree to dedicating a platform solely to a handful of Eurostar services...


A completely dedicated platform, which will be unused for 95% of the time, will not happen. A platform which is swept clean before departure of a Eurostar is a possibility.

However, I don't see any of this happening. Plans as they currently are that a Eurostar to London will travel from Amsterdam to Brussels, where all passengers will disembark. Passengers go through the security and immigrations in Brussels and will subsequently re-embark aboard the train. This procedure is expected to take about 45 minutes, adding to the journey time.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

I agree that separate platforms will be an obstacle in stations like Amsterdam CS or Köln Hbf, as they are already rather busy and not as huge as Paris N. Certainly DB will not be obliging to rent off a whole platform to a competitor and will claim that it is necessary for local trains. 
But: who actually demands the baggage check? It has nothing to do with customs, as internal customs controls in the EU are abandoned and they are carried out by security staff, not officials. Is it part of Eurostar procedure? Does the tunnel company demand it? Or UK law? According to this, other solutions could be found. Making everybody get off the train in Brussels lugging their baggage is ludicrous, in such a case separate trains and integrated ticketing would be the better solution. 
Mobile passport controls with large groups of officers on the train would be the easiest solution. If a sans papiers would be found, France or Belgium would be obliged to take him or her back anyways. This is how it was practiced on the Czech - German border before the abandonment of controls. The best solution would of course for the UK to abandon its paranoia and join Schengen but that is not in the cards at the moment.


----------



## K_

AlexNL said:


> A completely dedicated platform, which will be unused for 95% of the time, will not happen. A platform which is swept clean before departure of a Eurostar is a possibility.


But not on a major station in the Netherlands, Germany or Switzerland. Don't forget that you would also need to take precautions against people crossing over from adjacent platforms. So you'd need a fence between the tracks...
And getting for example exclusive use of a whole platform for, say 45 minutes, in eg. Geneve: Forget it.
And you need to clear the train itself too. That's why some of the seasonal Eurostar services have such long stops in Lille. 



> However, I don't see any of this happening. Plans as they currently are that a Eurostar to London will travel from Amsterdam to Brussels, where all passengers will disembark. Passengers go through the security and immigrations in Brussels and will subsequently re-embark aboard the train. This procedure is expected to take about 45 minutes, adding to the journey time.


Eurostar might indeed try this, in the hope that the sillyness of the situation will lead to some backlash, and a relaxing of the rules. If not, they might conclude that just keeping present through ticketing arrangements in place is a better solution.


----------



## K_

AlexNL said:


> There sure is screening, it's part of the Cyclamen programme.


But not every truck or car is screened...


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...liament-waters-down-unbundling-proposals.html
> 
> *European Parliament waters down unbundling proposals*
> 26 Feb 2014
> 
> EUROPE: Debating the six legislative proposals in the Fourth Railway Package during a plenary session in Strasbourg on February 26, the European Parliament voted by a large majority to overturn some of the key proposals on vertical separation, transparency and competitive tendering presented by the European Commission in January 2013.
> 
> The MEPs endorsed the so-called 'technical pillar' of the package, which recasts the safety and interoperability directives and introduces a new regulation giving the European Railway Agency responsibility for issuing safety certificates and vehicle authorisations valid throughout the European Union.
> 
> The MEPs also endorsed the compromise proposal for revision of the Public Service Obligation Regulation 1370/2007 adopted by the European Parliament's Transport & Tourism Committee in December. This would introduce a right to operate open access domestic passenger services in all member states from 2019, but postpones compulsory competitive tendering of public service contracts until 2023.
> 
> However, when it came to the 'market pillar', covering the proposed revision of Directive 2012/34/EC on rail sector governance and market opening, Parliament adopted by a large majority amendments that scale back the proposals on the independence of infrastructure management and financial transparency within vertically-integrated holding group structures.
> 
> The Commission immediately expressed its disappointment about the votes, which it said would limit effective competition in the rail sector, and could put at risk the development of a Single European Rail Area. Vice-President for Transport Siim Kallas said 'this is not the strong signal that European rail needs to increase its attractiveness. Today's plenary vote is yet another demonstration of the tenacity of the vested national interests that proved more appealing to MEPs than the balanced and well-reasoned compromises reached by the Transport & Tourism Committee.'
> 
> The Council of Ministers has yet to adopt its own position on the package, having as yet only examined the proposals in the technical pillar. The Council is expected to finalise its position on these measures in March, and start examining the market pillar measures in the next few months.
> 
> The outcome of the vote was welcomed by the Community of European Railway & Infrastructure Companies, which said that the amendments to the market pillar would 'guarantee more flexibility for member states when it comes to choosing the model of governance for their respective infrastructure managers'. CER Chairman Christian Kern said it was 'beyond all question that we have to ensure non-discriminatory access to the network and we have to strengthen regulatory rights'.


----------



## Sunfuns

How was it dealt with 20-30 years ago when passport controls within Europe where much more common? There might have been even more long distance trains back then albeit not HS or in competition with airlines.


----------



## AlexNL

Last year, Eurostar trialed a weekly service to Aix-en-Provence in France. During this trial, passengers had to disembark at Lille Europe for the security and immigration procedures. All in all this took about 80 minutes, as Eurostar was not able to arrange this in Aix-en-Provence due to it being a trial service.

As far as I know, the security checks are demanded by Eurotunnel. I'm not sure if it's really required to check *all* passengers but Eurostar does so anyway.


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> How was it dealt with 20-30 years ago when passport controls within Europe where much more common? There might have been even more long distance trains back then albeit not HS or in competition with airlines.


There were several ways this was dealt with.

- Often trains would terminate just across the border, in a separate platform with a border post between that platform and the rest of the station. You can still see that in Basel and Geneve. I remember arriving in Bregenz one day in '88 from Germany with a small group of students, on which had forgotten her passport. She was refused entry and had to return...
- On long distance trains, eg. Amsterdam - Paris, border guards would just board the train at the last stop before the border, and check passports on board, and then get off again at the other side. Often a compartment was reserved for them. The Eurostar train sets were even originally build with this in mind, complete with a place one could lock up someone caught without the right documentation. 
- On night trains you gave your passport to the car steward, who took care of things. Nevertheless I have once been woken up in the middle of the night by border guards when crossing in to what was then still Czechoslovakia.
- At some borders trains were just stopped and held while border police did their things. This is still how it's done on the Slovenian - Croatian border. A border that didn't even exist 20 years ago...


----------



## MarcVD

K_ said:


> There were several ways this was dealt with.
> ...


And in some remote places, you had to get off the train, even in the middle of the night, to buy your visa and present your passport (in two different offices!)
at the border station... This is still happening now when entering or leaving Turkey, both at the Bulgarian and Iranian borders. I suppose that when Turkey still
had through trains to Syria and Irak (not so long ago), it happened that way as well.


----------



## Suburbanist

I thought all rail traffic to/from Iraq had ceased after the Gulf War.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> I thought all rail traffic to/from Iraq had ceased after the Gulf War.


After the war, when conditions stabilized a bit in the north of the country, a train re-appeared from Turkey to Mossul, but it did not last very long. Now of course, trains to Syria have disappeared too.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> RENFE is doing a good job when it comes to running clean, punctual trains. However you will have noticed that your luggage was not scanned in Montpellier which kind of proves my point: it's just theatre, doesn't serve anything.


It´s an effective way to dissuade people who´d otherwise run for it down the stairs to the platform without their ticket and board the train in the first place, AND in case something happened, it could really be activated like in the Eurostar.



K_ said:


> Operators running through the channel tunnel however currently don't have the option to just skip the luggage scan when it's impractical... That's why we won't see services like Frankfurt - London or Zürich - London anytime soon. Unless the rules change.


I wonder which would be the case of a London-Barcelona.
I guess the controls at Barcelona-Sants would be harsher, but the infrastructure´s already there to do it.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> It´s an effective way to dissuade people who´d otherwise run for it down the platform without their ticket and board the train in the first place, AND in case something happened, it could really be activated like in the Eurostar. I wonder which would be the case of a London-Barcelona. I guess the controls at Barcelona-Sants would be harsher, but the infrastructure´s already there to do it.


There are other solutions to the problem of people getting on a train without tickets. Most railways appear to operate just fine without ticket checks on the platform...
And anyway, it remains the case that in Montpellier luggage is not scanned. Somewhat defeats the point of the scans in the first place.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> There are other solutions to the problem of people getting on a train without tickets. Most railways appear to operate just fine without ticket checks on the platform...


Yeah, in France that´s never a problem... :smug:
No controller´s ever been harmed. Ever. Come on.

I don´t particularly like them, the scans, but in Spain no one seems to have a real problem with them existing. 
And they really are an effective way of keeping ticketless passengers from entering the train... in the stations with scans, that is.
You just pass your stuff through the scanner, show the ticket, and that´s it, usually it´s rather quick.

Just as quick as IDTGV or Ouigo, if not quicker.



K_ said:


> And anyway, it remains the case that in Montpellier luggage is not scanned. Somewhat defeats the point of the scans in the first place.


Something tells me that you´ll end up scanning too. I hope not, but time will tell...


----------



## 437.001

Oh, btw, a forumer has told us in the Spanish forum that this morning an AVE Lyon-Barcelona was done by a TGV. 
Something must have happened to the AVE... and if I remember correctly, the AVE I took on Monday (which was doing Barcelona-Toulouse) had a problem with one door. Maybe it was the same one that later went to Lyon and broke down? :hmm:

He´s made a video of it:



carlesnuc said:


>


----------



## Sunfuns

If all you care about is no ticketless passengers on train then why not just have ticket gates like for most subway systems? One could use all kinds of tickets with a barcode on them. Amount of time lost would be negligible and added cost would be compensated with less on board personnel.


----------



## 437.001

Sunfuns said:


> If all you care about is no ticketless passengers on train then why not just have ticket gates like for most subway systems? One could use all kinds of tickets with a barcode on them. Amount of time lost would be negligible and added cost would be compensated with less on board personnel.


That´s also an option, but security was no game in Spain till recent dates... and I suspect it still isn´t. 

So better leave that option open and visible, more as a reminder than anything else, just in case. At least, for now.

And like I said, it doesn´t take more time than IDTGV or Ouigo.


----------



## Sunfuns

Zurich-Munich upgrade would definitely be useful, but as far as I understand the "problem stretches" are really in Germany not Switzerland...


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> Last time in Sants I only needed 5 minutes to find out how I could have gotten whatever I wanted on an AVE to Madrid.


I don´t know, I just don´t go abroad looking for the weak security points in places.



K_ said:


> The thing is to keep important connections cross platform. For example, in Basel any Zürich - France or Zürich - Germany train will have a Brig - Bern - Basel, or Interlaken - Bern - Basel on the side of the platform when it stops in Basel.


The thing is that this isn´t feasible everywhere. For instance Barcelona Sants is an underground station, with a very limited number of tracks. It would be extremely expensive to expand the station to add more platforms, and it´s very likely that the neighbours wouldn´t tollerate that. 

But even in that case, a limited number of cross-platform connections can be done (and are done). That could be improved (flyovers), but at a high cost, not only of money, but of long cuts (although it wouldn´t be very expensive, it would be technically... not really difficult, but very very tricky to build). 



K_ said:


> How is Sagrera going to be?


Underground. Not very different to Sants, although I expect a better accessibility (hard to do worse, even a horror station like Montpellier St Roch is better than Barcelona Sants in this). Btw the minister said that something must be done about the Sants overcrowding problems.



K_ said:


> No, in Switzerland this would go completely against the whole principle of making public transit easier.
> In Switzerland it's common for train platforms to be integrated in the public space. I know of places where restaurants are directly at the platform, and even people's front doors (I want to live in such a flat .


Surprising. I guess it´s your choice. I wouldn´t have that at all. 



K_ said:


> There areas little barriers as possible between platforms and their surroundings. For example, when a platform runs parallel to a street the Swiss will not put a fence between the street an the platform. People can access the platform along it's whole length. This is Zürich. You can actually see the trains from the street, and just cross it an board one...


Didn´t see that in Basel. Oh, yeah, of course, it was the Elsässer Bahnhof, how silly of me. :|



K_ said:


> Adding gates would mean a complete redesign of most stations.


We´ve done that in many stations, to little or no real complain.



K_ said:


> Something that is also very un-swiss is making a distinction between different types of trains tariff wise. If you buy a ticket from Zürich Airport to downtown you can use it on any train, from S-Bahn to Eurocity on that route, and even on the tram or bus. When you buy a ticket from Zürich to Basel you can again take any train, even the Zürich - Paris TGV...


Do people stand on Swiss trains when it´s full?



K_ said:


> It's all about making the threshold to taking public transport as low as possible. And it's quite successful...


I prefer the Japanese way. There are likenesses with Switzerland, but also many big differences.



K_ said:


> In the Netherlands they are adding gates, and everybody is unhappy about it. It's cutting of peoples walking routes for example, and cities are contesting them, with the argument that stations are public places, just like squares and streets are.


Here the contestation is really very much smaller, since people see them as a means to stop fraud. Actually people who protest against the fare barriers are seen as potential fare drifters.

I don´t see that as better or worse, but just a different take on things.



Sunfuns said:


> There are railway systems which are faster than the Swiss one (no real HS here) and many are cheaper, but I'm not aware of any which would be more frequent, better integrated or easier to use.
> 
> This is something other countries could learn from Switzerland not the other way around.


Will I ever find a modest Swiss? :smug: Japan, hands down.



Sunfuns said:


> As for gates they are fine for long distance trains wherever those are completely segregated from the suburban traffic (like in Spain) or for subway systems where everyone has to access through 2-3 points anyway.


That´s the thing. You can´t have everything.


----------



## Sunfuns

437.001 said:


> Do people stand on Swiss trains when it´s full?


Sure, but how does that relate to this discussion? :dunno:




437.001 said:


> I prefer the Japanese way. There are likenesses with Switzerland, but also many big differences.
> 
> Will I ever find a modest Swiss? :smug: Japan, hands down.


I've never been to Japan and don't know much about their railway system beyond Shinkansen. I do have a fair bit of experience in Europe and North America, though. In that way do you think is their system better than the one in Switzerland? 

P.S. I'm not a native of Switzerland, but I do live in Basel and am impressed with a public transportation system here.


----------



## 437.001

Sunfuns said:


> Sure, but how does that relate to this discussion? :dunno:


To stand in an AVE is seen as unconceivable (excepting in case of serious disruptions in the service).
I guess it´s all a matter of size of countries and travel times: you wouldn´t want to stand on an AVE Barcelona-Malaga (more than 1000 km).

Of course the approach is different. I wouldn´t even discard that laws have made the differences.



Sunfuns said:


> I've never been to Japan and don't know much about their railway system beyond Shinkansen. I do have a fair bit of experience in Europe and North America, though. In that way do you think is their system better than the one in Switzerland?


Step free in almost its entirety (and Japan is much bigger than CH). Shinkansen.
Cleaner. Fare barriers. High speed. Bigger metro. Bigger commuter trains. Bigger everything. Platform screen doors in progress. Just as frequent if not more. 

Do follow the Japan threads of rail and public transport. You´ll just: :drool:

In SSC Spain to name these Japan things we use the term _"añoslucismo"_ (literally translates into English as _"light-yearism"_).



Sunfuns said:


> P.S. I'm not a native of Switzerland, but I do live in Basel and am impressed with a public transportation system here.


It´s good, the best in Europe for a country of its size, and in many respects (not all though), the best in Europe overall.

But there´s no need to splatter it on our faces every single time, you know. :clown:

We already knew, most of us.


----------



## Sunfuns

437.001 said:


> To stand in an AVE is seen as unconceivable (excepting in case of serious disruptions in the service).
> I guess it´s all a matter of size of countries and travel times: you wouldn´t want to stand on an AVE Barcelona-Malaga (more than 1000 km).


True, it wouldn't be appropriate for long distance travel. It's pretty rare though that one would have to stand in a long distance IR/IC train in Switzerland. Usually happens only when there are some service disruptions. 

And that goes back to what I said previously that big and sparsely populated countries like yours require different solutions than small and densely packed ones. Still that doesn't mean we can learn nothing from each other...


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> I don´t know, I just don´t go abroad looking for the weak security points in places.


Neither do I. I more or less stumbled upon it by accident. I arrived in Barcelona on the night train from A Coruña, and when I alighted I found my self looking at an Velaro going to Madrid, and decided to just have a look inside, as it wasn't going to leave for another 15 minutes. Then it hit me. I was standing in this train, with my luggage, and without it having been scanned!
O the horror. The whole Spanish Railway System just ground to a standstill!

No not really, but it did illustrate that the system is really rather pointless. 
I later that day boarded the train for Alvia for Figueres, and there the TGV to Montpelier, and again found it odd that my luggage was scanned, but the guard had no interest in what I could have hidden in my coat...





> The thing is that this isn´t feasible everywhere. For instance Barcelona Sants is an underground station, with a very limited number of tracks. It would be extremely expensive to expand the station to add more platforms, and it´s very likely that the neighbours wouldn´t tollerate that.


There's 3 platforms for high speed services, with six tracks. I think quite a few connections could already be organised. Anyway, allowing stairs to be used in both directions would already be a huge improvement...



> Do people stand on Swiss trains when it´s full?


Yes. 



> Here the contestation is really very much smaller, since people see them as a means to stop fraud. Actually people who protest against the fare barriers are seen as potential fare drifters.
> 
> I don´t see that as better or worse, but just a different take on things.


It depends on what place public transit has in your society. Many countries still see public transit as something for people who can't afford cars. The Swiss however van afford cars, and will nevertheless use public transit. Because it's mostly wealthier people taking trains there is less fraud.



> Will I ever find a modest Swiss? :smug: Japan, hands down.


The Swiss are very modest. And complain about their trains all the time. It's the foreigners that are always very enthusiastic about the Swiss trains..


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> There's 3 platforms for high speed services, with six tracks. I think quite a few connections could already be organised.


Not yet. All high speed trains except for those coming from France (and not all of them allow for good connections) are terminus Barcelona Sants or Figueres Vilafant. Only when the trains from Valencia are diverted to the HSL between Barcelona and Camp de Tarragona will that be more common.



K_ said:


> Anyway, allowing stairs to be used in both directions would already be a huge improvement...


The lot of the access to the platforms must be upgraded.



K_ said:


> It depends on what place public transit has in your society. Many countries still see public transit as something for people who can't afford cars. The Swiss however van afford cars, and will nevertheless use public transit. Because it's mostly wealthier people taking trains there is less fraud.


But it depends on the population served by the line and particular stations, doesn´t it?

I mean, here in Spain (and in France too) you just don´t find the same kind of passengers on every line.
Some have working-class passengers as the dominant segment, others are mixed, others are posher...



K_ said:


> The Swiss are very modest. And complain about their trains all the time. It's the foreigners that are always very enthusiastic about the Swiss trains..


It´s a mix of everything, of course, like everywhere else. 

Don´t mind me on that, I was pulling his leg. :crazy2:


----------



## kbbcn

K_ said:


> I arrived in Barcelona on the night train from A Coruña, and when I alighted I found my self looking at an Velaro going to Madrid, and decided to just have a look inside, as it wasn't going to leave for another 15 minutes.


And didn't you go through security in A Coruña?


----------



## 437.001

He did, for sure.

But on other smaller stations in the same route you don´t go through anything.


----------



## 437.001

*Timetables Spain <--> France from March 31 to July 5:*



jotaerre said:


>


----------



## Suburbanist

^^which will use AVE and which will use TGV?


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> ^^which will use AVE and which will use TGV?


Barcelona-Paris always TGV, the others always AVE (Barcelona-Toulouse, Barcelona-Lyon, Madrid-Marseille). Like now.
Exception made of occasional technical problems (the other day for instance, a Lyon-Barcelona was done by a TGV as the AVE went broke in the Lyon depot -a problem with a door).


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ What will happen when they introduce Madrid-Paris trains?


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ What will happen when they introduce Madrid-Paris trains?


The question right now is "will they?".

Marseille-Madrid is more than 7 hours.

Paris-Madrid would be like 10 hours. Very much too long, for a route that wouldn´t go through the straight line (that is, via Valladolid-Burgos-Hendaye-Bordeaux-Tours). 

The travel time of Alvia + TGV via Hendaye is equivalent to that of a direct Madrid-Paris.

You´ve seen the table I´ve posted, that´s what we´ll get, and it´s not bad at all (I can do a return trip Tarragona-Grenoble on the same day now! ).

The next novelties in July will probably be a fourth TGV to Paris and maybe an increase of the AVE offer to either Marseille, Lyon and/or Toulouse.

Pity that the works will keep the Geneva train from running till December (I don´t think they´d start the train from Bellegarde or Annemasse, it would be an unpractical way to restart the service Switzerland-Spain).

Pity too that they didn´t consider an extension to Bordeaux of the AVE Barcelona-Toulouse.


----------



## Suburbanist

Maybe they could extend the trains that go to Marseille to Aix-en-Provence or Nice.


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> Maybe they could extend the trains that go to Marseille to Aix-en-Provence or Nice.


They already call at Aix-en-Provence TGV. 

Nice is not an option, the way things are now. Not even Toulon. It would only be feasible when the Nimes-Montpellier HSL will open, allowing the current Corail Intercités (former Téoz) to be morphed into TGVs. 

That would allow a coupling of TGV Duplex between Nice and Narbonne, from where one branch could continue to Bordeaux and the other to Barcelona.
The French Riviera line is saturated from end to end.

Having said that, even though Nice, Antibes, Cannes and Toulon are big cities and lots of tourists, I´m not sure that the travel time would be attractive enough to fill a TGV Duplex... :sly:

=================================================

On the other hand, and being much more cheeky, I wonder if the AVE Barcelona-Toulouse could be extended to Irun instead of Bordeaux.

That would make a longer travel time Barcelona-Irun, yes (but not extremely long, 8 hours -the current travel time via Zaragoza is 6 hours in average), and you´d have stops at Saint-Jean-de-Luz, Biarritz, Bayonne (compulsory for reversal), Orthez (not sure about this one), Pau, Lourdes, Tarbes, Saint-Gaudens (very practical to reach the Spanish Val d´Aran and its ski resorts), Toulouse Matabiau, and the current stops till Barcelona.

What do you think about this? :?


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I think it might make more sense to extend the AVE Barcelona-Lyon to Torino and Milano (vis HSL).


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ I think it might make more sense to extend the AVE Barcelona-Lyon to Torino and Milano (vis HSL).


I don´t think so: the travel time would be much longer.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> He did, for sure. But on other smaller stations in the same route you don´t go through anything.


I didn't go through security in a Coruña. I arrived on a train from Vilagarcia de Arousa, and saw the Trenotel to Barcelona just standing opposite me when I got of. So I did the obvious thing. Walked across to the car I had reserved a seat in, and got on. Quite nice trains btw. Again, Spain has great trains, and the infrastructure is impressive. But having to reserve a seat on a local train is silly. Running diesels on the HSL to A Coruña as well...


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> I didn't go through security in a Coruña. I arrived on a train from Vilagarcia de Arousa, and saw the Trenotel to Barcelona just standing opposite me when I got of. So I did the obvious thing. Walked across to the car I had reserved a seat in, and got on.


I would have done that, too.



K_ said:


> Quite nice trains btw. Again, Spain has great trains, and the infrastructure is impressive.


 Not all of it...



K_ said:


> But having to reserve a seat on a local train is silly.


Indeed. T´hat´s something we´ve complained about many times, and it´s something that wouldn´t be accepted in some regions (so it hasn´t been applied in there), but in some others like Galicia this measure can be a headache.



K_ said:


> Running diesels on the HSL to A Coruña as well...


That´s provisory, when the upgrade between Santiago and Vigo is finished they will be electric, and besides, strictly speaking, the section Santiago-Corunna (and Santiago-Vigo) is not a full HSL like Ourense-Santiago.


----------



## 437.001

*Madrid-Barcelona-Figueres Vilafant HSL.*

TGV 9702 Barcelona Sants-Paris Gare de Lyon, on March/04/2014.

Image taken near Sils (between Barcelona and Girona):



voltrega62 said:


>


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> Not a worse service. I mean, having all the current international services which currently start and end in Barcelona could be enlarged to Madrid too. It would mean, supposedly, a better service. But actually, which is the sense of enlarging the Marseille service and not the Toulouse or the Lyon train. They have researched about the people who are travelling between Madrid and Avignon, Aix and Marseille and they are more than people who are traveling between Madrid and Toulouse or Lyon? I am not sure. What I say is just that the fact of includying Madrid in the offer is mostly political and not practical. Currently, whithout a high speed line in Souther France between Perpignan and Nimes, travel times from Madrid to French destinations are not that good, except maybe Perpignan, Narbonne or Montpellier at most...
> 
> Do you understand what I wanna say?


Yes, I do, but according to that, passengers from the Spanish Alvia services between Gijón and Alicante or Cadiz should also be in very small numbers.
But no one seems to discuss their existence. Why should the Madrid-France services be discussed then? After all, those are entirely new services.

==========================================================================================

Stats, according to this article from El País: 

According to the article, around 146,000 people have used the new AVE/TGV services between Spain and France since they entered service.
According to the article, more than 50% of the passengers are French.

*Most used routes, between December 2013 and March 2014*:

Barcelona-Paris------------------130,000 passengers
Barcelona-Montpellier------------15,600 passengers
Barcelona-Narbonne---------------8,000 passengers
Barcelona-Toulouse----------------8,000 passengers
Barcelona-Marseille----------------4,800 passengers
Figueres-Paris----------------------4,300 passengers
Girona-Paris------------------------2,500 passengers
Madrid-Montpellier-----------------1,400 passengers
Madrid-Perpignan------------------1,100 passengers
Girona-Perpignan--------------------820 passengers
Madrid-Marseille---------------------600 passengers
Girona-Marseille---------------------400 passengers

No stats about Lyon ?), Valence, Nimes, Avignon, Aix-en-Provence, Carcassonne.

==============================================================================



Sunfuns said:


> Of course, but isn't Marseille-Madrid train also used for domestic traffic between Barcelona and Madrid? If so then it's probably less reliable than all the others which don't use French classical lines. That's what I wanted to say with my previous post...


But the AVE Marseille-Madrid, for inner Spanish trips (Madrid-Barcelona, not sure about Girona and Figueres though), is cheaper than the non-stop Barcelona-Madrid services.

==============================================================================



Reivajar said:


> Hmmmm, do you think that Madrid-Paris would get a good performance even with the current travel times?


Not now, at least not until the Nimes-Montpellier HSL is open (and even in that case it will keep on being a very long travel time, and moreover, Lyon won´t be useful, else danger of breaking the Schedule on the Paris-Lyon HSL).

==============================================================================



Sunfuns said:


> I am a bit surprised that Barcelona-Paris services are dominating to such an extent. Looks like no one cares about going to those "2nd tier" French cities :lol:


I´m not all that surprised (but that´s mainly because of the French, who are more used to naturally travel by train -the TGV in particular). 

Two big cities, the first and fourth most touristic ones in Europe, two important business centres, two important airports, two important interchange for other lines...

And also a travel time which, while still rather long, ít isn´t much longer tan other well-established TGV routes, such as Paris-Tarbes, Paris-Toulouse or Paris-Nice, which all are much smaller cities than Barcelona.

So it´s not much of a surprise, and if we add to that the fact that there always was a direct night train, you get the answer.

As for the other destinations (I´m missing much the numbers for places like Valence, Carcassonne, Avignon and Lyon, the latter in particular), if you take out Montpellier, Narbonne and Perpignan, which are also well-established routes, the others are all entirely new routes.

I´m really looking forward for the restart of a direct Barcelona-Geneva service, since that one was also well-established, day and night, and it´s much missed by the Swiss, it seems. We´ll see what happens with that one once the reelectrification works between Bellegarde and Geneva-Cornavin are finished.


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Yes (message under construction, hang on).


:lol:


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> 437.001 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes (message under construction, hang on).
> 
> 
> 
> :lol:
Click to expand...

*Fixed!!* ^^post above the last one^^


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> ^^ That's France... Paris.... and the rest of the country...


Size matters too. :|
Besides, I´m surprised by the Toulouse route. 
With only one train per day it gets only a little more than half the passengers that Montpellier gets with five trains.
So perhaps this should be a hint to both Renfe and Sncf... _I mean, Bordeaux, of course..._



Reivajar said:


> Anyway, I would be interested in the Barcelona-Lyon travellers stats.


Me too. Strange that they left Lyon out. :hmm:
I doubt that the numbers are that bad that they preferred to leave Lyon out of the stats issue, it´s Lyon, they can´t be _that_ bad... :dunno:


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Yes, I do, but according to that, passengers from the Spanish Alvia services between Gijón and Alicante or Cadiz should also be in very small numbers.
> But no one seems to discuss their existence. Why should the Madrid-France services be discussed then? After all, those are entirely new services.


Yes, for sure, this kind of diametral or really long services are useful, but mosty for intermediate cities and travellers. It means: the Madrid-Marseille train is more useful for trips like Madrid-Barcelona, Madrid-Girona, Madrid-Figueres, Barcelona-Girona, Barcelona-Montpellier, etc. If they called at Zaragoza or Tarragona, it would be even better,.

Almost the same level of quality in the service would be possible with a train between Madrid and Girona.

Anyway, it is fair. I don't mind having international trains calling at Madrid, even if they are not too used.


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> Yes, for sure, this kind of diametral or really long services are useful, but mosty for intermediate cities and travellers. It means: the Madrid-Marseille train is more useful for trips like Madrid-Barcelona, Madrid-Girona, Madrid-Figueres, Barcelona-Girona, Barcelona-Montpellier, etc. If they called at Zaragoza or Tarragona, it would be even better,.
> 
> Almost the same level of quality in the service would be possible with a train between Madrid and Girona.


Actually, and not wanting to sound too arrogant, I think that calling at Camp de Tarragona would bring a number of new international passengers to the train, I´m thinking about the holidays, but not only (both Marseille and Tarragona are two very important chemical poles, and they are two ports of some size, too).
So there will be some business travels, too.



Reivajar said:


> Anyway, it is fair. I don't mind having international trains calling at Madrid, even if they are not too used.


I think they´re not too used _yet_. People will get used to them with time, I hope.
Let´s not forget that rail travel to/from Spain has been rather horrendous till last Christmas... :|
Easter and Summer holidays will be an important test.


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Size matters too. :|
> Besides, I´m surprised by the Toulouse route.
> With only one train per day it gets only a little more than half the passengers that Montpellier gets with five trains.
> So perhaps this should be a hint to both Renfe and Sncf... _I mean, Bordeaux, of course..._


Size matters, that's true; but business, culture, politics, etc are really focused on Paris; and apparently it affects the way travellers move on TGV, even fro Barcelona. That's true, anyway, that Barcelona-Paris train is a historic route, and not as new as the others.

And yes, increasing trains to Toulouse, and even enlarging them to Bordeaux would be really positive. At least, I think so.


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Actually, and not wanting to sound too arrogant, I think that calling at Camp de Tarragona would bring a number of new international passengers to the train, I´m thinking about the holidays, but not only (both Marseille and Tarragona are two very important chemical poles, and they are two ports of some size, too).
> So they will be some business travels.


Tarragona, and probably when the Mediterranean Corridor will be adapted to UIC gauge, more and more services will move international travellers to the Eastern Spanish coast.  :yes:


----------



## Sunfuns

Barcelona-Lyon services could be extended to Geneva. Swiss are used to train travel and Barcelona is among the more popular travel destinations. A service like this is in plans, isn't it?


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> Size matters, that's true; but business, culture, politics, etc are really focused on Paris; and apparently it affects the way travellers move on TGV, even fro Barcelona. That's true, anyway, that Barcelona-Paris train is a historic route, and not as new as the others.


That´s the point, the Marseille to Madrid route is a new route, the Paris to Barcelona isn´t.

For more than 100 years, rail travel to Spain has been long and painful, so many people have never even bothered to use the rail (a bit like Spain with Portugal, come to think of it). 

So I guess that these kind of routes will take some more time than other international routes to establish themselves.

It´s a very different case than the Eurostar, since the distances between London and Paris, and between London and Brussels, are ideal for HSR, while in the case of the France/Spain new routes, the HSL isn´t finished yet on the French side, and the cities in between, while surely they will feed a crucial number of passengers, they aren´t really that big (not even Lyon or Marseille are).



Reivajar said:


> And yes, increasing trains to Toulouse, and even enlarging them to Bordeaux would be really positive. At least, I think so.


That should have been the goal, and I suspect that the only thing that has kept it from being extended till Bordeaux has been Renfe. 

The way the line is between Narbonne and Bordeaux, with a classic line and no HSL under construction in the coming years, it could have given some trouble to Renfe, since that kind of route in Spain falls more into the Alvia category, never AVE.

Otherwise, linking Barcelona to the two most important cities in SW France all in one go would have been quite interesting.



Reivajar said:


> Tarragona, and probably when the Mediterranean Corridor will be adapted to UIC gauge, more and more services will move international travellers to the Eastern Spanish coast.  :yes:


Attention, south of Tarragona the line will be re-gauged to standard, but the tension (3 kV DC) will be kept.



Sunfuns said:


> Barcelona-Lyon services could be extended to Geneva. Swiss are used to train travel and Barcelona is among the more popular travel destinations. A service like this is in plans, isn't it?


It is indeed, and what has kept it from being created is the re-electrification of the international section between Bellegarde and Geneva-Cornavin (they´re changing it from 1,5 kV DC to 25 kV AC).

I guess it will bring a good number of passengers since day one, as now there is no direct rail link between Spain and Switzerland.
That, plus Lyon, plus Montpellier, should largely suffice for the route. 

The only question mark is that I read somewhere that the Barcelona-Geneva route would be a TGV-Lyria service, not a Renfe/Sncf one. 
Is there any Swiss forumer out there with info about the matter? If so, thanks indeed.


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Attention, south of Tarragona the line will be re-gauged to standard, but the tension (3 kV DC) will be kept.


Yes, I know. Anyway, more trains will be needed for offering more international services. I have no idea about it, but at some point, if more Renfe 100 series are modified and adapted for running on France, I don't know if installing 1,5kV, 3kV and 25kV equipments inside the same train would be possible. Probably it is, as TGV Réseau and Thalys PBA are able to run on three different tensions and I think equipments for 1,5kV and 3kV are not that different.


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> Yes, I know. Anyway, more trains will be needed for offering more international services. I have no idea about it, but at some point, if more Renfe 100 series are modified and adapted for running on France, I don't know if installing 1,5kV, 3kV and 25kV equipments inside the same train would be possible. Probably it is, as TGV Réseau and Thalys PBA are able to run on three different tensions and I think equipments for 1,5kV and 3kV are not that different.


I´m suspecting that sooner than later all of the class 100 AVEs will become bi-tension, plus some new trains. 
And these new trains could well be Alstom´s AGV (you get my point, I take it... :|:|:|:|).


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> I´m suspecting that sooner than later all of the class 100 AVEs will become bi-tension, plus some new trains.
> And these new trains could well be Alstom´s AGV (you get my point, I take it... :|:|:|:|).


:lol:

I know what you mean, no worries. And you know my opinion... :lol: 

However, you don't think it would be possible transforming Renfe 100 series into tri-tension trains?


----------



## 437.001

Reivajar said:


> However, you don't think it would be possible transforming Renfe 100 series into tri-tension trains?


It´s not impossible, but they´re getting older.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> The only question mark is that I read somewhere that the Barcelona-Geneva route would be a TGV-Lyria service, not a Renfe/Sncf one.


Most probably the current service to Montpellier will be extended to Barcelona, which means that it will be run using TGV Dasye sets, just like the other SNCF services, with Lyria brand used only in the communication with passengers from Switzerland...


----------



## K_

Reivajar said:


> Yes, I know. Anyway, more trains will be needed for offering more international services. I have no idea about it, but at some point, if more Renfe 100 series are modified and adapted for running on France, I don't know if installing 1,5kV, 3kV and 25kV equipments inside the same train would be possible. Probably it is, as TGV Réseau and Thalys PBA are able to run on three different tensions and I think equipments for 1,5kV and 3kV are not that different.


It depends. Running under different AC voltages is not that hard, as all you need is an extra tap on the transformer. However a 50Hz transformer is less efficient under 16.6 Hz, so available power is lower. Unless you install a heavier transformer, as is currently more or less standard for AC locomotives.
However, DC can't be that easily transformed. So in most cases, in order to run under both 3kV and 1,5 kV DC some more complex switching is needed. Often it's done by putting motors pairwise in series under 3kV, and all in parallel under 1,5 kV. Not really easy to retrofit...


----------



## 437.001

Oops! I made a mistake. What I posted was this:



437.001 said:


> Stats, according to this article from El País:
> 
> According to the article, around 146,000 people have used the new AVE/TGV services between Spain and France since they entered service.
> According to the article, more than 50% of the passengers are French.
> 
> *Most used routes, between December 2013 and March 2014*:
> 
> Barcelona-Paris------------------130,000 passengers
> Barcelona-Montpellier------------15,600 passengers
> Barcelona-Narbonne---------------8,000 passengers
> Barcelona-Toulouse----------------8,000 passengers
> Barcelona-Marseille----------------4,800 passengers
> Figueres-Paris----------------------4,300 passengers
> Girona-Paris------------------------2,500 passengers
> Madrid-Montpellier-----------------1,400 passengers
> Madrid-Perpignan------------------1,100 passengers
> Girona-Perpignan--------------------820 passengers
> Madrid-Marseille---------------------600 passengers
> Girona-Marseille---------------------400 passengers
> 
> No stats about Lyon ?), Valence, Nimes, Avignon, Aix-en-Provence, Carcassonne.


In the post I quote ^^, I posted this below, which was a mistake:



437.001 said:


> *Barcelona-Paris------------------130,000 passengers* :nono:


The correct numbers are thus:

*Most used routes, between December 2013 and March 2014*:

*Barcelona-Paris----------------28,000 passengers*
*Barcelona-Perpignan----------21,000 passengers*
Barcelona-Montpellier------------15,600 passengers
Barcelona-Narbonne---------------8,000 passengers
Barcelona-Toulouse----------------8,000 passengers
Barcelona-Marseille----------------4,800 passengers
Figueres-Paris----------------------4,300 passengers
Girona-Paris------------------------2,500 passengers
*Figueres-Perpignan------------2,100 passengers*
Madrid-Montpellier-----------------1,400 passengers
Madrid-Perpignan------------------1,100 passengers
Girona-Perpignan--------------------820 passengers
Madrid-Marseille---------------------600 passengers
Girona-Marseille---------------------400 passengers

Still no stats about Lyon, Valence, Aix-en-Provence, Avignon, Nimes, Beziers, and Carcassonne... :?:?


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> Most probably the current service to Montpellier will be extended to Barcelona, which means that it will be run using TGV Dasye sets, just like the other SNCF services, with Lyria brand used only in the communication with passengers from Switzerland...


Do you mean "from Switzerland", but not "to Switzerland"? :hmm:


----------



## Reivajar

437.001 said:


> Oops! I made a mistake. What I posted was this:
> 
> 
> 
> In the post I quote ^^, I posted this below, which was a mistake:
> 
> 
> 
> The correct numbers are thus:
> 
> *Most used routes, between December 2013 and March 2014*:
> 
> *Barcelona-Paris----------------28,000 passengers*
> *Barcelona-Perpignan----------21,000 passengers*
> Barcelona-Montpellier------------15,600 passengers
> Barcelona-Narbonne---------------8,000 passengers
> Barcelona-Toulouse----------------8,000 passengers
> Barcelona-Marseille----------------4,800 passengers
> Figueres-Paris----------------------4,300 passengers
> Girona-Paris------------------------2,500 passengers
> *Figueres-Perpignan------------2,100 passengers*
> Madrid-Montpellier-----------------1,400 passengers
> Madrid-Perpignan------------------1,100 passengers
> Girona-Perpignan--------------------820 passengers
> Madrid-Marseille---------------------600 passengers
> Girona-Marseille---------------------400 passengers
> 
> Still no stats about Lyon, Valence, Aix-en-Provence, Avignon, Nimes, Beziers, and Carcassonne... :?:?


OK. Thank you for the correction.

So, not such a big difference in the case of Paris.


----------



## 437.001

Klausenburg said:


> What about a Brussels-Barcelona service? In Belgium there is a large spanish comunity, and also many belgians spend their hollydays is Spain...


Yes, we know.

The main problem is the lack of rolling stock adapted to the French, Spanish and Belgian signalling, tri-tension (1,5 kV DC, 3 kV DC and 25 kV AC), having also the ETCS and the anti-fire systems required for the Perthus international tunnel, all at once.

The current TGV that does the Brussels-Perpignan route lacks the ETCS and the anti-fire system.
The Thalys PBA rolling stock lack the anti-fire, and the TGV used for the Paris-Milan services lack the ETCS.

So for now, it is phisically possible, and also desirable.
The route has potential for at least a train per day and direction, albeit the travel time will be rather long (still, inside of Spain there are routes with a lesser potential and a longer travel time).

But there are no trains adapted to the conditions required for such a route yet. hno:
The EU prefers to regulate the size of bananas, the roundness of apples, and the green-ness of peas, rather than having a really integrated European rail network. :rant:


----------



## Suburbanist

They could run more Bruxelles-Lyon trains, and also London-Lyon trains. 

The need to change stations in Paris is a significant drawback on journeys that would involve a transfer between Gare du Nord and Gare de Lyon.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> They could run more Bruxelles-Lyon trains, and also London-Lyon trains.


There are already quite a few Brussel - Lyon trains. But more would always be welcome. However, as a interchange hub for different intersector TGVs with TGVs to Spain a better choice is Valence TGV.

London - Lyon (or even London - Valence) would be nice, but is rather not really going to happen as the current security theatre is still insisted upon. Such trains would only be profitable (except on a very limited seasonal basis) if they also transport domestic passengers.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> The EU prefers to regulate the size of bananas, the roundness of apples, and the green-ness of peas, rather than having a really integrated European rail network. :rant:


Actually the EU is regulating interoperability of trains as well. But these things take time.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> Actually the EU is regulating interoperability of trains as well. But these things take time.


Come to think of it, the next Renfe order of HSR rolling stock will feature some tri-tension trains.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Come to think of it, the next Renfe order of HSR rolling stock will feature some tri-tension trains.


And with the roll-out of ETCS in Belgium they ought to be able to run there...


----------



## MarcVD

K_ said:


> And with the roll-out of ETCS in Belgium they ought to be able to run there...


Not sure... The HSL between Brussels and the french border near Lille is 
currently equipped with the french system TVM430 and I'm not aware of any 
plans to replace that with ETCS in the near future.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> Not sure... The HSL between Brussels and the french border near Lille is
> currently equipped with the french system TVM430 and I'm not aware of any
> plans to replace that with ETCS in the near future.


I asume that any trains ordered by RENFE for high speed services to France would have TVM on board. Which means that with ETCS no additional systems would be needed for running in to Belgium in the near future.


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

Hamburg ---> Copenhagen with an ICE 3 (Diesel version) 

An ICE on a ferry. You don´t see that so often. 






EDIT:Another video from the ferry.


----------



## 437.001

I assume they use the ferry Rodby-Puttgarden.

But why don´t they go to Copenhagen via Flensburg? Is it that much longer than using the ferry?


----------



## Sunfuns

437.001 said:


> But why don´t they go to Copenhagen via Flensburg? *Is it that much longer than using the ferry?*


About 140 km, not sure how much time wise. The new Fehrman link will revolutionise the traffic on this route.


----------



## Slartibartfas

2021, if everything is on time. This thing will take an eternity to finish, like any tunnel or big bridge project.


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

*The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel will be an awesome piece of infrastructure!* opcorn:


----------



## 437.001

A nice article from the British newspaper The Independent.



> *New high-speed rail link from Paris:
> Breakfast in London, dinner in Barcelona*
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...st-in-london-dinner-in-barcelona-9254210.html


I´m certain, because I´ve seen it, that some British passengers already use it to travel from London to Barcelona (it´s a really nice trip, much faster and better than it used to -albeit still a bit long, but not much longer than say, travelling from London-Euston to Mallaig in the Scottish Highlands by daytime).

But we´ll have to wait for some more time till seeing direct Brussels-Barcelona or London-Barcelona regular rail services, for now the change at Paris is compulsory.
But I suppose it´ll end up happening.


----------



## Suburbanist

437.001 said:


> A nice article from the British newspaper The Independent.
> 
> 
> 
> I´m certain, because I´ve seen it, that some British passengers already use it to travel from London to Barcelona (it´s a really nice trip, much faster and better than it used to -albeit still a bit long, but not much longer than say, travelling from London-Euston to Mallaig in the Scottish Highlands).
> 
> But we´ll have to wait for some more time till seeing direct Brussels-Barcelona or London-Barcelona regular rail services, for now the change at Paris is compulsory.
> But I suppose it´ll end up happening.


 The worst part of that trip is the change of stations in Paris. They should make a tunnel between Gare d'Est and Gare de Lyon, and the also build an underground moving walkway between Gare du Nord and Gare d'Est, making them effectively a single station, and then run trains from the South through to Gare d'Est-Noord.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> The worst part of that trip is the change of stations in Paris.


Definitely. but rather than building this expensive underground infrastructure 
under Paris, why not organise the change in Lille ? A TGV Lille-Barcelona 
avoiding Paris (well, parisians could still catch it at Roissy) would be perfectly
feasable and it would serve both London and Brussels markets.


----------



## Reivajar

Currently there are direct trains between Montpellier and Lille? They could be easily extended to Barcelona.


----------



## Suburbanist

Reivajar said:


> Currently there are direct trains between Montpellier and Lille? They could be easily extended to Barcelona.


There are 4-5 daily trains Lille-Montpellier S.R.

2 of these originate in Bruxelles-Midi.


----------



## 437.001

Does the TGV Brussels-Perpignan still exist?


----------



## MarcVD

437.001 said:


> Does the TGV Brussels-Perpignan still exist?


There are other possibilities to avoid Paris : for example, from Brussels,
you can take a TGV at 10:31 that takes you to Valence TGV at 14:40
and from there a TGV at 16:21 that arrives in Barcelona at 20:40. That's
a long journey, but it will be stressless...


----------



## pietje01

MarcVD said:


> Definitely. but rather than building this expensive underground infrastructure
> under Paris, why not organise the change in Lille ? A TGV Lille-Barcelona
> avoiding Paris (well, parisians could still catch it at Roissy) would be perfectly
> feasable and it would serve both London and Brussels markets.


Or even better: abolish the silly security theatre between UK and Schengen, allowing a direct service from London to Barcelona
:cheers:


----------



## dimlys1994

pietje01 said:


> Or even better: abolish the silly security theatre between UK and Schengen, allowing a direct service from London to Barcelona
> :cheers:


You can't change MP's mind, if they are afraid of country's personal security. As far I remember, Britain is afraid of illigeal immigrants and they didn't want any newcomers to live there. If I wrong, correct me


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...-tested-on-europes-longest-freight-train.html
> 
> *Distributed diesel traction tested on Europe’s longest freight train*
> 16 Apr 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: On April 12 Fret SNCF operated a 1 524 m long freight train between Sibelin yard near Lyon and Nîmes, hauled at up to 100 km/h by two Euro 4000 diesel locomotives built by Vossloh España. Weighing 4 020 tonnes, ‘the longest freight train ever run in Europe’ comprised 72 wagons originally formed as separate rakes of 40 and 32 vehicles, operating regular Kombiverkehr intermodal services between Germany and Spain.
> 
> The second locomotive marshalled within the consist was controlled remotely from the head of the train, following work by Vossloh to develop new radio antennae and modify the driver’s desk. The radio control system has been developed by Createch and Schweizer Electronic, while Faiveley has been responsible for braking systems.
> 
> Diesel traction has been tested during the second phase of trials under Project Marathon, a programme funded by the European Union which aims to reduce operating costs by 30% and increase capacity on key corridors by operating longer freight trains.
> 
> Noting that the record train length had been made possible by the various skills of the 16 project partners, French Transport Minister Frédéric Cuvillier said that regular operation of longer freight trains on the major European corridors was ‘clearly foreseeable’ within two years. Routes being considered within France include those from Paris to Lille and Bayonne near the Spanish border, as well as Paris – Marseille, Paris – Le Havre and Bettembourg – Perpignan which are already able to accommodate freight trains up to 850 m in length.


----------



## K_

dimlys1994 said:


> You can't change MP's mind, if they are afraid of country's personal security. As far I remember, Britain is afraid of illigeal immigrants and they didn't want any newcomers to live there. If I wrong, correct me


The security theatre has nothing to do with fear of illegal immigrants. If it's ok to have passengers from Eurostars from Brussels pass through passport control upon arrival in London this should not be a problem for trains from Barcelona either.
No the problem is the luggage check. The requirement to scan everyone's suitcases, and to completely isolate the train from the other trains in the stations it calls at. This is done because of a mind boggling detachment from reality from the part of the UK authorities.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> There are other possibilities to avoid Paris : for example, from Brussels,
> you can take a TGV at 10:31 that takes you to Valence TGV at 14:40
> and from there a TGV at 16:21 that arrives in Barcelona at 20:40. That's
> a long journey, but it will be stressless...


This involves hanging around Valence TGV for 1h41min. Hardly a good connection...
You're faster with a change in Paris.


----------



## Stainless

K_ said:


> The security theatre has nothing to do with fear of illegal immigrants. If it's ok to have passengers from Eurostars from Brussels pass through passport control upon arrival in London this should not be a problem for trains from Barcelona either.
> No the problem is the luggage check. The requirement to scan everyone's suitcases, and to completely isolate the train from the other trains in the stations it calls at. This is done because of a mind boggling detachment from reality from the part of the UK authorities.


They don't check Brussels passengers in London though, they do it in Brussels. They sometimes to additional checks on arrival, usually customs but normally you just walk out into the station.


----------



## K_

Stainless said:


> They don't check Brussels passengers in London though, they do it in Brussels. They sometimes to additional checks on arrival, usually customs but normally you just walk out into the station.


I know they don't do this for all trains. But they do this for trains that stop in Lille, and it shows that doing the immigration check on arrival is a possibility. (It's never a customs check though. It's border police.)


----------



## MarcVD

K_ said:


> This involves hanging around Valence TGV for 1h41min. Hardly a good connection...
> You're faster with a change in Paris.


Yes I know. But look at the bright side, with such a delay, this connection,
you're not going to miss it. And you avoid Paris and the metro/RER trip.
Many people are afraid of that. I'm not, but I might consider this route 
anyway, the long stopover being a good opportunity for a meal, much better
and less expensive than what you could get on board.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> Yes I know. But look at the bright side, with such a delay, this connection, you're not going to miss it. And you avoid Paris and the metro/RER trip. Many people are afraid of that. I'm not, but I might consider this route anyway, the long stopover being a good opportunity for a meal, much better and less expensive than what you could get on board.


Except that there really isn't much on offer in Valence TGV...


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> Except that there really isn't much on offer in Valence TGV...


Can you buy ravioles or pognes, or other good Drôme things at the Valence-TGV station, or only LU biscuits and so on?


----------



## Suburbanist

Building more stores or restaurants at a station is relatively cheaper, if demand is there.

Changing in Paris via RER is easy for _connoisseurs_ of the ATAP network. It is not exactly comfortable if you have luggage (not because of the train itself but because it is full at peak times), and it is not exactly that easy if you never been in Paris.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Building more stores or restaurants at a station is relatively cheaper, if demand is there.


The problem with Valence TGV is that it is outside of the city centre. A station like that will never provide enough customers to support a lively restaurant scene, like in Paris.
If I have an hour to kill in Paris Nord I just cross the street. Plenty of good French bistros and restaurants there.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Building more stores or restaurants at a station is relatively cheaper, if demand is there.
> 
> Changing in Paris via RER is easy for _connoisseurs_ of the ATAP network. It is not exactly comfortable if you have luggage (not because of the train itself but because it is full at peak times), and it is not exactly that easy if you never been in Paris.


Changing using the RER is not that hard. It is well signposted. The main draw back is that you have to buy a ticket again, and that you are not covered by the normal railway terms and conditions if there is a disruption. 
SNCF should arrange with RATP for through tickets to include metro travel, just as it is in London.

However, a better coordination of the Intersecteur TGVs would be convenient.


----------



## bagus70

Does commuter service and intercity trains share the same track in major cities in Europe? Or do they have separate railway lines?


----------



## Sunfuns

Mostly the same except for high speed lines which have no commuter traffic.


----------



## MarcVD

In stations ? You have both cases. In Paris stations for example, Intercity and
suburban trains are mostly separated. In Germany, S-bahn tracks are often
separated too. Other countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland...) usually
mix all the traffic on the same tracks.

Outside stations, if traffic levels require it, you may have two track pairs, in
which case there is (not always) a pair for fast traffic and the other one for
slower trains.

And of course, high-speed tracks are mostly always specialized - but not
always : we have some high-speed lines with freight traffic.


----------



## XAN_

bagus70 said:


> Does commuter service and intercity trains share the same track in major cities in Europe? Or do they have separate railway lines?


Both.
In big cities they tend to have separate tracks, or an extra track(s) parallel to intercity.
In smaller towns they tend to be mixed at the same tracks.
But this aren't absolute rule, and there is a fair number of exceptions.


----------



## MarcVD

K_ said:


> Changing using the RER is not that hard. It is well signposted.


Not that hard ? You have to buy a ticket, sometimes at a machine where there
is an half-an-hour queue. Then find your track, decipher the signage, which is
done for the people who alreaqdy know the system, not those who discover it,
Then get on the right train, get off at the right station, and find you way to
the departure track of your next train - all of that making sure you won't miss
it. For people used to get around public transport system, hardly a challenge.
But for people not used to that, may be not understanding french, it can turn
easily into a nightmare. Compared with how easy it is to navigate an airport...


----------



## Suburbanist

You need a bit of guesswork to realize that you are looking for "Grandes Lignes" at Gare de Lyon, for instance.

Theoretically, you could travel between both stations (Gare du Nord and Gare de Lyon) in less than 30 min, comfortably. But that would be risky if you have another train to catch, one that has a proper reservation, and that you bought tickets for well in advance. So prudent people would schedule at least a 60 min interval (90 if getting into an Eurostar to London).

RER is also quite full on peak time. Riding any full subway/commuter train with many people standing while you cling to your luggage and find space to grab a handler is stressful for most passengers.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> Riding any full subway/commuter train with many people standing while you cling to your luggage and find space to grab a handler is stressful for most passengers.


Not even counting the fact that you have long walks and stairs between the
different stations. For someone not used to that, even a dwell time of 2 hours
in a desertic station will definitely be better than that.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> Not that hard ? You have to buy a ticket, sometimes at a machine where there is an half-an-hour queue.


Actually last time I bought my metro ticket from the SBB ticket office at the same time I bought my TGV tickets. But on the occasions I had to buy one at the station I've never had to queue. And the last time I was in Paris Nord I noticed that there were actually signs saying "Paris Lyon" that you could follow to get to the right platform. I have to check whether the reverse route is signposted in the same way though.
(I only change stations in Paris on the way to the UK. Switzerland - Belgium I always travel via Germany).


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> In stations ? You have both cases. In Paris stations for example, Intercity and
> suburban trains are mostly separated. In Germany, S-bahn tracks are often
> separated too. Other countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland...) usually
> mix all the traffic on the same tracks.


In smaller countries the distinction between suburban and intercity rail doesn't even really exist. Most of the Swiss ICs would be considered suburban trains in the US for example. And in Switzerland or the Benelux countries there is no difference in tariff between IC and local trains.


----------



## trance0

In Slovenia the difference between IC and local trains actually does exist. A surcharge of 1.5 EUR must be paid for all IC trains, which is not much, but for short journeys this can effectively double the price.


----------



## bagus70

For those who mixed their commuter and intercity trains in the same lines, how do they manage the traffic to prevent conflicts?


----------



## DKF01

bagus70 said:


> For those who mixed their commuter and intercity trains in the same lines, how do they manage the traffic to prevent conflicts?


Priorities


----------



## Reivajar

In Spain for example most of the commuter networks share tracks with the rest of trains. However, generally, platforms for commuter trains are segregated and used only for those services. However, sometimes commuter services and regional services are sort of mixed at some point, so, those platforms are used too for regional services. However the segregation most of times is due to fare systems, as to get into those platforms you need to cross turnstiles -and not generally for other services- or because those platforms are shorter than the used ones by long distance trains.

Really few stretches are reserved only for commuter trains, just some particular branches and particular lines. However, along trunk lines sometimes you get reserved tracks for commuter traffic.

The point, finally, is that in Spain commuter trains and network standards are completely compatible with the rest of the network, so, ultimately it can be used by any kind of traffic (or in other way, a commuter train can be enrouted out of the usual commuter network).

For preventing conflicts, usually or night hours are reserved for the most "disturbing" trains or it is just about looking for room in between trains and having enough tracks for allowing passing and overtaking in stations while other trains are stopped. The peak times in the morning and in the evening usually commuter trains have a huge priority, while in the night a freight train can run without any kind of problem and i is not a priority to tun during the day that kind of traffic.


----------



## K_

bagus70 said:


> For those who mixed their commuter and intercity trains in the same lines, how do they manage the traffic to prevent conflicts?


The same way you manage potential conflicts between any two trains. Timetables.


----------



## AlexNL

Proper timetabling, setting of priorities and where necessary space for IC trains to overtake regional or freight trains.


----------



## bagus70

DKF01 said:


> Priorities


Can you elaborate further? Which trains are normally given bigger priorities? The commuters or the inter cities?


----------



## XAN_

bagus70 said:


> Can you elaborate further? Which trains are normally given bigger priorities? The commuters or the inter cities?


You can choose either to have more trains, but with the same average speed (that called parallel timetable - timetable were no train overtake any other train), or chose to have faster intercity trains, but at cost of lower line capacity.


----------



## AlexNL

bagus70 said:


> Can you elaborate further? Which trains are normally given bigger priorities? The commuters or the inter cities?


Long distance overtakes short distance, international trains go before others. Freight is assigned a high priority as well as these trains need a long time to accelerate and to come to a stop, which is capacity intensive.


----------



## Road_UK

AlexNL said:


> Long distance overtakes short distance, international trains go before others. Freight is assigned a high priority as well as these trains need a long time to accelerate and to come to a stop, which is capacity intensive.


You'd think that in a small overpopulated country like Holland, you want to keep the masses moving. The hell with the international lines, people need to get to work. Imagine the London Underground coming to a standstill for a few minutes because the train to Paris needs to pass through...


----------



## DKF01

bagus70 said:


> Can you elaborate further? Which trains are normally given bigger priorities? The commuters or the inter cities?


It depends of what time is its.
If is rush-hour commuters trains are given a higher priority that inter cities trains and in some of the cases the Innercity train departs first since it does few stops along the way before the line is cramped with commuter trains.
When is not rush-hour ussualy the priority goes to Innercity and freight train since there isnt much traffic.


----------



## K_

DKF01 said:


> It depends of what time is its. If is rush-hour commuters trains are given a higher priority that inter cities trains and in some of the cases the Innercity train departs first since it does few stops along the way before the line is cramped with commuter trains. When is not rush-hour ussualy the priority goes to Innercity and freight train since there isnt much traffic.


The time of day shouldn't really matter. Railway like the NS or the SBB run the same timetable throughout the whole day. And basically you just time your trains such that fast trains overtake slower trains where overtake possibilities exists. The way an efficient railway does this is to first design the timetable, and then plan the infrastructure based on that timetable.


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> The time of day shouldn't really matter. Railway like the NS or the SBB run the same timetable throughout the whole day. And basically you just time your trains such that fast trains overtake slower trains where overtake possibilities exists. The way an efficient railway does this is to first design the timetable, and then plan the infrastructure based on that timetable.


The downside of that approach is that when some disruption happens, chaos ensue.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> The downside of that approach is that when some disruption happens, chaos ensue.


So you make sure disruption doesn't happen. My experience is that SBB is quite good at dealing with disruption anyway. My train back home today way actually an ICE, pressed in to service to replace an IC, and even rerouted part way. Yet most passengers on board could expect to reach their final destination on time anyway.


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> You'd think that in a small overpopulated country like Holland, you want to keep the masses moving. The hell with the international lines, people need to get to work. Imagine the London Underground coming to a standstill for a few minutes because the train to Paris needs to pass through...


Which is why some railways integrate international trains in the domestic network. The TGV from Zürich to Paris runs in an IC slot between Zürich and Basel, and is accessible for people with domestic tickets as well. 
The advantage is that it this way gets a very convenient schedule, with good connections with trains to other places in Switzerland. The disadvantage is that two train sets are needed on the morning TGV to Paris just to fit all the commuters. The second set actually gets uncoupled in Basel, and only one set continues to Paris...


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...-strong-first-quarter-growth.html?channel=542
> 
> *Eurostar reports strong first quarter growth*
> Wednesday, April 23, 2014
> 
> _THE number of passengers travelling by Eurostar high-speed services between London, Paris and Brussels increased by 3% to 2.3 million, while revenue grew by 7% to £227m during the first quarter of 2014_
> 
> Eurostar says growing economic confidence has translated in greater demand for business travel, with the number of Business Premier travellers increasing by 6%. It also says revenue would have grown by 8% had income not been affected by currency fluctuations.
> 
> "The improvement we have seen in the corporate travel market in recent months underpins the strong performance reported today," says Eurostar's CEO Mr Nicolas Petrovic. "Coupled with the benign winter weather which saw far lower levels of weather-related disruption than in previous years, the first quarter has set us on course for continued growth throughout the year."


----------



## AlexNL

Road_UK said:


> You'd think that in a small overpopulated country like Holland, you want to keep the masses moving. The hell with the international lines, people need to get to work. Imagine the London Underground coming to a standstill for a few minutes because the train to Paris needs to pass through...


Most of the international trains can also be used for domestic travel, including ICE (altho a small surcharge is required if you're not a pass holder). Exceptions are all Thalys trains and CityNightLine or EuroNight trains.


----------



## Road_UK

And yet - haven taken the CNL from Amsterdam to Munich a few times, I have always seen commuters getting on at Augsburg...


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> And yet - haven taken the CNL from Amsterdam to Munich a few times, I have always seen commuters getting on at Augsburg...


If you look at the arrivals for München you'll notice that there are two trains that both arrive at the same time at platform 13... CNL 419, and IC 60419... DB is just pulling two trains with the same locomotive.


----------



## Road_UK

K_ said:


> If you look at the arrivals for München you'll notice that there are two trains that both arrive at the same time at platform 13... CNL 419, and IC 60419... DB is just pulling two trains with the same locomotive.


The few times I traveled on it I I slept in a bed in the sleeping car. Last hour of the journey I just stand in the corridor to move my legs a bit - among commuters who got on at Augsburg.


----------



## K_

Road_UK said:


> The few times I traveled on it I I slept in a bed in the sleeping car. Last hour of the journey I just stand in the corridor to move my legs a bit - among commuters who got on at Augsburg.


I believe you. What DB does is add a whole rake of seating coaches in Stuttgart. That part is officially train 60419. The commuters are supposed to only get on board in that part, but apparently this is not strictly enforced. It is a way is sharing a slot between two trains though.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/freight/single-view/view/eurotunnel-cuts-freight-charges.html
> 
> *Eurotunnel cuts freight charges*
> 28 Apr 2014
> 
> EUROPE: Channel Tunnel concessionaire Eurotunnel announced a reduction in track access charges of up to 50% on April 28, saying it hopes this will lead to a doubling of the number of freight trains through the tunnel to 5 000 per year in 2018.
> 
> The announcement follows the European Commission opening an infringement procedure in June 2013 looking into whether France and the UK had failed to implement EU rules on access to the Channel Tunnel.
> 
> The revised access charges will apply from June 2014 until 2023. The Eurotunnel Incentive for Capacity Additions scheme which offers rebates to new entrants will also be extended to 2018 and expanded from intermodal trains to include the transport of new cars, food and drink in conventional full train loads, consumer goods, logistics flows, manufactured goods and permanent distribution and service flows ‘suffering from obstacles outside of the Fixed Link’.
> 
> Eurotunnel’s own Shuttle services are excluded from most EU rail rules, including those on track access charges, and were not covered by the EC infringement proceedings.
> 
> *Access charge reductions from 2013 levels:*
> 
> Peak times - 30% to 45%
> Off-peak (weekdays 23.00 - 07.00) - 25%
> Weekend maintenance periods - 33·3%
> _The most expensive maintenance period will be reduced from three to two nights per week, and access charges will not be linked to inflation until 2018_
> 
> In addition, the Intergovernmental Commission which regulates the tunnel has issued a decision obliging Eurotunnel to make its costs more transparent, and a €600 security fee imposed by French infrastructure manager RFF on UK-bound trains is to be eliminated.
> 
> The European Commission welcomed the changes, and has dropped the infringement procedure against the two countries. It said the average one-way access charge of approximately €4 500 per freight train was ‘a major reason’ why there is 43% unused capacity in the tunnel, with seven freight trains/day rather ’30 to 40 a day as originally envisaged when the tunnel was opened’. The Commission believes freight is being carried on lorries rather than by rail as a result.
> 
> ‘I welcome Eurotunnel's announcement because it should pave the way for more freight to use the Channel Tunnel and at lower prices’, said EU Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas. ‘It stands to unblock a major bottleneck in Europe's transport network. This is good news for Europe's businesses that rely on effective and competitively priced transport services and good news for consumers they serve. It is also good news for the environment, as rail is the most energy efficient way of transporting goods.’
> 
> *Channel Tunnel usage in 2011/12:*
> 
> _Passengers (million)_ - 9.7/9.9
> _Freight trains_ - 2 388/2 325


----------



## Coccodrillo

Suburbanist said:


> The downside of that approach is that when some disruption happens, chaos ensue.


That's absolutely false! Having a timetable rather than a bunch of trains running randomly actually eases handling traffic during disruptions. For example, SBB has a sort of backup timetables/procedures quickly applied when a disruption occurs. When landslides blocked the Gotthard railway three times in 2012, trains restarted running on time quickly. Obviously, if the railway is interrupted or with reduced capacity, disruptions are inevitables, but without chaos.


----------



## JumpUp

Hey!

any news about more France/Spain TGV and AVE trains?

There needs to be an early connection in the morning from Barcelona direction France! The first train leaving at 9.20!! is much too late to attract any business passengers for a train Barcelona - south of France!


----------



## 437.001

JumpUp said:


> Hey!
> 
> any news about more France/Spain TGV and AVE trains?
> 
> There needs to be an early connection in the morning from Barcelona direction France! The first train leaving at 9.20!! is much too late to attract any business passengers for a train Barcelona - south of France!


I´m afraid you´ll have to wait until July.
There will be some more changes then.
What we have for now, likely as they might seem, are just rumours...

But I think we can confirm that no TGV Barcelona-Geneva will be created yet.


----------



## Suburbanist

I have a question: do they have plans to improve the lackluster München-Praha connection?


----------



## Road_UK

Munich-Prague in English.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Oh come on, Roadster, don't be such a pig. Everybody understands what he means and in railway standards, it is common to indicate stations in their respective national languages no matter where you are.
To my knowledge, there is no plan for services from M. to the Czech lands, but upgrading between Prague and Pilzn (would you prefer Pilsen, Roadster?) will eventually lead to better services between Praha and Nürnberg. But correct me if I am wrong southerners. Problem is DB has such a backlog of improving to do it does not know where to start and on many important border-crossing projects, they usually only commit themselves to a minor upgrade sometime before 2030.


----------



## MarcVD

Between Prague and Nurenberg, for the time being, if you ask the bahn.de
website, it pushes you onto a bus instead of a train. So when I went there
(last month), I went via Dresden instead...


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> Between Prague and Nurenberg, for the time being, if you ask the bahn.de
> website, it pushes you onto a bus instead of a train. So when I went there
> (last month), I went via Dresden instead...


There is a train, but not from Nürnberg. The Vogtlandbahn still runs trains from München to Praha via Schwandorf. You can take a local between Nürnberg and Schwandorf. You ought to be able to force DB to sell you a ticket for that if you play around with the right via/mode of transportation combination.


----------



## 437.001

This is good news.



> *Euskotren and SNCF plan the improvement of the connection TER-Euskotren (popularly nicknamed "El Topo" -"the mole"-) at Hendaye station
> 
> Under the Basque Country-Aquitaine Euroregion and the programme Transfermuga-2, they will analize the improvement of the transfrontier route between Donostia/San Sebastian and Bayonne*
> 
> Source (in Spanish): Vía Libre


----------



## Coccodrillo

Road_UK said:


> Munich-Prague in English.


Suburbanist always uses place names in the original language, except for those in Südtirol-Alto Adige, where he uses only the Italian ones - even when those are a recent invention and not used by 99% of the locals.

(IMHO, when writing in a given language one should use its version if it exists -Munich and Prague in this case- and when it does not exist, the local version should be preferred, non the one of the main language of the state! so Neuchâtel not Neuenburg, Bellinzona not Bellenz, Innichen not San Candido)


----------



## 437.001

error post


----------



## Road_UK

Coccodrillo said:


> Suburbanist always uses place names in the original language, except for those in Südtirol-Alto Adige, where he uses only the Italian ones - even when those are a recent invention and not used by 99% of the locals.
> 
> (IMHO, when writing in a given language one should use its version if it exists -Munich and Prague in this case- and when it does not exist, the local version should be preferred, non the one of the main language of the state! so Neuchâtel not Neuenburg, Bellinzona not Bellenz, Innichen not San Candido)


He once lectured native English speakers how to speak English...


----------



## Deadeye Reloaded

Road_UK said:


> Munich-Prague in English.


München-Prag auf deutsch.


----------



## 3locations

Deadeye Reloaded said:


> München-Prag auf deutsch.


Munich-Prague en français (in french)


----------



## :jax:

München-Praha in Norwegian. According to the EU TEN-T schemes, Berlin-Nürnberg-München-Roma-Palermo will be a trunk line, while Nürnberg-Plzeň-Praha-Brno-Wien (and Dresden-Praha-Linz-Wien) will just be secondary lines in the future.


----------



## Reivajar

Special train between Madrid and Lisbon for the Champions League Final between Atlético de Madrid and Real Madrid. Extremely low fares for the regular price of tickets between Madrid and Lisbon. However, obviously this train is full. It was created when only Real Madrid was qualified, so we'll see if Renfe and CP create new additional special trains, which would be probably filled too, after the Atlético qualification.



jotaerre said:


>


----------



## Baron Hirsch

:jax: said:


> München-Praha in Norwegian. According to the EU TEN-T schemes, Berlin-Nürnberg-München-Roma-Palermo will be a trunk line, while Nürnberg-Plzeň-Praha-Brno-Wien (and Dresden-Praha-Linz-Wien) will just be secondary lines in the future.


I guess that is a reason all international lines via Praha have been rather neglected. By 2017, the northern half of the Berlin-Palermo corridor will be so developed that even when going from Berlin to Vienna or Budapest, it will be faster to go along the corridor via Nürnberg, although the map shows how big a detour that is. The direct route via Praha will however remain much cheaper. Some work is planned on developing Berlin-Dresden to the speed it had reached in 1938, but the more fanciful projects such as an HSR Dresden-Prague will probably remain a fantasy.


----------



## LtBk

That's just stupid.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

*New international Trains commence in Southeast Europe*

After years of canceling services, 4 new international trains were introduced in Southeast Europe last weekend. As of May 10, there are finally again international trains from Greece:
1. Thessaloniki-Beograd. The night train will use couchette cars from the Macedonian Railways. 
2. Thessaloniki-Sofia. There is one daily train that has onward connection to Athens in Thessaloniki.
3. Vidin-Craiova. Twice daily there is a local train using the new Danube Bridge in the West of the two countries. The train takes 3 hours and in Vidin there is always a connection with Sofia within 45-60 minutes. Connections are not so good on the Romanian side. See http://bdz.bg/p.php?id=ext_razp (the last two links in the list) and http://w3.srbrail.rs/zsredvoznje/?lang=sr for the schedules.


----------



## KingNick

Baron Hirsch said:


> I guess that is a reason all international lines via Praha have been rather neglected. By 2017, the northern half of the Berlin-Palermo corridor will be so developed that even when going from Berlin to Vienna or Budapest, it will be faster to go along the corridor via Nürnberg, although the map shows how big a detour that is. The direct route via Praha will however remain much cheaper. Some work is planned on developing Berlin-Dresden to the speed it had reached in 1938, but the more fanciful projects such as an HSR Dresden-Prague will probably remain a fantasy.


Additionally there won't be any direct EC service between Vienna and Berlin via Prague no more. Vindobona is going to be canceled with the next timetable change in December. hno:


----------



## Suburbanist

KingNick said:


> Additionally there won't be any direct EC service between Vienna and Berlin via Prague no more. Vindobona is going to be canceled with the next timetable change in December. hno:


Isn't it faster a route via Salzburg and München?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

No. Try Hafas and enter berlin-vienna. You get pretty much the same times (about 9 hrs) for either B-Dresden-Praha-Brno-Vienna or Berlin-Leipzig/Halle-Jena-Nürnberg-Passau-Wels-Linz-Vienna. But considering the Praha route is conventional and not very fast at that and very scenic whereas the second route in some parts counts as HSR with speeds at 200 or 250, it is a bit mad to follow the second route. To go via München and Salzburg instead of Passau though would definitively take longer.


----------



## LtBk

Why the EU ignoring the rail corridors out of Prague?


----------



## KingNick

The EU isn't ignoring anything, but it's up to the member states to come up with projects in order to get funding. It cannot be the other way round.

To my knowledge the south corridor from Prague towards Brno and Breclav is constantly being upgraded, but this brainchild of a HS-link between Prague and Dresden is not going to happen any day soon.

Current TEN-T projects in CZ: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/theme.../doc/ten-t-country-fiches/merged-files/cz.pdf


----------



## LtBk

Thanks for the link.


----------



## :jax:

These are missed, or hopefully merely severely delayed opportunities. The only corridor shorter than *Berlin-Dresden-Prague-Brno-Vienna* would be *Berlin-Dresden-Prague-Jihlava-Vienna*. 

Likewise a line *Munich-Nuremberg-Plzen-Vaclav Havel airport-Prague-Wroclaw-Lodz-Warsaw* would make a lot of sense, but I don't think either the Germans, Czechs, or the Poles think that way. Nuremberg-Prague sure (but not by the airport, which would have made it a regional airport for most of Bohemia), but not further on. The Czechs don't see the benefit of linking up with the Poles and the Poles don't see the benefit of linking up with the Czechs. 

In particular the Poles don't see that they could link up the old/new industry powerhouses of Lodz and Wroclaw (and the capital, though there air may be competitive) with Bavaria. The distance Wroclaw-Munich is 513 km, 811 km Warsaw-Munich, these are good distances. Assuming fairly straight tracks (these cities are almost on a line, though Nuremberg is a detour) and 200 km/h average speed, that would be less than 3 hours, and 4 hours respectively.

Today the train connection Prague-Wroclaw is ridiculous. The fastest route twice a day is 6 hours 19 minutes and takes two train changes, others take 7-9 hours. The distance is 214 km, it should be done in little more than an hour, a day commute between the cities would be feasible.


----------



## :jax:

I made a map to illustrate these points. The orange is the Polish Y backbone under discussion, the green line is the Berlin-Dresden-Prague-Jihlava-Vienna, and the blue line is Munich-Nuremberg-Plzen-Vaclav Havel airport-Prague-Wroclaw.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Thanx, jax. Yes, this is definitely a region of lost opportunities. In December, DB/PKP will withdraw the direct Hamburg-Berlin-Cottbus-Wroclaw EC train. Instead DB now operates a bus on that route. 
About the Jihlava-Retz variety for getting from Prague to Vienna, I had never thought about that. At present there are RegionalExpress double-deckers between Znojmo and Vienna and as far as I know only small classic DMUs between Znojmo and Jihlava. The countryside at least on the Austrian side is rolling hills, not the easiest but not the most difficult terrain for an upgrade or new route. 
But what I had always assumed would eventually replace the Brno detour for Prague-Vienna was the Franz-Josefs-Bahn heading straight south from Prague and then slightly turning Southeast. That would be Praha-Tabor-Veseli-Gmünd, or in a slightly bigger detour, Veseli-C. Budjovice-Linz to then join the Westbahn. Does anyone know the state of redevelopment on this line or lines and whether one day they could be a good alternative to the Brno corridor?


----------



## :jax:

The Jihlava alternative was mostly to show that it is pretty much a straight line. When everything is considered, the line would probably go through Brno even though it is a small detour for anyone not going to Brno. *Prague - Brno - Bratislava* would still be the trunk line for Czechs and Slovaks. I added your routes to the map as well (they are all conceptual, not "real").


----------



## 437.001

*News!!*

*New AVE/TGV services Spain/France*.

I´m not entirely sure wether the new Barcelona-Toulouse service is a replacement of the current one or a second train. 
If someone knows about it or learns about it, please do tell us about it.



jotaerre said:


>


----------



## AlexNL

The 4th Paris - Barcelona TGV is now appearing on the Renfe website, but not yet on Voyages-SNCF. Prices start at € 59 one way.









Here are the time tables for Paris - Barcelona as per July 6th:


Code:


+-----------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|                             | Train no and departure time       |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Station                     |  9711  |  9713  |  9715  |  9717  |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Paris Gare de Lyon          |   7:15 |  10:07 |  14:07 |  16:07 |
| Valence TGV Rhone-Alpes Sud |    |   |  12:21 |  16:21 |  18:21 |
| Nimes                       |  10:09 |  13:09 |  17:09 |  19:09 |
| Montpellier Saint-Roch      |  10:37 |  13:37 |  17:37 |  19:41 |
| Sete                        |    |   |    |   |    |   |  20:01 |
| Agde                        |    |   |    |   |    |   |  20:17 |
| Beziers                     |    |   |  14:18 |    |   |  20:31 |
| Narbonne                    |  11:35 |  14:35 |  18:35 |  20:47 |
| Perpignan                   |  12:13 |  15:13 |  19:13 |  21:25 |
| Figueres Vilafant           |  12:45 |  15:43 |  19:45 |  21:53 |
| Girona                      |  13:01 |  15:59 |  20:01 |  22:09 |
| Barcelona-Sants             | A13:40 | A16:38 | A20:40 | A22:48 |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+




Code:


+-----------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|                             | Train no and departure time       |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Station                     |  9700  |  9702  |  9704  |  9706  |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Barcelona-Sants             |   6:05 |   9:20 |  13:20 |  16:20 |
| Girona                      |   6:46 |  10:01 |  14:01 |  17:01 |
| Figueres Vilafant           |   7:03 |  10:18 |  14:18 |  17:18 |
| Perpignan                   |   7:37 |  10:51 |  14:50 |  17:51 |
| Narbonne                    |   8:14 |  11:28 |  15:27 |  18:27 |
| Beziers                     |   8:31 |    |   |    |   |  18:44 |
| Agde                        |   8:46 |    |   |    |   |    |   |
| Sete                        |   9:02 |    |   |    |   |    |   |
| Montpellier Saint-Roch      |   9:24 |  12:25 |  16:24 |  19:24 |
| Nimes                       |   9:52 |  12:52 |  16:52 |  19:52 |
| Valence TGV Rhone-Alpes Sud |    |   |  13:41 |  17:41 |    |   |
| Paris Gare de Lyon          | A12:45 | A15:53 | A19:53 | A22:45 |
+-----------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+


----------



## KingNick

€ 150 for one way is outrageous.


----------



## desi1

150 euros for the 2:00pm train but only 59 for the 10:00am train. :nuts:
Yield management is incomprehensible sometimes.


----------



## 437.001

KingNick said:


> € 150 for one way is outrageous.





desi1 said:


> 150 euros for the 2:00pm train but only 59 for the 10:00am train. :nuts:
> Yield management is incomprehensible sometimes.


Could it be that for the train with €159 seats, those are the last ones, and that the rest of trains have more seats left to offer, and that makes them cheaper?
Remember that these timetables start on July 6, so that will be the beginning of the summer peak, which on this route will be particularly strong, maybe even more than on the Nice route.


----------



## 437.001

An ad in the Barcelona metro:



Adpg said:


>


_"Aix-en-Provenance"_!! :crazy: :wtf: :lol:


----------



## Road_UK

Shame that they can't build a link through the Massif Central and Clermont-Ferrand. Barcelona-Paris would be even faster.


----------



## XAN_

Suburbanist said:


> A train with 24 cars? That look way too much, maybe? Isn't that longer than security specs for signaling blocks in certain sectors?


What's wrong with train occupying several signal blocks? It surely reduces track capacity, but it doesn't threaten security, as long as braking distance are within acceptable boundaries.


----------



## Suburbanist

XAN_ said:


> What's wrong with train occupying several signal blocks?* It surely reduces track capacity*, but it doesn't threaten security, as long as braking distance are within acceptable boundaries.


Aren't tracks between Coimbra and Lisboa quite busy?


----------



## DKF01

Suburbanist said:


> Aren't tracks between *Porto* and Lisboa quite busy?


Yep but there are gaps between the Intercitties trains and the regionals trains however looking at the timetable most of the trains will be running when the traffic is low.


----------



## Reivajar

Suburbanist said:


> Aren't tracks between Coimbra and Lisboa quite busy?


For sure. The Portuguese Northern Line (_Linha do Norte_, Lisbon-Porto) is the busiest of the Portuguese network. There are more than 100 trains in every direction every day. Probably the busiest section is the closest to Lisbon with four tracks.

Anyway, I assume the total length of the scheduled Talgo trainsets are absolutely within authorised circulation standards in Spain and Portugal. Maybe they are on the limit of the length for passengers trains, but not any extraordinary circulation either.

The longest scheduled trainset will have 24 cars. It would mean around 350 m long.


----------



## Suburbanist

Reivajar said:


> The longest scheduled trainset will have 24 cars. It would mean around 350 m long.


11.8m per car :dunno: ?


----------



## Reivajar

Every Talgo car is 13,14 m long (however, first and last cars are slightly longer) + 20 m for a locomotive... so, yes, more or less 350 m.


----------



## cle

How much time will the HSL Montpellier - Nimes avoiding route save on a Paris to Barcelona train? 

And will trains still stop at the traditional stations using the lines in and out to the classic lines, or will some skip them for faster end to end journeys?

Great to see expansion of the route, and to Toulouse also! I hope one day to be able to travel directly from London, but our security nonsense means this is a long way off. The current EU/UKIP climate makes Schengen even more of a hot potato!

Until then, perhaps more connections could be done at Lille or Disney! A segregated facility/route at Lyon should be next, if incrementally done. I'm not sure what Eurostar's full plans are, now that DB is backing off. I don't see much value in London to CDG though.


----------



## 437.001

cle said:


> How much time will the HSL Montpellier - Nimes avoiding route save on a Paris to Barcelona train?


Not a lot, 30 min at most.
The big save in travel time would be to have the whole Nimes-Montpellier-Perpignan route on HSL, that would mean saving more than one hour.

The main purpose of the Nimes-Montpellier section of the HSL is to desaturate the classic line between those two cities, the line´s very charged. 



cle said:


> And will trains still stop at the traditional stations using the lines in and out to the classic lines, or will some skip them for faster end to end journeys?


I think we´ll see a mix of both.
Nimes-TGV station will be at Manduel, near Manduel-Redessan station of the classic line (which will probably be relocated to the new Nimes-TGV).
But the current central Nimes station will be maintained for some services.

As for Montpellier, some trains will keep on using Montpellier-St Roch station (which is having an upgrade), while some others will use the future Montpellier-Odysseum station.



cle said:


> Great to see expansion of the route, and to Toulouse also!


Finally, there is no second AVE Barcelona-Toulouse, it´s just the timetables that will be modified.

There will be no other new service tan the fourth TGV Barcelona-Paris.

I can confirm another novelty though.
The AVE Madrid-Marseille will add two new stops: Zaragoza-Delicias, and Camp de Tarragona. Both cities (Tarragona and Zaragoza) have large urban areas, as large as Montpellier, so calling there makes sense, as right now people already use them to travel to France, but they have to change at Barcelona-Sants.



cle said:


> I hope one day to be able to travel directly from London, but our security nonsense means this is a long way off. The current EU/UKIP climate makes Schengen even more of a hot potato!


This is off-topic, but I'm frankly much more worried about France and the National Front (Le Pen) than about the UK. Not to talk about Spain, of course.

But yeah, a direct service Barcelona-Brussels and a Barcelona-London would make sense (at least one per day and direction).
There are people who travel by train from the UK and Belgium to Spain now, but they have to change at Paris, or at Montpellier and then Lille. 

The problem is the saturation of the Paris-Lyon HSL, where hardly any more trains could be stuffed, there´s a lack of capacity.



cle said:


> Until then, perhaps more connections could be done at Lille or Disney! A segregated facility/route at Lyon should be next, if incrementally done. I'm not sure what Eurostar's full plans are, now that DB is backing off. I don't see much value in London to CDG though.


We´ll see.


----------



## cle

Thanks for your replies. Shame about Toulouse but hopefully it will continue to prove itself - Bordeaux seems such an obvious extension.

One day, perhaps a Barcelona train could run to Lille and split - with one portion to Brussels and one to London. London people could get off for security and reboard, if that was necessary at the time (as with the Aix trial). Unit-wise, to split and join, this would need to be a TGV, correct?

Lille needs an iconic resto or attraction right near to the station to help placate people making changes; no-one complains about Le Train Bleu!


----------



## K_

cle said:


> How much time will the HSL Montpellier - Nimes avoiding route save on a Paris to Barcelona train? And will trains still stop at the traditional stations using the lines in and out to the classic lines, or will some skip them for faster end to end journeys? Great to see expansion of the route, and to Toulouse also! I hope one day to be able to travel directly from London, but our security nonsense means this is a long way off. The current EU/UKIP climate makes Schengen even more of a hot potato! Until then, perhaps more connections could be done at Lille or Disney! A segregated facility/route at Lyon should be next, if incrementally done. I'm not sure what Eurostar's full plans are, now that DB is backing off. I don't see much value in London to CDG though.


Security and migration are two different things. If the requirements of passenger screening are abolished and passport control is done upon arrival in London trains from other European destinations will become feasible.


----------



## cle

It's a shame they can't start doing it on the train after leaving Brussels/Paris/Disney/wherever - with slack in the timetable to stop if required at Lille or Calais to remove anyone.

I understand that was on the table, but rejected. Hopefully it can come back again. Don't Eurostar trains have a small detention facility? Do e320s?


----------



## doc7austin

The last months of the famous EuroNight Jan Kiepura (Amsterdam - Warsaw) have arrived.
There are strong rumours that Amsterdam as final destination will be cut in August. It will terminate already in Germany. From December the through cars Amsterdam - Copenhagen will be history, as well.

Some old videos for the memory:

In Through Sleeper Car Prague - Amsterdam:








In Sleeper Car Warsaw - Amsterdam:








In Sleeper Car Amsterdam - Prague:








In Sleeper Car Amsterdam - Moscow:








In Sleeper Car Basel - Minsk:








In Sleeper Car Basel - Moscow:


----------



## AlexNL

It's not certain yet that the EN Jan Kiepura will stop serving Amsterdam altogether, all we know right now is that it's scheduled to run until august.

At the end of August, ProRail and DB Netze will start infrastructure maintenance on the Zevenaar - Emmerich border crossing. The current ATB train protection system, which is used by the NS Class 1700 locomotive that haul the train between Amsterdam and Emmerich, will be dismantled. Instead, the ETCS system which is present on the Betuweroute freight corridor will be extended to Emmerich.

As the Class 1700 is not equipped with the ETCS system, it will no longer be allowed to cross the border into Emmerich after the transition is made. NS (the operator responsible for the operation on Dutch soil) is probably busy working out alternatives. Stay tuned...


----------



## :jax:

That is too bad. Amsterdam-Prague was one of the few distances where I found night trains to be competitive with air, where I actually would prefer a night on the train to a morning on a plane.


----------



## M-NL

Swapping the class 1700 for a class 186 would solve it, but knowing NS they have zero reserve capacity.


----------



## Surel

:jax: said:


> That is too bad. Amsterdam-Prague was one of the few distances where I found night trains to be competitive with air, where I actually would prefer a night on the train to a morning on a plane.


What a pity indeed. Actually, I took the train several times. The sleeping carriages were really comfortable and convenient. Breakfast and shower included.


----------



## KingNick

Del.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...ches-koeln-istanbul-semi-trailer-service.html
> 
> *DB Schenker Rail launches Köln - Istanbul semi-trailer service*
> 26 Jun 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _DB Schenker Rail has launched a freight service carrying road semi-trailers between Köln and the Çerkezköy freight terminal near Istanbul, photo by DB Schenker_
> 
> EUROPE: DB Schenker Rail has launched a freight service carrying road semi-trailers between Köln and the Çerkezköy freight terminal near Istanbul. The journey time is five to six days.
> 
> The semi-trailer service follows the launch of DB Schenker Rail’s Germany – Turkey Bosporus Shuttle container and wagonload service in September 2013. ‘Our new rail product is the first rail connection that is able to transport semi-trailers directly to their destination in Turkey, 40 km outside of Istanbul. Up to now, this procedure was only possible with containers’, said Andreas Schulz, Head of the Intermodal Industry Sector at DB Schenker Rail.
> 
> The service is operated for Turkish freight forwarder Ulusoy Logistics, which has transferred its existing traffic from road and ferry to rail. Subject to demand, DB hopes to increase the initial weekly semi-trailer service to three per week by the end of the year.
> 
> The trains are operated by DB Schenker Rail's national companies in Germany, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, while DB Schenker Rail has a partnership with Lokomotion in Austria and works with national railway TCDD in Turkey. DB Schenker offers terminal and agency services in Germany and Turkey, and a simplified customs procedure to reduce delays at the Turkish border.
> 
> ‘With our national companies, we already have a strong DB Schenker Rail presence in southeast Europe today. Looking at Turkey's position as a growth market, this is a clear advantage that we want to continue to develop in the future’, said Hans-Georg Werner, Head of Region East


----------



## IanCleverly

Brighton Argus said:


> An intrepid traveller from East Sussex has set a new world record after visiting seven European capital cities in 24 hours with six train journeys and one flight. Barnaby Davies has added his name to the Guinness World Record books.
> 
> Mr Davies, an experienced roadie who has worked for Madonna, Metallica and Beyonce, said his mum came up with the idea after being challenged by EasyJet to visit six capitals in one day.
> 
> Mr Davies said: “My Mum said, ‘You’re always travelling around Europe, you can do seven can’t you?’ And that was like a red rag to a bull.”
> 
> On a journey which lasted 23 hours and 49 minutes, Mr Davies visited London, Paris, Brussels, Ljubljana, Vienna, Bratislava and Budapest. When mapping out his route, Mr Davies was confident of setting the record.
> 
> The 39-year-old, of St George’s Road in Hastings, added: *“The schedule was do-able, but the train I was most worried about was Hastings to London".*
> 
> As well as setting a new world record, Mr Davies raised $300 for the US branch of the charity ECPAT, which campaigns against child trafficking and exploitation.
> 
> The Argus story link


(Bold by me)


----------



## 437.001

^^
Whenever I go abroad (that is, France or beyond), the train I´m most worried about is always the Tarragona to Barcelona regional express. :lol:


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...n-for-rail-baltica-and-transit-corridors.html
> 
> *€53m loan for Rail Baltica and transit corridors*
> 17 Jul 2014
> 
> LITHUANIA: Nordic Investment Bank has signed an 18-year €53m loan agreement with national railway Lietuvos Gelezinkeliai to finance works for the Rail Baltica project and modernisation of the east–west corridors.
> 
> The loan announced on July 15 will facilitate the construction of a 115 km standard gauge line parallel to the existing broad gauge line from the Polish border to Kaunas. Funds will also be allocated for upgrades to the Minsk – Vilnius – Klaipeda and Kaunas – Kaliningrad corridors, which carry about 90% of Lithuanian’s transit rail freight and 70% of passenger traffic.
> 
> A previous loan of €114m was signed by NIB and LG in June 2013.
> 
> _A draft shareholders’ agreement for the creation of a joint venture to undertake the development of the Rail Baltica project was finalised by Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia at the end of June. This is intended to facilitate securing European financing for the scheme_


----------



## Baron Hirsch

*Save International Night Trains!*

There are ongoing online petitions to save the endangered night trains (berlin/Hamburg-Paris) and from/to Copenhagen. Please give your support!

http://www.petitions24.com/signatures/save_the_night_train_from_denmark_to_europe/

http://www.change.org/de/Petitionen...utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...brenner-base-tunnel-sections.html?channel=542
> 
> *Construction begins on Brenner tunnel sections*
> Monday, July 21, 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _CONSTRUCTION began on one of the largest lots of the Brenner Base Tunnel on 18 July, when excavation commenced on the northern section between Tulfes and Pfons near Innsbruck_
> 
> A consortium of Strabag, Austria, and Salini-Impreglio, Italy, was awarded a €380m contract last month to carry out the work, which comprises a 9km emergency tunnel, which runs parallel with the existing Innsbruck bypass line, two connections totalling 9km between the bypass and the main running tunnels, and an exploratory bore along the first 15km section of the main base tunnel.
> 
> Construction of these tunnels should be completed by 2018. With the exception of the exploratory bore, which will use a TBM, blasting will be used to excavated the tunnels


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...-€50m-to-ten-t-rail-projects.html?channel=542
> 
> *EU allocates €50m to TEN-T rail projects*
> Thursday, July 31, 2014
> 
> AS part of continuing efforts to improve Europe's transport infrastructure through the Trans-European Network (TEN-T) programme, the European Union has allocated €320m to support 106 projects, including €50.25m to fund 50% of the cost of 18 rail project studies.
> 
> The bulk of the cash for rail is for ERTMS schemes, with 10 projects receiving €37.6m in total. Slovenia secured the largest allocation, €19.9m towards its project to introduce ERTMS on corridor D from Pivka to Murska Sobota and Divaca Koper. Programmes to retrofit locomotives and coaches used in Belgium and Luxembourg were other major beneficiaries, while Banedanmark secured €6.9m towards its test programme for ETCS Baseline 3.
> 
> Elsewhere Denmark's Road Directorate secured €15m towards studies of a 3.9km road-rail bridge that will replace the existing single-track Storstrøm bridge on the line to the new Fehman Belt fixed link. Austria's Federal Ministry for Transport Innovation and Technology secured just under €4m for an environmental impact assessment of the proposed second double-track section between Linz and Wels and €2.2m for a similar study on the Salzburg – Steindorf/Straßwalchen line. The Czech Republic's ministry of transport has received €629,000 towards planning of a high-speed line between Prague and Dresden, while Finland's Ministry for Transport will receive €2.5m towards studies for the track-doubling project between Helsinki and Riihimäki.
> 
> Other allocations include:
> 
> €1.2m towards a new centralised traffic control centre for Dublin
> €5.5m towards the removal of a bottleneck at the Calandbridge in the port of Rotterdam
> €2.9m towards studies to connect Crossrail with the West Coast Main Line in Britain
> €3.5m for improving intermodal links at the Belfast intermodal terminal
> €1.8m for studies to enhance capacity at Milan Lambrate from 700 to 800 trains per day.
> The Innovation and Networks Executive Agency will work with the project beneficiaries to monitor the projects under the auspices of the Directorate General for Mobility and Transport of the European Commission.


----------



## :jax:

dimlys1994 said:


> Elsewhere Denmark's Road Directorate secured €15m towards studies of a 3.9km road-rail bridge that will replace the existing single-track Storstrøm bridge on *the line to the new Fehman Belt* fixed link. Austria's Federal Ministry for Transport Innovation and Technology secured just under €4m for an environmental impact assessment of the proposed second double-track section *between Linz and Wels and €2.2m for a similar study on the Salzburg – Steindorf/Straßwalchen line*. The Czech Republic's ministry of transport has received €629,000 towards planning of a *high-speed line between Prague and Dresden*


At least that is something, even if merely for studies. The Fehmarn Belt would improve connections between Scandinavia and Northern Germany, and Dresden-Prague would improve connections between Northern Germany and Central Europe. 

That should shave off a few hours. Today the fastest connection Copenhagen-Prague would be 11 hours 45 minutes for a great circle distance of 634 km (for an average net speed of 54 km/h).


----------



## Manchester77

dimlys1994 said:


> From Rail Journal:


Were getting €2.9m to look into connecting Crossrail to the WCML (to relief capacity into Euston to allow for HS2 rebuilding one assumes) and yet people still say the EU does nothing for us! 

On wnxx this has been posted and this thread seems to be an appropriate place to put it since I've not seen anything about it: http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/100673/eurostar-to-launch-marseille-route


> Eurostar is planning to operate a new route to Marseille next year.
> 
> The cross-Channel operator wants to run a London-Lille-Lyon-Marseille service from next spring.
> 
> Last year, it trialled a London-Lille-Lyon summer service over a six-week period.
> 
> A Eurostar spokesman told Business Traveller: "Following the success and popularity of our trial service direct to Lyon and Provence in the south of France during summer 2013, we made the decision to introduction a permanent, year-round service from 2015.
> 
> "Tickets will be available for sale towards the end of 2014 with the first services departing in the spring 2015. We expect to be able to announce in the autumn full details of the new service including fares and timetables."
> 
> Eurostar yesterday announced it has seen a 6 per cent increase in business travellers in the first half of this year (see news, July 17).


I'm guessing it'll be one train per day since they don't have any additional stock available for these services yet. I'd imagine it'll just be some messing around with the diagrams for to get the stock but should be achievable. Euro* have one power car running around in the new livery but we're still awaiting the carriages, I'm guessing the first refurbished set will be formally unveiled at the same time as the 374s.


----------



## KingNick

:jax: said:


> At least that is something, even if merely for studies. The Fehmarn Belt would improve connections between Scandinavia and Northern Germany, and Dresden-Prague would improve connections between Northern Germany and Central Europe.
> 
> That should shave off a few hours. Today the fastest connection Copenhagen-Prague would be 11 hours 45 minutes for a great circle distance of 634 km (for an average net speed of 54 km/h).


The Linz - Wels section at this moment is already built for speeds up to 230 km/h, the additionel two tracks are just to increase capacity and not speeds.

Salzburg - Straßwalchen also won't happen before 2030 due to budget constraints.


----------



## JumpUp

Hey!

the journal "Todays railway Europe" quotes that two out of the four daily Paris - Barcelona TGV will be but back to run only national as Paris - Perpignan train, from October!

That's pretty sad, cutting 50% of the Paris - Barcelona trains!

What's the reason to do so? 
Off-season? 
Trains not popular? 

I'm pretty shocked to hear those sad news. in my opinion those four trains are a great service between Paris and Barcelona :'(


----------



## MarcVD

Probably both. Once September is over, the tourists flow between France and Spain 
largely disappears. And given the time taken by the Paris-Barcelona TGV trip, the flight
alternative is still probably quite popular. In fact the TGV trip is already a bit out of the
efficiency zone for daily train trips. Which is is my opinion why they should not have
cancelled the night train. People that were using this train most probably went to the
air competition, not to the TGV. This means lost customers.


----------



## cle

That is a shame. I'd have thought it would be successful due to the numerous journey possibilities within the route rather than just Paris - Barcelona, which is pretty long.

Still, it's an impetus to continue improving the route at the southern end, so that it can eventually be more competitive. Do all trains need to stop at Girona and Figueres too?


----------



## 437.001

cle said:


> That is a shame. I'd have thought it would be successful due to the numerous journey possibilities within the route rather than just Paris - Barcelona, which is pretty long.


Not much longer than travelling from Paris to Nice, but that's a different story.

Not so successful, when you know the facts that Spaniards are not very train-friendly, that business relationships between Spain and France are usually done via Paris (and there's the crisis, too, so people travel less abroad), and that Barcelona is rather off-centric from the rest of Spain, so many people will just avoid it since going through Barcelona means a detour.
For most of Spain, the shortest way to Paris is via Hendaye-Bordeaux.

The French aren't used to travel by train to Spain, either. Many people don't know about the new services, the _"you-don't-travel-to-Spain-by-train"_ attitude is still rather common. 

On the Spanish side, wrong perception of geography counts, too.
Many people assume that Paris is really very very far away, _"in Europe"_, a trip that isn't worth taking by train. In fact, many people believe that Switzerland is much further away from Spain than it actually is (reality is that some intra-Spain trips from Barcelona are longer in distance than Barcelona to Geneva -some in travel time, too).



cle said:


> Still, it's an impetus to continue improving the route at the southern end, so that it can eventually be more competitive.


It's not so much the southern end of the route that needs much improving, but the southern French (Languedoc) side of it, which is done through the classic line.

A (slight) improvement will be when the Nimes-Montpellier new section of the HSL will open.



cle said:


> Do all trains need to stop at Girona and Figueres too?


For now, yes, absolutely. The time lost by calling there is negligible, and both stations give a reasonable number of passengers to/from France, which are best kept, otherwise the number of international passengers would drop even more.


----------



## Sunfuns

What was the average price differential between this train and flying (Barcelona-Paris)? Maybe the train was just too expensive...


----------



## K_

cle said:


> That is a shame. I'd have thought it would be successful due to the numerous journey possibilities within the route rather than just Paris - Barcelona, which is pretty long.


I think it would be better to first concentrate on integrating the networks on both sides of the mountains, having a regular service on Barcelona - Perpignan, with good onward connections.
But that requires "network" thinking, something the SNCF isn't very good at, and RENFE has never heard of...


----------



## 437.001

Anyway, I find strange that a route that connects one city of more than 10 million people (Paris), one city of more than 3 million people (Barcelona), and on the way, a mid-size city of more than 500,000 people (Montpellier), plus minor stops, plus connections, can´t produce enough passengers for more than two trains a day in low season.

There are routes in Spain and France that take more or less the same in travel time, linking less populated cities to Madrid or Paris, and which get more trains!!

I don´t discard excessively rigid planning on the side of Renfe and Sncf.


----------



## Sunfuns

437.001 said:


> There are routes in Spain and France that take more or less the same in travel time, linking less populated cities to Madrid or Paris, and which get more trains!!


Perhaps those are subsidised, but for this route they were looking to make a profit?


----------



## cle

437.001 - apologies if not clear, by the 'southern end of the route' I did mean the French side and the HSR and bypasses yet to come there.

From my selfish POV, I'd love a London train one day. Perhaps us Brits are more willing to sit on a train for longer - plus the London to Nimes/Montpellier/Perpignan links could attract people too! It could stop in Lille and CDG to cover those bits of demand too.


----------



## 00Zy99

I'd ride a train from to Seville. Or Rome. Or Berlin. Or Zurich.


----------



## 437.001

Sunfuns said:


> Perhaps those are subsidised, but for this route they were looking to make a profit?


No Long Distance Spanish train is subsidized.
Only regional and commuter trains are.

Can´t speak for inner France services, though, but I´d say they aren´t subsidized, either, at least not the TGVs.

So I´d say that the international services aren´t subsidized. If they lose money, it´s the services that make money that cover up for their losses.
So for instance, the money made on an AVE Madrid-Barcelona covers up for the losses of an AVE Madrid-Huesca in the section between Zaragoza and Huesca.



cle said:


> 437.001 - apologies if not clear, by the 'southern end of the route' I did mean the French side and the HSR and bypasses yet to come there.


Oh, don´t worry, they´re on it between Nimes and Montpellier, I´ve seen it myself.

The only thing is the section between Montpellier and Perpignan... :shifty:

Let´s hope that they find the budget to build it as soon as possible, but I´m afraid it will take long. 

They are also building the Atlantic side of the line, between Tours and Bordeaux, and that will be a huge improvement for the Basque Country.
And they haven´t stopped planning the Bordeaux-Toulouse HSL, which will also benefit Barcelona, as the travel time Barcelona-Bordeaux will become excellent, even with a change at Toulouse.



cle said:


> From my selfish POV, I'd love a London train one day. Perhaps us Brits are more willing to sit on a train for longer - plus the London to Nimes/Montpellier/Perpignan links could attract people too! It could stop in Lille and CDG to cover those bits of demand too.


Well... if Eurostar can offer services from London to Avignon and from London to Marseilles... er... Barcelona is rather bigger than the other two, it´s not as far as that, and it has loads more population. Just saying, in case someone read it... :shifty: :grass:



00Zy99 said:


> I'd ride a train from to Seville. Or Rome. Or Berlin. Or Zurich.


We´d all love trains from Mallaig to Otranto, and from Narvik to Algeciras.

Not to say from Faro to Lhasa or Hong Kong.


----------



## HJD

Guys! Paris - Barcelona from the begining it was planned to have 2 trains off season. Only 1 thing which is missing is Geneva - Barcelona train. And Spanish people are starting to love trains. 2014 is another year when Spain have the biggest train passenger grow in Europe.


----------



## verfmeer

When talking about Eurostar trains I wondered: What happens with trains between Dublin and Belfast? They stop at every station inbetween, and those stations have no big security building there. If the British are that concearned about foreigners entering their country, why don't the put op border checks there?


----------



## 437.001

^^
Hiya, U here?  :wave:


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...ostar-train-change-in-france.html?channel=542
> 
> *Marseille - London Eurostars to face 1h 43min wait in Lille*
> Monday, September 08, 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ONEROUS border controls imposed by the British government will force passengers using Eurostar's new Marseille - London service to go through immigration and security controls lasting nearly two hours at Lille Europe when the service starts next year.
> 
> According to advance timings published in the September edition of the European Rail Timetable, passengers travelling on the new Marseille - Avignon - Lyon - Ashford - London service, which starts on May 1 2015, will have to alight at Lille with their baggage in order to pass through French and British border controls and a security check on the upper level at the northern end of the station. This process will take 1h 43min, negating the benefits of high-speed rail travel. Passengers on the outward journey from London and Ashford will go through border and security controls before boarding the train which will run directly to Lyon, Avignon and Marseille.
> 
> The new service is an expansion of the existing summer-Saturday Eurostar train which operates between London, Ashford and Avignon. However, northbound passengers currently pass through immigration and security checks in Avignon prior to departure obviating the need to do so in Lille
> 
> ...


----------



## Road_UK

I think it's time to move all border controls back to London. This is seriously beginning to disrupt rail travel on continental Europe now and could also jeopardise the new ICE services from London to Amsterdam and Frankfurt. With the ferry the French have their facilities in Dover, the British in Calais and Dunkerque, but I believe in this case, with more European links in planning, French controls can start doing the passport checks in London and Ashford as well.


----------



## Manchester77

The long wait is because the UKBA (or whatever the home office has renamed them to) won't put a base out in the France for a couple of trains per day. The issue of having the checks all at the London end is that if there are people without the right passes etc. then they'll have to be sent back which isn't ideal


----------



## Gusiluz

The UKBA (The UK Border Agency) explained that no outside current controls (Lille, Paris and Brussels), and he does not like the suggestion that DB controls are made on board. 
And it is a fact that the Lille-Europe station will double its size. There must be some. 
For as much as it would be preferable to train French, Dutch and German to Lille and there I do transfer to the Eurostar instead of saying to travelers direct trains, which is not real. And avoid those approvals. 
There should be no problems in passing control board (a big plus train) and return potential offenders without stepping on British soil. 

A greeting, and sorry for my bad English


----------



## Road_UK

In my opinion it is the UK who has decided not to join Schengen. So their checks should be made on UK soil, not bring their grievances to ours.


----------



## Gusiluz

No, so do in Paris and Brussels. 
The problem is not Schengen, in my opinion the problem is that not provide facilities to train and that favors air transport.


----------



## Verso

Why is there "Eurostar" in the title, as if the entire Europe revolved around it? It's completely unnecessary, so the title should be just "EUROPE | Inter-country Railways".


----------



## 437.001

Accident at Marseille St Charles station, a TGV derailed and hit an AVE.

I have no more details, but it mustn't have been grave, that's in the station itself, at the area near La Belle de Mai quarter, trains are never at speed there. 

Both the AVE and the TGV have broken the front, though... 

Let's hope no one's hurt... 



jotaerre said:


>


----------



## Manchester77

I don't understand how collisions can take place on the modern railway. Unless railhead condition was very poor surely some kind of safety system had to have kicked in? Do continental rail networks not have things like TPWS to prevent SPADs or an AWS to prewarn the driver of any signals at danger?


----------



## 437.001

'Course they do. It was probably the point that failed and took the wrong position, otherwise it's hard to explain.

Some stations in France have very old rails and points, or they are in very bad state (see the case at Brétigny-sur-Orge).


----------



## Manchester77

437.001 said:


> 'Course they do. It was probably the point that failed and took the wrong position, otherwise it's hard to explain.
> 
> Some stations in France have very old rails and points, or they are in very bad state (see the case at Brétigny-sur-Orge).


Will a board like the Rail Accident Investigation Board (RAIB) be mobilised to investigate it or is it done internally within the train operating companies.


----------



## AlexNL

I am pretty sure that BEA-TT (the French RAIB) will be involved.


----------



## Suburbanist

I've noticed that, save for that accident in Spain, all recent collisions of high-speed trains of recent years have been near stations at low speed. It is a situation where traditional approaches (like emergency stop of a train violating a red sign or speed limit) don't work.

Will ECTS-3 completely prevent these issues?


----------



## AlexNL

You won't need ETCS-3 to realize that, you can get there today with ETCS-2. Theoretically that is.

When programming a route, the interlocking will ensure that a movement authority can be granted from the train's position to the desired platform. Other trains, such as the ones leaving adjacent platforms, will get movement authorities as far as can be realized without causing conflicts. Should a train overspeed and miss a signal, then it will be put to a stop automatically before it reaches the end of its MA. However, this is very challenging. 

In and around stations there are lots of possible routes due to points, fly-over, dive-unders, et cetera. Furthermore, it's not uncommon that there are lots of trains in a station at the same time. 

Just look at a Swiss station, where lots of trains arrive within minutes of eachother, leaving a few minutes later. 

All those possible routes and trains are very complex to keep track of, that ETCS level 2 communication between train and control center is based on GSM is technically challenging as well. While GSM is reliable, it does not offer a lot of capacity. Something which is needed if you want to have a station controlled with ETCS.

Falling back to ETCS L1 in station areas is a possibility, but ETCS L1 has its limitations. First of all, it would mean putting down dozens of balises on the tracks which is quite an expensive excercise. As L1 is a fixed point signalling system, it won't be possible to cancel a programmed route once a train has passed a balise granting a movement authority. 

---

Nowhere in the world has a fully working ETCS-3 system been implemented yet, because it is very difficult to realize. There are trials going on in Sweden, but this is on low density single track lines that would otherwise have been closed.

Not only do computer systems need to have full knowledge about the composition of all trains and their characteristics (which is especially hard for cargo), but there is also a huge dependency on location accuracy and a quick data interchange.

The location information needs to be much more accurate than what the American GPS system can offer, but such a system is not in place yet. The go-live of the EU's Galileo project will help propel ETCS-3 forward, but it will be a long time before Galileo is fully up and running.

Data interchange is another thing: the current ETCS system works by exchanging messages over GSM-R using GPRS data connections. With ETCS-3 the amount of messages is very likely to increase, which will strain the capacity offered by GPRS. Replacing GSM-R with a more modern LTE (4G) based platform will bring relief here, but it will take a long time before there's any nationwide 4G-Rail network. Meanwhile the rail industry is performing field trials with it.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ What about creating a rail-specific radio standards based on transmission to trackside antennas + fiber?


----------



## AlexNL

In the past each railway company had their own communications system. The Netherlands used Telerail, Norway used SCANET, et cetera. Slowly but steadily, nation states in the EU are working on a roll-out of GSM-R.

Building a completely different communications system is of course a possibility, but it will undoubtedly be more expensive than using what is there (development costs, maintenance, patents, etc.) and it will get you in lots of legal hot water due to all kinds of rules and regulations regarding radiation and radio interference. 

Furthermore, it complicates adoption and makes it harder to find someone with knowledge of said standard. GSM is a standard protocol, having been used throughout the world for decades. It's fairly easy to find someone who knows how GSM works and who can determine what the best position is for a new cell tower. If you build something proprietary this will become harder and thus, more expensive.

Plus, the added value of something proprietary can be quite limited if the same desired functionality can be achieved using standardized protocols and technology.


----------



## Manchester77

GSM-R is being rolled out across the network here in the UK. It's definitely safe to say that we'll be pretty much all GSM-R before a significant part of the network is ERTMS signalled. 

Is ERTMS expected to be used for all lines in the EU, even those like the west highland line with very few trains per day, because it seems like it'd be a waste of resources for certain lines? It'll be a shame when most of the different types of signalling has gone, especially on branches where lots of variety lies with the different kinds of token block working.


----------



## 437.001

More details have been unveiled about the Marseille incident.

The thing happened yesterday evening.

It involved these two:



dirdam said:


> Taken from TRENES Y FOTOS at Facebook.


^^
Ironical, since the TGV 736 was the first French train ever to enter Barcelona-Sants station, and the AVE 24 was the first AVE ever to enter Paris-Est station... :sleepy:

As a result of the crash, today the AVE Marseille-Madrid had to be split in two: a TGV did the Marseille-Perpignan part of the route, and an AVE the Perpignan-Madrid part.

That's because there were no available AVE or TGV trains at the Marseille depot that were homologated to reach Madrid-Atocha station, so passengers had to change at Perpignan to continue their trip to Madrid.

As a footnote, the Sncf twitter denied that the change at Perpignan had anything to do with the crash... :|


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/news/europe/single-view/view/ten-t-funding-bids-invited.html
> 
> *TEN-T funding bids invited*
> 11 Sep 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: The European Commission’s Innovation & Networks Executive Agency announced on September 11 that it had opened the bidding for €11·9bn of funding to improve European transport links under the revised TEN-T programme. Member state governments have until February 26 to submit proposals, with the selected projects to be announced in mid-2015.
> 
> Hailed as ‘the largest single amount of EU funding ever earmarked for transport infrastructure’, the money forms the first tranche of transport funding to be made available through the Connecting Europe Facility. This has seen the EU budget for transport tripled to €26bn for 2014-20, compared to €8bn in 2007-13. The selected projects must also be co-financed by the member states
> 
> ...


----------



## KingNick

Nice increase, but still way too little money for my liking.


----------



## 437.001

Another image of the Marseille incident has appeared. The AVE and the TGV are more seriously damaged than expected.

What was the TGV doing and at which speed was it running? That's the question. 



dirdam said:


> https://twitter.com/crl_paca/status/509963996515291136/photo/1


----------



## Manchester77

Most of that will probably be visual damage but as long as beneath the sole bar is alright it shouldn't be too bad to do. Both trains will probably need new nose ends and auto couplers.


----------



## Minato ku

437.001 said:


> Ironical, since the TGV 736 was the first French train ever to enter Barcelona-Sants station, and the AVE 24 was the first AVE ever to enter Paris-Est station... :sleepy:|


Paris Est ? Why a AVE would go in Paris-Est?


----------



## 00Zy99

Minato ku said:


> Paris Est ? Why a AVE would go in Paris-Est?


It spent way too much time admiring the Orient Express? :nuts::lol:


----------



## parcdesprinces

Minato ku said:


> Paris Est ? Why a AVE would go in Paris-Est?


It was during the Alstom-AVE testings on the French network before their first official services in France and those testings occurred on the LGV Est (I guess that's because it's the most modern French LGV and the fastest one). Here is a picture I posted few months ago about that :



parcdesprinces said:


> a nice pic, on which we can see a Spanish Renfe AVE, a German DB ICE and a French SNCF TGV, taken last spring at Paris-Est station during the Renfe Alstom-AVE testings on the French High Speed network :cheers: :


----------



## Minato ku

Thank you, that's what I thought afterwards.


----------



## Suburbanist

Not sure this has been posted before... a UIC study on nigh trains on high speed era.


----------



## AlexNL

Here are the times for the Beneluxtrein (Intercity train between Amsterdam and Brussels) as per December 14th, 2014. The frequency will be increased back to the original 16 trains per hour, as once was the plan.

From Amsterdam towards *Brussels*:


Code:


+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Station           |  Arrival | Departure | Stop time |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Amsterdam Central |          |   10:52   |           |
| Schiphol          |   11:05  |   11:07   |    0:02   |
| Den Haag HS       |   11:38  |   11:43   |    0:05   |
| Rotterdam Central |   12:01  |   12:05   |    0:04   |
| Dordrecht         |   12:19  |   12:20   |    0:01   |
| Roosendaal        |   12:45  |   12:47   |    0:02   |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Antwerp Central   |   13:15  |   13:17   |    0:02   |
| Antwerp Berchem   |   13:21  |   13:23   |    0:02   |
| Mechelen          |   13:35  |   13:38   |    0:03   |
| Brussels Airport  |   13:49  |   13:52   |    0:03   |
| Brussels North    |   14:05  |   14:07   |    0:02   |
| Brussels Central  |   14:10  |   14:11   |    0:01   |
| Brussels South    |   14:15  |           |           |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+

Total journey time: 3h23

From Brussels towards *Amsterdam*:


Code:


+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Station           |  Arrival | Departure | Stop time |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Brussels South    |          |   10:45   |           |
| Brussels Central  |   10:48  |   10:49   |    0:01   |
| Brussels North    |   10:53  |   10:55   |    0:02   |
| Brussels Airport  |   11:08  |   11:11   |    0:03   |
| Mechelen          |   11:22  |   11:25   |    0:03   |
| Antwerp Berchem   |   11:37  |   11:39   |    0:02   |
| Antwerp Centraal  |   11:43  |   11:45   |    0:02   |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| Roosendaal        |   12:11  |   12:12   |    0:01   |
| Dordrecht         |   12:40  |   12:42   |    0:02   |
| Rotterdam Central |   12:56  |   12:59   |    0:03   |
| Den Haag HS       |   13:17  |   13:21   |    0:04   |
| Schiphol          |   13:48  |   13:49   |    0:01   |
| Amsterdam Central |   14:04  |           |           |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+

Total journey time: 3h19


It will *no longer* be possible to speed up the journey by changing to/from IC Direct at Rotterdam, due to the changes in the timetable...
- The Benelux train to Brussels has just left Rotterdam when the ICd from Amsterdam arrives. The Benelux leaves at :05 while the ICd arrives at :06.
- The ICd train to Amsterdam has just left Rotterdam when the Benelux train from Brussels arrives, resulting in a 28 minute changeover for the next ICd.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Weren't they going to run these trains via Breda?


----------



## Road_UK

^^ AFAIK only the ones on the HSL avoiding The Hague. And no, I am not following you. You just show up as the last poster in a lot of my User CP :lol:


----------



## AlexNL

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ Weren't they going to run these trains via Breda?


That's the plan, but it's not yet possible to do so as the locomotives and rakes aren't yet certified for use on the Belgian part of the HSL. The expectation is that the Benelux will be rerouted via Breda in december 2016.


----------



## Road_UK

So was I wrong or right?


----------



## AlexNL

You're wrong. The trains will continue to serve The Hague, only the south part of the HSL will be used for the Beneluxtrein. From december 2016 it will have the following stops:

Amsterdam Central, Schiphol, The Hague HS, Rotterdam, Breda, Noorderkempen, Antwerp Centraal, Antwerp Berchem, Mechelen, Brussels Airport, Brussels North, Brussels Central, Brussels South.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Beneluxtrein will also call at Antwerp Luchtbal, as the current train between Antwerp Centraal and Noorderkempen also stops in Luchtbal.


----------



## Road_UK




----------



## AlexNL

It's okay. It's quite absurd that the Beneluxtrein will continue to serve The Hague while there is fine HSL infrastructure in place which will better serve the majority of the passengers. 

The only reason for that stop is to make sure that Arriva will not proceed with the 'Lage Landen Lijn', the alternative connection which was launched shortly after The Hague lost its direct train to Brussels.


----------



## Sunfuns

How long does it take to get from Brussels to Amsterdam by Thalys and how big is the price difference?


----------



## Suburbanist

Sunfuns said:


> How long does it take to get from Brussels to Amsterdam by Thalys and how big is the price difference?


1h51min travel time. Lowest fares are € 29.


----------



## nachalnik

AlexNL said:


> Here are the times for the Beneluxtrein (Intercity train between Amsterdam and Brussels) as per December 14th, 2014. The frequency will be increased back to the original 16 trains per hour,


Per hour? Sure?


----------



## Suburbanist

nachalnik said:


> Per hour? Sure?


crap Benelux train = 16x/day
aweosme Thalys train = 12x/day


----------



## AlexNL

nachalnik said:


> Per hour? Sure?


:lol: Good catch, that should've been "1 train per hour, 16x a day".


----------



## Sunfuns

Suburbanist said:


> 1h51min travel time. Lowest fares are € 29.


And how much for Benelux trains?


----------



## Suburbanist

Sunfuns said:


> And how much for Benelux trains?


€ 39,20


----------



## Sunfuns

You are probably not comparing apples with apples here. Doesn't make sense that slower service is also more expensive.


----------



## nachalnik

Some news regarding international trains from/to Austria from mid-dec 2014:


- all trains from Vienna to Italy, Hungary (and beyond), Slovenia (and beyond) and Czech Republic (and beyond) will use the new Vienna main station (Wien Hauptbahnhof)

- the same applies for all overnight trains and for ICE-trains to Germany via Passau

- the other trains (RJ trains to Munich, Zurich) will switch to the Hauptbahnhof only one year later (in dec 2015), when the new station becomes fully operational

- the route to Prague will be served by a 2-hourly railjet line Graz - Vienna - Prague, which will replace existing Eurocity-trains (Villach-Vienna-Prague-Berlin-Hamburg, Graz/Wr Neustadt/Vienna-Prague - totally 7 train pairs). Travel time Vienna - Prague will be reduced to ~4h10.

- Eurocity "Polonia" will only run Vienna - Warsaw (now it runs Villach - Vienna - Warsaw; between Villach and Vienna it will be replaced by a railjet-train)

- Eurocity "Sobieski" will run Vienna - Warsaw - Gdynia (instead of just Vienna - Warsaw); Vienna - Gdynia will take ~11 hrs

- D 100/101 Vienna - Bohumin (with direct coaches Vienna-Moscow/St. Petersburg) will receive seating cars and these will run daily, so it will provide a new morning service from Bohumin/Ostrava to Vienna and back in the afternoon.

- two new Eurocity trains will run from Vienna to Hungary: 
EC 143/142 Vienna - Budapest - Debrecen and v.v., EC 345/344 Vienna - Budapest - Belgrade and v.v.

- There will also be a new EC 149/148 Vienna - Budapest, but this will just replace overnight train EN 467/466 Zurich-Budapest. The Zurich-Budapest-coaches of that train will be conveyed by EN 463/462 between Salzburg and Budapest, so EN 467/466 will only run Zürich-Vienna and v.v

- ICE trains from Frankfurt/Hamburg/Dortmund to Vienna and v.v. will be extended to Vienna airport (and will no longer serve the Westbahnhof, but Meidling and Hauptbahnhof).

- EC 31/30 Vienna - Venice and v.v. will receive a restaurant car; EC 164/163 Graz - Zürich and v.v. will receive a SBB observation car (1st class)


Nachalnik


----------



## Suburbanist

nachalnik;117447659EC 164/163 Graz - Zürich and v.v. will receive a SBB observation car (1st class)
Nachalnik[/QUOTE said:


> Will they give this train some touristic name?


----------



## AlexNL

Sunfuns said:


> You are probably not comparing apples with apples here. Doesn't make sense that slower service is also more expensive.


The € 29 mentioned by Suburbanist is the early bird fare, which gets you a No Flex ticket in 2nd class. 

I've just looked for a Amsterdam - Brussels Thalys for tomorrow morning and the only offer is € 109,00 for a Full Flex ticket for a one way trip. If I look at next Wednesday, I can get a Semi-Flex ticket for € 79,00. If I look even further than that I see some Semi Flex-tickets for € 55,00.


----------



## Sunfuns

I checked as well and looks like a realistic cheapest offer for a person who is not competely flexible with travel days, but is able to book well in advance is ca 100€ for a return ticket. It wouldn't be possible to beat this travel time by any other publicly available travel mode, but cheap it is definitely not.


----------



## Sunfuns

none


----------



## Suburbanist

Sunfuns said:


> I checked as well and looks like a realistic cheapest offer for a person who is not competely flexible with travel days, but is able to book well in advance is ca 100€ for a return ticket. It wouldn't be possible to beat this travel time by any other publicly available travel mode, but cheap it is definitely not.


€ 100 can realistically allow you to travel for a day at work (or leisure) and back same day, total train travel time = 2h40min

€ 78,40 (fixed fare) would require 6h50min on board. Not a realistic idea for a round-trip in one day unless you have just a simple midday appointment in Bruxelles. 

You can save 4h10 min from on-train time by € 22 extra. Sounds a good deal.


----------



## nachalnik

Suburbanist said:


> Will they give this train some touristic name?


SBB has given that train the traditional name "Transalpin", in Austria it is officially and unfortunately nameless...


----------



## Manchester77

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/J32894/2014/09/23/advanced

Next 374 due through to us is in the system :banana:


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...commission-approves-thalys-restructuring.html
> 
> *European Commission approves Thalys restructuring*
> 23 Sep 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: The European Commission announced on September 22 that it had approved the restructuring of Thalys as a 60:40 joint venture between SNCF of France and SNCB of Belgium. Operating high speed services from Paris to Brussels, Amsterdam and Köln, Thalys had originally been established in partnership with DB of Germany and NS of the Netherlands.
> 
> During its investigation, the commission had found that the impact on competition would be ‘particularly limited’, given that the proposed restructuring principally involved the existing relationship between SNCF and SNCB. In addition, the new joint venture would face competition from DB on certain routes ‘in the near future’, while air and the private car provided competition with Thalys services on certain routes.
> 
> Welcoming the commission’s decision, SNCF and SNCB said that the new joint venture was expected to be launched in 2015. By improving efficiency and flexibility, the partners are aiming to provide Thalys with increased resources that will enable it to grow by offering an even more attractive and better-performing service to its customers


----------



## Manchester77

Manchester77 said:


> http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/J32894/2014/09/23/advanced
> 
> Next 374 due through to us is in the system :banana:


The path has been activated so looks like tonight's run is on :banana:


----------



## Theijs

dimlys1994 said:


> From Railway Gazette:European Commission approves Thalys restructuring


So SNCB and SNCF want to keep NS out. Earlier NS wrote it would like to take over the share of DB: http://www.treinreiziger.nl/actueel/binnenland/ns_wil_belang_van_db_overnemen_in_thalys-146432


----------



## Suburbanist

Time for NS to start its own high-speed service to France.


----------



## Road_UK

If DB has troubles getting in, then NS won't stand a chance. And it's not anyway, the proposed London to Frankfurt and Amsterdam services would be conducted by DB only.


----------



## Gusiluz

DB will not attempt to operate trains from Germany to London this decade:



Gusiluz said:


> In 2010 DB announced in London that it was planning to run three trains per day from London to both Frankfurt and Amsterdam starting in December 2013, using class 407 Velaro-D, but in February this year DB admitted: “*the service is unlikely to be launched before the end of the decade*. For now focus on validating their trains in France, Belgium and Holland”.
> http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/db-puts-london-–-frankfurt-high-speed-plans-on-ice.html.
> 
> It is not true that the class 407 Velaro D are validated to cross the Channel Tunnel, as the test and the trip to Saint Pancras in 2010 were made with a class 406 ICE 3M, that is not authorized to cross the Channel Tunnel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What actually happened was that The Channel Tunnel Safety Authority, under the Inter-Governmental Commission (IGC) gave DB Part B of the Safety Certificate, which recognizes that you have a System Safety Management satisfying the Community legislation. Ie that it meets the safety procedures and organization, which empowers DB put the Eurotunnel services with any approved material.
> Part A of the certificate confirms that the Railway Company has a Safety Management System that meets European standards and national requirements and, in a harmonized way throughout the European rail system; while Part B confirms the application of the Safety Management System for use on a particular infrastructure (point a route point by a line).
> The certificate is valid for five years, renewable for successive periods where policy conditions for its execution are met.
> 
> A greeting
> 
> Sorry for my bad English


NS has enough to try to fix the disaster of Fyra. 

Eurostar operate trains to Amsterdam itself, and maybe even to Germany, but with a stop of 103 minutes in Lille-Europe do not think they get to fill the 900 seats of each train e320, either from Holland or from Germany. 

If the UKBA (The UK Border Agency) insists on not making passport control outside current controls (Lille, Paris and Brussels), i think it best to do London-Lille with Eurostar and take travelers from Marseille, Amsterdam and Cologne in TGV, Thalys and Velaro-D to Lille-Europe.
Passport control takes advantage of the train, I hope they reconsider.


----------



## KingNick

They should just make those damn border checks in the UK.


----------



## Road_UK

I agree. I think DB together with SNCF, NMBS and NS should make legal procedures to make that happen. A whole new world of European rail travel will open then...


----------



## K_

Baron Hirsch said:


> Guys, let's keep our hats on.
> 1) It is true that the present xenophobic climate in European politics tends towards more, not less border control...


But at other Schengen borders they don't make everybody get off the train. They just stop the train, the border police walks through the train, looking at each passport, and then leaves again.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Yes, K, exactly. as I mentioned, it copies the system the Turkish border police employs on the train from Bulgaria to Turkey. 30 years ago the Turkish police invested into computers for passport controls. Ever since, people have to disembark at the border station, shuffle into the office, get their passport stamped, then reenter the train and wait for another officer to check that every passenger actually bothered to get the stamp. Despite the improvement in technology since, nobody ever thought that with the simple investment into some mobile equipment and making some more policemen get their a$%&es up from their soft chairs, this procedure could be reduced to 20 minutes, as is customary say on the Hungarian Schengen border. The Sofia-Istanbul train (presently suspended due to works) has a scheduled stopover of 95 minutes inbound and 75 minutes outbound for this and that is the kind of company paranoid and lazy UK border police wish to move the Eurostar into http://www.tcdd.gov.tr/home/detail/?id=233


----------



## Leeds No.1

Well I personally think the UK's obsession with border controls are ridiculous, and it's detrimental to the viability of high speed rail travel here. It's basically impossible to have high speed rail services at the moment from Glasgow, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds or Edinburgh to the continent at the moment because everyone is required to go through border controls at St. Pancras.

It also creates problems for everyone else on the mainland who are disrupted by British border checks.

The real progress will be made when the UK joins Schengen, which I'm sure won't happen in the next twenty years. Before that, the UK must accept it is causing a problem by not co-operating with its neighbours, and deal with the consequences of it. If we can't deal with our problems here, it's our own fault frankly.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/thello-to-launch-marseille-milano-service.html
> 
> *Thello to launch Marseille – Milano service*
> 25 Sep 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: Open access passenger operator Thello is to launch a daily service between Marseille in France and Milano in Italy with the timetable change on December 14. Announcing the new route on September 23, Thello said that intermediate stops would include Cannes, Nice, Savona and Genoa, and that it would be selling tickets for domestic journeys wholly within France or Italy.
> 
> The service to Milano would leave Marseille Saint-Charles at 15.30, departing Nice Ville at 18.09. In the reverse direction, departures would be from Milano Centrale at 15.10 and Genoa Piazza Principe at 16.56. Rolling stock would be drawn from the Frecciabianca fleet operated by Trenitalia
> 
> ...


----------



## MarcVD

Baron Hirsch said:


> Yes, K, exactly. as I mentioned, it copies the system the Turkish border police employs on the train from Bulgaria to Turkey...


Even worse than that : first you need to queue to a first window to purchase 
your visa, and then to a second one to have your passport stamped.

This of course, in the middle of the night, after having spent one hour waiting 
for the Bulgarian border police to do its work at the last station (Svilengrad ?)
before the border. Makes you wonder why you paid for a bed in a sleeper for 
that night.

And by the way, the same cirque occurs at the Turkish-Iranian border as well.
But at least the Iranian control takes place on board, while the train runs.
I suppose that when there were still trains from Turkey to Irak and Syria,
(will they ever re-appear ?) it was even worse...


----------



## Slartibartfas

Manchester77 said:


> Come 2020 I'd imagine that what you're proposing is far more realistic but you have to understand that this sort of thing is highly sensitive because of UKIP making it a big issue.
> 
> One thing that would have to make a come back is the little cell on eurostar trains which as far as I aware were removed during their last refurbishment. Their new 374s would need to cells installing too in case someone on board is found to not have the right documents etc.


I totally get your point. And ridiculously time wasting and inefficient border controls are probably rather insiginficant facing the very real prospect of the UK leaving the EU altogether with all the potential implications for the banking sector, the single market, British EU citizens living in other member states etc ... all of which is of course totally off topic here. 

Still, the current system is nonsense and it tells us a lot about the world we are living in that it seems impossible to change it. So I guess we'll have to live with the serious limitations of expansion of efficient high speed rail links from London to other places, except for a chosen few and transfer connections with rather unpredictable and long transfer times.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://railoutlook.com/index.php/hi...-high-speed-services-restart.html?channel=542
> 
> *France - Spain high-speed services restart*
> Monday, October 06, 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SPAIN's infrastructure manager Adif reopened the Figueres - Barcelona high-speed line on Saturday evening, five full days after the line was closed following severe flooding in the 7km tunnel below Girona.
> 
> In cooperation with the local emergency services and the Spanish Army, around 40,000m3 of water was extracted from a 1.8km section of the tunnel, located 40m below the surface.
> 
> Adif also replaced 4km of cable used for communications and signalling, as well as 4km of electric wiring, two water extraction pumps, eight point motors, and service and emergency lighting along the whole flooded section
> 
> ...


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...-interest-in-buying-40-stake-in-eurostar.html
> 
> *UK invites interest in buying 40% stake in Eurostar*
> 13 Oct 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: The British government formally invited expressions of interest in buying its 40% stake in cross-Channel high speed train operator Eurostar International Ltd on October 13.
> 
> Potential bidders have until October 31 to respond, with the government saying its key objective is to ‘maximise value for money for the UK taxpayer, which will be achieved through a combination of value maximisation, risk transfer and enabling the continued operation of EIL.’ Subject to achieving this, the government expects to reach a definitive agreement in the first quarter of 2015. UBS Ltd has been appointed as the Treasury’s exclusive financial advisor for the sale.
> 
> French national operator SNCF which owns 55% of EIL and its Belgian counterpart SNCB which owns 5% have undertaken not to participate in the sale of the UK stake, except in accordance with their right to acquire ordinary shares at a 15% premium over the successful final bid
> 
> ...


----------



## KingNick

So now that Eurostar finally reached the point where it became profitable, the Torries want to sell it? What a retarded move, but then again, the Torries never had the interest of the people in mind, so why would they start now.


----------



## K_

KingNick said:


> So now that Eurostar finally reached the point where it became profitable, the Torries want to sell it? What a retarded move, but then again, the Torries never had the interest of the people in mind, so why would they start now.


Selling it when it's profitable is smart. You get more that way. What the "interest of the people" has to do with this escapes me...


----------



## Manchester77

KingNick said:


> So now that Eurostar finally reached the point where it became profitable, the Torries want to sell it? What a retarded move, but then again, the Torries never had the interest of the people in mind, so why would they start now.


Same with every privatisation though really 


K_ said:


> Selling it when it's profitable is smart. You get more that way. What the "interest of the people" has to do with this escapes me...


The sell off isn't in the interest of the population of the UK, I imagine in a few months after its been sold we'll find out which tory members friends made £££ from the sale.


----------



## TedStriker

K_ said:


> What the "interest of the people" has to do with this escapes me...


Agee with you here. I don't understand why anyone cares about the sale. It's not as if it's the NHS!


----------



## Manchester77

TedStriker said:


> Agee with you here. I don't understand why anyone cares about the sale. It's not as if it's the NHS!


Because it's uet another one of our public assets (a profitable one too) which is being sold off. And for the record the NHS is pretty much being contracted and privatised so it won't be long until we have only a few state assets.


----------



## KingNick

K_ said:


> Selling it when it's profitable is smart. You get more that way. What the "interest of the people" has to do with this escapes me...


No, selling gets you a one time profit (just look how Royal Mail was given away way too cheap) in exchange for the loss of a constant stream of income, which in the long run is always less for a profitable company, meaning it is againt the interest of the people to sell.


----------



## Nexis

Why are they switching to left Hand train operating in Europe?


----------



## AlexNL

I wouldn't mind owning some Eurostar shares, who should I contact? :lol:


----------



## KingNick

Nexis said:


> Why are they switching to left Hand train operating in Europe?


Who is?


----------



## LtBk

Not trying to be political, but why the Torres are obsessed with privatizing everything?


----------



## K_

KingNick said:


> No, selling gets you a one time profit (just look how Royal Mail was given away way too cheap) in exchange for the loss of a constant stream of income, which in the long run is always less for a profitable company, meaning it is againt the interest of the people to sell.


But why should the state own a company?


----------



## K_

Nexis said:


> Why are they switching to left Hand train operating in Europe?


What makes you come to the conclusion they are?


----------



## bagus70

parcdesprinces said:


> HSTs, option #3:
> 
> 
> *Rome -> Torino (P. Susa)* by *.Italo* (100% high-speed)
> *Torino (P. Susa) -> Paris (Gare de Lyon)* by *TGV France-Italia* (100% high-speed from the Lyon Airport station to Paris)
> *Paris (Nord) -> Amsterdam* by *Thalys* (100% high-speed)


This sounds like the most comfortable option


----------



## jonasry

oslogospelchoir said:


> It would be interesting to see how many more intercountry links, involving large cities within the high speed feasible zone, have not yet been considered. I think Germany and its eastern neighbours particularly need to be looked at.


Well, there has been a gradual removal of passenger trains eastwards from Germany. Recently the service Berlin - Wroclaw was cut. A curious fact someone mentioned is that the same service in 1930s was much faster.

Night trains linking Crimea-Kiev and Berlin was also lost a few years ago. The service to Kaliningrad i reduced to summer only.

Giving the current political situation in Ukraine I do think it might be feasible to expect services from Lviv/Lvov in the near future. Some cross-border services to Poland and Hungary have already been expanded. But I think we'll see more services soon. Railway diplomacy at it's best!


----------



## eu01

Channel Tunnel closed and services hit after lorry fire.

Eurostar says all its services today have been cancelled and trains are returning to their original stations.

Kent Police said the fire happened at the French end of the tunnel and is being dealt with by the French authorities.

There were no reported injuries, a police spokesman said.

The spokesman said the fire had led to the closure of both tunnels, and that there are currently no trains in either. The lorry is being recovered, he added.

"Rail passengers are advised to expect significant delays whilst the vehicle is being recovered and fumes are cleared from the tunnels," the spokesman said.​Read more from the BBC News (the source).


----------



## KingNick

Don't they have some sort of heat sensors like the once introduced to the Mont Blanc Tunnel after the inferno?


----------



## eu01

^^


> Eurotunnel, which transports vehicles and freight through the Channel Tunnel, said the alarm had been raised when two CO2 detectors were triggered.


----------



## KingNick

To scan the trucks before they get to board the train.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mont_B.../File:Thermographic_inspection_mont_blanc.jpg


----------



## AlexNL

The Channel Tunnel freight terminals do have preventative scanning equipment installed, but appearantly it failed to detect the smouldering load on this lorry. Perhaps the smouldering was not intensive enough to be picked up by the scanners?


----------



## Gusiluz

*Traffic on the Eurotunnel*

The Eurotunnel Group just announced a revenue growth from 7% (measured in £) to 1206.7 M €. 6% increase truck traffic, 4% cars and 2% lower in coaches. Passengers in HSR increase by 3% and tons transported in freight trains do it in, nothing less than 21%. Each train carries an average of 568 tonnes.



This term appears in the press release from the Eurotunnel Group:

Following the liquidation of SeaFrance on 9 January 2012, Eurotunnel acquired three ships from the Paris Commercial Court in July 2012 and, as a ferry owner, subcontracted the operations to an independent company, the SCOP SeaFrance. This new business, which started services on 20 August 2012, has seen its revenues grow from €7 million in 2012 to €93 million in 2014. *MyFerryLink* registered a strong growth of its traffic: truck (+22%) and cars (+7%). Thanks to the good quality of its service and despite legal proceedings with the UK competition authorities MyFerryLink has become a major player in the cross-Channel transport market However on 9 January 2015, the Competition Appeal Tribunal confirmed the decision of the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority to ban MyFerryLink from operating within six months, The Eurotunnel Group which has already appealed twice, has announced that it is seeking a buyer for MyFerryLink.


----------



## Gusiluz

*Talgo gauge-changer installed at Belarus-Poland border*

From Railway Gazette:

"Belarus Railways has installed a Talgo automatic gauge-changer at Brest station, close the Polish border, and expects to obtain certification for it to be used by Talgo passenger trainsets during the first quarter of 2015 
Installation required remodelling tracks and signalling and the installation of electrification equipment. The project is being implemented jointly by Belarusian Railways and Russian Railways, which has ordered three gauge-changing Talgo trainsets for use on Moscow – Minsk – Warszawa – Berlin services. 
The wheels will be adjusted from 1.520 to 1.435 mm gauge as the trainsets move slowly through the changer, eliminating the time-consuming need to jack up coaches and swap bogies. The Talgo trains will allocated 30 min for gauge changing and border formalities, compared to 2 h at present".

The photo on the news is the base where the Talgo remain in Moscow. In this other news (in Spanish) is a picture of a Talgo changer (you have to put roof, because in Brest should do some cold) and a map with the situation.

The Moscow-Berlin materials will be three branches Talgo 9 without suitable locomotive for 200 km/h, each with 20 mixed cars (the other 4 with Russian fixed gauge for Moscow-Kiev, which finally Moscow-Nizhny Novgorod, will have 2 first, 9 tourist, 5 beds, restaurant, café and 2 generators with 414 seats).
The Talgo 9 (T9) branches are designed specifically for the Customs Union (Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus) and comply with their rules GOST.
Since December 2015 it will take 18 hours (now they are 27) between Moscow and Berlin.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ I don't like this project for political reasons (won't go much off-topic, just say I'd rather have worse, not better links between Russia and Eastern Europe at this moment).

From a strictly technological POV, it is obviously a major improvement of manual change of bogies. I read it take up to 3 hours for a train to undergo all modifications in Brest.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> From a strictly technological POV, it is obviously a major improvement of manual change of bogies. I read it take up to 3 hours for a train to undergo all modifications in Brest.


2 to 3 hours yes (was there a few years ago). It takes time because each
car of the train must be separated, so that you can change not only the
bogies, but also the couplings.

I'm glad I was able to take many pictures, if this operation disappears.


----------



## XAN_

MarcVD said:


> 2 to 3 hours yes (was there a few years ago). It takes time because each
> car of the train must be separated, so that you can change not only the
> bogies, but also the couplings.
> 
> I'm glad I was able to take many pictures, if this operation disappears.


It wouldn't, not now, because only 2 trains would be replaced with Talgos, and there are much more trains around.


----------



## Eiropro

Gusiluz said:


> From Railway Gazette:
> 
> "Belarus Railways has installed a Talgo automatic gauge-changer at Brest station, close the Polish border, and expects to obtain certification for it to be used by Talgo passenger trainsets during the first quarter of 2015
> Installation required remodelling tracks and signalling and the installation of electrification equipment. The project is being implemented jointly by Belarusian Railways and Russian Railways, which has ordered three gauge-changing Talgo trainsets for use on Moscow – Minsk – Warszawa – Berlin services.
> The wheels will be adjusted from 1.520 to 1.435 mm gauge as the trainsets move slowly through the changer, eliminating the time-consuming need to jack up coaches and swap bogies. The Talgo trains will allocated 30 min for gauge changing and border formalities, compared to 2 h at present".
> 
> The photo on the news is the base where the Talgo remain in Moscow. In this other news (in Spanish) is a picture of a Talgo changer (you have to put roof, because in Brest should do some cold) and a map with the situation.
> 
> The Moscow-Berlin materials will be three branches Talgo 9 without suitable locomotive for 200 km/h, each with 20 mixed cars (the other 4 with Russian fixed gauge for Moscow-Kiev, which finally Moscow-Nizhny Novgorod, will have 2 first, 9 tourist, 5 beds, restaurant, café and 2 generators with 414 seats).
> The Talgo 9 (T9) branches are designed specifically for the Customs Union (Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus) and comply with their rules GOST.
> Since December 2015 it will take 18 hours (now they are 27) between Moscow and Berlin.


nice news.


----------



## NordikNerd

In *1968 *The international trains from Copenhagen-Stockholm went by ferry through Helsingör-Helsingborg. Today they go over the Öresund bridge.










How often do you see CSD czech sleepingwaggons in northern Norway. Was there even a regular service Prague-Bodö (Norway) ?


----------



## Road_UK

ICE train from Copenhagen on ferry Roedby, Denmark - Puttgarden, Germany.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

*International trains Germany-Western Europe Booming*

Deutsche Bahn claims that its border-crossing trains have seen a large increase in passengers in the past year. 
The largest increase came in traffic to the Netherlands on the IC line from Berlin and the ICE line from Frankfurt, both terminating in Amsterdam (7% of a total of 2.2 million passengers). German-French border-crossing with ICE and TGV trains saw an increase of 3% to 1.88 million; passengers to Belgium on the Frankfurt-Brussels ICE increased by 1.5% to 1.77 million. See http://dmm.travel/news/artikel/lesen/2015/02/fahrgastrekord-im-internationalem-fernverkehr-66424/ (German).
In other news, Deutsche Bahn's night trains, which the company claimed could not be operated profitable in the long run, were much more profitable than DB had claimed. While DB had justified closing down many of its international lines, claiming that overall only 1.4 million used DB night trains in 2013, the true number has now been established at 2.6 million. The company now stated that the night train service would be "redesigned", without any more concrete statement. See http://dmm.travel/news/artikel/lesen/2015/02/bahnchef-im-tourismus-ausschuss-66444/fortsetzung/2/ (in German).


----------



## oslogospelchoir

I thought Germany Netherlands traffic had always struggled with cross border secondary route closures


----------



## Theijs

oslogospelchoir said:


> I thought Germany Netherlands traffic had always struggled with cross border secondary route closures


The short distance service to Bad Bentheim & Emmerich have. For both prolongatiom of the German RE to Hengelo and Arnhem is being prepared in new concessions. Nijmegen - Kleve and Roermond - Dalheim have been closed in the 80s.


----------



## AlexNL

Arnhem - Düsseldorf is likely to start in december 2016, Hengelo - Bielefeld will follow a year later.


----------



## Suburbanist

Theijs said:


> The short distance service to Bad Bentheim & Emmerich have. For both prolongatiom of the German RE to Hengelo and Arnhem is being prepared in new concessions. Nijmegen - Kleve and Roermond - Dalheim have been closed in the 80s.


Are there are long-term plans to reopen these links, like the talks to re-start passenger rail service to Hasselt (B)?


----------



## AlexNL

Arnhem - Düsseldorf and Hengelo - Bad Bentheim - Bielefeld services will start to run in the next few years. For Nijmegen - Kleve and Roermond - Dalheim there are lots of ideas and plans (including trams, tram-trains, heavy rail) but nothing is concrete.


----------



## Sunfuns

Is Roedby-Puttgarden the only train ferry left in Europe?


----------



## TedStriker

Sunfuns said:


> Is Roedby-Puttgarden the only train ferry left in Europe?


No, there are many others still operating, although they are almost all for cargo wagons as oppose to passenger cars.


----------



## NordikNerd

Sunfuns said:


> Is Roedby-Puttgarden the only train ferry left in Europe?


Trelleborg-Sassnitz a seasonal service by Veolia, but for how long will this trainroute go on ?


----------



## TedStriker

NordikNerd said:


> Trelleborg-Sassnitz a seasonal service by Veolia, but for how long will this trainroute go on ?


May be a year or two. 

I've read that Stena operate just one train ferry now on this route and I'm surprised that even this exists as I'm sure that the Rostock-Trelleborg service can easily absorb the freight traffic that is routed via Sassnitz.


----------



## :jax:

If your goal is Berlin or beyond, Rostock is a significant detour.


----------



## TedStriker

:jax: said:


> If your goal is Berlin or beyond, Rostock is a significant detour.


If you're a human, yes. But my reference had been to freight traffic. I'm sure in the next year or two there will be no standard gauge train ferries serving Sassnitz - concentrating all cargo traffic via Rostock is a logical step and I'm surprised it hasn't been done sooner.


----------



## oslogospelchoir

It goes without saying, but tunnels and bridges across the sea are infinitely better than train ferries, so if we get the full set of possible links ie Denmark Sweden, Denmark Germany, Britain France, Finland Estonia, Italy Sicily, Spain Morocco and perhaps even Britain to Ireland, then i will not weep for the disappearance of this mode of transport.


----------



## MarcVD

Sunfuns said:


> Is Roedby-Puttgarden the only train ferry left in Europe?


No - Messina strait between Sicily and mainland Italy.


----------



## TedStriker

oslogospelchoir said:


> Il... i will not weep for the disappearance of this mode of transport.


Train ferries are not a redundant concept. Yes for certain corridors they will disappear due to the creation of fixed rail links. But not every train ferry route is subject to the threat of a fixed link.


----------



## MarcVD

Are you sure ? My opinion is that those that are reasonably well used will get a fixed link,
and the other ones will disappear.


----------



## TedStriker

MarcVD said:


> Are you sure ? My opinion is that those that are reasonably well used will get a fixed link,
> and the other ones will disappear.


Well first of all the various train ferry routes across Europe and the CIS-region are operated by a range of different companies and there is no one single organisation that unites all of these companies that is confirming some kind of policy that relates to the future operations of these connections. 

And nor is there everywhere where there is a train ferry a proposal for a fixed link. 

Perhaps you have in mind only certain corridors, such as the route between Germany and Sweden and that between the Italian mainland and Sicily?


----------



## eu01

The railway tunnel between Finland and Estonia looked to me as a bit unrealistic and very distant, but the project is not dead. According to a new research, this could be profitable.


> The results of a preliminary study show that linking Helsinki and Tallinn with an undersea tunnel would cost 9-13 billion euros, and its payback period would be about 35-40 years, LETA/Postimees Online reports.
> 
> On Wednesday in Helsinki, the results of the preliminary study of the feasibility study of the fixed link between Tallinn and Helsinki were presented, which enable to analyse the undersea tunnel and related wider impacts more thoroughly.
> 
> - edit: shortened a bit. Please stick to the first paragraph when quoting a source, thanks.


Source: The Baltic Course


----------



## Cloudship

Road_UK said:


> ICE train from Copenhagen on ferry Roedby, Denmark - Puttgarden, Germany.


Do the passengers remain on board the train while it is on the boat, or do they ride in the cabin area?


----------



## Road_UK

The crossing is 45 minutes so they can get off the train if they wish and have a stroll on the deck or go for a coffee or meal in the restaurant area.


----------



## :jax:

oslogospelchoir said:


> It goes without saying, but tunnels and bridges across the sea are infinitely better than train ferries, so if we get the full set of possible links ie Denmark Sweden, Denmark Germany, Britain France, Finland Estonia, Italy Sicily, Spain Morocco and perhaps even Britain to Ireland, then i will not weep for the disappearance of this mode of transport.


A Sweden-Germany link? No, that is not going to happen unless a vastly cheaper means for building undersea tunnels were developed. 

There will be, eventually, a Denmark-Germany Fehmarn link, and perhaps after that a Rostock-Gedser link to connect Scandinavia with Berlin and hinterlands, but a Sweden-Finland link is more likely than a Sweden-Germany link.


----------



## TedStriker

:jax: said:


> ... a Sweden-Finland link is more likely than a Sweden-Germany link.


What makes you say that? Are you thinking that there'll be a fixed link between, say, Turku and Stockholm? 

I'm not saying that a rail tunnel between Gedser and Rostock will arise anytime soon, but I can't see any reason why a rail tunnel between Sweden and Finland will be built before a rail tunnel between Sweden and Germany.


----------



## oslogospelchoir

The Finland toEstonia
Iink is political, a bypass of Russia


----------



## ArtManDoo

eu01 said:


> The railway tunnel between Finland and Estonia looked to me as a bit unrealistic and very distant, but the project is not dead. According to a new research, this could be profitable.
> 
> Source: The Baltic Course


It is possible thanks to the favourable surface. More than 2/3 of the tunnel will be in granite. It will be like a subway from Tallinn to Helsinki, but still not one as it will have catenary


----------



## NordikNerd

ArtManDoo said:


> It is possible thanks to the favourable surface. More than 2/3 of the tunnel will be in granite. It will be like a subway from Tallinn to Helsinki, but still not one as it will have catenary











It's about 50km across the Gulf from Finland to Estonia.

It would be the world's longest undersea tunnel.


----------



## Sunfuns

I'd also like to clarify: my prediction was only about passenger services


----------



## Road_UK

Can I clarify something too?


----------



## TedStriker

Sunfuns said:


> I'd also like to clarify: my prediction was only about passenger services


Okay. I and I believe the rest of rest of us have been referring to the train ferry technique as oppose to the types of train that use the ferry.


----------



## bongo-anders

NordikNerd said:


> Yes and you have to leave it in a hurry, the conductors are quite stressed out about having the passengers to exit the train.


Maybe you were to lazy :lol

I have never witnessed such behavior from the conductors so maybe you was just unlucky.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Baron Hirsch said:


> To clarify: the traditional freight train ferry across the Bosporus has been closed since the beginning of Marmaray reconstruction of former rail access lines (a few years now). What only started recently and will not disappear anytime soon is freight transport across the Marmara Sea between Bandirma and Tekirdag: the Tekirdag rail link is brand new and is being used for container transports between Western Anatolia and Central Europe. Someday there might be a bridge over the Dardanelles which could prove more convenient, but this is not so soon.


Thank you.

Just a question: wasn't the Maramaray designed also to carry freight traffic at nights? Maybe the capacity isn't high enough so that a ferry is needed to carry freight trains that don't fit within the Marmaray timetable?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

It will someday. At the moment only the underground and undersea sections are finished, i.e. 5 stations. The technically much easier part, modernizing the access routes through the city, the old suburban rail routes, is stalled, as the constructing company has failed to do more than tear everything down. Negotiations for a new company to take over are ongoing, with 2017 as the earliest date when following these delays Marmaray will be more than a mini-subway. 
Nonetheless I think the Bandirma-Tekirdag rail ferries will continue, as this services the Aegean coast and for them Marmaray would be a lobg detour.


----------



## kerouac1848

> *Eurostar Taps Surprise Demand on 1,235-Km London-Marseille Route*
> 
> Eurostar International Ltd. said it’s seeing strong demand for seats on a new train service that will push the boundaries of long-distance rail travel from London by linking the U.K. capital directly to the Mediterranean.
> 
> Sales on the 1,235-kilometer (767-mile) route from London St. Pancras station are “off to a cracking start,” with buoyant bookings to stops at Lyon and Avignon and higher-than-than-expected interest in the full six-hour trip to Marseille, Chief Executive Officer Nicolas Petrovic said in an interview.
> 
> 
> edit: too much quoted text deleted
> 
> ...


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ise-demand-on-1-235-km-london-marseille-route


----------



## m_avorreixo

^^ Wow! That makes foreseeable a hypothetical train service between London and Barcelona (1,500 km, aprox). The (partially, already under construction) extension of French HSL to Prepignan would make possible such a train service with same time than current highly successful TGV service between Paris and Barcelona.


----------



## Suburbanist

m_avorreixo said:


> ^^ Wow! That makes foreseeable a hypothetical train service between London and Barcelona (1,500 km, aprox). The (partially, already under construction) extension of French HSL to Prepignan would make possible such a train service with same time than current highly successful TGV service between Paris and Barcelona.


I'm a bit skeptical because London - Barcelona is a very busy and competitive air route with several carriers offering flights between both cities.


----------



## m_avorreixo

You're right, but air route between Paris and Barcelona is also busy and competitive. Nevertheless, TGV service is a real success. Why London - Barcelona should not have its place under the sun with same travel time?


----------



## parcdesprinces

kerouac1848 said:


> Eurostar will commence year-round operations to the French Riviera
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, Marseille was clearly not on the French Riviera. Non mais ! :colbert:


----------



## Stainless

Suburbanist said:


> I'm a bit skeptical because London - Barcelona is a very busy and competitive air route with several carriers offering flights between both cities.


I'm quite optimistic for the same reason.


----------



## Suburbanist

m_avorreixo said:


> You're right, but air route between Paris and Barcelona is also busy and competitive. Nevertheless, TGV service is a real success. Why London - Barcelona should not have its place under the sun with same travel time?


Because, for various modes and markets, research has shown attractiveness of a route is not a linear function of total travel time.

London - Barcelona by trains adds another 2h20 (southboudn) or 3h35 (northbound) to Paris-Barcelona travel time. It makes a 6h journey into a 8h30-9h30 journey.

Flying adds just another 25min at cruise altitude.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Because, for various modes and markets, research has shown attractiveness of a route is not a linear function of total travel time.
> 
> London - Barcelona by trains adds another 2h20 (southboudn) or 3h35 (northbound) to Paris-Barcelona travel time. It makes a 6h journey into a 8h30-9h30 journey.
> 
> Flying adds just another 25min at cruise altitude.


Time is not the only thing that matters. 

I for example don't mind spending 8 hours on a train, as long as I can leave after breakfast and arrive before dinner.
And I'm not alone in this.
But the biggest obstacle here is of course the silly security theatre. That does make trains from London to other places on the continent a bit of an issue...


----------



## Suburbanist

If Eurostar makes Lille a good station for border procedures, and is able to speed them up, then we will see more services around. I think they could process an entire train in Lille in no more than 40 min, if they build a separate station on the fields for that specific purpose. But I wonder, if that is the case, whether Calais is not a better place to build such "border control station".


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> . I think they could process an entire train in Lille in no more than 40 min, if they build a separate station on the fields for that specific purpose. But I wonder, if that is the case, whether Calais is not a better place to build such "border control station".


But why invest money to improve to a superflous requirement?

A beter strategy for Eurostar is to make the border procedure as onerous and annoying as possible, to increase the pressure to get rid of it.


----------



## eu01

Concerning these border procedures, one thing is incomprehensible to me. Even travelling between EU Finland and Putin's Russia the passport control is nowadays performed entirely on board of trains. 


> On board the train, each passenger is visited by four officials: a Finnish passport control officer, a Finnish customs officer, a Russian passport control officer and a Russian customs officer.
> 
> Between Vyborg and Vainikkala, the train travels in custom surveillance zone. During this period, the restaurant is closed and nobody can leave the train without permission from the relevant officers.
> (source)


So, why is it possible between more and more hostile countries, but not so within the "friendly" European Union?


----------



## Gusiluz

They are doubling the capacity of Lille-Europe, so evil is done :nuts: hno:

Eurostar has just released for sale tickets to Marseille and says that they "better than expected", but if they want to be competitive farther than Paris and Brussels should make border procedures on the train, and is made in many sites.
And I ask: why do you want standardize the Velaro e320 in the tunnel and 4 others countries if travelers Marseille and Amsterdam should get off at Lille?. They should put the e320 between Lille-Europe and London and take travelers from Western Europe to Lille by TGV and Thalys. They will take the same hno:
...................................
Están duplicando la capacidad de Lille-Europe, así que el mal ya está hecho.
Eurostar acaba de sacar a la venta los billetes a la Costa Azul y dice que van "mejor de lo esperado", pero si quieren ser competitivos a más distancia que París y Bruselas deberían hacer el control de aduanas en el tren, así se hace en muchísimos sitios.
Y pregunto: ¿para qué quieren homologar los Velaro e320 en el túnel y en otros 4 países si los viajeros de Marsella y Amsterdam deberán bajar en Lille?. Deberían poner los e320 entre Lille y Londres y llevar a los viajeros de Europa occidental hasta Lille en TGV y Thalys. Van a tardar lo mismo.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> Time is not the only thing that matters.
> 
> I for example don't mind spending 8 hours on a train, as long as I can leave after breakfast and arrive before dinner.
> And I'm not alone in this.


Not alone, but still a bit outside mainstream. Are you perhaps afraid of flying?


----------



## kerouac1848

There are a number of people who dislike the whole experience of flying, particularly older people. They are a minority of passengers for sure, but a minority of a large market is still sizeable. Additionally, with the travel market increasingly removing the price disparity between a return ticket vs. two singles, you can see lots of opportunities for open trips whereby passengers get the train down before picking up a flight somewhere else (there is always likely to be more destinations by plane than train). Many people in their 20s and 30s, like myself, experienced much of their adult travels like this, rather than the more typical fixed trips to one location and accommodation.

That all being said, I can't see a route down to Barcelona happening this decade. Eurostar will probably want to introduce further routes in Southern France first (Bordeaux and Montpellier are the obvious ones next), see what the impact of boarding at Lille has on demand and also wish to see the Paris-Barcelona travel time come down.


----------



## 00Zy99

AlpTransit is supposed to help with that, allowing some pretty fast running across some the worst of the terrain.


----------



## Suburbanist

00Zy99 said:


> AlpTransit is supposed to help with that, allowing some pretty fast running across some the worst of the terrain.


AlpTransit will help, but there is a larger problem about lack of track capacity north of the Alps. It is very hard to find paths for, say, an express train coming from Germany and calling only at Bern or Luzern and then Milano (which would somehow resemble French services like Lille-Lyon). 

Actually, I read that if an open-access operator wanted to run a Frankfurt-Milano train, for instance, its options would be:

- make the train follow a shadow path of some IC train, even if it doesn't want to stop at all stations domestic SBB IC's call at, which increases travel time.

- pay an access fee so high to get special paths that it would render the train service non-economical. 

- enter some arrangement whereas such train would be part of SBB netwok within Switzerland.


----------



## MarcVD

eu01 said:


> Concerning these border procedures, one thing is incomprehensible to me. Even travelling between EU Finland and Putin's Russia the passport control is nowadays performed entirely on board of trains.
> 
> So, why is it possible between more and more hostile countries, but not so within the "friendly" European Union?


Because the goals are different.

Controls at the entrance of the Channel tunnel have two main objectives :

- Prevent a terrorost attack (bombing) while in the tunnel
- Prevent illegal immigration

Both objectives require to perform the controls before entering the tunnel. 
Travel time between Lille and Calais is not sufficient for this.


----------



## AlexNL

00Zy99 said:


> Don't the Chunnel regs just mean that it has to be able to split in half?


It also has to do with aligning with the emergency crossovers that were built every 375 meters. By having 400m trains, you know for sure that one door will always be near a crossover (no more than a 20 meters walk from the door). By doing this passengers can remain inside the train as they walk to the crossover, should there be a serious incident such as a fire.

If you'd run a service with a 70 meter EMU, the odds are that the nearest emergency crossover is located 170 meters away from the front of the vehicle. This would mean a 170 meter walk through smoke. As we've seen in the Kaprun disaster, this can be quite a challenge.



> And I would expect the TMM to start after Britain went into Schengen.


And when do you expect that to happen, precisely? :lol:


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> Not alone, but still a bit outside mainstream. Are you perhaps afraid of flying?


I love flying. Especially when I'm doing the flying. 

But what commercial flying has become makes me angry. There are thousands of people now being paid solely to make the world a worse place. When people think that railways should introduce this as well I get ready for murder (figuratively speaking). 

I'm not the least bit afraid from flying. I just find that the train is less nerve wracking. It's also allows me to better organize my day, provided there is a frequent schedule. When I visit my relatives I want to be there before dinner. The day is going to be dominated by travel anyway. It doesn't really matter that much if the travel takes 6 or 8 hours, as long as it's pleasant.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I'm sure there is marginal demand for a lot of odd services. The question is, for instance: are there enough passengers willing to board an early morning train in London arriving late in the evening in Malaga? Or departing Roma 9.00 to arrive in London 22.00...


There is not enough demand to fill a whole train. But here the beauty of a train shows: you don't need to fill a train completely with people going all the way. A train can serve a whole lot of markets at the same time. 
A London Barcelona train would serve a lot of intermediate places as well. But as long as the security theatre is insisted upon such a train is indeed dead in the water. 

There is a train from Interlaken to Berlin, at two hours interval. It doesn't just serve Interlaken - Berlin travelers. Far from...


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> This would be expensive, because such a train would have to be an specially adapted engine able to run at 750 DC with third rail.


Such a train already exists. Euro stars ran using 750v third rail during the first years of service, before HSL1 opened.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> Because the goals are different. Controls at the entrance of the Channel tunnel have two main objectives : - Prevent a terrorost attack (bombing) while in the tunnel - Prevent illegal immigration Both objectives require to perform the controls before entering the tunnel. Travel time between Lille and Calais is not sufficient for this.


No it's not about preventing terrorism. (Neither are the checks at the airports). Its pure ass covering by officials.

Hou don't stop terrorism by forcing terroriste to change their tactics. The whole security theatre at the Eurostar is superfluous.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> I thinking that while France has built lines that enable now a lot of very long-distance international trains, Switzerland is set to become the dark hole of international travel in Western Europe, where average commercial speed is going to plummet if trains need to travel through, to or from Switzerland.


How many dedicated high speed lines has France build through the Alps? How many has Italy?

None.

Despite the difficult geography the average commercial speed of public transport is high in Switzerland then in Italy of France once you leave the high speed lines. 

The train from Basel to Milano has the lowest average speed on it's Italian section. Once it has left the mountains... 

That is the reality. 
It's not the SBB that is slowing trains to Milano down, it's Trenitalia.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Actually, I read that if an open-access operator wanted to run a Frankfurt-Milano train, for instance, its options would be:
> 
> - make the train follow a shadow path of some IC train, even if it doesn't want to stop at all stations domestic SBB IC's call at, which increases travel time.
> 
> - pay an access fee so high to get special paths that it would render the train service non-economical.
> 
> - enter some arrangement whereas such train would be part of SBB netwok within Switzerland.


Without many intermediate stops such a service would never be economically viable to begin with. Trains function best as part of a network. Stops add time to a train, but they also add value. They increase the number of destinations a train is useful for.
The main market for a train from Frankfurt to Milano would not be people going from Frankfurt to Milano, but people going to Frankfurt of Milano from places in between. 

The value of a train service is in the number of destinations it allows you to reach within your time budget. Speed is important, but is not the only thing that matters.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> I love flying. Especially when I'm doing the flying.
> 
> But what commercial flying has become makes me angry. There are thousands of people now being paid solely to make the world a worse place. When people think that railways should introduce this as well I get ready for murder (figuratively speaking).
> 
> I'm not the least bit afraid from flying. I just find that the train is less nerve wracking. It's also allows me to better organize my day, provided there is a frequent schedule. When I visit my relatives I want to be there before dinner. The day is going to be dominated by travel anyway. It doesn't really matter that much if the travel takes 6 or 8 hours, as long as it's pleasant.


You no doubt mean all that security theatre. It's not fun at all I agree with you, albeit not extra terrible in Switzerland. I just don't think too much about it because there are too many occasions when nothing else would get me to the desired location in a reasonable time or at all.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> There is a train from Interlaken to Berlin, at two hours interval. It doesn't just serve Interlaken - Berlin travelers. Far from...


Yes, although there is a downside too on using long distance trains for local traffic. These trains are late a lot more often than regular Swiss trains even considering that they are not on tight schedule. Sometimes they even have to be replace with extra trains.


----------



## Nexis

A rare double trainset High Speed meet


----------



## 437.001

*AVE/TGV France-Spain services.*

Passengers on the Perpignan-Barcelona route are quite angry at the ticket prices.

They have created this Facebook page (in French) to complain about it, and also about the bad timetables, which don't suit them, forcing them to travel by car to Figueres-Vilafant station (if they have to travel to anywhere beyond Barcelona)... or to drive all the way down to Barcelona, since car-sharing is less expensive in their case than travelling by train to Barcelona.

Besides, a Perpignan-Barcelona ticket will cost €37.10 from April, while a Narbonne-Barcelona ticket (which is a longer distance), will cost only €36.00.

Why is that?


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Passengers on the Perpignan-Barcelona route are quite angry at the ticket prices.
> 
> They have created this Facebook page (in French) to complain about it, and also about the bad timetables, which don't suit them, forcing them to travel by car to Figueres-Vilafant station (if they have to travel to anywhere beyond Barcelona)... or to drive all the way down to Barcelona, since car-sharing is less expensive in their case than travelling by train to Barcelona.
> 
> Besides, a Perpignan-Barcelona ticket will cost €37.10 from April, while a Narbonne-Barcelona ticket (which is a longer distance), will cost only €36.00.
> 
> Why is that?


Because RENFE and SNCF are incompetent/not interested. SNCF considers the train as something that only people traveling to/from Paris take. RENFE doesn't seem to be able to understand that the same service can serve both local and long distance markets.

Ideally there should be an hourly service between Barcelona and Perpignan. That way you could develop a market for cross border traffic. That you build a high speed railway and then run so few trains over it is mind boggling. 

How I would design a timetable for this line:

- At least every two hour a TGV from Barcelona to Perpignan and points north. Some trains would go to Toulouse/Bordeaux, others to Paris, others to Marseilles, and at least one to Geneva. For trains that turn "west" in Narbonne there is a good connection with a train going East, and vice versa (and if this is done right the same trains also serve as offering good connections on the Nimes . Narbonne - Bordeaux axis).
- On the other hours extend the current Alvia services to Perignan.
- On Barcelona - Perpignan (and beyond) TGV services offer tickets at ALVIA prices- Make it easy for people to exchange tickets when they decide they want to stay it bit longer at either end. Reserve two (or more, depending on demand) cars in the TGV for local traffic. 

This would probably not be very profitable in the first years, but it would build a market for day trips, shopping etc. It would make cross border commuting more attractive. I'm sure you could even get a EU subsidy for the first years...


----------



## TorinoBianconera88

I'd like to go to Dortmund from Torino (Italy) by train going tuesday , staying wednesday and coming back a Thursday.
Anyone have any suggestion or site where i can see this through?


----------



## k.k.jetcar

^^
The DB website? I reckon the most direct, fewest train change daytime routings are either via Paris or Milano/Basel.


----------



## flierfy

TorinoBianconera88 said:


> I'd like to go to Dortmund from Torino (Italy) by train going tuesday , staying wednesday and coming back a Thursday.
> Anyone have any suggestion or site where i can see this through?


I suggest you the Sparpreisfinder of Deutsche Bahn. There you'll find some bargains at least from Milano to Dortmund. To get to Milano and back home again you still need lefrecce.it I'm afraid.



k.k.jetcar said:


> The DB website? I reckon the most direct, fewest train change daytime routings are either via Paris or Milano/Basel.


Paris is not exactly direct nor fast in this case. There alone she had to change twice. The route via Milano and Bern looks a whole lot better.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...aly-sign-lyon-–-turin-accord.html?channel=537
> 
> *France and Italy sign Lyon – Turin accord*
> Thursday, February 26, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _FRENCH president Mr François Hollande, French secretary of state for transport Mr Alain Vidalies and Italian infrastructure and transport minister Mr Maurizio Lupi signed an agreement to go ahead with a new €26bn railway linking Lyon and Turin during an international summit in Paris on February 24_
> 
> "We can now say the Lyon – Turin railway is not just in the pipeline, but has been launched," Hollande says. "It will take time to come to fruition but there are, as of today, no brakes on the project and no obstacles lying in the way of its completion."
> 
> This agreement follows the approval of the project by the Italian Interministerial Committee for Economic Planning (CIPE) on February 20, paving the way for an application for TEN-T funding from the European Union (EU). The French and Italian governments hope to secure up to 40% of the funding required for the project from EU sources
> 
> ...


----------



## Baron Hirsch

TorinoBianconera88 said:


> I'd like to go to Dortmund from Torino (Italy) by train going tuesday , staying wednesday and coming back a Thursday.
> Anyone have any suggestion or site where i can see this through?


It really depends on what you expect from the ride most, comfort, good prices, or speed. 

I checked the DB website and the fastest connections are 11 hrs 20 min if you start in the morning at 6 or 10.00. via Switzerland with a few changes. Tight changes are usually not a problem in Switzerland. In Germany, they can be but if they do not work out you have the right to board the next train and demand part of your money back (with some minimal paperwork). 

Some people might prefer traveling a long route like this in a night train with couchette or sleeper options. The only night train that could help you for part of the way is the Basel-Amsterdam train, which stops in Duisburg, from where there are many local trains to Dortmund that do not take long. 

Prices do not show for your connection on the DB website, but they should show for any connection between a Swiss city and Germany and possibly Milano-Germany. Try around with German and Italian rail websites (Swiss is not very helpful as far as I remember). See also seat61.com on how to use DB website or Trenitalia and get a good deal out of them.


----------



## MarcVD

AlexNL said:


> The 1200 locos aren't owned by EETC, but loaned.


Wikipedia says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS_Class_1200) :

ACTS Nederland BV, EETC[edit]

Engine 1253 was taken out of service in 2003 and is now used for spare parts. In 2007 engine 1252 was taken out of service. In 2009 and 2010 the remaining 3 engines were taken out of service by ACTS and engines 1251, 1252, 1254 and 1255 were acquired by Euro-Express-Treincharter BV (EETC).

As of January 2011 engines 1251 and 1252 are again in active service whilst engine 1254 is being refurbished. They are used for transporting the empty Citynightline train from Munich and Zurich and the Euronight Jan Kiepura train from Moscow, Minsk, Warsaw, Prague and Copenhagen between Amsterdam Centraal railway station and Watergraafsmeer. They are also used for spare runs with charter trains and transporting carriages to and from the EETC workshop in Rotterdam.


Are they wrong ?


----------



## NordikNerd

*Trans Asia Express Ankara-Teheran*









*Ankara*








*Kayseri*
















*Tatvan*








*Train-ferry on the Van lake*








*Turkish-iranian border*


----------



## Verso

^ Europe?


----------



## MarcVD

NordikNerd said:


> Trans-Asia Express


Was on that train 5 years ago, when it still departed from Istanbul. Quite
an experience indeed !


----------



## Eiropro

MarcVD said:


> Was on that train 5 years ago, when it still departed from Istanbul. Quite
> an experience indeed !


How long does ride take?


----------



## NordikNerd

MarcVD said:


> Was on that train 5 years ago, when it still departed from Istanbul. Quite
> an experience indeed !












Seems strange that the train is taken on a ferry across a lake, why is there no railway around the lake Van ?


----------



## MarcVD

NordikNerd said:


> Seems strange that the train is taken on a ferry across a lake, why is there no railway around the lake Van ?


Regarding the previous question, when I took that trip it was like that :

- leave Istanbul around 10 PM (day 0) - electric traction
- arrive Ankara on the next morning (day 1)
- day travel to Kayseri - diesel traction
- night travel to Malatya - electric traction through the mountains (*)
- day travel to lake Van - diesel traction (day 2) (**)
- embark on the ferry on middle afternoon for a 6 hours cruise
- leave the ferry in the middle of the night
- turkish border early morning (day 3) (***)
- arrive mid morning in Tabriz - customs control (****)
- arrive late evening in Tehran (*****)

(*) it must have been spectacular but I missed all the action as it was in
the dark...

(**) we are in Kurdistan there, so the train is escorted by armed soldiers,
usually one at each train door.

(***) like at Kapikule; all passengers must disembark for the passport exit 
control. Then Iranians control passports on board.

(****) takes a few hours because the whole van is unloaded to control the
contents. Lokking for alcohol, pornography, and other items forbidden by
muslim religion, among others...

(*****) in theory. We were a few hours late, so really arrived in the middle
of the night. A bit uneasy when you don't know anything about the place...

The train is not put on the ferry - the turkish train finishes at Tatvan Pier
and an Iranian train takes over at the other side of the lake (only the loco
is turkish and changed at the border). Only the train van, loaded with 
luggage, is carried on the ferry and hooked to the other train. This is why,
at that time, I learned to read iranian digits, to be able to find my car and
compartment... That's what you can see on the picture : the van is pushed
on the ferry by the train, only this car will board, the others will remain
there ; and the passengers board the ferry by foot.

There is no rail line around Van lake because the terrain is extremely difficult
there. A line was considered, but now the option chosen is to build a line from
Kars to Naxichevan, where it will join the old line coming from Yerevan, 
currently disused, and reach from there the Iranian network at Jolfa.


----------



## K_

MarcVD said:


> R
> (***) takes a few hours because the whole van is unloaded to control the
> contents. Lokking for alcohol, pornography, and other items forbidden by
> muslim religion, among others...


Makes one wonder what the point of a through train is then. If everything needs to be unloaded one can as well make passengers change trains, and pass through customs between trains.


----------



## MarcVD

K_ said:


> Makes one wonder what the point of a through train is then. If everything needs to be unloaded one can as well make passengers change trains, and pass through customs between trains.


Well they do change trains, not at the border (which is in the middle
of nowhere), but at Van lake. And the stop at Tabriz is nice anyway, it
allowed me to strech my legs, gulp some fresh air (air conditioned cars, 
windows did not open, I miss that), have a drink, and steal some (many!) 
train pictures : train photography is normally not allowed but nobody seemed 
to bother. In Tehran it was another story !

In Tabriz, there are no controls for people - the Iranians do it on board the
train, it's only goods control which is done there. And they seem only
interested in what is stowed in the van, they did not want to open the
luggage in the passenger's compartments. We are not used to that anymore,
in our countries, luggage vans are an extinct species. How did that happen
at, say, the french-swiss border in the past ?


----------



## CB31

*Eurostar debuts London to Marseille high-speed rail link*









© Philippe Huguen



> Eurostar on Friday began whisking passengers from London to Marseille in a journey that took just over six hours as the international rail company opened a permanent and direct route connecting Britain and southern France.
> 
> The new year-round transport service will see high-speed TGV trains race from the heart of London to the French cities of Lyon, Avignon and Marseille, the company announced.
> 
> Eurostar said travellers departing from St Pancras International would be able to reach Lyon in four-and-a-half hours, Avignon in just less than six hours, and the Mediterranean city of Marseille in six-and-a-half hours.
> 
> Lyon is considered to be the capital of French gastronomy, while Avignon attracts tens of thousands of tourists for its annual theatre festival.
> 
> Marseille, France’s second-largest city, is a historic Mediterranean port, long considered a gateway between continental Europe and much of the world.
> 
> “Brits have a long standing love affair with the south of France, and our new service brings the gastronomy, culture and art from the region closer to the UK,” Eurostar commercial director Nick Mercer said in a statement when the company announced the launch of its new rail link last year.
> 
> (...)


http://www.france24.com/en/20150501-eurostar-london-marseille-six-hour-opens-lyon-avignon


----------



## KingNick

Its hardly a direct train when you have to get out for border checks.


----------



## Coccodrillo

From Euronews:

http://www.euronews.com/2015/05/01/...o-marseille-leaves-london-st-pancras-station/

Note powercar 3999, which is the spare locomotive.


----------



## doc7austin

Some photos from my journey with the international EuroCity train EC 1010 between Poprad-Tatry (Slovakia) and Praha hl.n. (Czech Republic) - RegioJet Business Class.


----------



## doc7austin

And here is the comprehensive video of my journey in RegioJet Business Class (EuroCity EC 1010 Kosice - Praha hl.n.) :


----------



## KingNick

Ah, those ÖBB business compartments were beyond comfortable. Nice to see they kept them the way they were. Restaurant carriage looks delicious as well.

Also I had no idea that RJ is operating EuroCity trains or any private company for that matter.


----------



## 437.001

From May 19 on, AVE/TGV tickets between Spain and France bought in Spain or at www.renfe.com will offer the 15-25 discount fare (for youngsters between 15 and 25 years old).

I don't know wether the 15-25 fare already applied if the passenger bought the tickets at www.sncf.com or in France.

Source: one of our deep throats.

:banana: YAY.


----------



## NordikNerd

Vienna is the most accesable city for international train travel. You can reach pretty much all of continental europe with train within less than 18 hours.


----------



## Slagathor

Unless you live in Iberia.


----------



## Verso

Who walks 12 km/h? :nuts:


----------



## phoenixboi08

Verso said:


> Who walks 12 km/h? :nuts:


Olympic, Speed Walking, Gold Champions, of course


----------



## flierfy

KingNick said:


> Only if you consider HSR the only train option these days. That of course is not the case. Paris is better connected to Western Europe, while Vienna trumps Paris in Central Europe.


This is a rather unqualified remark. Paris beats Wien by a country-mile not because we consider just one part of the railway network but because of the entirety of the railway networks in France and its neighbouring countries is technologically advanced. And the only reason why Vienna has quicker connections to most places in central Europe is because it is located there. But towns like Ulm, Fulda, Erfurt and even Bregenz are already closer to Paris than to Wien.



Wouter999 said:


> I guess Frankfurt/Main is even better connected than both Paris or Vienna.


Frankfurt/M may be better connected than Wien but certainly not better than Paris. One is simply quicker in Amsterdam, Brussels and Milano from Paris than from Frankfurt/M.


----------



## KingNick

flierfy said:


> This is a rather unqualified remark. Paris beats Wien by a country-mile not because we consider just one part of the railway network but because of the entirety of the railway networks in France and its neighbouring countries is technologically advanced. And the only reason why Vienna has quicker connections to most places in central Europe is because it is located there. But towns like Ulm, Fulda, Erfurt and even Bregenz are already closer to Paris than to Wien.


And how does this remark even remotely counter my argument that Wien is better connected to central Europe? You picked towns that happend to be half way between Wien and Paris where Paris is better connected. Well lets take Munich and you'll see Vienna better connected by a country mile, or Augsburg and Nürnberg. Don't even get me started with all the capitals in eastern central Europe. If we take your point of view further we will come to the conclusion that Madrid would then be the best connected city of Europe. It just happens to be nowhere near places abroad worth connecting, but the quality of the rail network trumps all the others.


----------



## flierfy

KingNick said:


> And how does this remark even remotely counter my argument that Wien is better connected to central Europe? You picked towns that happend to be half way between Wien and Paris where Paris is better connected. Well lets take Munich and you'll see Vienna better connected by a country mile, or Augsburg and Nürnberg. Don't even get me started with all the capitals in eastern central Europe. If we take your point of view further we will come to the conclusion that Madrid would then be the best connected city of Europe. It just happens to be nowhere near places abroad worth connecting, but the quality of the rail network trumps all the others.


Your argument has already been countered by the isochrone charts that have been linked in this thread. These graphics show distinctly the relative isolation of Wien from where only one fairly fast railway line radiates. On the other side there a city like Paris whose high-speed tentacles reach out in every direction and connect the city quickly to a fairly large area. But Paris is not only better connected to a larger part of Europe than Wien. It is incidentally the more important part of the continent as well.

As for being midway between those cities. All towns I mentioned are geographically closer to Wien but have faster connection to Paris. These are the facts. And they speak volumes in favour of Paris.


----------



## KingNick

flierfy said:


> Your argument has already been countered by the isochrone charts that have been linked in this thread. These graphics show distinctly the relative isolation of Wien from where only one fairly fast railway line radiates. On the other side there a city like Paris whose high-speed tentacles reach out in every direction and connect the city quickly to a fairly large area. But Paris is not only better connected to a larger part of Europe than Wien. It is incidentally the more important part of the continent as well.
> 
> As for being midway between those cities. All towns I mentioned are geographically closer to Wien but have faster connection to Paris. These are the facts. And they speak volumes in favour of Paris.


Nope, those graphs only show travel times and nothing else. It says absolutely nothing about the connections available. Vienna is directly connected to every capital (forget about Bern) in Central Europe and additionally to that the capitals of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Russia and Italy. Therfore no, Paris does not cover a greater area, but one that is significantly smaller, but within those borders travel time is indeed faster.


----------



## K_

flierfy said:


> Frankfurt/M may be better connected than Wien but certainly not better than Paris. One is simply quicker in Amsterdam, Brussels and Milano from Paris than from Frankfurt/M.


This is not interily correct. For example trip times from Frankfurt to Milano are the same as from Paris to Milano, but you have more options on Frankfurt - Milano then on Paris - Milano.

The thing the isochrone maps are missing, is that it is not area that matters, but population. The purpose of travel is usually to meet other people. And so what matters is not how many square km you can reach from a place but how many destinations that that are actually useful. One way to for example quantify how wel a place is connected is to look at how many urban areas of a particular size one can reach within a certain time.
How often a train runs is also important. A city pair that has a train every hour that takes 2 hours is better connected then one that has only a few trains a day, that take only 1 hour. 

The structure of a country matters too. These are the urban areas in France with more than one million people:

Lille
Lyon
Marseille
Nice
Paris

Now from Paris you can reach Lille in a bit over an hour, Lyon in a bit under two hours, Marseille in 3 1/2 hours and Nice in 5 1/2 hours. 

And these are the urban areas with more than one million inhabitants in Germany:

Berlin
Bremen
Frankfurt
Hamburg
Munich
Nuremberg
Düsseldorf
Cologne
Ruhr area
Saarbrücken
Stuttgart

Now from Frankfurt you can reach 3 of those in under 2 hours, 3 more in under three hours, 3 in under 4 hours, and one (Berlin) in just over 4 hours. And in each case you have a train every hour. 

So it would appear at first glance that Frankfurt is better connected to Germany than Paris is to France... But of course this has everything to do with geography...


----------



## K_

flierfy said:


> As for being midway between those cities. All towns I mentioned are geographically closer to Wien but have faster connection to Paris. These are the facts. And they speak volumes in favour of Paris.


It wouldn't be surprised that every place that is halfway between Paris and Vienna has more trains to Vienna then to Paris...


----------



## Verso

KingNick said:


> Nope, those graphs only show travel times and nothing else. It says absolutely nothing about the connections available. Vienna is directly connected to every capital (forget about Bern) in Central Europe and additionally to that the capitals of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Russia and Italy. Therfore no, Paris does not cover a greater area, but one that is significantly smaller, but within those borders travel time is indeed faster.


So that map doesn't take into account waiting times? For example, if I wanna go from Ljubljana to Bratislava, I have to change train in Vienna. Does the map take into account the waiting time in Vienna, or it assumes that I can immediately continue to Bratislava?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

K_ said:


> It wouldn't be surprised that every place that is halfway between Paris and Vienna has more trains to Vienna then to Paris...


Oh K, your naive belief that the turtle always beats the rabbit. But unfortunately no. Take Stuttgart: 534 km as the bird flies from Vienna and 500 km from Paris. DB shows 4 direct TGVs per day that do the run in 3 hours 40 minutes. There are 8 slower connections with changing trains that all get you there between 4 and 5 1/2 hours, admittedly not at regular intervals. 
By contrast, there is no direct train from Stuttgart to Vienna. All connections involve at least one change , sometimes two. Best traveling time to Wien Westbf is 6.32 h, Wien Hbf ca. 7 hrs. There is no lack of connections, sometimes as many as 3 an hour, but as they all depart within a common 15-minute window, the benefit to passengers is minimal. Also, they dwindle after 15.00, as this means a very late arrival. 
Now you tell me which one of the two cities can claim to be better connected to Stuttgart?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

K_ said:


> So it would appear at first glance that Frankfurt is better connected to Germany than Paris is to France... But of course this has everything to do with geography...


A nice comparison. But as you yourself like to point out, there are not as many good reasons to be in Frankfurt as there are to be in Paris, so many people will want to travel via Frankfurt among these agglomerations, and then often a trip by rail will seem unattractively slow to people (> 4 hrs) who have no qualms about flying and an airport nearby. As one colleague above suggested, a lot would be gained if the access routes to Frankfurt would be upgraded or built new from Mannheim, Fulda, Würzburg and Erfurt, as this would make a big effect on overall travel times on the German HS network.
While most cities in the ICE grid are only connected hourly (except on lines where routes double and for a couple of vintage IC train sets on Fridays and Sundays), Paris-Marseille, Paris-Lille, and Paris-Lyon see mostly twice hourly departures. Nice is admittedly the ugly little duckling at the end of the country no-one much cares about. 
The advantage of the German system is hardly to be found in its long distance services. The advantage is mostly that long distance services are integrated into a heavily subsidized regional traffic system, which can more easily guarantee for a door to door service via public transport.


----------



## K_

Baron Hirsch said:


> Oh K, your naive belief that the turtle always beats the rabbit.


It's not my belief that the turtle beats the hare. It's my belief however that 10 turtles indeed will beat 5 hares....

Speed isn't the only thing that matters. 

But anyway, I was more thinking about places that were in the middle timewise, not distance wise. What I wanted to point out that not only how fast matters, but how often too.
Speed isn't everything. On Amsterdam - Brussel the slow IC is still more popular than Thalys...


----------



## K_

Baron Hirsch said:


> While most cities in the ICE grid are only connected hourly (except on lines where routes double and for a couple of vintage IC train sets on Fridays and Sundays), Paris-Marseille, Paris-Lille, and Paris-Lyon see mostly twice hourly departures. Nice is admittedly the ugly little duckling at the end of the country no-one much cares about.
> The advantage of the German system is hardly to be found in its long distance services. The advantage is mostly that long distance services are integrated into a heavily subsidized regional traffic system, which can more easily guarantee for a door to door service via public transport.


The difference is also in the fact that it is a grid, not a hub and spoke system. The German ICE system gives acceptable connections between all major urban areas in Germany. The French system gives excellent connections with Paris, but the moment you try to get from "somewhere not Paris" to "Somewhere else not Paris" the system quickly becomes unsatisfactory. Just look at the service level on Bordeaux - Toulouse - Marseille for example. That's a corridor with quite a few major cities, that would merit a half hourly IC service throughout the day. 

This is the main difference. DB doesn't concentrate on serving one urban area the expense of all else.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Even that works out kind of well. Bordeaux to Marseille is also 500 km as the crow flies and has 7 direct connections per day in 6 hours each. Not great, but still superior to Stuttgart-Vienna timewise, although of course sub-standard when you see other French services. 
By the way according to the list I just consulted, Bordeaux and Toulouse are also > 1 million conglomerations. While Bordeaux is rather well connected under 3 1/2 hours from Paris and more HS rails are being laid to get it closer to Paris, Toulouse is the odd one out with 5 1/2 hours traveling time from Paris (via Bordeaux) and few direct connections.


----------



## Suburbanist

The importance of frequency diminishes as distances increase and travel time becomes more relevant.


----------



## flierfy

KingNick said:


> Nope, those graphs only show travel times and nothing else. It says absolutely nothing about the connections available. Vienna is directly connected to every capital (forget about Bern) in Central Europe and additionally to that the capitals of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Russia and Italy. Therfore no, Paris does not cover a greater area, but one that is significantly smaller, but within those borders travel time is indeed faster.


Your last sentence doesn't make sense at all. And as for being directly connected to central European capitals, these capitals are numerous because their countries are in most cases small and of little significance. The political and economic centre of gravity of Europe is located western Europe, somewhere between Brussels and Köln. An area closer and better connected to Paris.


----------



## flierfy

K_ said:


> This is not interily correct. For example trip times from Frankfurt to Milano are the same as from Paris to Milano, but you have more options on Frankfurt - Milano then on Paris - Milano.


The quickest connection from Paris is 20 min faster than the fastest one from Frankfurt/M. And it is a direct train from Paris. Connections from Frankfurt/M require a change, often even more than one, and there aren't that much more frequent that this criteria would make up for the lag in quickness and convenience that the Paris-Milano TGV is ahead.



K_ said:


> The thing the isochrone maps are missing, is that it is not area that matters, but population. The purpose of travel is usually to meet other people. And so what matters is not how many square km you can reach from a place but how many destinations that that are actually useful. One way to for example quantify how wel a place is connected is to look at how many urban areas of a particular size one can reach within a certain time.




The red line in this graphic roughly marks the 'time'shed between Paris and Frankfurt/M, while the green line marks the geographic halfway line.
That gives you an idea in which area one is timely closer to Paris or Frankfurt/M by railways. This graphic alone demonstrates the superiority of the French railway network over the German one.



K_ said:


> How often a train runs is also important. A city pair that has a train every hour that takes 2 hours is better connected then one that has only a few trains a day, that take only 1 hour.


The importance of frequency decreases with the length of a journey. I haven't found a town whose travel time to the cities are roughly the same and yet the frequency in service to one is significantly more frequent than to the other.



K_ said:


> The structure of a country matters too. These are the urban areas in France with more than one million people:
> 
> Lille
> Lyon
> Marseille
> Nice
> Paris
> 
> Now from Paris you can reach Lille in a bit over an hour, Lyon in a bit under two hours, Marseille in 3 1/2 hours and Nice in 5 1/2 hours.


You seem to forget the largest conurbation in France, the Île de France. Its population of 10m people are located within the 1h isochrone from Paris. This already gives Paris a lead over Frankfurt/M



K_ said:


> And these are the urban areas with more than one million inhabitants in Germany:
> 
> Berlin
> Bremen
> Frankfurt
> Hamburg
> Munich
> Nuremberg
> Düsseldorf
> Cologne
> Ruhr area
> Saarbrücken
> Stuttgart
> 
> Now from Frankfurt you can reach 3 of those in under 2 hours, 3 more in under three hours, 3 in under 4 hours, and one (Berlin) in just over 4 hours. And in each case you have a train every hour.
> 
> So it would appear at first glance that Frankfurt is better connected to Germany than Paris is to France... But of course this has everything to do with geography...


There are 65m people in France, another 65m in Britain, 55m on the Iberian peninsula, most of the 25m in Benelux and most of the 60m people in Italy which live closer to Paris than to Frankfurt/M. You have to go deep into Asia to find enough people to counter the population on the Paris side of the shed.


----------



## Suburbanist

Germany should have built a maglev line between München and Köln, that would have helped with issues a lot.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> The importance of frequency diminishes as distances increase and travel time becomes more relevant.


That's true if you only consider the end points relevant. But a train from for example Berlin to Frankfurt does a lot more than just move people from Berlin to Frankfurt.


----------



## K_

flierfy said:


> There are 65m people in France, another 65m in Britain, 55m on the Iberian peninsula, most of the 25m in Benelux and most of the 60m people in Italy which live closer to Paris than to Frankfurt/M. You have to go deep into Asia to find enough people to counter the population on the Paris side of the shed.


So now it's Germany's fault that Spain is to the Southwest of France?


----------



## K_

flierfy said:


> You seem to forget the largest conurbation in France, the Île de France. Its population of 10m people are located within the 1h isochrone from Paris. This already gives Paris a lead over Frankfurt/M


No, it's actually a point I keep on making, that you seem to ignore: The population distribution in France is very different than in Germany. That means that French recipes can't be applied to Germany.


----------



## K_

Baron Hirsch said:


> Even that works out kind of well. Bordeaux to Marseille is also 500 km as the crow flies and has 7 direct connections per day in 6 hours each. Not great, but still superior to Stuttgart-Vienna timewise, although of course sub-standard when you see other French services.


Stuttgart - Vienna is 535km. Thus 35 km more and 20 minutes longer. . Fewer direct trains, but more connections and a larger amplitude. 
I'd call that a tie..


> By the way according to the list I just consulted, Bordeaux and Toulouse are also > 1 million conglomerations.


It does indeed depend a bit on the list you use.
But it is quite striking that in France you have one huge metropolis, Paris, and then quite a few ones that just are about 1 million or a bit more. 
I used this list (and more specifically the first column of figures):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_Europe

The thing is that in France the biggest city has 11 million inhabitants. The second biggest has 1.6 ... That is a huge difference, and shows how centralised France is. It also means that from about anywhere in France the main destination is Paris. And this market SNCF serves quite well.
Germany is very different. The biggest urban area, the Ruhr, is not even a city. There are no cities of the size of Paris, but several in the 2 to 5 million bracket. That asks for a different network.


----------



## TedStriker

^^

There's about as much chance of anything like this happening in the short term as there is Greece getting it's finances sorted out.


----------



## TedStriker

To complicate matters a little, the only cargo capable HS-trainsets in existence, the TGV La Poste vehicles that you refer to, are being scrapped.


----------



## Sunfuns

There is really very little need for a high speed freight delivery. At least for the kind of delivery railways would be good at (large volumes).


----------



## Suburbanist

Most network management companies use nighttime to do regular maintenance and repairs on high-speed tracks, reason for which they are rarely closed during daytime. If regular nigh traffic starts using them, this philosophy would have to change.


----------



## Nexis




----------



## skyrocket2

Why is the area surrounding Rhine in Germany classed as a metropolis, but Benelux not?



dreaad said:


> italy and germany both are pretty similar since the population is more equally distributed. spain and france don't instead. fully visible in maps at night with artificial lights.
> 
> just see the huge "stain" in the Po valley and the adriatic coast.


What surprises me is how undeveloped British HSR is considering how dense and close it's populations are. We are expecting 4 new HSR right? And maybe two tunnels to Ireland?

Then there's a route between Germany and Moscow waiting to be built.


But does anyone here wonder whether EU should invest in long distance Mag-Lev?


----------



## TedStriker

skyrocket2 said:


> But does anyone here wonder whether EU should invest in long distance Mag-Lev?



Only those who are insane in the membrane will wonder about such a thing.


----------



## [atomic]

skyrocket2 said:


> What surprises me is how undeveloped British HSR is considering how dense and close it's populations are. We are expecting 4 new HSR right? And maybe two tunnels to Ireland?


I can't think of any valid reason but there must have been some national policy decision back in the 80s that they would not develop hsr, unlike france and germany.
And a Tunnel to Ireland will probably never come true since digging 80-90 km will cost you a pretty penny.


> Then there's a route between Germany and Moscow waiting to be built.


Planes are probably far too competitive at those distances. Plus the russians use broad gauge.


> But does anyone here wonder whether EU should invest in long distance Mag-Lev?


maglev is currently being build in Japan but it is incredibly expensive and runs in tunnels for much of the line. it might be just a giant financial black hole. time will tell.


----------



## TedStriker

[atomic] said:


> I can't think of any valid reason but there must have been some national policy decision back in the 80s that they would not develop hsr, unlike france and germany.



Britain in the 1980s was certainly not a place that was embracing the idea of high speed railways as France was. France in fact had kicked-off research into the HS train idea back in the 1970s. 

The 1970s and 1980s were two very difficult decades in Britain. And with the arrival of the Margaret Thatcher led Conservative administration in 1979 anything that was taxpayer-funded was under the spotlight. 

Check out the infamous Serpell Report, for example. 

But we live in more logical times now, thankfully.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...s-rail-investment-priorities.html?channel=537
> 
> *EC identifies rail investment priorities*
> Monday, June 29, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _THE European Commission (EC) revealed its rail investment priorities for the next five years on June 29, when transport commissioner Mrs Violeta Bulc unveiled a shortlist of 276 transport projects which are being put forward to share €13.1bn in funding from the European Union's (EU) Connecting Europe Facility (CEF)_
> 
> The EC says it has received more than 700 applications from member states requesting a total of €36bn in funding for transport projects since the CEF was launched last September. The EU's contribution to selected projects will range from 20% to 85%, with nearly €4.8bn allocated to member states eligible for cohesion funding.
> 
> The EC says the investment will unlock additional public and private co-financing which will increase the total value to €28.8bn
> 
> ...
> 
> The list largely focuses on enhancements to the core trans-European network and includes flagship projects including *Rail Baltica*, the *Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link*, *Lyon - Turin*, Austria's *Brenner Base Tunnel*, and Spain's *Mediterranean Corridor upgrade*, as well as a range of smaller-scale initiatives including studies on the *reopening of the Iron Rhine*, *upgrading of the cross-border link between Groningen and Bremen*, and capacity enhancements on the *Kiruna - Narvik line* in northern Sweden
> 
> ...


----------



## Verso

Looks like even a Slovenian commissioner can't provide us with any mentionworthy money from EU. Then again, it's our own fault.


----------



## TedStriker

Rodalvesdepaula said:


> Are there any news about Euro Carex?



Last post for French high-speed freight as postal TGVs bow out


----------



## K_

skyrocket2 said:


> What surprises me is how undeveloped British HSR is considering how dense and close it's populations are.


It's exactly because it's close and dense that HSR made less sense in the UK. The largest and second largest cities in the UK are already less than two hours apart by train. The situation in for example France is very different.

However building new dedicated lines will make it possible to fix some of the problems plagueing British railways, like the constrained loading gauge and short platforms.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

dimlys1994 said:


> From Rail Journal:


Found the exact list of projects entitled to funding and amounts/quotas: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/theme...015-06-29-cef/selection-decision-awp-2014.pdf
And do not worry, Slovenia is in. There is funding for a second tube for the Karawankentunnel between Slovenia and Austria (although applied for by Austria).


----------



## Verso

^^ 3.7 million euros, that's nothing. We need more than a billion for the second rail to the port of Koper. Even Austria and Hungary are getting annoyed with lack of it.


----------



## KingNick

I suppose Slovenia is still eligible for grants out of the Cohesion Fund anyway.


----------



## MarcVD

Baron Hirsch said:


> Found the exact list of projects entitled to funding and amounts/quotas


From this text, the description of a project :

MEDAS 3.0 - Greening the automotive supply 
chain with trusted collaborative networks to 
bundle cargo and operate a sustainable `just 
in time? Mediterranean rail shuttle service 

Was this the result of a contest to insert a maximum of today's buzzwords
in one single sentence ? And do project really have to be described that way
to be taken in consideration by the european commission ?


----------



## skyrocket2

K_ said:


> It's exactly because it's close and dense that HSR made less sense in the UK. The largest and second largest cities in the UK are already less than two hours apart by train. The situation in for example France is very different.
> 
> However building new dedicated lines will make it possible to fix some of the problems plagueing British railways, like the constrained loading gauge and short platforms.


I agree that UK has different population distribution compared to France. But Britain is also increasingly American in it's approach to socialism and liberalism, and this must have played a role in railways investment.

UK needs more capacity and I agree that investment in HSR is a perfect way to solve this problem. I would add that the next HSR3 should be built in between Glasgow and Edinburgh to help spread out investment away from London.

I also think the new Euston/St Pancreas/Kings Cross area will be very intresting, especially if it merges with a new train station east of Euston... London may have it's own "Northern Station" soon...


----------



## Fatfield

skyrocket2 said:


> I agree that UK has different population distribution compared to France. But Britain is also increasingly American in it's approach to socialism and liberalism, and this must have played a role in railways investment.
> 
> UK needs more capacity and I agree that investment in HSR is a perfect way to solve this problem. I would add that the next HSR3 should be built in between Glasgow and Edinburgh to help spread out investment away from London.
> 
> I also think the new Euston/St Pancreas/Kings Cross area will be very intresting, especially if it merges with a new train station east of Euston... London may have it's own "Northern Station" soon...


There's already a planned HSR between Glasgow & Edinburgh. Its due to be completed by 2024.

As for your first point, can I have a pint of what you've been drinking?!


----------



## Suburbanist

I was thinking whether an international rail link between Gibraltar and Algeciras could be built, with a tunnel crossing under La Linea and the border.


----------



## Gusiluz

*Comparison of HS services worldwide 2007/2012*

Data calculated based on the report: Performance and efficiency of high-speed rail systems of Jack E. Doomernik. Lloyd's Register and University of Antwerp

First of comparative *Use*:


Do not confuse with the occupation (passengers / seats); when the % is very high, as the Sapsan (84.5%), usually it is the latter: in a train of 100 seats were occupied 84.5 at some point along the route, even a very short drive. In this case the Use is roughly between 50 and 65%.

You can see that the best data are CRH (with many ups and downs due to the halt in construction of HSL by corruption scandals of former minister, who was sentenced to death) followed, although I have the 2012, Eurostar, TGV, KTX, Shinkansen and Spanish LD (includes AVE). These reached 61.26% in 2013 and 63.41% in 2014, so we are KTX-level and above the TGV. 
I have only data Eurostar 2010 (65%), will now be better (hardly make stops, the thickness is London-Paris or Brussels). NTV began in 2012 (data from your own site: 51%), 6 points higher than its public competitor.

Now *average km* per passenger:


You can check that services whose passengers travel more km are TGV and the Spanish LD (remember that are total runs, counting HSL and Conventional), with 50% more than their pursuers: ICE and Frecce (which has reduced its route average from 393 to 309 km, 21.4% in 5 years). China continues to rise and then are KTX (almost covering the Shinkansen), both very stable, followed by NTV (within a range 24% lower than its public competitor Frecce) and THSR, punishable by a maximum travel of 338 km between Taipei and Kaohsiung.

Now we will see that there are *trains with a different size*:


You can see the huge difference in size between Asian and European trains, especially the Spaniards, who are 69% smaller; and that these have been in six years, from 276 to 325 seats, 2013 (not in picture), an increase of 18% in its average capacity.

THSR 700T tops the list of places Taiwan 989, on par with the average of the Shinkansen (between 338 and 1,324 seats), followed by Eurostar, the KTX, which began with the 935 seats of the KTX I (TGV-Réseau derivatives) and they dropped 363 of the KTX II (HSR 350X Hyundai Rotem) and CRH (between 494 and 1,299 seats).
In Europe (excluding Eurostar) the larger the Frecce (between 402 and 656 seats); They are also the least exploited, maybe that's why the new ETR 1000 have 457 seats. They are tied NTV (460), TGV (between 345 and 634 seats) and ICE (between 195 and 649 seats).
Apart from the study are Russian Sapsan (604 seats), the Moroccan Duplex Maroc (533 seats in 2018), the Turks (the Velaro TR 500 and 409 of the ATPRD CAF), the Saudi Haramain (417 squares, 2016) and American Acela (304 seats).


----------



## K_

Gusiluz said:


> You can see that the best data are CRH (with many ups and downs due to the halt in construction of HSL by corruption scandals of former minister, who was sentenced to death) followed, although I have the 2012, Eurostar, TGV, KTX, Shinkansen and Spanish LD (includes AVE). These reached 61.26% in 2013 and 63.41% in 2014, so we are KTX-level and above the TGV.
> I have only data Eurostar 2010 (65%), will now be better (hardly make stops, the thickness is London-Paris or Brussels). NTV began in 2012 (data from your own site: 51%), 6 points higher than its public competitor.


Higher average occupation% is not always better. From the point of view of the passenger lower occupation is actually better. Some railways also can turn a profit at a lower occupancy % because they are more efficient.


----------



## Gusiluz

^^ mg:


----------



## flierfy

K_ said:


> From the point of view of the passenger lower occupation is actually better.


That is a fairly short-sighted view. Train-operating companies adjust their service level and the size of the deployed vehicles to the number of passengers. It is therefore in the interest of each traveller that trains are filled to keep up the existing service level or to get even additional services.


----------



## K_

flierfy said:


> That is a fairly short-sighted view. Train-operating companies adjust their service level and the size of the deployed vehicles to the number of passengers. It is therefore in the interest of each traveller that trains are filled to keep up the existing service level or to get even additional services.


However a company that can turn a profit with an average occupancy level of 30% will start adding services if average loading is above 30%, whereas another company will only do this once loadings go above 60%. Which is the better from the point of view of the passengers?


----------



## Sunfuns

I doubt that. Such a company will happily take 60% loading and do nothing. Why bother if money is coming to you for free?


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> I doubt that. Such a company will happily take 60% loading and do nothing. Why bother if money is coming to you for free?


Because a company like that makes more money when they run 20 trains with 40% average loading than 10 trains with 60% average loading.

Trains are expensive. Letting them sit idle in the yards costs money too.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> Because a company like that makes more money when they run 20 trains with 40% average loading than 10 trains with 60% average loading.


But it's not like that usually. The company only has 20 trains, runs all of them at 40% average loading. If the demand increases by 15% they'll be very happy about it, but they won't invest in buying new trains just yet. 

I work in a chemical company and we try to squeeze all possible capacity out of existing assets before we even consider investing large amounts of money to acquire more. A new factory building takes a long time to pay off. I don't think the situation is radically different for a railway company.


----------



## AlexNL

You are right. It takes ages to procure new rolling stock, a short-term demand increase (which later declines) does not justify the money and time involved to get the new trains running.

In the most optimistic situation, it take about a year before a newly ordered train or locomotive can run in commercial service. However, this requires that the train has alreayd been homologated (approved for commercial service), that staff has been trained and preferably that there is still an option available with the manufacturer.

If it concerns new trains, the order can take somewhere between 2 to 5 years depending on vehicle type (new design or existing, approved or not), ownership structure (small private company vs government owned) and if there's a requirement to put it out to tender or not.


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> But it's not like that usually. The company only has 20 trains, runs all of them at 40% average loading. If the demand increases by 15% they'll be very happy about it, but they won't invest in buying new trains just yet.


DB or SBB indeed not, as they have their trains in motion as much as possible. 
But for example SNCF or RENFE have large numbers sitting idle for large parts of the day, because the marginal cost for an extra train is higher for them.


----------



## Jeff Hawken

K_ said:


> DB or SBB indeed not, as they have their trains in motion as much as possible.
> But for example SNCF or RENFE have large numbers sitting idle for large parts of the day, because the marginal cost for an extra train is higher for them.


I think that has more to do with the historical procurement and operating philosophy of SNCF (I'm not so sure about RENFE), where long-distance rolling stock is diagrammed very slackly. There are usually TGVs to be found sitting around spare at various depots around the country during the daytime, and many of the station turnround times are very generous. Compare and contrast with the intensive utilization of (say) the UK Pendolino fleet (also manufactured and maintained by Alstom). I don't think it has anything to do with different marginal costs.


----------



## suasion

> I think that has more to do with the historical procurement and operating philosophy of SNCF


I think the operating philosophy of SNCF is to just drive trains around at random hours.
How is it that they border Germany, Switzerland, and Belgium all running clockface timetables successfully and they still think having 3 trains in 10 minutes and none for the following 6 hours is a proper timetable?


----------



## NordikNerd

*A planned train connection between Oulu and Luleå.*

The municipality of Luleå and the train operator Norrtåg Ab are up to start passenger traffic from Luleå, Sweden to Oulu, Finland.

"_The Journey would take about 3 hours, when the Bothnia High-speed rail link is completed between Luleå and Haparanda_," says Luleå council Coalition Group CEO Anders Josefsson.

The passenger trains could run at speeds of more than 200 km/h
on the Botnia-rail link

*Background: *The last train to Haparanda was canceled in 1992.

The high-speed rail link would facilitate the movement of workers and students in the common economic region of the Bothnia Arc. 

It consists of seven municipalities in Sweden and four Finnish sub-regions, which will improve cooperation. The new train service is not related to the refugee crisis.

"_I think the two major growth centers of Oulu and Luleå can create opportunities for passenger traffic between them, we have had discussions with the finnish railways VR, because we can not operate in Finland_," says Olle Tiderman the technical director of Norrtåg.

Norrtåg is to resume the passenger traffic to Haparanda in the next year. However, the obstacle of the Luleå-Oulu rail traffic is the electrification on the Laurila and Tornio section of the line which would cost an estimated ten million euro.", Says VR's Corporate Relations Director Otto Hardwood.

Previously, between Oulu and Luleå there has been testing of EU-funded bus connections, but it was discontinued as unprofitable.

The Finns are hoping for cooperation in the Upper Gulf of Bothnia in order to improve the conditions of youth unemployment.

The youth unemployment has risen on the finnish side of the Bothnian Arc. On the swedish side it has decreased. Last year, the unemployment rate for young people on the swedish side was only 4 % says Bothnian Arc Association President and CEO Heikki Aalto. The association was founded in 2002.

According to the mayor of Luleå Anne Karlenoiuksen, it's Sweden's fastest growing municipality.

Luleå has 75 000 inhabitants and Facebook has opened a new data server here, the first one outside the United States.

This has attracted several companies to Luleå in addition to the traditional heavy metal industry.


"The project will cost around EUR 300 million.


----------



## 33Hz

A question regarding CIV / Railteam "hop on the next train" promise on delays...

Passenger 1 is heading to Paris from London by Eurostar.

Passenger 2 is heading to Paris from Holland by Thalys.

Passengers 1 & 2 are then heading south from Paris by TGV on a joint booking with the same PNR code.


What happens if one of the passengers is delayed and will miss the connection?

Does the other unaffected passenger have to take the original booking or are both entitled to be re-booked on a later service?

If it is the last train of the day to the end destination, are one or both entitled to travel as far as possible to an intermediate location and get a hotel before continuing the journey? What if that subsequent option is via another country and involves another operator?


Any insight much appreciated...


----------



## chornedsnorkack

NordikNerd said:


> The municipality of Luleå and the train operator Norrtåg Ab are up to start passenger traffic from Luleå, Sweden to Oulu, Finland.
> 
> "_The Journey would take about 3 hours, when the Bothnia High-speed rail link is completed between Luleå and Haparanda_," says Luleå council Coalition Group CEO Anders Josefsson.
> 
> The passenger trains could run at speeds of more than 200 km/h
> on the Botnia-rail link


On which gauge?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Dear 33 Hz, why don't you ask RailTeam? This is really a bit too particular and complicated that you can expect people to have made this experience before. 
As you probably know, Amsterdam trains will be more prone to delays than Eurostar, so maybe that person should make sure to travel with some breathing space, especially if you have to change stations in Paris.


----------



## K_

33Hz said:


> A question regarding CIV / Railteam "hop on the next train" promise on delays...
> 
> Passenger 1 is heading to Paris from London by Eurostar.
> 
> Passenger 2 is heading to Paris from Holland by Thalys.
> 
> Passengers 1 & 2 are then heading south from Paris by TGV on a joint booking with the same PNR code.
> 
> 
> What happens if one of the passengers is delayed and will miss the connection?


I think that in this case the three tickets will be considered as three different trips.
A while ago I travelled Basel - Brussel by TGV and Thalys. I had two tickets, and these tickets shared the same booking nr. (I had bought them together). My train to Paris was late, and in Paris Nord I went to the Thalys booth and they validated my ticket for the next Thalys departure.

I think you should in this case have made two bookings, one London - South of France, and one Holland - South of France in stead of three bookings.


----------



## 33Hz

I've had late trains before and had the ticket inspector stamp the ticket which was accepted on the next service (in one case the next day). This is just normal for Railteam and mimics your situation.

With Railteam, it doesn't matter if you book the whole through trip through seperate sources with different PNR codes (trip references). I often buy a Eurostar ticket from them directly and then the second leg from NS International or Captain Train or whoever, because they can get me to an end destination that Eurostar can't. That's never been a problem with late trains.

In my specific case above, passengers 1 and 2 have to travel together on the second leg. If I had booked them as completely separate trips, then they definitely would be travelling on different trains if one was delayed on the inbound to Paris. But as I have booked already, I would like confirmation from someone in the know as to what my rights are if the worst happens.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...irst-section-of-rail-baltica-inaugurated.html
> 
> *First section of Rail Baltica inaugurated*
> 16 Oct 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: Lithuanian Prime Minister Algirdas Butkevičius and European Commissioner for Transport Violeta Bulc inaugurated the first completed section of the Rail Baltica standard gauge line with a ceremony at Kaunas station on October 16.
> 
> Rail Baltica envisages the construction of a 1 435 mm gauge corridor linking Poland with Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, and potentially Finland via a 60 km tunnel.
> 
> The first section to be completed is a 1 435 mm gauge line from the Polish border to Kaunas, which has been built alongside the existing 1520 mm gauge line from the former break of gauge at Šeštokai which has also been upgraded. The project is designated Rail Baltica I, with Rail Baltica II referring to the proposed 728 km double-track electrified line on a new alignment from Kaunas to Tallinn which is estimated to cost €3·68bn
> 
> ...


----------



## eu01

dimlys1994 said:


> First section of Rail Baltica inaugurated


...with no passenger trains coming, apparently. Not now, not a single connection scheduled in the next timetable either. Am I wrong?


----------



## DingeZ

Read the article, it says passenger operations are stating in december.


----------



## eu01

^^ Just one train arriving to the border station and not using the new 1435mm track to Kaunas at all. Congratulations!


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...rove-cross-border-rail-links.html?channel=537
> 
> *Czech-Polish deal to improve cross-border links*
> Tuesday, October 27, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _CZECH Railways (CD) has signed an agreement with Silesian Railways (KS) to co-operate on measures to improve cross-border regional rail links between eastern Czech Republic and southern Poland_
> 
> Under the deal, KS services which currently terminate at Chalupki or Wodzislaw Slaski in Poland will be extended across the border to Bohumin, providing passengers from stations in Silesia with connections to inter-city services to destinations such as Ostrava, Prague, Olomouc, and Brno. In return, CD will extend Frydek-Mistek - Ostrava - Česky Těšin services across the River Olše to the Polish town of Cieszyn
> 
> ...


----------



## 437.001

_*Rumour...*_ :gossip:

Looks like the AVE Barcelona-Toulouse will not run between January and April.
Of all the Spain-France services, it's the one that carries less passengers.

If this rumour turned out to be true, I expect some kind of angry reaction in southern France, Perpignan in particular, which already has a very late first train to Barcelona, the Toulouse-Barcelona precisely (past 10:00), and which would see their first train to Barcelona turn up at the station after 11:00.


----------



## NordikNerd

*More train departures Stockholm-Oslo*

In a few years SJ will offer yet more departures by high-speed train between Oslo and Stockholm.

*Researches do not think this will threaten the air travel. Today there are three daily departures with express train from Oslo to Stockholm and the Swedish railway company believes several departures will attract even more travellers to take the train.

- Yes, we see a very positive development for traintravel, therefore we plan already from 2017 to add even more daily departures, confirms Åsa Larsson who is responsible for external communications at SJ, .

The express train offer is relatively new. And the new service cuts travel time significantly, from a journey time of 6 hours down to 4.5 hours on the fastest departures. This is due primarily to the fact that a new modern rolling stock is introduced that can run with increased speed.

The response from the public has been so great that swedes now have appetite for more of the Norwegian market.

The travel time will be reduced even more
Therefore SJ now announces that the efforts will continue and that the company also is looking at the possibility of shortening the travel time down even more than today:

- Travel time is of course dependent upon the railway track quality and the number of trains. In the coming years it is going to be certain that capacity improvements will be made, and it will be possible to cut travel time a little more. Already in December this year, our SJ-express trains will stop in Kongsvinger. This means that travelers with an NSB ticket can get to Oslo in 1 hour, 15 minutes, that is faster than with the NSB trains, says Åsa Larsson to Aftenposten.

The rain is no competitor
Information manager Knut Morten Johansen at SAS, which currently has the highest number of flights on the route, says the company has not noticed any weakening passenger influx after the SJ-express train offer came. Norwegian Airline communications director Lasse Sandakerveien-Nielsen says that the train must offer a significantly shorter journey before it could become a competitor to the plane.

http://www.aftenposten.no/okonomi/Svenskene-vil-ha-flere-hurtigtog-til-Oslo-8234668.html


----------



## Suburbanist

The Lille-Geneva TGV service will be suspended.


----------



## Nexis

Why , the winter season is approaching...


----------



## NordikNerd

*Now the longest freight corridor opens*

On November 10, the longest of the nine corridors established in the European rail network opens . 
The corridor runs from Stockholm / Oslo to Palermo in Sicily. The aim is to facilitate cross-border rail transport.











The corridor runs from Oslo / Stockholm to Palermo in Sicily. One of the major advantages of the corridor ScanMed RFC (Scandinavian-Mediterranean Rail Freight Corridor) is that it should be much easier to run freight trains across the national railway networks. The carrier only needs to request capacity once in the freight corridor One Stop Shop (C OSS), instead of as today, in all countries in which the goods passes.

The management of the work on the corridor consisted of representatives from the infrastructure holder in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria and Italy and led by Lars Stone Gard, Trafikverket.

- The initiative for the freight corridors is based on a EU regulation. The aim is to increase the international rail transport attractiveness and efficiency, so that the railways can increase its market share on the European transport market, says Hans Dahlberg, Head of Service Management at the Swedish Transport Administration.

http://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/p...15-11/nu-oppnar-europas-langsta-godskorridor/


----------



## TedStriker

^^

This thread has more of a passenger train focus than a freight train focus so I don't want to cause any upset, but I think it's worth noting that if one is thinking of intermodal trains serving the southern area of Italy, and specifically trains carrying intra-European trade, then it is, in fact, the corridor via Bologna, Ancona, Taranto, Cosenza and Lamezia that is being cleared for the carriage of 4m-high unaccompanied semi-trailers, and therefore, almost certainly, many intermodal operators will wish to expand along this corridor rather than the corridor via Naples, especially if they aim to carry traffic originating from and destined for the central and northern areas of Europe. 

The long-standing function of Gioia Tauro as a container port is well known, but I suspect that once this new 4m-high corridor is ready Gioia Tauro may also serve as a hub for semi-trailer traffic, along with the likes of Bari and Ancona.


----------



## Suburbanist

How can the link be "complete" without a bridge :bash:


----------



## TedStriker

^^

You're not happy with just having a train ferry connection with Sicily I take it?


----------



## Suburbanist

TedStriker said:


> ^^
> 
> You're not happy with just having a train ferry connection with Sicily I take it?


No, only a bridge* will provide the mobility the inhabitants and the economy of _Sicilia_ deserve!

*tunnel is not an option there due to depth of the strait


----------



## Surel

dimlys1994 said:


> http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...ml?channel=537
> 
> Czech-Polish deal to improve cross-border links
> Tuesday, October 27, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> CZECH Railways (CD) has signed an agreement with Silesian Railways (KS) to co-operate on measures to improve cross-border regional rail links between eastern Czech Republic and southern Poland
> 
> Under the deal, KS services which currently terminate at Chalupki or Wodzislaw Slaski in Poland will be extended across the border to Bohumin, providing passengers from stations in Silesia with connections to inter-city services to destinations such as Ostrava, Prague, Olomouc, and Brno. In return, CD will extend Frydek-Mistek - Ostrava - Česky Těšin services across the River Olše to the Polish town of Cieszyn
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> From Rail Journal:
Click to expand...

Pity they don't extend the service to Ostrava. That would make just so much more sense then ending it in Bohumin. But I guess, they would need a joint operation for this, as it would be rather lucrative.

A really interesting service could be connecting the Airports in Katowice and Ostrava - Mošnov as they both have rail stations afaik.


----------



## towerpower123

Suburbanist said:


> No, only a bridge* will provide the mobility the inhabitants and the economy of _Sicilia_ deserve!
> 
> *tunnel is not an option there due to depth of the strait


A floating immersed tunnel would solve that problem. It is anchored to the sea floor by cables and the sections are pre-built and floated into place before submerged. That way it doesn't have to be on the sea floor in the extreme water pressure.

Is that Strait of Messina Bridge still a possibility? They were all ready to go ahead and then some political issues stopped it because they didn't want to spend mainland money in Sicily.


----------



## Nexis

Suburbanist said:


> No, only a bridge* will provide the mobility the inhabitants and the economy of _Sicilia_ deserve!
> 
> *tunnel is not an option there due to depth of the strait


The Depth of the Strait isn't that deep enough to rule out tunneling with modern methods..


----------



## hammersklavier

towerpower123 said:


> A floating immersed tunnel would solve that problem. It is anchored to the sea floor by cables and the sections are pre-built and floated into place before submerged. That way it doesn't have to be on the sea floor in the extreme water pressure.
> 
> Is that Strait of Messina Bridge still a possibility? They were all ready to go ahead and then some political issues stopped it because they didn't want to spend mainland money in Sicily.





Nexis said:


> The Depth of the Strait isn't that deep enough to rule out tunneling with modern methods..


The Strait of Messina is 250 m (830 ft) deep -- there's probably some U/C building thread that's that high on this board somewhere. But I haven't ever heard of an undersea tunnel exceeding 500 ft (180 m?) in depth.

I agree with the idea that this would be the perfect place to test a floating tube tunnel (it isn't "immersed" on the seabed, but rather would be ballasted and held in place with guy wires). Especially if it'd be cheaper than a bridge over the strait.


----------



## MarcVD

Nexis said:


> The Depth of the Strait isn't that deep enough to rule out tunneling with modern methods..


The depth itself is not a problem indeed. The length of the tunnel ramps
needed to reach that depth is the problem. At 3°, it would make almost
5000 m on each side. Plus the width of the strait itself, this is getting quite
long, and would probably not allow to join the stations of Villa San Giovanni
and Messina as a bridge could do.


----------



## Suburbanist

Geological conditions are bad for tunneling and a very active seismic fault lies there as well.


----------



## 437.001

:shifty: All French borders have been closed for obvious reasons. RIP to all the victims.


----------



## Suburbanist

437.001 said:


> :shifty: All French borders have been closed for obvious reasons. RIP to all the victims.


On Thalys and Eurostar websites, nothing is said of train service cancellations. Apparently, the "closed borders" are just referring to controls on people leaving the country to prevent terrorists from escaping. 

Eurostar has the following advice 



> Our deepest sympathy and condolences to all those affected by the tragic events in Paris this evening.
> We would like to offer free exchanges to all customers who choose not to travel today. Please allow 60 minutes for check-in throughout the day if you still wish to travel and check our web site for further updates before travelling.
> If you would like to exchange your ticket please call us on 03432 186 186 between the hours of 09:00 – 17:00 GMT


(note: I'm not saying passenger train traffic is the most important thing at the moment, just commenting on what I checked online)


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Geological conditions are bad for tunneling and a very active seismic fault lies there as well.



A bridge would be much nicer anways, especially if they make sure that you get a good view while passing over it.


----------



## suasion

Does anyone know where I could download .kml .gpx or .shp files of different european rail networks?
Specifically I am only looking for simple plans of routes. I have found some files on line but they contain every block section, turnout and siding much too detailed time consuming to edit and they slow my gis to a crawl. I would especially like to find one for channel tunnel link HS1 in the UK.

Thanks for any help with this.


----------



## hammersklavier

suasion said:


> Does anyone know where I could download .kml .gpx or .shp files of different european rail networks?
> Specifically I am only looking for simple plans of routes. I have found some files on line but they contain every block section, turnout and siding much too detailed time consuming to edit and they slow my gis to a crawl. I would especially like to find one for channel tunnel link HS1 in the UK.
> 
> Thanks for any help with this.


Some people maintain files for proposed, U/C, and disused lines but I find it's quite easy to make your own files for active lines on Google Maps. Those files are natively in the KML format, though, which can be iffy when you transition them to ESRI shapefiles. That said, the KML format is pretty flexible in its own right.


----------



## XAN_

You can try extracting them from openstreetmap dataset.


----------



## Trupman

From iDnes.cz (in Czech):
*From 100 to 20. Poles slow down trains between Czechia and Germany*

_"The state of the railway is catastrophic. The (Polish) railway administration have recently droped the speed limit from 30 to 20 km/h without any earlier notification."
_
http://idnes.cz/773D4

The mentioned line is this short stretch between Zittau and Hrádek nad Nisou through Porajów, where international trains Liberec-Dresden are operated.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/50.8794/14.8362
The transport authority have already proposed that Czechs and Germans would lease the line and pay for its maintenance but this was rejected by Polish authorities.


----------



## :jax:

TedStriker said:


> ^^
> 
> You're not happy with just having a train ferry connection with Sicily I take it?


Or maybe the connection Stockholm - Finland?


----------



## flierfy

Trupman said:


> The transport authority have already proposed that Czechs and Germans would lease the line and pay for its maintenance but this was rejected by Polish authorities.


Sounds as if the Poles want to get rid of this line altogether.


----------



## eu01

Why would PKP PLK want to get rid of this line? They just charge their normal track access fees without bothering to invest in the proper maintenance nor to upgrade to basic standards... A bit cynical, aren't they?


----------



## 33Hz

First e320 passenger trip en route now...


----------



## doc7austin

I have posted the travel video already in a parallel thread (Russia Railways).
EuroNight Train EN 452/453 is probably the most famous international European train, connecting five European capitals (Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Minsk, and Moscow)/


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/europe/rail-baltica-funding-agreement-signed.html?channel=537
> 
> *Rail Baltica funding agreement signed*
> Wednesday, November 25, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _THE extension of the European standard-gauge network through Lithuania to Latvia and Estonia took an important step forward on November 24 with the signing of a €734m European Union (EU) grant funding agreement for the Rail Baltica project_
> 
> The deal was signed in Tallinn by representatives of the RB Rail trilateral joint venture, which is responsible for co-ordinating implementation of the project, together with the European Commission Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (DG Move), the EU's Innovation and Networks Agency (Inea) and the transport ministries of the three countries
> 
> ...


----------



## Trupman

The railway border crossing between Aš (CZ) and Selb (DE) has been reopened for passanger trains after long 70 years. 9 trains daily are now connecting Cheb and Hof.


----------



## 437.001

Some France-Spain AVE and TGV services.
Seen at Toulouse Matabiau, Carcassonne, Narbonne, Montpellier St Roch, Perpignan, Lyon Part Dieu, and Barcelona Sants.


----------



## NordikNerd

*A railwaytunnel Tallinn-Helsinki*

A tunnel to Tallinn? Helsinki believes it's feasible

A tunnel connecting Helsinki with Tallinn would transport upwards of 11 million people a year, say preliminary figures. The City of Helsinki believes that the tunnel, which would cost 13 billion euros to build, would therefore be a profitable investment. The estimated ticket price would be 36 euros one way.










A cooperation agreement was signed on Tuesday to develop traffic alternatives between Helsinki, Finland and Tallinn, Estonia. At present, a wide selection of boats runs the route between the two cities across the Gulf of Finland. The trip normally takes two hours, from April to November just one hour and forty minutes. If a tunnel was built under the gulf, a rail connection would connect the cities in just a half hour.

City planners have dreamt of an undersea tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn for years. Now, a preliminary feasibility study has established that the tunnel’s construction is an option that should be explored thoroughly.

The estimated cost of the tunnel, along with all of its train and traffic equipment, would be between 9 and 13 billion euros in all. According to the feasibility study commissioned by Helsinki, Tallinn and the northern county of Harju in Estonia, the expenses could be covered if the project were to secure at least 40 percent of its funding from the European Union.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/a_tunnel_to_tallinn_helsinki_believes_its_feasible/8571689


----------



## 00Zy99

Why, hello there Dubai Metro!! (seriously, that's what the image is)


----------



## Nexis

How deep is the area they want to build the tunnel through?


----------



## Suburbanist

Nexis said:


> How deep is the area they want to build the tunnel through?


It's very shallow between Finland and Estonia, no more than 40m. Even a bridge would not be that difficult. 








Source


----------



## MarcVD

Considering that even the Channel Tunnel, which is much shorter, and connects bigger
cities and economies, is barely profitable, I doubt very much that there is a real business
case - except, that is, for the companies that would execute the detailed studies.


----------



## Suburbanist

MarcVD said:


> Considering that even the Channel Tunnel, which is much shorter, and connects bigger
> cities and economies, is barely profitable, I doubt very much that there is a real business
> case - except, that is, for the companies that would execute the detailed studies.


That is probably true, but tunneling long distnaces has become significantly cheaper than in the 1980s.


----------



## 00Zy99

Suburbanist said:


> That is probably true, but tunneling long distnaces has become significantly cheaper than in the 1980s.


How so?

Might that render a tunnel to Ireland feasible?


----------



## clickgr

Baron Hirsch said:


> You make it sound like HS trains could not shift onto conventional rail. They do, all the time, both in France and Italy. TGV from Paris to Milan already exist. At 7 hrs, they can definitely need some additional HS routes to minimize traveling time, but one of the most avoidable hindrances to better traveling times is that TGVs are not allowed onto the HS grid in Italy and thus take an hour longer than an Italian ES (could therefore do Paris-Milan in 6, what could make a big difference to interested travelers). Do not get me wrong, I am not against the tunnel, but what use are the billions for such a project if simple technical problems of interoperability are not addressed too?


I will put it the other way round. Maybe the reason they haven't solve those interoperability problems so far is because without such a link it doesn't make much sense to do it, as long as the high speed trains are not able to offer actual high speed services competitive to other transportation means. 

If they manage to built such a link under the Alps, they will very easily solve such a problems.


----------



## Sunfuns

Bobo90 said:


> The Lotschberg base tunnel, Gotthard base tunnel and in the future the Brenner base tunnel will be faster and shorter to every place from Italy to Germany. The relevance of this tunnel for the traffic between these countries is next to none.


Yes and it is an issue for what reason? This tunnel will be important for connections between France, Spain and UK with Italy. For far away destinations mostly freight, for closer also HS passenger.


----------



## Bobo90

This will indeed be an very important tunnel for connecting Italy to countries west of it, but clickgr was stating that this tunnel would connect Italy to Germany. I just said that I don't think this is true, because it will be perpendicular seen from Germany. Maybe for services from Munich but I think crossing the alps twice isn't the best way to get to southern france.


----------



## clickgr

Bobo90 said:


> This will indeed be an very important tunnel for connecting Italy to countries west of it, but clickgr was stating that this tunnel would connect Italy to Germany. I just said that I don't think this is true, because it will be perpendicular seen from Germany. Maybe for services from Munich but I think crossing the alps twice isn't the best way to get to southern france.


Germany is a big country. Maybe for Munich or Berlin this link does not have any use, but for other areas on the west side of the country like Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Rhine-Ruhr etc. via Lyon and Basel can be useful, especially if there is no other high speed connection through Switzerland or Austria.


----------



## Sunfuns

clickgr said:


> Germany is a big country. Maybe for Munich or Berlin this link does not have any use, but for other areas on the west side of the country like Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Rhine-Ruhr etc. via Lyon and Basel can be useful, especially if there is no other high speed connection through Switzerland or Austria.


Gotthard tunnel opens at the end of this year and Ceneri will follow few years later. Not a true high speed route, but nevertheless due to much shorter distance Frankfurt-Freiburg-Basel-Gotthard-Milan route will be faster.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

clickgr said:


> Germany is a big country. Maybe for Munich or Berlin this link does not have any use, but for other areas on the west side of the country like Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Rhine-Ruhr etc. via Lyon and Basel can be useful, especially if there is no other high speed connection through Switzerland or Austria.


Absolutely ridiculous. Why do you not look at a map or a rail schedule before making such claims? Today a direct train Basel-Milano takes 4 hrs. By comparison, the same trip via Lyon takes 8 hrs. No tunnel in the world can make that much difference. 
The Gotthard Tunnel does not really help trains coming from Frankfurt-Basel, only those from Zurich and Stuttgart, but the other trains will benefit from the mentioned improvements in Switzerland. HSR is good, but it does not perform miracles.


----------



## Bobo90

And maybe you don't know but the Frejus base tunnel route will be 220 kmh but Gotthard base tunnel and Brenner base tunnel will be 250 and lotschberg to a certain extend. It will not be in anyone be convenient to go via the Frejus route, just except it. Swiss and Austrian routes will always be faster to go to Italy. basta


----------



## Sunfuns

Baron Hirsch said:


> The Gotthard Tunnel does not really help trains coming from Frankfurt-Basel, only those from Zurich and Stuttgart, but the other trains will benefit from the mentioned improvements in Switzerland. HSR is good, but it does not perform miracles.


It doesn't help as much, but it should still be a bit faster. Right now Basel-Milan goes via Simplon pass and Domodossola, but I think with the new tunnel Gotthard route should be at least half an hour better.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Paris-Milan TGVs don't use Turin-Milan HSL because they are old, and SNCF thinks it isn't worth to equip them with ETCS as they might have to be replaced in 10-15 years and as even via the HSL the travel time will too long anyway (6 hours or so).

If there was an HSL all the way from (a junction on the HSL near) Lyon to Turin, the Fréjus route should be faster for Benelux-Turin-Milan trains. However there will not be anytime soon (only the Fréjus base tunnel is planned now), so for any trip longer than Paris-Milan (or even Paris-Turin) the airplanes (but probably also a train via Switzerland/Austria) will still be faster. However, on the routes via Switzerland there are more capacity issues that limits speed.


----------



## flierfy

Baron Hirsch said:


> Absolutely ridiculous. Why do you not look at a map or a rail schedule before making such claims? Today a direct train Basel-Milano takes 4 hrs. By comparison, the same trip via Lyon takes 8 hrs. No tunnel in the world can make that much difference.
> The Gotthard Tunnel does not really help trains coming from Frankfurt-Basel, only those from Zurich and Stuttgart, but the other trains will benefit from the mentioned improvements in Switzerland. HSR is good, but it does not perform miracles.


Milano isn't the only place in Italy. Due to the faster approaches it is not inconceivable that the Frejus route will be at least as fast as the Gotthard route for travels from Frankfurt/M to Torino and other places in northwestern Italy.



Bobo90 said:


> And maybe you don't know but the Frejus base tunnel route will be 220 kmh but Gotthard base tunnel and Brenner base tunnel will be 250 and lotschberg to a certain extend. It will not be in anyone be convenient to go via the Frejus route, just except it. Swiss and Austrian routes will always be faster to go to Italy. basta


There won't be regular services in the Gotthard base tunnel which will run faster than 160 km/h though. While it is not foreseeable yet which speeds will be operated in the Frejus base tunnel, it seems to me more likely that high speed services could actually reach the design speed of this tunnel.


----------



## clickgr

Baron Hirsch said:


> Absolutely ridiculous. Why do you not look at a map or a rail schedule before making such claims? Today a direct train Basel-Milano takes 4 hrs. By comparison, the same trip via Lyon takes 8 hrs. No tunnel in the world can make that much difference.
> The Gotthard Tunnel does not really help trains coming from Frankfurt-Basel, only those from Zurich and Stuttgart, but the other trains will benefit from the mentioned improvements in Switzerland. HSR is good, but it does not perform miracles.


First be polite! 

Secondly we are talking about the future. When this tunnel will be completed there will also be other improvements on the high-speed networks. Lyon-Basel HSL is in the plans and the total time for Turin-Basel via this route is expected to be far below 4 hours, plus as I said the link will serve in addition many other routes towards France and Spain.


----------



## Nexis

*Züge in der Schweiz - Deutsche Bahn DB ICE1*


----------



## K_

clickgr said:


> How? As far as I know there is no high speed line all the way from Brussels or London to Italy.


Who said you need a high speed railway all the way? There are actually not that many high speed trains in Europe that don't spend at least some of their time on the conventional network.


----------



## Verso

Last night all freight trains were denied entry into Slovenia due to congested single-track railway to the port of Koper. :sleepy:

http://www.primorske.si/Novice/Istra/Kriza-na-visku-v-Slovenijo-od-sinoci-ne-sme-vstopi


----------



## clickgr

K_ said:


> Who said you need a high speed railway all the way? There are actually not that many high speed trains in Europe that don't spend at least some of their time on the conventional network.


I answered about that already. For long distance routes you need all the way high speed railways in order the high speed train to be competitive to the airplane or other transport means. It is not where the high speed train can go, it is how long does it take to go from point A to point B.


----------



## suasion

The ERB train from Heerlen no longer goes direct to Aachen or Duren. It now ends in Herzogenrath and you must change train to continue further.
I'm not sure who's bright Idea this is.


----------



## Bobo90

It'll be back in 2 years right? And continue to Maastricht and liege


----------



## suasion

Almost 3 years, its 01/2016 now the plan is for Limax in 12/2018. One thing I've learned about scedules is that they can only slip. Anyway, the upshot is what was once a straight trip now involves a change of train and platform.


----------



## Gusiluz

*Eurotunnel traffic until 2015*

Throughout 2015, and excluding MyFerryLink (*), revenues increased by 5%.


> Following the decision by the Competition Appeal Tribunal on 9 January 2015 (confirmed by the Supreme Court on 16 December 2015) with regard to theprohibition on operating out of the port of Dover for the MyFerryLink ships after 9July 2015, the Group is forced to announce its withdrawal from its maritime business.


Eurostar passengers (historical record) remain, the cars fell by 1%, 7% coaches, freight trains by 17% and 14% tons, trucks increase by 3% (record high).


In Excel format on Wikipedia


----------



## Olbrzym

*High speed rail books*

Please, advise me on books about high-speed railways, trains or high-speed railway network development or projects in the world, everything that concerns high speed rail transport and rail project management. Maybe French experience in high speed rail project managment will definetly be useful in my work... Even books in French or German, I can read in these languagues, are possibly available to download, but I don't know where. I've spent much time searching for these books and found just a couple of books but only articles. Thank you!


----------



## Suburbanist

suasion said:


> Just setting up an EU company is not enough, the company itself must be majority EU owned.


Isn't the majority-owner of Easyjet class A shares a Greek-British citizen?


----------



## clickgr

The owner of Easyjet is Cypriot but this has nothing to do with the company which is 100% British and headquartered in London.


----------



## Sunfuns

How come then Easyjet can fly from Switzerland to various destinations both in EU and outside?


----------



## suasion

They have an Swiss unit and swiss reg aircraft.

Also under the current Swiss/ EU bilateral (2002), any EU airline is free to fly from the EU to anywhere in CH. CH airlines are allowed to fly to any EU city from Switzerland and between any two city pairs (after a two year delay). This sort of agreement would probably also be dependent on open borders, and might take some years to reach post brexit.


----------



## Coccodrillo

There are actually two EasyJet, although passenger don't notice the difference. I think the main company has airplanes registered in Ireland certainly for tax purposes (registration marks EI-xxx), the Swiss one in Switzerland (HB-xxx). Note that EasyJet Switzerland is not just a brand, it is a company owned also by others, not only by EasyJet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyJet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyJet_Switzerland

None of the two will be in the EU in the medium term, though...


----------



## Suburbanist

They could maybe greatly expand Lille-Europe and make it a true hub for further distribution of high-speed passengers. A station optimized for faster border control procedures, with some 6 platforms on UK-bound sector and some 10-12 on continental railway links.


----------



## suasion

I cant see the French allowing the border to stay on their side of the channel post Brexit


----------



## Kpc21

MrAkumana said:


> Moreover, forget about direct trains to Lyon (as happens today) or anyplace on the south of France (the planned Bordeaux direct Eurostar or the Amsterdam one) where no customs exist at the stations...


Why? There is even a direct train Moscow-Paris, and the customs isn't a problem, although on the Belarus-Poland border it must be much more complicated than on the UK-France border.

I haven't crossed this border by train - but I did in case of the Hungary-Croatia and Hungary-Romania borders. They are internal EU borders, but external Schengen borders. The control takes place on the train - on the last station before the border and on the first station after it. From what I know, the same is, for example, on Poland-Belarus and Poland-Ukraine borders.


----------



## suasion

Wetern European trains are trying to compete with aircraft. Extra border/ customs checks just slow the whole process down, reducing its competiveness. Plus as noone knows what any final agreement looks like or indeed when it will be implemented, no company can really make plans.


----------



## Stainless

suasion said:


> I doubt France or Belgium will permit UK border controls in their stations if the UK does leave the EU without some sort of EEA agreement


I guess we will have to wait and see what sort of agreement or compromise we end up with.

I can't see them not permitting it though, I don't think the agreements are entirely dependent on EU membership as they have been ratified by all 3 countries. Only the immigration controls on Eurostar are in juxtaposed, there is still customs on arrival, which is usually unmanned in my experience. There have been some stories about France ripping the agreement up for the Calais ferry terminal, but I don't think we would allow a ferry to dock without checks. If France tried it we would probably move the main ferry operations to Belgium.

In reality we will (well I hope, but British politics is full of surprises) either end up not leaving the EU, or with an EEA type of agreement which would pretty much keep things as business as usual.

I don't see why it would have to go if we left though. The US has border pre-clearance in a number of places, even in the EU (two in Ireland) with standalone agreements with them. Relations would have to go quite bad for these to be scrapped, maybe if Trump gets his way the one in Abu Dhabi might have to go though.


----------



## Robi_damian

suasion said:


> Just setting up an EU company is not enough, the company itself must be majority EU owned.


Isn´t the owner Greek or Cypriont? Problem solved. :troll:


----------



## Eco-rat

Stainless said:


> I guess we will have to wait and see what sort of agreement or compromise we end up with.
> 
> I can't see them not permitting it though, I don't think the agreements are entirely dependent on EU membership as they have been ratified by all 3 countries. Only the immigration controls on Eurostar are in juxtaposed, there is still customs on arrival, which is usually unmanned in my experience. There have been some stories about France ripping the agreement up for the Calais ferry terminal, but I don't think we would allow a ferry to dock without checks. If France tried it we would probably move the main ferry operations to Belgium.
> 
> In reality we will (well I hope, but British politics is full of surprises) either end up not leaving the EU, or with an EEA type of agreement which would pretty much keep things as business as usual.
> 
> I don't see why it would have to go if we left though. The US has border pre-clearance in a number of places, even in the EU (two in Ireland) with standalone agreements with them. Relations would have to go quite bad for these to be scrapped, maybe if Trump gets his way the one in Abu Dhabi might have to go though.


If Trump gets his way, nobody will be flying from Abu Dhabi to the USA (anyone from Abu Dhabi or surrounding countries, the vast majority Muslims, will be banned from entry; American Muslims banned from returning, and why would UAE or any Arab or Muslim country do business with the USA?.)

Re the train, the way they currently rationalise border controls outside Schengen is that the UK does not have a compulsory ID card system within the country, hence the need to check everyone at the border. While Schengen members do have compulsory ID checks within each country, then less urgency to check at the borders.


----------



## Fatfield

suasion said:


> I cant see the French allowing the border to stay on their side of the channel post Brexit


Le Touquet agreement isn't changing according to Bernard Cazeneuve of the French Ministry of the Interior. And it has as nothing to do with the EU. Its a completely separate agreement between the UK & France.


----------



## 00Zy99

And then there's this, which just might render everything else meaningless:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/politics-brexit-unlawful-eu-uk


----------



## dimlys1994

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/lyon-torino-tunnelling-launched.html
> 
> *Lyon – Torino tunnelling launched*
> 25 Jul 2016
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EUROPE: The 2 400 tonne TBM ‘Federica’ that is now at work on a 9 km test bore for the Lyon – Torino project was launched by Prime Minister of France Manuel Valls during a ceremony held at Saint-Martin-La Porte on July 21.
> 
> A total of 443 people are at work on the trial bore, which by more closely examining local geology in this ‘particularly delicate’ section of the route beneath the Alps will form an ‘important test’ for the main 57⋅5 km Mont Cenis base tunnel, according to project organisation Tunnel Euralpin Lyon Turin
> 
> ...


----------



## Nexis

*Eurostar - stary i nowy / Eurostar high-speed train - old & new*


----------



## Nexis

*TGV, Eurostar, Thalys at Stratford International and in France!*


----------



## Nexis




----------



## 00Zy99

youtube links/inserts not working

could you please post the URL?


----------



## sacto7654

00Zy99 said:


> youtube links/inserts not working
> 
> could you please post the URL?


What web browser are you using? I'm using Google Chrome 52.0.2743.116 m (the current public release version) and was able to see the very nice videos of those trains with no problems.


----------



## 33Hz

K_ said:


> One thing almost all so-called "anti terrorism" measures have in common is that they do not work. They do not work, because they are not required to work. "effective" is never a requirement.
> 
> None of the extra security measures that have been taken since 9/11 would have prevented 9/11. (They however have already killed at least 150 people).
> 
> There is no way in which this PNR requirement can be implemented. That will not prevent authorities from trying, and claiming that they are doing something for the public's safety.


Indeed everything they have done so far at Midi is an ineffective joke. Inconveniencing real passengers while plenty of loopholes to let the terrorists through. But there are usually 5 camouflaged armoured personnel carriers parked outside so that's ok.

When I was there earlier in the summer there were literally no police around the back entrance checkpoint (couloir sud). When I walked across the road to the new Thalys lounge they were all sitting in there drinking coffee. You couldn't make it up.

Trouble is this time the responsibility will be passed over to the operators, so the authorities can crack the whip on them and I fear we will see the likes of DB just say to hell with it.


----------



## dougdoug

Gare du Nord, Paris



in the refurbished eurostar in gare du Nord Paris





St Pancras London


----------



## Nexis

*Izy, the low-cost train by Thalys*


----------



## NordikNerd

*Russian railways to introduce new Moscow-Berlin service*

Russian Railways (RZD) is to begin operating a new Moscow to Berlin service in December using variable gauge Talgo trainsets.

At 13:05 on December 17, the new service will leave Moscow for Berlin, arriving 20 hours 14 minutes later. This is four-and-a-half hours faster than the current through service, the Moscow to Paris train.

Initially the service will run on Saturdays and Sundays. The return journey from Berlin leaves at 18:50 and runs on Sundays and Mondays.










The trains have 18 passenger coaches (5 x 2nd class sleepers, 4 x 1st class sleepers, 5 x VIP class with showers and baths, 2 x 1st class seating cars, a buffet and dining car) plus end coaches which have generator sets to power the coaches.

RZD has acquired three trainsets from Patentes Talgo SL for this service. These are articulated 200 km/h coaches with passive tilt. The single axle between each coach has independently rotating wheels and variable-gauge running gear. This enables the train’s gauge to be changed from Russian (1520 mm) to standard (1435 mm) gauge in 20 minutes. It takes at least an hour to change bogies on a conventional train.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Yeah, nice trains. But while one may save time between Berlin and Moscow, it must be said that the Paris-Moscow services have been reduced from 3 to 1 a week. I do not understand why the Talgo is not allowed to run to Paris? 
Also the dates of departure apparently do not make sense (on two consecutive days, then 5 days no train) and to run the trains as twenty wagon coaches seems a bit wishful thinking. RZD we have heard must save money, but I do not know if this is the way to go about it.


----------



## stingstingsting

NordikNerd said:


> RZD has acquired three trainsets from Patentes Talgo SL for this service. These are articulated 200 km/h coaches with passive tilt. The single axle between each coach has independently rotating wheels and variable-gauge running gear. This enables the train’s gauge to be changed from Russian (1520 mm) to standard (1435 mm) gauge *in 20 minutes*. It takes at least an hour to change bogies on a conventional train.


While 20 minutes is faster, I was under the impression that such bogie changes could be made "on the fly" thereby negating any dwell time for passengers. I understand the following video is of a high speed trainset but aren't they using Talgo coaches too?


----------



## AlexNL

I suspect a loco change is involved as well.


----------



## Suburbanist

What current does Russia use?


----------



## suasion

gauge may be a bigger issue than current.

20 mins is OK, you get that on the Berlin Amsterdam train, its a good chance to stretch the legs, smokers appreciate it and sometimes the shop is open at the station. I don't get upset about it on a 5 hour journey, I don't think anyone will mind it too much on a 20 hour trip.


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> What current does Russia use?


3 kV = and 25 kV 50Hz. 

Envoyé de mon GT-I9505 en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## MarcVD

AlexNL said:


> I suspect a loco change is involved as well.


Yes of course. None of the rail networks involved own locos that can adapt their axle width. On the Moscow to Berlin trip, the 1520 loco will be detached, then the Talgo rake will go through the gauge changer (either pushed or on its own like in Spain), and then a 1435 loco will be attached. 

Envoyé de mon GT-I9505 en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Stratford

Class 373 Eurostar heading for scrap


----------



## 00Zy99

Oh my!

I would have thought that they would be able to use them on some new routes, like heavy schedules from Paris to Brussels. Or maybe refit them with bigger seats and run Paris to Barcelona/Madrid.

They can't really be THAT worn out, can they?

Such a sad end for such historic equipment. Hopefully, at least one full set will be preserved.


----------



## Fatfield

00Zy99 said:


> Oh my!
> 
> I would have thought that they would be able to use them on some new routes, like heavy schedules from Paris to Brussels. Or maybe refit them with bigger seats and run Paris to Barcelona/Madrid.
> 
> They can't really be THAT worn out, can they?
> 
> Such a sad end for such historic equipment. Hopefully, at least one full set will be preserved.


I travelled to Lille earlier on this year via Eurostar and the inside of the carriages were very worn and would probably need a complete refit. In fact, they hadn't changed that much from when I first used Eurostar to go to Brussels in 2005.


----------



## AlexNL

The Eurostar e320 sets are more than 20 years old and have been used extensively throughout the years. By running at speeds of up to 300 kph, and traversing the warm channel tunnel (even if it's snowing outside), the units have received quite a battering.

A heavy refurbishment is required, but Eurostar decided that replacement of the majority of the fleet is a better investment than an overhaul. A few TGV-TMST units will be retained, but the majority of services will be replaced with the newer - and bigger (150 seats more) - Velaro fleet. The additional capacity allows Eurostar to sell more tickets (and thus increase their revenue) without having to run additional trains.

The National Railway Museum in York has received a Eurostar powercar. They probably won't preserve a full set... where are you going to leave 400 meters of train?


----------



## NordikNerd

*Oslo-Stockholm will take one more hour in 2017*

Today, the fastest journey with X2000 between Oslo and Stockholm takes 4:30 h.










With the new timetable in 2017 the journey will take at least 5 h, some trains even 5:30 h! There will be more departures, but longer trips between Oslo and Stockholm from 2017.










The reason for slowing down the trains is single-track passages on double-track. About 50% of the distance Oslo-Stockholm has single-track. 
The additional 30 minutes is spent on the single-track between Charlottenberg and Laxå. 

In the new time-table, the train has to stop several times to let other trains pass. This adds extra time to the timetable.


----------



## Suburbanist

Are there plans to improve that route, at least? Else, travelling via Gothenburg might seem attractive!


----------



## NordikNerd

Suburbanist said:


> Are there plans to improve that route, at least? Else, travelling via Gothenburg might seem attractive!


Yes. The Company Oslo-Stockholm AB 2:55 is working together with the local authorities in that area to finance construction of double tracks on the route Karlstad-Kristinehamn. 

The problem is Norwegian national politics, which most often prioritize domestic infrastucture over international connections. 

There is only one real obstacle for highspeed trains between Oslo and Stockholm: Norwegian and Swedish top politicians.


----------



## 00Zy99

I am assuming that they plan to get the travel time down to two hours and fifty-five minutes? That will make the trip superior to air travel, which in turn will lead to explosive growth in traffic. 

What needs to be done in order to achieve such travel times? Is the existing alignment straight enough? Do they need new tunnels to bypass curves? Are new signals needed? What about grade separation? 

Or do they just need to add a lot of double-tracking within existing alignments?


----------



## :jax:

Oslo-Stockholm is 416 km in a straight line, so 2:55 would correspond to a sustained speed of 143 km per hour along such a line. That's quite feasible, but the current line is anything but straight. It is meandering, single-tracked and in poor condition. 

This project would certainly include Nobelbanan, a connection between (Karlstad-)Kristinehamn and Örebro, but to really get speed a new direct line across the border would be necessary, preferably starting at Ski-Mysen and then either Arvika-Karlstad or Årjäng-Karlstad. That would cost a pretty penny, but would be straight through empty forests, so it shouldn't be too bad. 

I made a map a good while ago.


----------



## bench_mark_2

There have been some reports that Eurostar are decreasing the number of services between Paris and London (the only two cities with population over 10 million in the world being situated so close to each other). 

This is rediculous! How come, even with the new trains and with spending tens of billions on infrastructure, they could not reach a travel time of less than two hours (although it has been promised) for a distance of 300 miles! And complain of low revenues, not doing anything to attract passangers and selling tickets at standard price of 80-100 pounds one-way! Note, that the number of flights, for the first time, is more than the railway service that are going to be rum from London do Brussels - so the problem is not the demand at all.


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ The total number of seats will stay roughly the same. Newer trains introduced in the route have more seats.


----------



## MarcVD

Following a recent article in The Indépendant it is mostly the London to Brussels line that will be impacted (20 trains less per week ) and the new trains will mostly run on Brussels - Paris. So no there won't be compensation but a net reduction of the seat offering. 

Envoyé de mon GT-I9505 en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## 00Zy99

MarcVD said:


> Following a recent article in The Indépendant it is mostly the London to Brussels line that will be impacted (20 trains less per week ) and the new trains will mostly run on Brussels - Paris. So no there won't be compensation but a net reduction of the seat offering.
> 
> Envoyé de mon GT-I9505 en utilisant Tapatalk


Now you have me confused. Is it that there will be less service London-Brussels or less service London-Paris? 

What exactly is the planned service look like? How many trains per day on each route and how many of those are each type of train?


----------



## bench_mark_2

00Zy99 said:


> Now you have me confused. Is it that there will be less service London-Brussels or less service London-Paris?
> 
> What exactly is the planned service look like? How many trains per day on each route and how many of those are each type of train?


They claim that the services between London and Paris are not to be affected. However, the problem is more general - you cannot have two cities, probably the most influential ones in the world history, art, politics, science etc., just two hours of each other, and not to be able to offer an adequate railway service in terms of travel time and price.

Does anyone know why much longer tunnels in Switzerland for example allow for speed of 180 miles per hour, and in the Eurotunnel the speed is restricted to 100 miles per hour? Is that the design of the tunnel, security reasons or something else?


----------



## 00Zy99

The Chunnel DOES have a higher design speed, if I recall correctly. However, the issue is that there are also many car shuttles and more than a few freight shuttles going through it. It makes scheduling much more simple to have everything going at the same speed (100 mph). If a train were to be going at 180, it would need more room ahead and behind it, consuming blocks of time, or paths, that could be used by other trains.

If there were no other trains in the Chunnel, then the Eurostar could go much faster. However, this would likely require digging a new set of parallel tubes.


----------



## Vaud

bench_mark_2 said:


> There have been some reports that Eurostar are decreasing the number of services between Paris and London (the only two cities with population over 10 million in the world being situated so close to each other).
> 
> This is rediculous! How come, even with the new trains and with spending tens of billions on infrastructure, they could not reach a travel time of less than two hours (although it has been promised) for a distance of 300 miles! And complain of low revenues, not doing anything to attract passangers and selling tickets at standard price of 80-100 pounds one-way! Note, that the number of flights, for the first time, is more than the railway service that are going to be rum from London do Brussels - so the problem is not the demand at all.


Eurostar's market share on the London-Paris route is nowadays close to 90%, so they don't seem to be doing things that wrong...


----------



## Suburbanist

Many of these Belgium-London flights are there to serve mostly connecting passengers, not point-to-point demand.


----------



## MarcVD

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...ist-attacks-cheap-train-tickets-a7429466.html

Envoyé de mon GT-I9505 en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## bench_mark_2

00Zy99 said:


> The Chunnel DOES have a higher design speed, if I recall correctly. However, the issue is that there are also many car shuttles and more than a few freight shuttles going through it. It makes scheduling much more simple to have everything going at the same speed (100 mph). If a train were to be going at 180, it would need more room ahead and behind it, consuming blocks of time, or paths, that could be used by other trains.
> 
> If there were no other trains in the Chunnel, then the Eurostar could go much faster. However, this would likely require digging a new set of parallel tubes.


How do you know about the design speed? In order to have such a speed achievable, the tubes should be much larger than the ones we know in England on the West Coase Main line for example. Also, the gradients should not be too big, I think less than 0,2 or 0,3% to allow for 200 miles per hour.


----------



## bifhihher

bench_mark_2 said:


> How do you know about the design speed? In order to have such a speed achievable, the tubes should be much larger than the ones we know in England on the West Coase Main line for example. Also, the gradients should not be too big, I think less than 0,2 or 0,3% to allow for 200 miles per hour.


Because the research is out in the open.
It's not only the blocks, but the tunnels designed and calculated between both tunnels to reach 250km/h are not going to work when a train in the big automobile Eurochunnel loading gauge is right in the other tunnel. The wind blows too hard on the train (train picks too much wind).
That is the reason.
Take away those huge trains and freight with open cars, and you can drive at least 250km/h


----------



## bench_mark_2

bifhihher said:


> Take away those huge trains and freight with open cars, and you can drive at least 250km/h


Would be nice if it was so. But is that your assumption or is based on any technical information that can be seen from other readers of the forum as well, presumably publicly available?


----------



## 00Zy99

My information is coming from a quotation from one of the engineers who planned the whole thing I found in a book about the tunnels construction.


----------



## bifhihher

bench_mark_2 said:


> Would be nice if it was so. But is that your assumption or is based on any technical information that can be seen from other readers of the forum as well, presumably publicly available?


More information about pressure relief valves in the chunnel:
http://www.brighthubengineering.com...s-and-pressure-changes-in-the-chunnel/#imgn_4


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...h-prague-bratislava-services.html?channel=524
> 
> *Regiojet poised to launch Prague - Bratislava services*
> Thursday, December 01, 2016
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _CZECH and Slovak open-access operator Regiojet is to set to launch Prague - Bratislava services with the start of the 2017 timetable on December 11, with trains running via Pardubice and Brno_
> 
> Both Regiojet and Czech Railways (CD) applied for the paths being used by the new services, with Czech infrastructure SŽDC ultimately ruling in favour of the open-access operator
> 
> ...


----------



## NordikNerd

*Copenhagen-Bornholm train-service ends in January 2018*

The swedish rail company _Skånetrafiken_ cancels the agreement about direct trains from Copenhagen to the danish island of Bornholm. 
The railway ends in Ystad, Sweden where the passengers board the ferry to Rønne.

The changes will take place from january 2018.


For a long time, there has been uncertainty about what the change of operator will mean, among other ticket services. But the situation is under control, the director of Skånetrafiken Magnus Andersson says.

- It continues to be as it is today. You still need to book the ticket through DSB, so the only difference is that there is another train operator in Sweden, he says.

There will be no direct connection from Ystad to Copenhagen. When travelers come from Bornholm, they must instead board the swedish commuter train from Ystad to Malmö and then change onto the Öresund train to Copenhagen.

This means that in a few days in peak season there may not be enough seats in the train when the jam-packed ferry from Bornholm docks in Ystad.

- It is a risk that one must wait for the next departure half an hour after. But besides the busiest departures there will be available seats, says Magnus Andersson.

The Ministry of Transport does not want to comment on the negotiations as they happen.


----------



## NordikNerd

*No international trains to Oslo in 2018*

There will be no trains from Stockholm to Oslo in 2018. Today representatives of the swedish state railways (SJ) met with the Norwegian National Rail Administration, 
to discuss the maintennance works to be carried out on the line Kongsvinger-Lilleström.

The norwegian rail administration wants to do track maintennance during the day to avoid interfering with the transport of goods, which takes place at night. 

It's about the transport for the fishing industry which is very important for Norway. The swedish railways however want to prioritize express-train between Stockholm and Oslo, 
which departs daily. This train has reduced the travel time between Stockholm and Oslo from 6 hours to 4.5 hours.

- We have been told that freight traffic is more important during the construction phase, says Petter Essén, business manager of SJ's express-trains.

- In 2017, we are expanding from 3 to 5 daily departures between Stockholm and Oslo, via Karlstad, but after the announcement today, we will cancel all departures in 2018, when the catenary will be replaced.

- I have received quite a little understanding for our arguments. Jernbaneverket is very adamant about the freight traffic being more important.

What was said at the meeting today is that during daytime the tracks will be closed due to construction and that the railway will be closed for passenger-traffic, says Petter Essen. 
- It's about 150 000 trips, which now must take place in any other way with the larger impact on the environment.

Track work on the stretch Kongsvinger-Lillestrom is expected to take 3 years to complete.


----------



## 00Zy99

What are they doing that requires such disruption?


----------



## Slartibartfas

Pretty crazy stuff. 

One could certainly do that overhaul without stopping all express services, it may be more expensive though.


----------



## Gusiluz

*Share of market between train and airplane*

I have just finished this list, which aims to increase and update.

The UIC data (80%) refers to the mean HST that take less than 150 minutes.
The figure for China is the total of CRH trains compared to domestic flights.

I do not have data from Korea (I only have 2005, just start the HS) and Taiwan; You can also put others that are significant, even if they are not from HS, as the last of the graph, so we thank the collaboration with source. Thank you!




It is interesting to compare 35% of the train on the Rome-Milan route in 2004 (with a journey of 238 minutes) with the current 73%, thanks to 170 minutes (little more than an hour of cut, 33%) and to NTV competition.

To make it clearer, I also put them sorted by the average speed:


And by the distance:


----------



## Kpc21

It's not a place to make an OT about Brexit, but I think, it would be very difficult for the British economy withou foreign employees.

One thing are the populist voices and the hatred against Poles working in the UK, but a different thing is the real politics, which takes into account what the country really needs, the populism has nothing to do with.

But anything is possible.

My assumption was the UK staying closely related with the EU, which means that if it is possible to live cross-border now (despite all the border checks and controls because of the British schengenlessness), it will be the same after the Brexit.


----------



## K_

pimlico30 said:


> ^^
> Arrival half an hour before departure? Security and passport checks, luggage and personal belongings through the X-ray scanners - and twice the number than, say, a Boeing 747. It all takes a little longer than simply having your ticket checked!


And as these things are all completely superfluous they can be abolished, saving everyone 30 minutes, and saving some money too. How is that not superior to investing billions in more direct route from Calais to Paris?

Compare the Eurostar with the train from Helsinki to st. Petersburg. That train crosses an external EU/Schengen border, to a country that needs visa from most people. Yet immigration formalities are done on board.


----------



## Kpc21

The new Przemyśl (Poland) - Lviv - Kyiv train too. All the formalities on the board. Sometimes the passengers must wait some time after the arrival, because... those formalities are not finished yet. But doing them on the board is not a problem.

And it's not only an external Schengen border, but even an external EU border.


----------



## Suburbanist

Unless UK changed its asylum laws, which give substantial more legal standing for applicants that are physically present within UK borders, those onboard checks are a no-go, unless St. Pancras had a full-fledged "pre-border" area like international airports, legally.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

No, what makes the difference is that countries agree that a person claiming asylum in a country has to do so in the first safe country he reaches. If caught on a vehicle that obviously comes from such a safe country, he is repatriated immediately by the first train/ship/bus departing in the opposite direction. That is what was common practice for example on the Czech/German border prior to Schengen. All legal agreements to act so are in place, it would just take a greater degree of organization by UK border police and more mobility, but they apparently prefer to sit comfortably in railway offices rather than patrol on the trains.


----------



## Kpc21

Does it work in the EU now so, as it should? I cannot see it.


----------



## btrs

00Zy99 said:


> I think that they might be talking about the fact that HS1 swings out around through Ebbsfleet rather than coming straight up from the south, and the plan to build a cut-off that bypasses Lille entirely. If those two "issues" were rectified, Eurostar would likely have a travel time less than two hours. That would be enough to UTTERLY dominate the market (+95%), and transform things into a commuter system (two hours generally being regarded as the limit of travel time for commuters outside of Japan).


The French had such a plan with the LGV Picardie, but then it was scrapped with the 2009 review of their investment plans..


----------



## MarcVD

And rightfully so IMHO. High speed rail is not supposed to sneak in each and every corner of the country. Even the existing network becomes difficult to support financially. Some real missing links put aside, the expansion of HST network should now be stopped, and focus put back on the classical network.


----------



## 00Zy99

btrs said:


> The French had such a plan with the LGV Picardie, but then it was scrapped with the 2009 review of their investment plans..


How much time would LGV Picardie have saved?


----------



## 33Hz

Reputedly it would save 15-20 minutes, enough to get the London - Paris time down to under 2 hours.

When Eurostar started they were doing passport checks on the train. I can recall being checked 20 years ago. There was even a holding cell on the trains to put people without the right documentation into. Things have gone backwards.


----------



## MarcVD

The main supporters for that line were using the faster journey from Paris to London as a prétexte but their real motive was merely to put a new HSL station on the territory of Amiens.


----------



## 00Zy99

I would think that the Amiens argument would BOOST matters.

Had the journey time been below 2 hours, it would have been utterly transformative-people would have been commuting back-and-forth on a daily basis. Going by how people commute by air in the US (a lot of the people on Flight 1549 were regular commuters), demand would have been immense.


----------



## MarcVD

You cannot justify the existence of à high speed line with just 2 or 3 trains each way per day in the morning and afternoon.


----------



## 00Zy99

I would think that with sub-2 hour journeys there would be London-Paris trains running every 15-20 minutes.


----------



## MarcVD

That would mean multiplying the current traffic by 3 or 4... For just a 20 to 30 min accélération. Realistic ? What is the market share of E* on the London - Paris line today ? And what effect should be expected from Brexit ?


----------



## Gusiluz

*Share of market between train and airplane*

^^ Here is a lot of data done in December on the percentage of HST and aircraft. 



Gusiluz said:


> I have just finished this list, which aims to increase and update.
> 
> The UIC data (80%) refers to the mean HST that take less than 150 minutes.
> The figure for China is the total of CRH trains compared to domestic flights.
> 
> I do not have data from Korea (I only have 2005, just start the HS) and Taiwan; You can also put others that are significant, even if they are not from HS, as the last of the graph, so we thank the collaboration with source. Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is interesting to compare 35% of the train on the Rome-Milan route in 2004 (with a journey of 238 minutes) with the current 73%, thanks to 170 minutes (little more than an hour of cut, 33%) and to NTV competition.
> 
> To make it clearer, I also put them sorted by the average speed:
> 
> 
> And by the distance:


----------



## MarcVD

Do I understand well from the data above that rail already has 80% market share on Paris London ? In that case multiplying by 3 or 4 looks quite ambitious.


----------



## The Polwoman

Kpc21 said:


> Does it work in the EU now so, as it should? I cannot see it.




Well, as everybody should know, it doesn't. So-called labor migrants are put in a bus or train, but then every single check stops. These people, especially from North-Africa, are still amongst us. And refugees, well, we see what happens all over Europe. No background checks or anything, extremists walk free. A shame.


----------



## 00Zy99

MarcVD said:


> Do I understand well from the data above that rail already has 80% market share on Paris London ? In that case multiplying by 3 or 4 looks quite ambitious.


That's assuming that only the current market exists. A trip below two hours would expand the Paris-London market. 

Two hours is about the limit of what people are willing to spend commuting. That's one big new market opening up right there.

Then you are going to have many more day-trippers. Imagine somebody living in Camden and going out for dinner on the Champs-Elysees (assuming tickets are affordable). 

And then there are school trips being possible. 

In short, the market would massively expand if a direct downtown-downtown trip below two hours existed.


----------



## AlexNL

I think that relaxing the security theatre alone (which takes at least 30 minutes nowadays) would help in making Eurostar even more attractive than it however is. However, under the current climate (Brexit, security threats) I don't think that is likely to happen anytime soon.


----------



## Sunfuns

I'd never tried multi country connections like that and would probably be too cautious to try... As for Copenhagen to Hamburg one day in a not too far future it will be a premium route taking 3 h or so when the bridge and all the associated upgrades are complete. 

I'm not expecting a revival of a grand cross Europe train travel (flying is too cheap and frequent), but serious optimisation to get to the neighbouring country fast and on time would be welcome. In the Swiss context it would mean reliable and frequent trains to Milan and with such a timetable that you can easily transfer to HS trains further South and actually believe 15-20 min connection time. Also Zurich-Munich upgrade is decades overdue...


----------



## K_

Kpc21 said:


> Was it a single ticket just for a few trains, or a few separate tickets?


Actually it is immaterial if it's multiple tickets or not. The regulations say that if you miss a train "due to a fault of the railway" you are entitled to travel on the next one available.


----------



## K_

Sunfuns said:


> I'm not expecting a revival of a grand cross Europe train travel (flying is too cheap and frequent), but serious optimisation to get to the neighbouring country fast and on time would be welcome. In the Swiss context it would mean reliable and frequent trains to Milan and with such a timetable that you can easily transfer to HS trains further South and actually believe 15-20 min connection time.


It is for this reason that the SBB wants to get the Zürich - Milan trains below 3 hours. But for that several things are still needed:
- the Ceneri Base tunnel needs to be finished. 
- RFI needs to make a fast path available for the EC trains. 

What I would like to see (and with the Giruno's this might become possible) is for SBB to extend some of the EC's south. For example to Genoa and the Cinque Terre, and the Adriatic coast, and Trenitalia could extend a few Rome - Milan services to Zürich. 



> Also Zurich-Munich upgrade is decades overdue...


Yes, but it is now finally happening.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

K_ said:


> What I would like to see (and with the Giruno's this might become possible) is for SBB to extend some of the EC's south. For example to Genoa and the Cinque Terre, and the Adriatic coast, and Trenitalia could extend a few Rome - Milan services to Zürich.


Just noticed there is a Geneva - Venice EC in the early morning. But mostly, all trains must terminate in Milan, which definitely makes rail connections less attractive. I wonder though if this is not more SBB's fault. They seem so overprotective of letting any delays spill over onto their network from other countries. Most incoming ICEs and TGVs in Basel have some obligatory stopovers of 12 minutes or more, which seem to serve no other purpose (or maybe also to make them conform to some slots that are not harmonized with their slots in other countries).


----------



## Kpc21

K_ said:


> Actually it is immaterial if it's multiple tickets or not. The regulations say that if you miss a train "due to a fault of the railway" you are entitled to travel on the next one available.


I know that, but I meant the thing of getting the reimbursement.


----------



## Grzegorz.Janoszka

Kpc21 said:


> I have heard - no idea how much truth is in it - that the Dutch trains are never delayed. A delay of a few minutes is already unusual.


Well, trains in the Netherlands go quite often, through country trains go like twice an hour being complemented by shorter connections to 4 fast trains / hour between all main cities. There are also local trains that stop on every station/stop and adding them into the mix we have 8 trains / hour onto most lines.
With such a tight schedule big delay is not possible, trains get canceled quite often though. I have used local trains in the Netherlands at least twice a day for more than two years and about half of them was delayed about 5 minutes.

Very characteristic to Dutch railroad is its big dependency on the weather. In fall the problem are leaves on tracks and trains get canceled, in winter it might be snow - even few cm is enough to cancel more than half trains. In summer it might be hot temperature and bending tracks or anything else


----------



## Kpc21

Don't you have regulations there about the minimum distance of the tracks from trees?

In Poland, the leaves on tracks in the autumn are a problem for trams, but trains do not typically suffer from them, just because there is no trees next to the tracks.

Which would be a problem (sometimes it anyway is) when there are strong winds - a falling tree may block the tracks and damage the catenary.

The problem the trains have in winter here is not snow (why should it be a problem with so frequent trains as in the Netherlands? the tracks will be anyway clean of snow because of the passing trains), but, sometimes, ice on the catenary. Ice is not conductive, so it causes sparks between the catenary and the pantograph. The catenary may get burned and broken, or the train just cannot receive enough power.

But it usually occurs when it's not snowing, but raining, and the temperature is below 0 degrees Celsius.


----------



## AlexNL

Kpc21 said:


> Don't you have regulations there about the minimum distance of the tracks from trees?



We do, but a lot of trees were there before the regulations came into force. ProRail (the infrastructure manager) does tend to vegetation. When trees form a danger to the railway, they are felled.


----------



## Sunfuns

K_ said:


> What I would like to see (and with the Giruno's this might become possible) is for SBB to extend some of the EC's south. For example to Genoa and the Cinque Terre, and the Adriatic coast, and *Trenitalia could extend a few Rome - Milan services to Zürich.*


Is it technically possible for the current Frecciarossa trains to travel all the way to Zurich?


----------



## AlexNL

The Frecciarossa 1000 fleet is technically capable of operating under all 4 voltages used in the EU (25 kV AC, 15 kV AC, 3 kV DC and 1.5 kV AC), so that's not an issue. Train safety systems might need to be installed though.


----------



## Coccodrillo

No, both the ETR 400 (the new Frecciarossa) and ETR 500 can only run under 25 kV AC and 3 kV DC (and maybe also 1,5 kV DC with reduced power).

The only trains Trenitalia owns which are able to run both under 15 kV AC and the two Italian systems are the ETR 610, which are just 7 and once used on Frecciargento services. Now they run on Italy-Switzerland ECs, but no more on Italuan HSLs. When they were ordered it was planend to run Zürich-Roma trains, and even Zürich-Torino, but these services were never run.



Baron Hirsch said:


> Just noticed there is a Geneva - Venice EC in the early morning.


There is also the 6.09 Zürich to Venice EC, returning in the afternoon (at 15.20 from Venice), but only Saturday and Sunday (the other days it only runs to/from Milano).

This train might become daily from December 2017, when a Frankfurt>Gotthard>Milano + Milano>Simplon>Frankfurt train will be added (to make every city happy, they decided to run it one way on different lines in different directions...).



Baron Hirsch said:


> (or maybe also to make them conform to some slots that are not harmonized with their slots in other countries)


That's the main reason.

(and no, impacting dozens of other trains to make a single train passenger's happy with a faster path is not a good idea)


----------



## Kpc21

AlexNL said:


> We do, but a lot of trees were there before the regulations came into force. ProRail (the infrastructure manager) does tend to vegetation. When trees form a danger to the railway, they are felled.


Well. We had an opposite case, concerning a more tram-like commuter rail in Warsaw - the WKD. It operates as a railway, so those regulations apply to it too. And to satisfy them, they wanted to cut out 2 thousands of trees less than 15 metres to its tracks. Which was not good as it passes literally through centers of towns more like a tram. Many trees being natural monuments or in city parks were endangered. There were social actions against cutting those trees and, luckily, they ended up successfully, with a change of the law.


----------



## K_

AlexNL said:


> The Frecciarossa 1000 fleet is technically capable of operating under all 4 voltages used in the EU (25 kV AC, 15 kV AC, 3 kV DC and 1.5 kV AC), so that's not an issue. Train safety systems might need to be installed though.


I thought the next batch of Freccuarossa 1000 trains was going to be certified for several countries, as Trenitalia apparently has rediscovered that Italy isn't an island 

Zurich - Rome looks like a good candidate here.


----------



## Verso

doc7austin said:


> The signpost also says Bucuresti below.


I know, but it's contradictory.



Kpc21 said:


> "Istanbul - Sofia Express" is the name of the train, which doesn't have to refer to the real relation of the train (pointed on the sign below). Although it's weird.


Why would an Istanbul–Bucharest train be called "Istanbul–Sofia Express"? :nuts:


----------



## Kpc21

Because it did traditionally go to Sofia. You may ask in the same way, why is the Dakar race called Dakar even though it doesn't start nor end in Dakar and it's actually organized on a different continent now.

But it's misleading in fact. They shouldn't do it so.


----------



## Verso

Wait, Istanbul–Sofia trains still exist.


----------



## Kpc21

Then it's even more misleading.

From what I read, that the main train is Sofia-Istanbul, and it gets the carriages from Bucharest added to it in Dimitrovgrad in Bulgaria (not to mistake with Dimitrovgrad in Serbia, it has nothing to do with this train), only in summer. Maybe this is the reason why they call the whole train Sofia-Istanbul Express.


----------



## 3737

So I found some pics of a TMST abandoned on some rail yard.
Can someone explain why it is abandoned ?




























Link


----------



## AlexNL

The majority of the original Eurostar TMST fleet is being sent to the scrapheap as they've fulfilled their duties and newer trains have taken over their jobs. It looks like this train has already been stripped of its useful parts (such as monitors), so it's possibly awaiting its appointment with the cutting torch.


----------



## Stainless

3737 said:


> So I found some pics of a TMST abandoned on some rail yard.
> Can someone explain why it is abandoned ?


That is a very sad and undignified end for such an iconic train . It looks like something from a post apocalyptic film. They still look pretty modern now, especially as the UK are still using trains nearly twice as old as this in regular mainline service.


----------



## jonasry

I've never understood the practice of scrapping trains only 20 years old. Would be interesting to see the numbers behind that reasoning. Older trains consume more electricity, but apart from that I really can't think of any valid reasons that would make them unusable.


----------



## The Polwoman

^^ Sometimes it does (it would in the case of the Fyra V250 or other failed projects) but in this case it does not make sense indeed. It would still work well beyond the 2020s. I hate the fact that many public goods called trains and buses are scrapped early. They should be more careful, especially when the old stuff is economically still pretty good.

This is also the reason I think the maximum age of buses in the Netherlands is bogus. I mean seriously, it does serve no purpose except keeping the VDL factory away from bankruptcy but instead we pay a lot of taxes to fund new buses. 12 years old is not really much. If bus tickets can get cheaper by making them going around for 15-20 years instead, I'd choose for that, absolutely. Also, in many countries buses from the 1980s still work perfectly (though that is beyond the border for environmental reasons, particles etc. I mean, electric buses especially should have an extended age limit).

Also, trains of 45 years old have worked pretty well here in the Netherlands. They had not the comfort you could expect nowadays but what extra comfort, not being speed or something, could you expect in the years to come? I think nothing, AC is there, Wi-Fi is there, plugs are there in many trains as well (especially in the first class), I do absolutely not see a reason to scrap trains of today early if there is no reason.

Reasons: electrification, new HST, scrapping lines in favour of HST or because of excessively low demand, single-deck trains on heavy-used lines that cannot be put in elsewhere. Otherwise: 30 years and no less!


----------



## 00Zy99

In the case of Japan, the bullet trains get an obscenely high amount of use during their lifespans.

Combine that with the constant improvements to squeeze out more capacity, and the subsequent need for a consistent fleet with as close-as-possible acceleration curves, and you get a short service career.

The 500 and 700 series are both within 20 years old, yet they are slowly being pushed towards retirement.


----------



## AlexNL

The Eurostar TMST sets are more than 20 years old and have clocked up a lot of miles throughout their years in service. Some of them are in a bad state (think corrosion) and in desperate need of repairs. They were made to fulfill a specific purpose and due to their length and power requirements it's hard to deploy them elsewhere. Their build limits their usability (i.e. they can't run to Germany or Switzerland) and it's becoming increasingly hard to get spare parts.

As much as it might hurt to see these trains being scrapped, it's not a strange decision to scrap them.


----------



## Kpc21

Even if they don't want to use them any more - I am sure a railway of another country wouldn't mind buying those train for the price of scrap, or even more.

So what's the point of scrapping them?


----------



## 00Zy99

Kpc21 said:


> Even if they don't want to use them any more - I am sure a railway of another country wouldn't mind buying those train for the price of scrap, or even more.
> 
> So what's the point of scrapping them?


As AlexNL said, the power requirements are high, and the technical specs are highly restrictive.


----------



## MarcVD

Sometimes railway companies scrap rolling stock just to avoid seeing it fall in the hands of competitors. Getting new equipment to go through the chunnel is horribly expensive. But putting those trains on sale might have helped another company to start, at a very low price, a competing service. Other companies have done that in the past. Not entirely sure, but NS and DB come to mind. I think SNCF does that now with its first generation TGVs too. I remember well that when the preservation group I'm member of tried to salvage old SNCB 1805, the hardest part was to convince SNCB officials that it would not be used in commercial service again. They were afraid that this quadricourant loc might be used to start a service competing with Thalys...


----------



## AlexNL

Kpc21 said:


> Even if they don't want to use them any more - I am sure a railway of another country wouldn't mind buying those train for the price of scrap, or even more.
> 
> So what's the point of scrapping them?


Don't forget that we're talking about 400 metre units which offer seats to 750 passengers. They're fixed formation units, so even if you'd want to reduce the amount of coaches you'll most likely have to adjust the on board computers.

Their physical characteristics limit their usefulness a lot: due to their length not all stations can handle them, dwell times are long due to a limited amount of doors, power usage is high* and because they're fixed formation units it's impossible to adapt capacity to demand.

The only place where these trains could be useful is on the current Eurostar routes - why would Eurostar help a potential competitor?

* When GNER used the Regional Eurostar sets for London - York services, only 1 TMST set was allowed in a section to prevent the power supply from getting overloaded.


----------



## The Polwoman

^^ thank you for the last sentence: I was looking for an answer for something different:

why we had to wait fifteen minutes in order to let a Thalys pass on the HST near Lage Zwaluwe before entering it. For the speed it isn't needed as in the same time our train could have been in Rotterdam already, but the power on the system gets used heavily.


----------



## mistertl

Because TAD ("Treinafhandelingsdocument")
I think I wrote about it in the Dutch thread. Basically, it's a document that dictates which trains goes first. The maximum delay for the Thalys train to go first is 13 minutes, and with an enthusiastic driver, you'll arrive a few minutes early at the entry point to the high speed line, which means you'll have to wait for 15 minutes in order to proceed.
It has nothing to do with the power supply.


----------



## Kpc21

The Polish Pendolinos also used to cause some power problems. Some claimed it's a reason why they aren't used in multiple traction. In practice, it was shown that they can be used in multiple traction (some trains for the World Youth Days in Cracow were set in such a way), but if I am not mistaken, they cannot reach their maximum speed in such a situation. Otherwise, they would overload the power supply.

But we are using the 3 kV DC system in Poland. With 25 kV AC, it should be better.


----------



## MarcVD

Kpc21 said:


> The Polish Pendolinos also used to cause some power problems. Some claimed it's a reason why they aren't used in multiple traction. In practice, it was shown that they can be used in multiple traction (some trains for the World Youth Days in Cracow were set in such a way), but if I am not mistaken, they cannot reach their maximum speed in such a situation. Otherwise, they would overload the power supply.
> 
> But we are using the 3 kV DC system in Poland. With 25 kV AC, it should be better.


This might also be because of a problem with the catenary. Two units means two pantographs and if the power line isn't mechanically tensioned enough, the catenary will move up and the second panto will lose contact. The only way to avoid that is to lower the speed or to increase the wire mechanical tension.


----------



## AlexNL

The Polman said:


> why we had to wait fifteen minutes in order to let a Thalys pass on the HST near Lage Zwaluwe before entering it. For the speed it isn't needed as in the same time our train could have been in Rotterdam already, but the power on the system gets used heavily.


The HSL Zuid power supply can handle the load of a Thalys and an ICd in the same section just fine, this is just a matter of priority. Thalys trains take precedence over domestic trains.

The electrification on the East Coast Main Line was done on the cheap: instead of solid structures, the BR engineers used headspans which are more susceptible to strong winds and cause significant disruption when the overhead lines go down. Furthermore, the substations can deliver less power when compared to their counterparts on the WCML.


----------



## dimlys1994

From Rail Journal

http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...yon-turin-high-speed-project.html?channel=523

*Macron pauses Lyon - Turin high-speed project*
July 20, 2017










_FRANCE’s minister of transport Mrs Elisabeth Borne confirmed on July 19 that the €26.1bn Lyon - Turin high-speed line is one of the major projects to be paused by president Mr Emmanuel Marcon pending a review of France’s infrastructure plans_

In an interview with French news website Reporterre, Borne said that the state faces a €10bn shortfall in funding for committed projects and maintenance, and a “break” is therefore needed to “reflect on the mobility model and prioritise projects”

...


----------



## 33Hz

Predictable but sad for what is an important link in a *European* context.


----------



## Silly_Walks

Pro-European in talk, not in investment.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Judge a person by his deeds, indeed.


----------



## 33Hz

He's a free market economist that in any other time would be labelled Thatcherite, and they are not known for favouring large amounts of state spending on infrastructure. It's only the opponent he was up against that allowed him to take the centre-left ground in the election.


----------



## 33Hz

http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/20...ause-signifie-pas-suspension-gestionnaire.php



> La ministre a toutefois fait état de la "spécificité" du projet qui "a été financé à 40% par l'Union européenne, mais aussi à 35% par l'Italie, et qui fait partie des réseaux trans-européens", "un aspect" à "prendre en compte" dans les éventuelles décisions à venir.


Maybe there is hope.


----------



## Verso

After 6 years there will be again passenger trains running between Slovenia and Italy next year (Ljubljana–Trieste–Venice). These days there's an Italian train testing Slovenian railways:









http://www.slo-zeleznice.si/sl/novi...ke-povezave-med-ljubljano-trstom-in-benetkami

I say _finally_, although I don't like the idea of driving 4 hours on a not-very-comfortable regional train. They should also skip Trieste and send another train there from Aurisina.


----------



## Gusiluz

^^ For the European Union to allow it as cabotage:



> The service shall be deemed to be international if, in the medium term, at least one third of the revenue and total traffic is derived from travelers from / to destinations outside the country.


----------



## Steinbock

Ugo Fantozzi said:


> In the Past there were many international trains.But today they are "low" and replace by bus/plan (more cheaply).
> But in the future I hope that return train thanks to High-Speed Rail.
> I think track as Milano-(Parigi)-Londra or (my dream) Reggio Calabria-Naples-Rome-Florence-Geneve-Marseille-Barcelona in one day


I do not think the line Calabria-Naples-Rome-Florence-Geneve-Marseille-Barcelona will ever exist 
Why bother passing trough Geneve when you can pass much more easily trough Nice ? (and it'll save a lot of time)


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

Steinbock said:


> I do not think the line Calabria-Naples-Rome-Florence-Geneve-Marseille-Barcelona will ever exist
> Why bother passing trough Geneve when you can pass much more easily trough Nice ? (and it'll save a lot of time)


Sorry, I would wrote Genoa (Genova)


----------



## NordikNerd

*The Beltsavers protest against the Fehmarn-tunnel*

A movement called "Beltretters" protest against the planned railway-tunnel in the Baltic Sea.

The German Belt-savers work hard to stop the tunnelproject under the Fehmarn Belt. Here's a current call asking for help to influence politicians involved in the decision-making process. Especially the head of the state ministry of transport Bernt Buchholz is a target, because he wants to speed up the decision-making process.

_"Dear BELTRETTER and Supporters,
We need your help again and again!
This coming Friday, Kiel's Minister of Economic Affairs and Transport Dr. Bernd Buchholz will visit the (still) wonderful island of Fehmarn. However, he has just announced in the media that he intends to accelerate the approval procedure for the planned billion-belt tunnel project- A madness, juding by the deficiencies,Risks and gaps in the current planning. 

These have even been criticized by the licensing authority itself.
For this reason and because of the ongoing election campaign , we should remind him of the non-construction consortia in Germany.


Please send him an e-mail: [email protected]
And best of all, send a copy of the German Federal Minister of Transport Dobrindt ([email protected]) and Wolfgang Kubicki ([email protected]).
And / or comment on the Facebook page of Bernd Bucholz: https://www.facebook.com/bernd.buchholz.58
Bernd Buchholz comes from the business-sector and should not have any interest in an uneconomical mammoth project that would cost taxpayers billions, threatens the main economic tourism in the north and that is an immense risk to the environment and our Baltic Sea. And as a former chairman of the board, he should not fall into the winds of the tunnel lobbyists. Above all, Buchholz should not speed up the approval process, because then a new German large-scale building is threatening. Finally, the tunnel plans still show dramatic shortcomings and gaps.
Thank you very much for the great support !!!
It helps and motivates us!
best regards
The BELTRETTER team "
_


----------



## Grotlaufen

As there was a change in political guard this Spring with the state election in Schleswig-Holstein (from SPD-Greens-SSW to CDU-Greens-FDP) there are new politicians to petition. Thus this is more a way to create attention to oneself than the start of a new process ( Beltretter has existed for several years now and their aim hasn't changed ).


----------



## Grzegorz.Janoszka

NordikNerd said:


> A movement called "Beltretters" protest against the planned railway-tunnel in the Baltic Sea.


What is the rationale behind it? Are they just nimby's?


----------



## NordikNerd

Grzegorz.Janoszka said:


> What is the rationale behind it? Are they just nimby's?


The arguments were the same in the 90's during the planning of the Öresund-bridge. Back then the Danes were not (and are not) very interested in the Öresund Bridge. They are looking for better connections to the south. 

The danes want the Fehmarn-tunnel just like the swedes wanted the Öresund-bridge. Now they meet the same attitude that they had against their swedish neighbours. 

The Germans do not care about the tunnel to Denmark. They have other important transport-projects to think about.


----------



## Slartibartfas

NordikNerd said:


> The Germans do not care about the tunnel to Denmark. They have other important transport-projects to think about.


The Germans don't seem to care much about upgrading their links across the Alps either, or think that is the job of their neigbhours alone. So what do they actually care about then?


----------



## Robi_damian

Slartibartfas said:


> The Germans don't seem to care much about upgrading their links across the Alps either, or think that is the job of their neigbhours alone. So what do they actually care about then?


Exactly. The fact that the Munich-Zurich link is not even electrified (in a country with a very high rate of electrification) says very much. Prague-Munich is another cross-border link sorely missing an upgrade. The most direct line is not electrified and requires trains changing direction.


----------



## AlexNL

Robi_damian said:


> The fact that the Munich-Zurich link is not even electrified


There is a project to upgrade the entire line, electrification is part of that. They're also planning to build a new station at Lindau-Reutin, so that trains running to Austria and Switzerland no longer have to change ends in Lindau Hbf.

Freight activities which currently take place at Lindau Hbf will be moved to Lindau-Reutin, the current Lindau Hbf will be scaled down to a station which will only see regional traffic.


----------



## Slartibartfas

^^ Yeah, there are a lot of projects and plans. That doesn't mean that they feel the need to actually realise them in a timely manner. Just take that corridor linking to the Gotthard base tunnel. Apparently it is much easier and faster to build such a tunnel than upgrading the connecting track in Germany. The same seems to be happening with the connection towards the Brenner base tunnel even though that tunnel is still many years away from opening.


----------



## Grotlaufen

NordikNerd said:


> The arguments were the same in the 90's during the planning of the Öresund-bridge. Back then the Danes were not (and are not) very interested in the Öresund Bridge. They are looking for better connections to the south.


Yes and no.
Back then there were still heavy traffic going through residential areas in Copenhagen and Dragør to reach the ports (including Indre By in Cph, with vehicles camping next to Nyhavn to get on/off the ferries to Bornholm/Oslo plus rail ferries going to and from Nordhavnen/Frihavnen with the current S-bane line F being used for freight and port traffic). Plus there were no great connections from Kastrup airport to the rest of Denmark either (there were buses, but even they had to cross residential areas in Amager to get out of Cph except for a 3 kms isolated stretch of motorway which was built in the 1960's). 

Without the bridge in Öresund, there would have been a need to plan for a replacement of Dragør and Indre By (Kvæsthusbroen) as ferry terminals (you basically had to drive right through town to get to and from the port in both cases). It would have been a very difficult task as the areas closest to Sweden were already built-up and a new port in say Avedøre on Zealand would have extended the journey time for the ferries considerably - Don't forget the ferries Limhamn-Dragør went around the clock unlike Bornholm/Oslo which was once a day. Most likely in such scenario Nordhavnen/Frihavnen would've been expanded to accomodate for motor ferries as well (and Limhamn might have been replaced with northern part of Malmö harbour on the Scanian side as ferry terminal), but such a move would've caused enormous protests in the residential areas next to Nordhavnen/Frihavnen west of Kystbanen (the ferries and esp. the rail traffic to and from were already quite controversial). In any case all of this would've meant huge investments on the Danish side which would've been deeply unpopular by everyone living nearby plus hemmed a lot of potential real estate sites (look at Nordhavnen/Frihavnen today and compare with say 1987 to get the perspective of what I mean). Plus the airport would still have crappy road connections and non-existent rail traffic. 


I don't think it was ever contemplated to put all motorized traffic over Elsinore-Helsingorg (as it was for half a year before the bridge was opened in 2000). Such a move would also had put a lot of pressure on the northern connection if anything happened there, the need for a ferry with motor vehicles in the southern part of Öresund would still be there. 


So I'd rather say the Danes were, from a city planning and infrastructure point of view, really interested and vested in a bridge across the sound and all for it. But maybe not as emotionally invested in it as the Swedes for whom this is the gateway to The Continent (thus the gate to heaven and hell at once) and a lot of such pompous descriptions


----------



## Grotlaufen

Slartibartfas said:


> ^^ Yeah, there are a lot of projects and plans. That doesn't mean that they feel the need to actually realise them in a timely manner. Just take that corridor linking to the Gotthard base tunnel. Apparently it is much easier and faster to build such a tunnel than upgrading the connecting track in Germany. The same seems to be happening with the connection towards the Brenner base tunnel even though that tunnel is still many years away from opening.



In the case of Fehmarn/Femern there are since 2008 a state treaty (in both languages) where the German state agreed to oblige to be done with a double track railway on their side of the tunnel at least seven years after the construction is finished ("Der Ausbau der Schienenstrecke zwischen Bad Schwartau und Puttgarden zu einer zweigleisigen elektrifizierten Schienenstrecke soll spätestens sieben Jahre nach der Eröffnung der Festen Fehmarnbeltquerung betriebsbereit sein. Die Schienenstrecke über die Fehmarnsundbrücke soll eingleisig bleiben.")(NB: This was before it was discovered that Storstroemsbroen and the bridge in Fehmarnsund were deficient and must be replaced.). 


Time will tell if it happens this time and in this case.


----------



## Slartibartfas

A treaty exists also with Switzerland if I am not mistaken. To my knowledge they have already broken it because of how the DB is dragging its feet, despite those obligations. The German side should have been completed already 3 years ago. 

But I do see that they factored in alraedy quite a lot of "I don't care at all" this time into thet reaty given how they only talk about completing the track a whopping 7 years after the completion of a long sea crossing. And even then, are they still keeping parts of the corridor single tracked? Pretty crazy stuff you ask me.


----------



## Grotlaufen

Slartibartfas said:


> But I do see that they factored in alraedy quite a lot of "I don't care at all" this time into thet reaty given how they only talk about completing the track a whopping 7 years after the completion of a long sea crossing. And even then, are they still keeping parts of the corridor single tracked? Pretty crazy stuff you ask me.



Originally Denmark wasn't going to replace Storstroemsbroen, the 3.5 kms bridge between Zealand-Falster, nor was Germany going to replace the 1 km Fehmarnsund bridge with double-track bridges. However as analysis have shown both bridges were structurally deficient (the Danish bridge is ~80 yrs, the German is ~55 yrs old) thus they must be replaced anyway. As they have to be replaced, on both sides agencies have agreed upon replacing it with double track bridges. 


On the Danish side the bridge construction starts next year: 
http://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/DA/vejprojekter/storstroemsbro/Sider/default.aspx

On the German side, well at the end of next year we'll hopefully have the answer to what the replacement will look like:
https://www.fehmarn24.de/fehmarn/ende-2018-steht-variante-8053337.html
Then after that has been public German planning fun starts.


----------



## NordikNerd

*The Oslo-Stockholm Express may be canceled*

The express-train service between Oslo and Stockholm may be discontinued. The Swedish railway manager is dissatisfied with the fact that the upgrade on the Norwegian side is taking too much time.

The three daily departures that run the Oslo-Stockholm route in five hours are imminently threatened with closure, warns SJ's CEO and Chief Executive Officer Crister Fritzson in a letter to Bane Nor and Transport Minister Ketil Solvik-Olsen (Frp).

In that case, traveling in ten hours and with one or two changes will be the only train service between the two capital cities.

Deferred and prolonged
The background is the postponement of the most required work to replace the contact lines on the Norwegian side of the line. The initial plan to start at the turn of the year is now changed to October 1st, 2018. In addition, Bane Nor is now expecting the work to last for three years, compared to previously estimated 24 months.

In addition, the SJ boss assumes that the route tables must be posted for an entire calendar year at a time.

- This means that a "run time schedule" must be run even in the nine months before the start of the field work in 2018 and the three remaining months of 2021 after the completion of the field work. In practice, this means 48 months of reduced table, compared with previous 24 months. It is not sustainable, it is stated in the letter from Fritzson.


The Swedish chief executive's conclusion is clear:

"Unless the planning of the field work is changed in line with what Bane Nor and the Norwegian Rail Administration have informed me about earlier, I have to decide that the express-service Oslo-Stockholm must cease operations, he warns.

The SJ director believes it is "sensational" that the Norwegian infrastructure company Bane Nor first came with this clarification during a meeting in August.

budgets
Executive Vice President Bjørn Kristiansen in Bane Nor says to NTB that the postponement is due to the signals they have received about next year's budgets.

"We now see that the money will not be enough for the whole year. The money we have must be prioritized on measures that go to safety. We have always wanted, and told the train companies, that we have planned to get started on January 1st, 2018, but at the same time be aware that the prerequisite is sufficient budget resources. Having said that, we are very pleased that we are able to get started in October next year and that it will not be a full year postponement, "says Kristiansen.

Does the Road Administration Oppose New Roads: Who Can Cut The Cost The Most?
Hope for solution
He rejects that it is not possible to customize the timetables as Fritzson claims. Thus, it is a maximum of 36 and not 48 months, as the SJ boss assumes.

"We are now looking at opportunities for route changes from October 1st. This is a big jigsaw puzzle that also affects freight traffic. We are committed to work with SJ, the charity companies and NSB to see how we can do this. Our hope is to be able to find a solution that will enable us to get a good route offer until October, "he told NTB.

"But the SJ boss is quite aware that the quick offer is being rejected if he does not get what he wants?

"We will work to find solutions, but 100 % the way they want is not possible to get to. If he decides to cancel, it must be his choice. All we do is to change the startup with nine months. Today's offer is fantastic, but the problem is that the train line has to be upgraded. We absolutely need to do this work, "Kristiansen says.


----------



## arctic_carlos

*Badajoz - Elvas*

After almost 6 years without passenger trains in this international connection, since yesterday Badajoz (Spain) is again connected to Elvas and the rest of the Portuguese rail network.

A daily service operated by CP now connects the Portuguese town of Entroncamento (a key rail junction in the center of the country) with the Spanish city of Badajoz, next to the border, and then back to Entroncamento. 

Travel times aren't really competitive (it takes 3 hours for 170 km), and the new connection won't be really useful to go from Badajoz to Lisbon, but at least it will be an important shortcut for people traveling to the north of Portugal from southern Spain.

First Portuguese train in Badajoz station since January 2012:










http://www.elperiodicoextremadura.c...-ferrocarril-despues-casi-6-anos_1036763.html

Video:

http://www.hoy.es/badajoz/extremadura-vuelve-conectar-tren-5556280893001-20170829170824-vi.html


----------



## JumpUp

Can somebody give me more information about the proposed 36 month work on the Norwegian railway from Oslo to Stockholm which threatens the international service: Is it just a maintenance or a proper upgrade of the line? Will the journey time between the two capitals be speed up soon?

Thanks




NordikNerd said:


> The express-train service between Oslo and Stockholm may be discontinued. The Swedish railway manager is dissatisfied with the fact that the upgrade on the Norwegian side is taking too much time.
> 
> The three daily departures that run the Oslo-Stockholm route in five hours are imminently threatened with closure, warns SJ's CEO and Chief Executive Officer Crister Fritzson in a letter to Bane Nor and Transport Minister Ketil Solvik-Olsen (Frp).
> 
> In that case, traveling in ten hours and with one or two changes will be the only train service between the two capital cities.
> 
> Deferred and prolonged
> The background is the postponement of the most required work to replace the contact lines on the Norwegian side of the line. The initial plan to start at the turn of the year is now changed to October 1st, 2018. In addition, Bane Nor is now expecting the work to last for three years, compared to previously estimated 24 months.
> 
> In addition, the SJ boss assumes that the route tables must be posted for an entire calendar year at a time.
> 
> - This means that a "run time schedule" must be run even in the nine months before the start of the field work in 2018 and the three remaining months of 2021 after the completion of the field work. In practice, this means 48 months of reduced table, compared with previous 24 months. It is not sustainable, it is stated in the letter from Fritzson.
> 
> 
> The Swedish chief executive's conclusion is clear:
> 
> "Unless the planning of the field work is changed in line with what Bane Nor and the Norwegian Rail Administration have informed me about earlier, I have to decide that the express-service Oslo-Stockholm must cease operations, he warns.
> 
> The SJ director believes it is "sensational" that the Norwegian infrastructure company Bane Nor first came with this clarification during a meeting in August.
> 
> budgets
> Executive Vice President Bjørn Kristiansen in Bane Nor says to NTB that the postponement is due to the signals they have received about next year's budgets.
> 
> "We now see that the money will not be enough for the whole year. The money we have must be prioritized on measures that go to safety. We have always wanted, and told the train companies, that we have planned to get started on January 1st, 2018, but at the same time be aware that the prerequisite is sufficient budget resources. Having said that, we are very pleased that we are able to get started in October next year and that it will not be a full year postponement, "says Kristiansen.
> 
> Does the Road Administration Oppose New Roads: Who Can Cut The Cost The Most?
> Hope for solution
> He rejects that it is not possible to customize the timetables as Fritzson claims. Thus, it is a maximum of 36 and not 48 months, as the SJ boss assumes.
> 
> "We are now looking at opportunities for route changes from October 1st. This is a big jigsaw puzzle that also affects freight traffic. We are committed to work with SJ, the charity companies and NSB to see how we can do this. Our hope is to be able to find a solution that will enable us to get a good route offer until October, "he told NTB.
> 
> "But the SJ boss is quite aware that the quick offer is being rejected if he does not get what he wants?
> 
> "We will work to find solutions, but 100 % the way they want is not possible to get to. If he decides to cancel, it must be his choice. All we do is to change the startup with nine months. Today's offer is fantastic, but the problem is that the train line has to be upgraded. We absolutely need to do this work, "Kristiansen says.


----------



## sotavento

Montenegro to Servia cabview 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zomZywCAPTA


----------



## NordikNerd

*Austria wants to extend the Trans-Siberian railway to Vienna.*

Austria wants to extend the Trans-Siberian railway to Vienna. The project has been on the decision makers' table for a long time but was put on hold due to the crisis between Ukraine and Russia in 2014. But now, the Government of Austria wants to turn it back into a high priority project.

The construction of 400 kilometers of railway between Kusice on the Ukrainian-Slovakian border, and Vienna would make it possible to connect Asia with Central Europe without transhipment," said Austria's Minister for Transport, Jörg Leichtfried, according to AFP.

The project has an estimated budget of 6.5 billion euros and was subject to a Memorandum of Understanding between the Austrian, Slovakian, Ukrainian and Russian Railways in 2013 before it was postponed.

The project should be implemented "now", emphasizes Jörg Leichtfried who wants to make Vienna a "logistics hub" on the continent. According to a recent study, the project would generate 30 billion euros in value over the next 30 years, half of which would come to Austria.

The project is estimated to take 10 years to complete.









Map of The Trans Siberian Railway


----------



## Kpc21

What carrier services it?


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

Kpc21 said:


> What carrier services it?


Trenitalia-SBB-Deutsche Bahn


----------



## Baron Hirsch

And train sets will be Swiss ETR 610, nice stuff for traveling. Nonetheless, the idea is a bit absurd. The Gotthard Base Tunnel actually takes longer to travel through coming from Germany and Basel than the Simplon Base Tunnel, as the Simplon is straight south from Basel on a rather speedy line. However, the opening of the slower route is taken as occasion to reopen direct trains from Germany via Switzerland to Italy, which use the slower route in one direction and the faster one in the other.


----------



## Sunfuns

Baron Hirsch said:


> And train sets will be Swiss ETR 610, nice stuff for traveling. Nonetheless, the idea is a bit absurd. *The Gotthard Base Tunnel actually takes longer to travel through coming from Germany and Basel than the Simplon Base Tunnel*, as the Simplon is straight south from Basel on a rather speedy line. However, the opening of the slower route is taken as occasion to reopen direct trains from Germany via Switzerland to Italy, which use the slower route in one direction and the faster one in the other.


The schedule posted above, few minutes in favour of Gotthard route, does not support your assertion. Once Ceneri base tunnel opens in few years the advantage will be more noticeable.


----------



## jonasry

*Istanbul - Thessaloniki trains to start in March 2018?*

Rail Turkey is often quite well informed, so hopefully we will see a return of this train during 2018.



> As a couple of international train services have started by TCDD this year, there’s a strong expectation about Istanbul-Thesselonike train as well. Although some officers state that the train will start on March 2018, this information is not confirmed by neither OSE nor TCDD.


Source: https://railturkey.org/2017/08/15/when-will-istanbul-thesselonike-train-start/


----------



## cle

JumpUp said:


> Passenger service one the new TGV-line "Contournement ferroviaire de Nîmes et de Montpellier" along with the new station "Montpellier Sud de France" will commence in July 2018.
> 
> This will speed up TGV from Paris/Lyon to Montpellier by ca. 25 minutes!!!
> 
> How likely is it, that this better speed from Paris to the south will lead to an increase of trains from Lyon/Paris to Barcelona?
> Today there are only 2 daily TGV Paris - Barcelona (+2 seasonal TGV) and only one TGV Lyon - Barcelona.
> 
> Or will the opening of the new line not change anything and still most trains will terminate at Perpignan, only minutes away from Spain?
> 
> Thanks


I've not heard anything about new services yet. I do like the way that this improvements are coming steadily - the next bypass will make a big difference too - another 45 minutes when Montpellier to Perpignan are hooked up.

That's 70 minutes less than today. Journey time improvements from that point onwards will be through stopping patterns - not every train needs to stop at Figueres, Girona, Narbonne, Beziers etc... and each one will save about 5 mins.

I think Paris-Barcelona could get to 4h45 and hopefully demand a few more services. I think Nimes, Montpellier and Perpignan only on the fastest.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

jonasry said:


> *Istanbul - Thessaloniki trains to start in March 2018?*


I heard the same, without explicit date, from a TCDD official in late summer, and recently read a statement by the minister of traffic here reiterating the same. TCDD had wanted to reintroduce this connection ever since OSE did away with it in the financial crisis. OSE had been opposing this move, but now apparently changed its stance.

@sunfuns: You are right, in the final schedule, the ride is pretty much the same either way. However, it is not an improvement. The ride via Bern could have been (re-)introduced long ago. Anyways, the ride has so many arbitrary long stops it hardly reflects what could be the optimal connection between the two cities at each end. Who needs a 14 minute stop in Basel Bad Bf, just after having stopped in Basel SBB for enough time? And why hang around Luzern for so long in the other direction? SBB just loves chilling, I know, always for some very important reasons, but not the best thing for promoting long haul international relations.


----------



## Sunfuns

There are always longs stops in Basel Bad Bf for trains coming from Germany. The reason is that SBB doesn't trust their punctuality and I'm afraid for a good reason. Why are stops in Luzern so long is less obvious, however that is a case for local trains as well. Two weekends ago I took a train to Schwyz from Basel and had enough time (14 min) to get out in Luzern to buy some snacks.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

14:24 14:36	Bern
15:02 15:05	Olten
15:29 15:38	Basel Sbb
15:44 15:52	Basel Bad Bf

But the 8 minute long stop in Basel Bad Bf is northbound, and just after a 12 minute break in Basel SBB (ok there might be reasons for this) and another hour after 12 minutes in Bern.
By teh way: Aren't 13 minutes in Luzern enough for a compete city walking tour?


----------



## NordikNerd

*New railways connects Europe with China*

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Azeri Ilham Aliyev and Georgia's Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili invoked the construction of the new railroad.









Soon you can travel all the way to China - without going through Russia.
Three neighboring countries have invested in a new railway line.


Azerbaijan, Turkey and Georgia have now taken steps towards a 826 kilometer long railway line linking the countries together.
The railroad will open a route between Europe and China that does not go through Russia, and the countries hope that it will generate a financial boost for the region.


The train will stop in Baku in Azerbaijan, in Georgia's capital Tbilisi, in Achalkalaki in the same country and finally in Turkish Kars.
To get to China, from Baku, you need to cross the Caspian Sea.

105 km of newly built rails are included in the project.
The total cost is estimated to be around the equivalent of one billion US dollars, most of the money comes from the Azeri oil fund.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

NordikNerd said:


> Soon you can travel all the way to China - without going through Russia.


So what is wrong with going through Russia? Would you really prefer to ride one of those run down Caspian Sea ferries? And deal with visas or for freight customs of Kazahstan, Azerbayjan, Georgia, and Turkey instead of one single visa plus perhaps transit visa for White Russia? 
And even if you need to avoid Russia, is it not simpler to go via Turkey, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazahstan instead? 
It is nice for Turkey to have a rail link with Georgian and Azerbayjan, but one should not believe all the hype.


----------



## Gusiluz

Leaders inaugurate Kars - Tbilisi - Baku railway. IRJ. 

How far is the DB AG-Rafil Type V gauge changer in the Georgian town of Akhalkalaki for the passengers Baku-Tiblisi-Istanbul route?
It was announced for mid-2017.


----------



## Verso

This news belongs to the Asian thread. But nice to see again a functioning railway between the Middle East and Russia.


----------



## KingNick

You can now book your RegioJet Wien - Praha tickets and they are super cheap forcing ÖBB to offer so called "Sparschiene" tickets for the route as well starting at EUR 14. :banana:










https://jizdenky.regiojet.cz/Bookin...retdep/20171220/return/false?3#search-results


----------



## Baron Hirsch

Hello everyone, a couple of months ago, we heard there would once again be direct trains from Ljubljana to Trieste Centrale and and Venezia. Now that new schedules are available, I have not been able to spot such a train. Am I only inept at reading Slovenian and Italian schedules, will they pop up post fact, or have the new services been delayed? Anybody have an idea?


----------



## Ponta

I think they announced there would be direct trains next year only IIRC


----------



## suasion

Baron Hirsch said:


> Hello everyone, a couple of months ago, we heard there would once again be direct trains from Ljubljana to Trieste Centrale and and Venezia. Now that new schedules are available, I have not been able to spot such a train. Am I only inept at reading Slovenian and Italian schedules, will they pop up post fact, or have the new services been delayed? Anybody have an idea?


European timetables change DEC 9/10 so anything after that date may not be visible or bookable.
If they are Bahn.de is the place to check. Just beware that often trains change number at major cities borders/ so it might often appear to be a different train, I assume you already aware of this but others might not be.


.


----------



## touya

Baron Hirsch said:


> Hello everyone, a couple of months ago, we heard there would once again be direct trains from Ljubljana to Trieste Centrale and and Venezia. Now that new schedules are available, I have not been able to spot such a train. Am I only inept at reading Slovenian and Italian schedules, will they pop up post fact, or have the new services been delayed? Anybody have an idea?


Nobody ever said Trieste Centrale, just Trieste (which could mean Villa Opicina).

Also, there has never been a single official statement by Region Friuli-Venezia Giulia (FVG from now on; the administrative body where Trieste is) about such a service. There has been only some test runs of the Region FVG owned CAF Civity E563 trains on the Slovene railway network and a "statement" promising the service made by an assistant of the director of the passenger division of SJ... nonetheless :lol:

Those trains were originally bought with public money to increase commuter service within the Region, and it has been much, much, much discussed as to whether using those trains to run an international service, that goes from Venice (in region Veneto) to Ljubljana (in a foreign state) and serves a limited number of stops in Region FVG, and probably won't even stop in Trieste but only at Villa Opicina (aka in the middle of nowhere), is legal at all.

The whole situation is very, very foggy (if not fishy). If the service does indeed start, it will be more because the current regional government is up for reelection in Spring 2018 than because there's any real interest in providing such service.


----------



## geogregor

Europe-bound Eurostar racing through Ebbsfleet, just after exiting Thames Tunnel:

DSC04831 by Geogregor*, on Flickr


DSC04832 by Geogregor*, on Flickr


DSC04833 by Geogregor*, on Flickr


DSC04834 by Geogregor*, on Flickr


DSC04835 by Geogregor*, on Flickr

Another Eurostar bypassing Ebbsfleet International, visible from the domestic platforms:

DSC04774 by Geogregor*, on Flickr

What is the speed limit of Eurostars bypassing Ebbsfleet International? Do they have to slow down?


----------



## Gedeon

geogregor said:


> What is the speed limit of Eurostars bypassing Ebbsfleet International? Do they have to slow down?


Section 2 speed limit (Ebsfleet - St Pancras) is 230 km/h.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_1#Section_2


----------



## sotavento

Baron Hirsch said:


> I read about it. It seems ÖBB knew they would never make it to hamburg, took off nonetheless and was eager to turn about and head back the same night "for logistic reasons". The report I read though says passengers were kicked out in Nuremberg (as your picture would suggest), far south of where the rail lines were closed down. This indeed looks like a purely profit-oriented decision.


A couple of years back the "sudexpresso" to and from Lisboa-Irun was navigating the Linea del Norte main route in castilla (spain) and somedays the intermediate section was by bus ind the middle of the night with both extreme sections by the night trains suck at each side of the gap ... and some other days there were so few passengers that they just send them all by bus from one end to the other... the entire 1000km sitting in a BUS when you paid for a couchete or a sleeper.


----------



## doc7austin

The surprising bus replacement services for the Sudexpresso are still a common problem - even in 2017.
It's not always quite clear what the reason was.
Sometimes travellers have to change to a bus exactly at the border station between Portugal and Spain.


----------



## touya

I was going thru Directive 2016/2370 (the 4th RP directive that liberalizes open access services in all member states) and I saw this:



> ‘5. Member States may also limit the right of access to railway infrastructure for the purpose of operating domestic passenger services between a given place of departure and a given destination within the same Member State where:
> 
> (a) exclusive rights to convey passengers between these stations have been granted under a public service contract awarded before 16 June 2015; or
> (b) an additional right/authorisation to operate commercial passenger services in competition with another operator between these stations has been awarded by 25 December 2018 on the basis of a fair competitive tendering procedure;
> 
> and where these operators receive no compensation to operate these services.
> 
> Such a limitation may continue for the original duration of the contract or authorisation, or until 25 December 2026, whichever is shorter.’;


It seems something put in to grandfather some existing arrangement. 
I'm not aware of any case like this in Italy, or, rather, such a device seems rather moot for Italy given that the domestic market is already liberalized (you just need to get a national license). 
Could it be that it was meant to protect the Franchise system in the UK (point B seems to protect the few open access operator that managed to access the railway network in the UK on corridors already served by franchises)?


----------



## alserrod

sotavento said:


> A couple of years back the "sudexpresso" to and from Lisboa-Irun was navigating the Linea del Norte main route in castilla (spain) and somedays the intermediate section was by bus ind the middle of the night with both extreme sections by the night trains suck at each side of the gap ... and some other days there were so few passengers that they just send them all by bus from one end to the other... the entire 1000km sitting in a BUS when you paid for a couchete or a sleeper.


They are under works in part of line.

You could ask for a refund in these cases. Normally they know that less than half of people ask for refund... but system works (if you bought in Spanish web with card, you can ask for refund online and cash is back in a couple of days just with ticket and card number)


San Sebastian-Hendaye is out of service due to upgrade for HSL. Only operates Lisbon-Hendaye and Vigo-Hendaye. Rest of trains until San Sebastian and free commuter to Irun. Expected until October 2018 or so


----------



## cle

San Sebastian is such a bitch to get to. A TGV from Paris via the new line to Bordeaux must be a compelling idea.

In other news - test run!

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/J17780/2017/12/20/advanced - expires in about a week... 

timetabled at 3h50 with 17 mins layover at Brussels but no Rotterdam stop. As we've seen, Schipol and Antwerp are out, for now. I wonder if that could come down to 5 mins in Brussels and another 3-4 penalty for Rotterdam - nothing non-stops there after all. Would bring it to 3h45 or less, which is really nice.

Unsure about pre-Brussels stops which could add time too. Lille calls I think are on all current Brussels ones - and post-Brexit, BRU demand may slide further. Looks like it did a ghost call at Ebbsfleet, took it up to 4hr flat.


----------



## alserrod

cle said:


> San Sebastian is such a bitch to get to. A TGV from Paris via the new line to Bordeaux must be a compelling idea.



At the moment, all trains (except night one Lisbon-Hendaye and day one Vigo/Coruña-Hendaye) ends at San Sebastian. You are entitled to take local euskotrain network with same ticket and it reach Hendaye. 

This means the three regional trains Vitoria-Irun, long-distance Barcelona-Zaragoza-Hendaye and Madrid-Valladolid-Hendaye and... commuter train which ends at San Sebastian too. They are refurbishing line for high speed.
As far as Euskotrain has less schedules than commuter train, there are some extra buses in early morning and late night.

Plans are:

the Basque "Y" is being finished. This will mean starting in Miranda, later Vitoria, it will join Vitoria-San Sebastian/Bilbao (and Bilbao-San Sebastian) with an Y.

In the case of San Sebastian it was supposed to have a station out of the city to let it approaching border.

As far as France will take some time to have HSL until Hendaye, trains will go until here
https://www.google.es/maps/place/Sa...5994864649!8m2!3d43.318334!4d-1.9812313?hl=es

more or less, and will use current line to approach Irun and Hendaye. As far as between Irun and San Sebastian there is Iberian gauge, a line able for both gauges at the same time (not first time in Spain to have it) is u/c.

SNCF has released trains required for service in Atlantic line and seems there will be four daily Paris-San Sebastian (instead of ending at Hendaye but crossing border), one of them enlarged until Bilbao.

No custom facilities are being built.

Estimated date, october 2018


----------



## Gusiluz

*San Sebastián station-French frontier*

^^ The new San Sebastián station will be next to the current one, in the center of the city.









The trains that will not pass through San Sebastian will be those of freight.









At the same time that the new HSR called Y Vasca, is adapting to mixed gauge the two tracks between San Sebastian and the border to allow the entry of French TGV trains that will have to have power at 3 kV.

The system to extend the Gaintxurizketa tunnel allowing, at the same time, the circulation of trains. Very curious!













Gusiluz said:


> Creo que no se ha comentado aquí, y me parece algo interesante.
> 
> Es conocido que se está instalando ancho mixto en ambas vías entre Astigarraga (al Sur de Donosti) e Irún. Ello implica el aumento de sección en el túnel de Gaintxurizketa, y hay que hacerlo de forma compatible con la circulación de trenes por el tramo. Pocos: sí, pero alguno queda.
> Entre los motivos que obligan al aumento de sección se me ocurre que uno de ellos será porque al circular sobre una vía más estrecha las cajas sobresalen más, aparte de que será necesario que la catenaria esté más alta para los TGV Océane, y porque las normativas europeas (ETI) obligan a un mayor gálibo, que vendrá muy bien al tráfico de automóviles.
> 
> El túnel de Gaintxurizketa, con una longitud de 536 metros, tiene sus bocas en los kilómetros 634,387 y 634,923 de la línea Hendaya-Chamartín, entre Lezo-Rentería y Ventas de Irún.
> En las zonas de acceso y en el interior del túnel se han realizado las actuaciones necesarias sobre catenaria, vía y demás instalaciones de seguridad quedando apta para la circulación la vía I que se ha ripado y colocado en el centro del túnel.
> 
> 
> Para la excavación mecanizada es necesaria la utilización de una máquina específica (tuneladora D-835-TES) cuya característica principal es que establece una nueva sección del túnel independizando y protegiendo la circulación de los trenes por la misma.
> Digamos que se convierte en una especie de huevo protector que permite la circulación por su interior ¡¡¡con catenaria y todo!!!
> 
> 
> Los trabajos se realizarán durante las 24 horas durante la fase de excavación y ampliación de la sección con la máquina.
> 
> El avance de la máquina irá condicionado a la longitud de avance especificada en cada sostenimiento tipo.
> Se realizarán los siguientes pasos para cada longitud de avance especificada:
> 
> 2.1 Demolición de la bóveda y hastiales actuales, excavación para la ampliación de la sección del túnel, y proyección de una capa de sellado en la sección resultante de la excavación.
> 2.2 Ejecución del sostenimiento del túnel con cerchas y hormigón proyectado según proyecto.
> 2.3 Montaje de un vallado de ocultación para la circulación de trenes en el tramo del túnel.
> 2.4 Evacuación de materiales procedentes de la excavación por las calles de trabajo en el interior del túnel con maquinaria KUBOTA R065.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Thank you. This system has already been used to enlarge two tunnels (on the same line) in Germany, but in this case on a non electrified line. However it similar cases it is more common to build a new single track tunnel and reuse the old one for the other track, without enlarging it.


----------



## doc7austin

A trip report on an 11 hour long rail journey from Berlin Main Station to London St Pancras in First Class, changing both in Frankfurt and Bruxelles Midi from ICE to Eurostar:








Enjoy!


----------



## Pansori

I have a question for those who are knowledgeable about services between Germany and France. I'm planning a European rail trip later in the year and one of the most important legs would be Frankfurt to Paris. When I search the fares I see there is a direct ICE service between Frankfurt and Paris. And also a direct TGV service. How does that work? Do those services utilize the maximum speed of the Strasbourg-Paris line which is 320km/h?

I'm not really looking for overall fastest or cheapest route but want to get the service that achieves highest top speed and is the coolest to ride on. My original idea was to change trains in Strasbourg.


----------



## Suburbanist

Now that the Portuguese reopened their railway services to the Spanish border, are there plans to run daytime trains again between Madrid and Lisboa?


----------



## Suburbanist

Pansori said:


> I have a question for those who are knowledgeable about services between Germany and France. I'm planning a European rail trip later in the year and one of the most important legs would be Frankfurt to Paris. When I search the fares I see there is a direct ICE service between Frankfurt and Paris. And also a direct TGV service. How does that work? Do those services utilize the maximum speed of the Strasbourg-Paris line which is 320km/h?
> 
> I'm not really looking for overall fastest or cheapest route but want to get the service that achieves highest top speed and is the coolest to ride on. My original idea was to change trains in Strasbourg.


The direct ICE service runs via Saarbrücken and joins the HSL at an intermediate junction. The TGV runs via Strasbourg.


----------



## Pansori

Suburbanist said:


> The direct ICE service runs via Saarbrücken and joins the HSL at an intermediate junction. The TGV runs via Strasbourg.


Nice to know that, thanks. Does ICE reach 320km/h anywhere on that route?


----------



## Kpc21

There are also ICE going via Karlsruhe and Strasbourg.

This is kind of a joint offer of the DB and the SNCF. The trains have German and French staff each, and I believe, a ticket bought both from DB and from SNCF can be valid for any of those trains.

According to this: http://www.badische-zeitung.de/offenburg/viel-oefter-mit-320-km-h-nach-paris--108445269.html also the ICE drive 320 km/h in France. Those are ICE-3 trains that can reach the maximum speed of 330 km/h, although the maximum used in practice is 320 km/h in France (in Germany it's not more than 300 km/h).

Here is a video about this route: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-RsQb0T3Ws - it's in Polish (even though made by a German man, pity that they don't do English subtitles), but you can see the pictures at least.


----------



## Pansori

Thanks Kpc21, that's very helpful. I'll have to decide on the exact route and service but it will have to be 320km/h from Strasbourg to Paris 

My plan is to go from Lithuania to Portugal all the way by train. I would also welcome any advice on any other stretches of the route.


----------



## Kpc21

Great plan! So you will have to go through Poland too 

On the stretch to Warsaw you don't really have any choice (and you are lucky that there trains between Lithuania and Poland are finally back, even though they are regional trains only in a very limited offer), then the Berlin-Warsaw Express and an ICE from Berlin to somewhere around Frankfurt, Stuttgart or Karlsruhe are rather an obvious choice.

Unless you want to try some other routes, maybe go through Czech Republic or anything like that, maybe somehow else through Poland (there exists also e.g. an option via Dresden - but it will be much slower on both the Polish and the German side), but it will elongate the travel time quite a lot.

Even though currently, on the route of the Berlin-Warsaw Express, there is quite a big detour through Inowrocław because of a closure between Września and Konin.

If you have any specific questions about the Polish section, then ask.


----------



## eu01

Kpc21 said:


> maybe somehow else through Poland


Indeed. As the route through Central Poland doesn't pass through particularly interesting landscapes, you could try the more northern route, like that:
TLK 18104 Bialystok - Szczecin
dep. Bialystok 05:43, arr. Szczecin 16:51
and than by local train to Berlin.​ It is possible to make this northern route in some 14 hours, I'd recommend making some stops though. The TLK train passes through beautiful Masurian region with its forests and lakes and via Gdansk. As an alternative, from Olsztyn you can go via Torun and Poznan, depending on amount of time you can use.


----------



## NordikNerd

*Travelplan-Reiseplan*

Do you still get a timetable (Reiseplan) with your ticket when you go with the international trains from Germany ? 









Reiseplan for the IC 83-train "Paganini"










Reiseplan for the IC 89-train "Leonardo da Vinci"









Information about arrivals and departures at the stations along the Munich-Verona train service. Do you still get such a timetable with the ticket today?









A DB international train-ticket.


----------



## Kpc21

For sure you can log in to the on-board WiFi network, which doesn't provide free internet (at least not in the 2nd class), but it provides you with such a timetable (and some other services).


----------



## K_

NordikNerd said:


> Do you still get a timetable (Reiseplan) with your ticket when you go with the international trains from Germany ?


You never got that with your ticket, as tickets are for not for particular trains. But you did, and still do, get them on board the train.


----------



## Suburbanist

Printed timetables are so outdated in the world of apps and everybody-with-a-smarpthone-at-hand...


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> Printed timetables are so outdated in the world of apps and everybody-with-a-smarpthone-at-hand...


I know a lot of people who still have an ordinary mobile phone only, and sometimes even no mobile phone at all ; and no internet connection at home.

Lots of people who were already old when internet was made available to the general public did not make the transition, and will most probably never do.

May be in a couple of decades you will be able to assume that everyone is connected, but not today yet.


----------



## Nerone.Au

And timetables help for brand recognition, too, helpful in a competitive market.
Say you buy a ticket at the counter and with it you receive a timetable, surely its redundant, but brand awareness increases, not only for the branding, but for the swag, freebies are always welcome and make you appreciate the company. In 2019/20/21 rail will be liberalised in Europe, so that could come in handy.


----------



## Short

Suburbanist said:


> Printed timetables are so outdated in the world of apps and everybody-with-a-smarpthone-at-hand...


Almost everyone has a smartphone and there is a myriad of apps available. That is also their downfall. Most people have a car, but it does not mean that they have good vehicles (some certainly do not have a clue and are not able to drive them properly). Some cities/regions/countries have many apps for their respective areas. Which app is the correct one? Just like printed timetables, many apps are poorly laid out, confusing and possibly misleading. 

The app I need to use for nearby Queensland public transport is hopeless because the station I need most is across the border in New South Wales and can not be searched for in a straight forward manner. Routing options suggest I cross the nearby border into Queensland and then catch the transport there, ignoring the immediate area where I arrive from my hometown.

With a printed timetable, a person is able to write on them, highlighting relevant stations or routes and they can be quick to hand in a pocket to refer to. They can be relied on regardless of your phones battery level or signal strength.

Trust me, I am tech savvy, I research the hell out of any city I plan to visit. I am a fanatic of Google Maps and various apps. Yet even I am reluctant to download a specific app for a specific place just because I might be in a certain place for a short time. All apps and printed timetables are simply aids and neither should be totally relied on, as they all have their benefits and value to all people.


----------



## Suburbanist

DB app is quite neat.


----------



## RicarAG

Hi friends!!!

Last year I was in Denmark and I had the opportunity to cross the øresund bridge from København to Malmö.
It was an enriching experience, not only because of the trip under and over the sea, but because of the cultural changes, the landscapes, the people ... It was very nice, here I leave a small video of the bridge !!

A greeting

¡ Subscribe if you like !


----------



## alserrod

Did that island exist before tunnel&bridge?


----------



## :jax:

The Pepper islet (so named for the original Salt Islet nearby) is artificial and off-limit except for the tunnel/bridge.


----------



## alserrod

So... is there any point until you can be fined by one or other police?


----------



## Gusiluz

*The Channel Tunnel*

We already have the data of *Getlink*, the new name of Eurotunnel Group.

At €1.033 billion, revenues for the year 2017 are up by 4% at a constant exchange rate:

*Channel Tunnel Fixed Link*
Revenues from Shuttle Services increased by 3% to €604.1 million
Eurostar: a record year with 10.3 million passengers (+3%)
*Europorte*: revenues up 2% to €118.5 million

*Traffic data*:

The passenger data and tons in The Shuttle are estimated using official formulas.


----------



## Fatfield

Work has started at Rotterdam Centraal for direct Eurostar services from London.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...ion-to-be-modified-for-eurostar-services.html


----------



## K_

Gusiluz said:


> We already have the data of *Getlink*, the new name of Eurotunnel Group.


So more than 20 years after opening traffic is at about half what was originally forecasted...


----------



## Suburbanist

K_ said:


> So more than 20 years after opening traffic is at about half what was originally forecasted...


Major issue are low cost airlines and the absence of further links from Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool, Leeds to the continent.


----------



## SSCreader

For comparison, the previsions made for 2013 in 1987-1990 were between 22.4 and 28.9 millions passengers for Eurostar only.


----------



## Grzegorz.Janoszka

Suburbanist said:


> Major issue are low cost airlines and the absence of further links from Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool, Leeds to the continent.


I think the major issue are complicated security checks that you don't have on any other train in the world.


----------



## K_

Suburbanist said:


> Major issue are low cost airlines and the absence of further links from Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool, Leeds to the continent.


And the reason we don't have these links is the silly security theatre involved.

There would be a market for trains from other places in the UK, and to other places on the continent. However such trains would only be viable if they can also transport passengers between intermediate stations. So a Birmingham - Paris train would be viable if it also transported for example Birmingham - Londen or Birmingham - Ashford passengers, and a Basel - London train would need to be open for Basel - Lille (with transfer to Brussel) passengers. 

And having a local commuter service would have helped to. When the Oeresund bridge opened an extensive commuter network was installed across it, and a whole new town was even build on the line. Imagine that France and the UK would have done something similar. Have a commuter service, and heavy new Urban development around Calais and Ashford...


----------



## geogregor

Grzegorz.Janoszka said:


> I think the major issue are complicated security checks that you don't have on any other train in the world.


It really isn't a problem. Security is much more strict at the airports.

As already mentioned by others, when the tunnel was being build and forecasts were made nobody predicted the rise of the cheap airlines.

If you travel from, let say, Manchester to Paris then you can fly for less and be in Paris quicker. Such options didn't really exist in the 90s. 

Eurostar is nowadays doing good job by getting bigger share of London - Paris traffic. Part of the reason is that security at Eurostar is not as a painful as at the airports and you travel from city centre to city centre.


----------



## Grzegorz.Janoszka

geogregor said:


> It really isn't a problem. Security is much more strict at the airports.


It is a problem. When you go from Copenhagen to Malmoe there is no security theater involved. There are dozens other trans-borders trains in Europe, some go outside EU. Nobody reached level of absurd like we see with Eurotunnel trains.
It is always easier to blame cheap airlines instead of looking what can be done to improve the experience and travel time.


----------



## MarcVD

*Trains between Slovenia and Italy will return*

https://www.europebyrail.eu/direct-trains-between-ljubljana-and-trieste-in-june-2018/

One more border that we will finally be able to cross by train again.


----------



## Suburbanist

Are therr plans to restore more service across Belgian French border?


----------



## geogregor

Grzegorz.Janoszka said:


> It is a problem. When you go from Copenhagen to Malmoe there is no security theater involved. There are dozens other trans-borders trains in Europe, some go outside EU. Nobody reached level of absurd like we see with Eurotunnel trains.
> 
> It is always easier to blame cheap airlines instead of looking what can be done to improve the experience and travel time.


Connection between Malmo and Copenhagen is just a suburban train. It has nothing in common with the Eurostar which is a long distance intercity train. You are not going to fly between Malmo and Copenhagne, are you? So the airlines are simply not a competition.

Sure, the boarding experience could be better with the Eurostar but let's face it, it is a non-starter, especially in the current reality.

Anyway, I really don't think the security checks have any particular effect on passenger numbers. The numbers were over-inflated at the planning stage and never came close to that. In recent years the Eurostar has healthy growth without any particular changes in the security arrangements. 

Ultimately the passenger numbers is function of demand, price and competition. If you want to travel from the UK to France you simply can't avoid security checks. Let's say that you are really put off by the Eurostar experience. What is your other option? Yes, flying, with even more annoying security 

But in reality if the price of flight is low, and your destination is somewhere further than Paris, flying is quite competitive.
The other day I was looking how to get to St Malo. I can fly with Ryanair for £30 and land 10 min from St. Malo. Or I can pay much more for the train, change twice, and travel for hours, even with all the high speed trains along the route. This option didn't exist 20-30 years ago, no surprise the forecasts were off.


----------



## geogregor

Just found this interesting piece about Ashford International stataion and the Eurostar:
https://thebeautyoftransport.com/2017/03/22/the-accidental-railway-station-ashford-international-kent-uk/










A few quotes as a teaser 


> So why build a railway station that looks and feels like a regional airport? Well, that’s the story of the end of the end of rail travel in Britain.
> 
> Ashford International was planned in the late 1980s, at a time when, with absolute certainty, the consensus view recognised that the British rail industry faced a future of gentle but inexorable decline. Any rail project worth its salt at the time would, in essence, have to deny it was anything to do with railways at all. And in the late 1980s there was one such gigantic rail project.





> The whole thing was a bit of a leap in the dark, not so much for Belgium and France, but much more so for Britain. Although sectorisation of British Rail in 1986 had helped InterCity generate a slightly better image of long distance British train travel, the reputation of British Rail still loomed large over the industry. Fairly or unfairly, it wasn’t a very good one. Few people took the British rail industry seriously as a travel mode of choice. It’s not surprising given the patronage figures.
> 
> In 1985/86, there were 686 million passenger journeys on the railways. It sounds a lot, but it was a long way off the 1 billion-plus journeys made in the 1950s, and even the over-800 million annual journeys made in the early 1970s.





> The next question was how to brand those international train services. The Belgians and French might have little difficulty getting on board with such international train services (pardon the pun) but the railway-sceptical British were a different matter. The answer was Eurostar, the train operator that was determined to be a low flying airline. Everything about the brand identity had as little to do with rail travel as possible. There was no mention of trains or railways in its name. The different classes of on-train accommodation had names which sounded airline, not railway. At the London end of Eurostar’s services, Waterloo International Terminal was called just that; a terminal rather than a station. It had arrivals and departures, just like an airport. *And, just like many of the low-cost airlines which have sprung up since the creation of Eurostar (and which destroyed the business case for the Nightstar sleeper services)* its customer care in the event of major disruption was – and actually still is – absolutely rubbish.





> Because Ashford International was built as an airport, rather than a railway station, it also simply had to have that airport staple, a long-stay car park. You’ll find it on the other side of the A2042 from the main railway station, linked via a footbridge to the internation building. It is finished in a similar style to the rest of the station, complete with glass brick lanterns.


----------



## Paul Bigland

Eurostar have just announced details of their new London-Amsterdam service which will start on 4th April with 2 trains per day. https://paulbigland.blog/2018/02/09...-of-their-new-london-amsterdam-train-service/


----------



## K_

geogregor said:


> It really isn't a problem. Security is much more strict at the airports.


It is a problem. For several reasons.

To maximise the value of a train service you must look at trains as a network, not a collection of point to point connections. And the in the network the friction must be low. 
The IC from Bern to Basel has a cross platform connection with the TGV from Zurich to Paris. So the time lost during the transfer is only 5 minutes. 
Imagine if cross platform connections were possible in Ashford. It would bring Kent and Paris closer by half an hour. That would increase passenger numbers.


----------



## Vaud

^^ well, to be fair it wouldn't make much difference. The nearest airport from Canterbury is Gatwick which, despite being on the south of London, can only be reached via a change in Tonbridge and yet another change in Redhill, taking the total journey time to well above 2 hours. Ashford is close to most of east Kent and there's many services that call at the station. The airport being so far, I always check first the trains when going to France and only if the times don't work I go for a plane.

The main issue is the scarcity of services. More trains should stop in Ashford than in Ebbsfleet; at the end of the day, a passenger going to Ebbsfleet could change in Ashford to a Javelin and take almost as long to get to their final destination. Whereas it's a pain to take a train all the way to Ebbsfleet to then get on a Eurostar and go back on the same track that you've just used. That alone adds 40 minutes of additional travel time (20 minutes to get to Ebbsfleet from Ashford + 20 minutes to go back)


----------



## K_

geogregor said:


> Connection between Malmo and Copenhagen is just a suburban train. It has nothing in common with the Eurostar which is a long distance intercity train. You are not going to fly between Malmo and Copenhagne, are you? So the airlines are simply not a competition.


There are also long distance trains taking that bridge. Copenhagen - Stockholm. 
A train that would not be able to survive if it was only allowed to take passengers going from Copenhagen to Stockholm and vice-versa...



> Sure, the boarding experience could be better with the Eurostar but let's face it, it is a non-starter, especially in the current reality.


Which is rather frightening really. That security theatre is taken for granted. That it is perceived as something necessary. Have we all been so brainwashed?



> Anyway, I really don't think the security checks have any particular effect on passenger numbers. The numbers were over-inflated at the planning stage and never came close to that. In recent years the Eurostar has healthy growth without any particular changes in the security arrangements.


If reductions in travel time don‘t increase passenger numbers, why build high speed railways?



> Ultimately the passenger numbers is function of demand, price and competition. If you want to travel from the UK to France you simply can't avoid security checks. Let's say that you are really put off by the Eurostar experience. What is your other option? Yes, flying, with even more annoying security


You can drive. Or take a coach. No security theater there. 



> But in reality if the price of flight is low, and your destination is somewhere further than Paris, flying is quite competitive.
> The other day I was looking how to get to St Malo. I can fly with Ryanair for £30 and land 10 min from St. Malo. Or I can pay much more for the train, change twice, and travel for hours, even with all the high speed trains along the route. This option didn't exist 20-30 years ago, no surprise the forecasts were off.


And here you actually prove my point: Eurostar is a Railway that is unique in hat it only serves a limited end-to-end travel market. Because it is a big market it can survive. 
But if it could cast its net wider it could be more successful. Better integration with the conventional networks in Northern France, Western Belgium and Kent would bring in more passengers. For many people living on both sides of the channel the tunnel did not bring a reduction in travel time.

Most long distance trains live of intermediate traffic, not end to end. The twice hourly Zurich - Vienna train does not primarily transport people from Zurich to Vienna.
Such long distance trains would be possible, and were envisioned for the channel tunnel. But only if such trains also are allowed to serve the intermediate market. A London - Marseille a couple of times a day would be well filled. Provided it were also open for passengers travelling domestically in France. That is currently not possible.


----------



## K_

Vaud said:


> ^^ well, to be fair it wouldn't make much difference. The nearest airport from Canterbury is Gatwick which, despite being on the south of London, can only be reached via a change in Tonbridge and yet another change in Redhill, taking the total journey time to well above 2 hours. Ashford is close to most of east Kent and there's many services that call at the station. The airport being so far, I always check first the trains when going to France and only if the times don't work I go for a plane.


Imagine there was a Eurostar to Geneva...



> The main issue is the scarcity of services. More trains should stop in Ashford than in Ebbsfleet; at the end of the day, a passenger going to Ebbsfleet could change in Ashford to a Javelin and take almost as long to get to their final destination. Whereas it's a pain to take a train all the way to Ebbsfleet to then get on a Eurostar and go back on the same track that you've just used. That alone adds 40 minutes of additional travel time (20 minutes to get to Ebbsfleet from Ashford + 20 minutes to go back)


But imagine now that there existed a local high speed cross channel commuter service. That the Javelins went through the tunnel and called at Frethun, Calais Lille and then continued to Kortrijk. Imagine it would offer flexible tickets, commuter passes, and short boarding times. Imagine that it meshed well with local commuter services on each side of the channel. Imagine passport control done on board. 
Don’t you think that such a service would attract a lot of new passengers?


----------



## Gusiluz

^^ The train had 80% between London and Paris in 2014. 
I do not have more current data. hno:


----------



## eu01

*Eurostar security*

Are there any statistics concerning the security checks' results? How many dangerous items / objects detected, how many passengers denied boarding?


----------



## Baron Hirsch

I think K is right. All West European major business centers with relatively high living costs and in proximity to borders have developed a high level of cross-border commuting. Think of Geneva, Basel, Luxemburg and their French and German hinterland. I am sure there are numerous smaller scale examples, such as Szeczin. Add to that high-speed commuting from and to such business cities, look for example how far from Paris and from Frankfurt people settle to avoid prohibitive rents and real estate prices. Now transfer that scenario to London, of course assuming border checks were casual and train operations were as flexible as ICE or TGV trains. Would we not by now have had a considerable scene of commuters working in London and living in Bretagne and Normandy?


----------



## geogregor

Baron Hirsch said:


> I think K is right. All West European major business centers with relatively high living costs and in proximity to borders have developed a high level of cross-border commuting. Think of Geneva, Basel, Luxemburg and their French and German hinterland. I am sure there are numerous smaller scale examples, such as Szeczin. Add to that high-speed commuting from and to such business cities, look for example how far from Paris and from Frankfurt people settle to avoid prohibitive rents and real estate prices. Now transfer that scenario to London, of course assuming border checks were casual and train operations were as flexible as ICE or TGV trains. Would we not by now have had a considerable scene of commuters working in London and living in Bretagne and Normandy?


With all the respect by idea of commuting from France to London is just ludicrous.

Cross-border commuting happens when city is located really close to the border, like the examples you give (Basel, Geneva, Luxembourg, Szczecin). Those cities are often just a few miles from the border. And the neighboring country often offers significantly lower prices. 

Now, let's look at London. It is well over 100 km to Folkestone, then we have 30 km of water to cross. And one have to cover this distance every day just to live in places like Calais? Come on, you get cheaper and better places in the UK, closer to London.

Brittany or Normandy are really too far for realistic commuting.


----------



## Kpc21

The question is, how long would it take to commute from a place in France to London city center?

Something like 2 hours is a limit.

And the ticket price (say, a monthly pass) must be also taken into account, because it might be so that you earn 300 euro more or pay 300 euro less for the rent and the living, but a monthly ticket costs you 300 euro (or not much less) too.


----------



## kerouac1848

It's about speed and price not distance per se. 

The main effect of Home Office requirements, and even the CT's safety regulations, is that it's locked out a load of potential destinations for Eurostar. It's highly likely that the service would be serving far more places if there wasn't a need to have isolated and 'sterilised' platforms and separate spaces for border control and security checks.


----------



## Kpc21

kerouac1848 said:


> It's about speed and price not distance per se.


Travel time.



> The main effect of Home Office requirements, and even the CT's safety regulations, is that it's locked out a load of potential destinations for Eurostar. It's highly likely that the service would be serving far more places if there wasn't a need to have isolated and 'sterilised' platforms and separate spaces for border control and security checks.


Why can't they do the controls on the board of the train e.g. during the travel in the tunnel instead of on the platform?

On the Polish-Ukrainian border (external EU border!) they can, on the France-UK (internal EU - yet - just external Schengen only) they cannot.


----------



## kerouac1848

The used to check passports on the train when Eurostar first started I believe. 

My guess is events in the late 1990s - refugees/migrants around Calais - forced a change in British policy. There was a hysterical reaction by sections of the British press by the end of the decade.


----------



## K_

Kpc21 said:


> Why can't they do the controls on the board of the train e.g. during the travel in the tunnel instead of on the platform?


Well, they’re not allowed to. And paranoia reigns at the moment... common sense has no chance. 

We’re seeing the consequences. Eurostar is going to run from London to Amsterdam, but not from Amsterdam to London. Let’s see how long this silliness lasts...

I give it a year, max.


----------



## K_

Kpc21 said:


> The question is, how long would it take to commute from a place in France to London city center?
> 
> Something like 2 hours is a limit.


I was thinking more about the potential for commuting from Nord-Pas-de-Calais to Kent. 
Imagine that the UK had decided to develop the area around Ashford, and France did the same around Frethun. 
It would be an ideal location for businesses that wanted to be in a well connected place, but wish to get out of the expensive place that Paris and London is...


----------



## AlexNL

There are plenty of ideas around that very idea, it's called the _Transmanche Metro_. Sadly, immigration and Channel Tunnel fire safety rules make it impossible to realise the TMM.


----------



## Kpc21

How long do the fire safety checks take and wouldn't it be possible to make them equally thorough but more efficient (e.g. by installing more gates)?

Concerning the immigration, how long is the section between the last station and the tunnel? Maybe it would be possible to do those checks on the train before the tunnel, and if someone wants to cross the border illegally, expel him from the train before the tunnel, on a technical stop?


----------



## AlexNL

There used to be rules relating to a minimum train length for passenger trains: they should be at least 375 metres long, so that in the case of an emergency a train could be stopped with at least 1 door directly opposite to (or at least, close to) an emergency evacuation exit.

I've had a look at the Eurotunnel network statement and I can't find any rules about this any more, so perhaps the regulations have been relaxed after new insights have emerged. In emergencies it's often better to continue until you're no longer in a tunnel as this will help evacuation (see also the Mont Blanc, King's Cross and Kaprun disasters).

Nevertheless, the TMM project is unlikely to ever come to fruition due to Eurotunnel's charging regime. Each crossing costs thousands of euro's, which is impossible to finance from a commuter operation alone.


Regarding immigration checks: on the French side it might be possible to do this, as Calais-Fréthun is pretty close to the tunnel entry. On the British side, the closest station is Ashford International.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Verso said:


> Italians can't spell Ljubljana in Italian (Lubiana, not Ljubiana). :lol:
> 
> http://shrani.si/f/2f/Av/tNK2Joz/1/8.jpg


What is a Ljubljana? :dunno:


----------



## Verso

It's a Laibach.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Ah, now I understand. Life ist Life.


----------



## 437.001

*SPAIN/FRANCE & SPAIN/PORTUGAL high-speed services*

The National Commission for Markets and Competition in Spain has given the green light to new High-Speed services by private company ILSA.
These would run from Madrid to Montpellier, seemingly calling at Zaragoza, Barcelona, Perpignan and Narbonne.
Looks like the rolling stock used would be class S-100F trains, on loan from Renfe.
No idea about which Montpellier station would be used (Saint-Roch, or the new one).
It remains to be seen how the French will react to this.
Perpignan and Montpellier had since day one been claiming for better cross-border services to Barcelona (and beyond).

Personally, I'd like to see an improvement of Toulouse-Barcelona. 
One train per day between Toulouse and Barcelona just doesn't do, people will still prefer the road.

============================================

There is also this idea by Arriva to operate a Corunna to Porto service, but it's still unclear how it would be able to save the Cesantes gap (a stretch between Redondela and Arcade which is not electrified).
I guess that such a service won't be possible until full continuity of the OHLE exists between Corunna and Porto.
And it should be using bi-tension rolling stock, as the section between Guillarei and Vigo-Guixar is electrified at 3kV, while Vigo-Urzaiz to Arcade, Pontevedra, Santiago and Corunna, as well as Guillarei to Valença and Porto is electrified (or is being electrified, or will be electrified) at 25kV.

Personally, I'd love Corunna to Lisbon.


----------



## AlexNL

Renfe Alquilar, a Renfe owned rolling stock leasing company, have indicated that they do not have S/100's available for rental to ILSA. The company is now considering renting rolling stock in Italy instead.

https://treneando.com/2018/09/19/renfe-bloquea-los-planes-de-air-nostrum/


----------



## Mac_07

3-day trip through Europe in 14 minutes


----------



## JumpUp

Are there any Italian trains with Homologation for France + Spain High-Speed-Rail?


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

JumpUp said:


> Are there any Italian trains with Homologation for France + Spain High-Speed-Rail?


Fyra V250 (ETR 700) ?


----------



## 437.001

Ugo Fantozzi said:


> Fyra V250 (ETR 700) ?


U sure that that's homologable? :shifty:


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

437.001 said:


> U sure that that's homologable? :shifty:


No


----------



## Eddard Stark

Verso said:


> Italians can't spell Ljubljana in Italian (Lubiana, not Ljubiana). :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> http://shrani.si/f/2f/Av/tNK2Joz/1/8.jpg




Lubliana in Italian, truth is we don’t care enough


----------



## Eddard Stark

Ah no you are right, as I said we just don’t give a f...k


----------



## Gusiluz

JumpUp said:


> Are there any Italian trains with Homologation for France + Spain High-Speed-Rail?
> 
> 
> Ugo Fantozzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fyra V250 (ETR 700) ?
Click to expand...

Fyra was the name of the service operated for only a few days, trains are V250 Albatross. They can not be approved more than Bélgic, Holland and, now, in Italy.

What the Ilsa (Air Nostrum) trains should have is the same as the approved S-100F, TGV Duplex and Euroduplex, basically:

Disturbance current tests, GSM-R and 25 kV for HSR, 1.5 kV and KVB for France, and ASFA as backup system for Spain.
There is also an 8.3 km tunnel, so they have to have redundant equipment, fire extinguishing equipment and pressurization. And some more that I forget.

Both French (TGV Duplex) and Spanish trains took more than a year to be approved: from August 2012 to December 15, 2013 and thanks to the fact that the S-100 derives from the TGV Atlantique.

But Trenitalia has already announced that it will use the ETR 700 in Torino-Venice and Adriatic. (They used to say: Puglia-Naples / Rome).

On the other hand the trains that were in the Renfe´s Rosco were the S-100R, not the S-100F. They are those who go to Castellón and Alicante, can not go to France, and put them in rent for the failed attempt of qualifying title for a single private operator in that area in 2014.

Ilsa should have started long before looking for her trains.


----------



## Mr_Dru

*Dutch Gov working on 4 hour train from Amsterdam to Berlin*
A delegation from NS, ProRail and the Dutch government are in Germany this week to make a 4 hour train trip from Amsterdam to Berlin a reality within the next few years. They hope that shorter travel times will make the rail a real alternative to flying within Europe, NOS reports.

"Both NS and Prorail and KLM and Schiphol see that the train is a good alternative for planes", ProRail CEO Pier Eringa said to the broadcaster. "Not competitors of each other, but in addition to, and instead of the plane where possible. Because it is a shame to put so much kerosene in the air for short flights." The four parties, with the support of the government, aim to give trains a much stronger position on short distances. "Not only to Berlin, but many more European cities as far as we are concerned."

source


----------



## Gusiluz

*Madrid-Montpellier*

Regarding the subject of my last message, I forgot, and I think it's important: the Ilsa spokesman said that his business plan is conditioned to have at least four trains.

On the other hand, it is striking that Ilsa announces a Madrid-Montpellier service, Arriva announces another (it does not have trains either, we'll see what happens) Corunna-Porto and, shortly after, SNCF asks for more collaboration to Renfe and the Portuguese Railways do what same.


----------



## Verso

Eddard Stark said:


> Lubliana in Italian, truth is we don’t care enough





Eddard Stark said:


> Ah no you are right, as I said we just don’t give a f...k


You really don't care, which is why you promote and subsidize this line.  Knowing your comments you don't care about many things, especially politeness.


----------



## 437.001

Gusiluz said:


> Fyra was the name of the service operated for only a few days, trains are V250 Albatross. They can not be approved more than Bélgic, Holland and, now, in Italy.
> 
> What the Ilsa (Air Nostrum) trains should have is the same as the approved S-100F, TGV Duplex and Euroduplex, basically:
> 
> Disturbance current tests, GSM-R and 25 kV for HSR, 1.5 kV and KVB for France, and ASFA as backup system for Spain.
> There is also an 8.3 km tunnel, so they have to have redundant equipment, fire extinguishing equipment and pressurization. And some more that I forget.
> 
> Both French (TGV Duplex) and Spanish trains took more than a year to be approved: from August 2012 to December 15, 2013 and thanks to the fact that the S-100 derives from the TGV Atlantique.
> 
> But Trenitalia has already announced that it will use the ETR 700 in Torino-Venice and Adriatic. (They used to say: Puglia-Naples / Rome).
> 
> On the other hand the trains that were in the Renfe´s Rosco were the S-100R, not the S-100F. They are those who go to Castellón and Alicante, can not go to France, and put them in rent for the failed attempt of qualifying title for a single private operator in that area in 2014.
> 
> Ilsa should have started long before looking for her trains.


Unless ILSA goes for adapting some old TGV, the S-100R (in case they were made redundant), or the redundant Alstom Eurostars (in case Eurostar doesn't scrap them straight away), I fail to see how they could rent any homologable rolling stock for both Spain and France without serious upgrades.
I think buying new rolling stock can't be that much more expensive.


----------



## Eddard Stark

Verso said:


> You really don't care, which is why you promote and subsidize this line.  Knowing your comments you don't care about many things, especially politeness.




We don’t care about how to write exactly the name of a city in Serbian, Croatian or whatever they speak over there. Or in Italian...it’s not we are talking of Berlin or Paris here

These are things they care a lot in the balkans though


----------



## 437.001

Eddard Stark said:


> These are things they care a lot in the balkans though


Trains.


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

Gusiluz said:


> SNCF asks for more collaboration to Renfe and the Portuguese Railways do what same.


 :uh: It is incredible!!
Too bad they left NTV...


----------



## AlexNL

As far as I know the plan is to use them between Brussels and Paris.


----------



## Coccodrillo

^^ On the classic line between Paris and the border (or Lille?)...



437.001 said:


> (or even Annecy? If you route a TGV via Annecy, would it be able to enter Cornavin from Annemasse or would there be a tension problem?)


It would require 3-system trains, as Cornavin-Annemasse will use 15 kV 16,7 Hz. One track in Annemasse will use this current (because of some Swiss trains ending there), while all trains coming from Cornavin and going beyond Annemasse will switch to 25 kV 50 Hz before entering Annemasse.

The line to Cornavin from Bellegarde is in 25 kV instead, and used 1,5 kV DC until 2014. There are 3 tracks from Cornavin to the junction of the lines from Bellegarde and from the airport: one uses 15 kV, one uses 25 kV, and the third has a commutable 15/25 kV overhead line. French trains to Cornavin does not need special equipment to reach it.


----------



## MarcVD

Coccodrillo said:


> ^^ On the classic line between Paris and the border ?


Today those low cost trains use the classic line between Paris and Arras, where they find a junction with the High Speed Line to continue towards Brussels. Unless of course the Izzy train is coupled to a regular Thalys set, in which case they use the HSL all the way. Apparently in Belgium the cost difference between HSL and ligne 96 is not high enough to bother.


----------



## ajaxfan98

The LGV Nord is quite crowded with Thalys to Brussels, TGV to Lille and other cities and Eurostar to London. By directing Izy over the conventional line between Arras and Paris, you free some capacity that you can use for more profitable trains.


----------



## MarcVD

ajaxfan98 said:


> The LGV Nord is quite crowded with Thalys to Brussels, TGV to Lille and other cities and Eurostar to London. By directing Izy over the conventional line between Arras and Paris, you free some capacity that you can use for more profitable trains.


Bah bah bah... There is largely enough capacity on LGV Nord for one or two more trains per day. The diversion through the classical line is to pay less track charges and make the trip time a bit longer, in order to project the attractiveness of the full price Thalys service.


----------



## Ugo Fantozzi

ajaxfan98 said:


> More services aren't easy as well, as the LGV is quite saturated. One or two services would be possible, yes, but not much more.


Double composition of Thalys?


----------



## ajaxfan98

Ugo Fantozzi said:


> Double composition of Thalys?


They already do that.


----------



## Reivajar

And how's about duplex units?


----------



## MarcVD

ajaxfan98 said:


> Thalys doesn't need to make its regular service more attractive, as passengers are already flocking to their trains in large numbers. In the last couple of years, Thalys has seen a huge increase in demand, which gives them two options: increasing the prices, or offering more capacity. A price increase is problematic, because they would face a lot of competition from airlines. More services aren't easy as well, as the LGV is quite saturated. One or two services would be possible, yes, but not much more. The Izy brand is therefore an ideal solution for Thalys, so they can offer some cheap tickets without having to worry about rights on the LGV Nord.


LGV Nord is nowhere near the trafic levels of LGV Sud Est and could easily take two or three more trains per hour per direction (reminder : LGV SE : one train every 4 minutes).

If Izzy trains have same performances as Thalys ones for a third of the price, guess what will happen ?

Most Thalys trains already operate in multiple, to be cut In Brussels where one unit ends while the other continues to Amsterdam or Koln. 

The new TGV sets ordered by SNCF will all be duplex and some of them are expected to replace current Thalys sets. But that will not be before 8 to 10 years.


----------



## Steel City Suburb

Strange that the front of the izy carriage hasn't been subject to the same paint job.


----------



## AlexNL

The powercar has huge ventilation grilles on it, it's probably very hard to vinyl over that


----------



## Suburbanist

Do you think a very-long double-decker high-speed train service (think something carrying 1600 passengers per train) linking big European cities would have any success? I'm thinking something like a Paris-Madrid non-stop service. Or Berlin Hbf - Milano Centrale. Bruxelles Midi - Geneve. Roma-Frankfurt. 

Non-stop, fast service that can be cheap due to the high number of seats available.


----------



## Stuu

Those are long routes which take hours longer than flying, they would need to be extremely competitive prices to make sitting on a train for a minimum 4 hours extra worthwhile. 

Paris-Madrid can be done for €78 return in two weeks time, and takes 2 hours. Add 3 hours extra for getting to and from airports means you still have ~4 hours extra than the fastest train. Can't see much chance of a train beating that price by enough to make it worthwhile


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> Do you think a very-long double-decker high-speed train service (think something carrying 1600 passengers per train) linking big European cities would have any success? I'm thinking something like a Paris-Madrid non-stop service. Or Berlin Hbf - Milano Centrale. Bruxelles Midi - Geneve. Roma-Frankfurt.
> 
> Non-stop, fast service that can be cheap due to the high number of seats available.


SNCF considered the idea and then dismissed it. Basically two duplex sets permanently coupled together, the intermediate power cars having no driver compartment.


----------



## alserrod

Suburbanist said:


> Do you think a very-long double-decker high-speed train service (think something carrying 1600 passengers per train) linking big European cities would have any success? I'm thinking something like a Paris-Madrid non-stop service. Or Berlin Hbf - Milano Centrale. Bruxelles Midi - Geneve. Roma-Frankfurt.
> 
> Non-stop, fast service that can be cheap due to the high number of seats available.


Not now...

It seems Renfe and SNCF do not want service longer than 6 hours. In addition, you can schedule a train and will not know how many "local journeys" will be required (they are the most at the moment).

In addition, Madrid-Marseille is a bit cheaper between Madrid and Barcelona but they advice they will not refund in case of delay due to it is an international train (for the rest of AVE trains, 20 minutes delay = 50% refund, if you payed by credit card, you can ask for it online, no need to go to station to ask for it)

It is why I ask for shuttle from Barcelona. First Barcelona-Paris departed just 20 minutes later first Madrid-Barcelona arrived. Quite fast but enough to change train and go through Paris.
Nowadays it departs... before that train arrives!!!


----------



## 3737

*Eurostar to expand Amsterdam service next year*


EUROPE: Cross-Channel high speed operator Eurostar expects to launch a third daily train between London and Amsterdam in June 2019, reflecting the initial success of the route which was launched with two trains per day in April this year.

Eurostar reports that it has already carried more than 130 000 passengers on direct trains between London, Rotterdam and Amsterdam. These currently operate as a through train between London and the Netherlands, but inbound passengers to the UK must change trains in Brussels, where border and security checks are carried out.

Link


----------



## K_

alserrod said:


> It seems Renfe and SNCF do not want service longer than 6 hours. In addition, you can schedule a train and will not know how many "local journeys" will be required (they are the most at the moment).


That is how you run long distance trains: you market them both to less time sensitive long distance travellers, and local markets.

For a Barcelona - Paris train the main market is actually not Barcelona - Paris but "places in between Barcelona and Paris" to both Paris and Barcelona.
Which is why those trains should stop in Lyon Part-Dieu. People travelling by train form Paris to Barcelona do not care whether it is 6 hours or 6 1/2 hours. But calling at Lyon Part-Dieu opens a lot of markets.
Trains should take advantage of their network effects. Ideally the Paris - Barcelona train should continue to Madrid, and give a cross platform connection to an Euromed service down the coast. 

And of course you should offer through ticketing. DB does it right, with a system of advance purchase discount where the price for a ticket from Belgium to Switzerland is pretty much the same for any origin/destination pair beween those countries.

And the trains should be open for local traverl too.

There is a train from Interlaken to Berlin. I often take it when I need to go to a customer in Germany, as it offers me more destinations than just Berlin. And when I board it in Interlaken most people that board it are actually only going as far as Bern or Basel...
But the train is well used. And useful.

There are many such trains all over Europe, that in spite of end-to-end times of 10 hours or more are nevertheless still relevant.


----------



## cle

K_ said:


> That is how you run long distance trains: you market them both to less time sensitive long distance travellers, and local markets.
> 
> For a Barcelona - Paris train the main market is actually not Barcelona - Paris but "places in between Barcelona and Paris" to both Paris and Barcelona.
> Which is why those trains should stop in Lyon Part-Dieu. People travelling by train form Paris to Barcelona do not care whether it is 6 hours or 6 1/2 hours. But calling at Lyon Part-Dieu opens a lot of markets.
> Trains should take advantage of their network effects. Ideally the Paris - Barcelona train should continue to Madrid, and give a cross platform connection to an Euromed service down the coast.
> 
> And of course you should offer through ticketing. DB does it right, with a system of advance purchase discount where the price for a ticket from Belgium to Switzerland is pretty much the same for any origin/destination pair beween those countries.
> 
> And the trains should be open for local traverl too.
> 
> There is a train from Interlaken to Berlin. I often take it when I need to go to a customer in Germany, as it offers me more destinations than just Berlin. And when I board it in Interlaken most people that board it are actually only going as far as Bern or Basel...
> But the train is well used. And useful.
> 
> There are many such trains all over Europe, that in spite of end-to-end times of 10 hours or more are nevertheless still relevant.


This was my thinking behind Barcelona - Toulouse - Bordeaux - Paris too. Many good pairs, plus some end-to-end. Mix of business and leisure, perfect.

And of course, the ideal outcome is selling the same seat twice (assuming the revenue total is less than the whole journey fare!)


----------



## alserrod

Anyway, Madrid-Barcelona is quite punctual

You can surf HERE
http://www.adif.es/AdifWeb/estacion_mostrar.jsp?e=e26f0aaaebbj&i=es_ES&pes=horarios
English version (there are sentences not translated into any languages though)
Click in second option "Llegadas y Salidas" (Arrivals and Departures).

Nowadays it says two trains are waiting to arrived (today). One HS train coming from Madrid absolutely online and a Talgo from Alicante 24 minutes delayed (they will make their best not to increase 30 minutes because they may refund money if delay is over 30 minutes in non HS trains)

This is... I guess, nobody will bother if arriving to Barcelona and having one train to Valencia-Alicante and other one to Zaragoza-Madrid waiting in 20-30 minutes. Just hold off and get on in next train. Not difficult at all. I remember last time I made a journey in France, with same price several trains were proposed and return ticket was with a 30 minutes call (I could choose between waiting two hours and direct train or going asap, getting out, waiting, getting on and arriving 1h30 before... what would you do?)

In addition, they can shuttle with a Barcelona-Seville train too, for instance, or Barcelona-anywhere in northern Spain.

This is... IMHO, problem is not point to point trains but leting you to travel... and be sure, all trains enlarged from Barcelona would stop in my homecity!!, but I really prefer to have more chances to shuttle instead of some enlarged trains only (nowadays it calls only Marseille-Madrid train).

Being in the fifth city in population in Spain, there are RYR flights to Beauvois only six months per year, twice per week, and not easy to shuttle in Barcelona, despite there is more than one train every hour.

That's why I prefer to have chances to shuttle to other trains

And... I strongly agree with you about Lyon call. I asked several times in a Spanish thread about international services, several explanations and I said... ok... but I do not get it


----------



## Gusiluz

*Getlink 2018*

We already have the most Getlink data (exEurotunnel) in 2018.

Revenues and profits have increased by 5%, and traffic was between 6.51% (passengers in HST) and 0.14% (passengers in coaches).


They have not facilitated the data of the tons transported in freight trains, that since the number of trains did it in 3% will be about 1,256 thousands of tons that in total with the trucks they can be 23,271 (+3.41%) approximately.


----------



## doc7austin

Summer Railway Journey from Germany to Kazakhstan:
PART 1: 
Karlsruhe - Warsaw in Second Class Sleeping Car 
aboard Russian EuroNight Train EN 453 Paris - Moscow:








Enjoy!


----------



## hkskyline

*Power failure halts Paris-London Eurostar trains*
_Excerpt_

PARIS, July 26 (Reuters) - High speed rail services between Paris and London as well as Brussels ground to halt after a power cable failure at the Gare du Nord station in the French capital on Friday, hampering the summer holiday getaway.

Eurostar warned passengers not to travel on its cross-Channel rail services to and from Paris unless it was essential, while the state controlled French rail operator SNCF said Thalys services to Brussels were also affected.

"Traffic to and from Paris is severely disrupted," Eurostar said in a statement.

An SNCF spokesman said Eurostar services would resume at 1 p.m. (1100 GMT), though delays were likely to persist. The spokesman said it was not clear what caused the outage and that there was no early indication it was due to the heatwave.

Passengers on social media described chaos at the London's St Pancras station and the Paris terminus.

"Shambolic scenes at Ebbsfleet. No announcements...," grumbled on delayed passenger on Twitter, referring to a station east of London.

More : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ts-paris-london-eurostar-trains-idUSKCN1UL19E


----------



## MrAronymous

Not only that, a Eurostar train was caught without power in the middle of some fields in Belgium on te day the heat record got broken. Took 2 hours before they could evacuate all the passengers.


----------



## MarcVD

MrAronymous said:


> Not only that, a Eurostar train was caught without power in the middle of some fields in Belgium on te day the heat record got broken. Took 2 hours before they could evacuate all the passengers.


It happened just before the station of Halle, where the high speed line merges with the classical belgian network. Due to the heat, the contact wire felt, still live, on the hood of the trailing Eurostar driving cab, which caught fire. The train was then stuck with no power, as well as a Thalys train behind it. A total of 1000 passengers stranded in the heat. And as usual, SNCB was not very efficient in the organisation of the rescue...


----------



## Verso

Sounds like hell. :nuts:


----------



## alserrod

In Spain there was a general failure north Barcelona tunnel. Therefore, all HSL trains coming to Barcelona could reach Barcelona-Sants station but no service till Gerona and Figueras and, obviously, for a while, no international service


----------



## Kpc21

MarcVD said:


> It happened just before the station of Halle, where the high speed line merges with the classical belgian network. Due to the heat, the contact wire felt, still live, on the hood of the trailing Eurostar driving cab, which caught fire. The train was then stuck with no power, as well as a Thalys train behind it. A total of 1000 passengers stranded in the heat. And as usual, SNCB was not very efficient in the organisation of the rescue...


Couldn't they send a diesel locomotive, even a shunter, for this train, if it was just before a station in a big city?


----------



## mgk920

Kpc21 said:


> Couldn't they send a diesel locomotive, even a shunter, for this train, if it was just before a station in a big city?


The coupling systems might have been incompatible. IIRC, Eurostar trains don't have buffer and chain equipment.

Mike


----------



## TER200

mgk920 said:


> The coupling systems might have been incompatible. IIRC, Eurostar trains don't have buffer and chain equipment.
> 
> Mike


Diesel locos used for this task have a compatible Scharffenberg coupler, of course.
But before moving the train one needs to cut the fallen wires and possibly broken pantographs, which takes a while.


----------



## NCT

What can be realistically done to improve the attractiveness of rail and reduce short-haul flights in Europe?

A cursory glance at aviation statistics suggests some of the largest European short-haul air markets are in fact domestic:
- Paris - Toulouse/Nice
- Berlin - Cologne/Dusseldorf
- London - Edinburgh

The French and UK examples both have high speed rail projects/extensions planned/proposed. The German example has high speed rail coverage part way, but I'm not too sure about upgrade plans.

Among the other type of high potential routes are a couple from London, to Amsterdam and Frankfurt. The former has 3 return Eurostars and a day but the latter had DB's plan for direct trains shelved. The former has some potential (The Dutch side are going to put in immigration and customs facilities to enable direct London bound services), but progress on the latter is probably unlikely given its weaker demand (even when combined with Dusseldorf/Cologne) and the ongoing political saga that shall not be named.

Other than that the rest of the air market seems to be a large number of modest flows. This presents a little problem. Individual flows don't fill trains, so a train has to combine a few flows to fill up. Now on a high-speed train station stops are a major source of journey time, have a few of them and the journeys that can be done this side of the magic 4-hour mark becomes very limited. This is especially true of flow between Western and Eastern Europe which have to cross some very difficult terrain on land.

I noticed a distinct lack of 300km/h grade high speed lines in Central Europe, and a distinct lack of the point-to-point operating model, with lines tending to go through places with no bypasses and trains to stop frequently. It might just be market conditions that it's uneconomical to try and develop high-speed point-to-point rail services rail markets designed to abstract from air, other than the few Western Europe high volume medium distance flows?


----------



## Kpc21

But why point-to-point? A train is not a plane, intermediate stops are cheap and don't cost much time either.


----------



## MarcVD

TER200 said:


> Diesel locos used for this task have a compatible Scharffenberg coupler, of course.
> But before moving the train one needs to cut the fallen wires and possibly broken pantographs, which takes a while.


SNCB is since years notoriously short of drivers so finding someone with the required knowledge (rolling stock and line) is often the most difficult part...


----------



## NCT

Kpc21 said:


> But why point-to-point? A train is not a plane, intermediate stops are cheap and don't cost much time either.


Stopping penalties do become significant at higher speeds. On a 200km/h railway a stop costs 4 minutes compared to running straight through at line-speed; on a 300-350km/h that number becomes 7-8 minutes. Just 5 intermediate stops mean your journey takes 35-40 minutes longer.

This is just the pure stopping penalty. There is also the alignment penalty if the lines are sent through urban centres with compromised curvatures and therefore line-speeds. If the objective is to bring as many markets to under 4 hours then for each market individually the ability to 'lose' even one stop becomes valuable.

There's one corridor where I think High Speed Rail can significantly improve on journey time gain further market share, but the existing rail offer for the mature markets is already sub 4 hours and the potential to bring another market into the 4-hour threshold is unfortunately low (the next destination s too far away).

I'm talking about Brussels to Cologne, where a Aachen Bypass would reduce journey times and increase capacity for Paris - Cologne and London - Frankfurt. The latter has too many political risks at the moment to contemplate any serious investments for. Also given the strength/potential of the Paris/London - Amsterdam markets, the ability to bypass Brussels could probably save you 20-30 minutes of journey time (currently the approaches are very slow and trains have long dwell times at Brussels Midi). This would probably be marginal for the Paris market (already high rail market share) but could be a game changer for the London market were it not for UK politics.

These are the most obvious places where I think bypasses to allow a more point-to-point type of operation would have the biggest impact in reducing air travel, but even then I think the economics is very risky if not marginal, and the political risks (not just that elephant in the room, but local politics too) too high.


----------



## MarcVD

NCT said:


> I noticed a distinct lack of 300km/h grade high speed lines in Central Europe, and a distinct lack of the point-to-point operating model, with lines tending to go through places with no bypasses and trains to stop frequently. It might just be market conditions that it's uneconomical to try and develop high-speed point-to-point rail services rail markets designed to abstract from air, other than the few Western Europe high volume medium distance flows?


High speed lines are extremely expensive to build and eastern countries simply do not have sufficiently robust economies to bear the price. Those who did have to resort to loans from China and understand that they gave away an arm and a leg when they read the contract's fine print. And in western europe, where economies are quite stronger, those who built extensive high speed networks had to neglect their classical network for decades in order to free the budget...


----------



## NCT

MarcVD said:


> High speed lines are extremely expensive to build and eastern countries simply do not have sufficiently robust economies to bear the price. Those who did have to resort to loans from China and understand that they gave away an arm and a leg when they read the contract's fine print. And in western europe, where economies are quite stronger, those who built extensive high speed networks had to neglect their classical network for decades in order to free the budget...


In terms of non-domestic European rail markets it's only the London-Paris-Frankfurt-Amsterdam-Brussels cluster that has can sustain a true high-speed operation. Most other places lack the critical mass to some extent.

Not sure about the neglecting the classical network argument. From what I've seen where this argument is often touted the high-speed lines and trains are operating economically as they are supposed to without draining resources from elsewhere; the conditions of those classical network are really as a result of old vested interests and a failure to modernise, and the new high speed networks are used as a convenience scapegoat.


----------



## LPP68

With the opening of the Fehrmanbelttunnel, one can hope for a decent amount of air traffic taken away between Germany and Denmark.


----------



## MarcVD

NCT said:


> In terms of non-domestic European rail markets it's only the London-Paris-Frankfurt-Amsterdam-Brussels cluster that has can sustain a true high-speed operation. Most other places lack the critical mass to some extent.
> 
> Not sure about the neglecting the classical network argument. From what I've seen where this argument is often touted the high-speed lines and trains are operating economically as they are supposed to without draining resources from elsewhere; the conditions of those classical network are really as a result of old vested interests and a failure to modernise, and the new high speed networks are used as a convenience scapegoat.


Why do you limit the reasoning to international trafic ? For small countries like mine (Belgium) high speed is indeed only for international traffic. But for large countries like France, Spain, Germany, or Italy, domestic traffic on high speed lines is prevalent. And there are several high speed lines that were built just for political reasons, but that do not even recover their maintenance costs, and will never repay their investments. On the Paris to Barcelona journey for example, Paris to Lyon is profitable, Lyon to Montpelier may be, and Perpignan to Barcelona will never be. And to compensate those costs, SNCF closes rural lines and neglects maintenance on others, which led to accidents like Bretigny...


----------



## TER200

MarcVD said:


> On the Paris to Barcelona journey for example, Paris to Lyon is profitable, Lyon to Montpelier may be, and Perpignan to Barcelona will never be. And to compensate those costs, SNCF closes rural lines and neglects maintenance on others, which led to accidents like Bretigny...


No.


Unprofitable HS lines in France have mostly been financed by the state and regions. Operation of the trains on most of them is still profitable (Perpignan-Barcelona maybe not).
Maintenance of rural lines is underfunded, but this situation predates the construction of those high-speed lines. Had the TGV not existed, it is not sure we would have spent money on rural lines... probably we would just have a passenger rail network like in the USA :nuts:.


----------



## NCT

MarcVD said:


> Why do you limit the reasoning to international trafic ? For small countries like mine (Belgium) high speed is indeed only for international traffic. But for large countries like France, Spain, Germany, or Italy, domestic traffic on high speed lines is prevalent. And there are several high speed lines that were built just for political reasons, but that do not even recover their maintenance costs, and will never repay their investments. On the Paris to Barcelona journey for example, Paris to Lyon is profitable, Lyon to Montpelier may be, and Perpignan to Barcelona will never be. And to compensate those costs, SNCF closes rural lines and neglects maintenance on others, which led to accidents like Bretigny...


This thread is about inter-country railways so I didn't want to talk at length about domestic journeys.

On the specific subject of Barcelona - Peipignan, I think once Lyon - Barcelona is complete Paris - Barcelona traffic will grow and the line's fortune should improve quite dramatically.


----------



## Kpc21

MarcVD said:


> SNCB is since years notoriously short of drivers so finding someone with the required knowledge (rolling stock and line) is often the most difficult part...


In Poland train drivers are allowed to drive a train without line knowledge at the speed reduced to 40 km/h. Which is useful e.g. in case of unplanned detours – when the train may get significantly delayed because of it but the passengers don't get stuck, they finally get delivered to the destination. Is it different in Belgium?



NCT said:


> This is just the pure stopping penalty. There is also the alignment penalty if the lines are sent through urban centres with compromised curvatures and therefore line-speeds.


Well, if you're trying to omit this penalty, it doesn't disappear, it just gets transferred onto the passenger who has to spend even more time to travel to a train station in the middle of nowhere.


----------



## Mac_07

London to Berlin in first class:


----------



## 437.001

*France/Spain high-speed services*

Floods have badly hit Southern France last week.

The line between Sète and Béziers was flooded and damaged, and it won't be ready to reopen until December at least.

One train per day Barcelona to Paris Montparnasse via Bordeaux has been created to make up for that problem.
I don't know wether this train is direct, or with a change at Narbonne. I suspect the latter (the Montparnasse trains are not equipped to enter Spain).
This will be just for Barcelona-Paris passengers. No tickets sold for Barcelona-Bordeaux (or Toulouse, Poitiers, etc).
For "Barcelona" you should understand "Barcelona, Girona, Figueres-Vilafant, Perpignan, Narbonne".

All other trains (Barcelona-Paris Gare de Lyon via Valence, Barcelona-Lyon, Madrid-Marseille, have been curtailed to Figueres-Vilafant, Perpignan o Béziers).

I've been told there's no replacement buses between Béziers and Sète or Béziers and Montpellier! :uh:
Is this accurate?

PS: passengers from Barcelona travelling beyond Paris (ie London, Brussels, Frankfurt, Munich, Luxembourg, Lille, Strasbourg, Metz, Cologne, Amsterdam, etc), should remember that Paris Montparnasse station is the only big Paris main station without RER service. 
Instead they must use metro line 4 to St Michel-Notre Dame (for RER C), Châtelet (for RER A, RER B, or RER D), or Gare du Nord (for RER E, Eurostar, Thalys) or Gare de l'Est (for TGV/ICE to Frankfurt, Munich, Strasbourg, Metz, Luxembourg).
Remember that metro line 4 gets pretty overcrowded.

pps: having looked at the timetables, sleeping in Paris is almost compulsory if you travel from Barcelona to beyond Paris. Take a close look at the timetables.


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> One train per day Barcelona to Paris Montparnasse via Bordeaux has been created to make up for that problem.
> I don't know wether this train is direct, or with a change at Narbonne. I suspect the latter (the Montparnasse trains are not equipped to enter Spain).


No, the train is direct to Spain but not Barcelona : it terminates at Figueras, so that one trainset can do the whole round trip in a day. In Figueras a connection on a Renfe train is provided.
So they the same "Euroduplex 3UH" train for this service as usually from Gare de Lyon, not one from the Montparnasse network (of which most are unavailable now because of a strike in the maintenance site).


----------



## 437.001

TER200 said:


> No, the train is direct to Spain but not Barcelona : it terminates at Figueras, so that one trainset can do the whole round trip in a day. In Figueras a connection on a Renfe train is provided.
> So they the same "Euroduplex 3UH" train for this service as usually from Gare de Lyon, not one from the Montparnasse network (of which most are unavailable now because of a strike in the maintenance site).


Okay, so... does it depart/arrive at Montparnasse, or at Gare de Lyon via Villeneuve-St-Georges and Massy?


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> Okay, so... does it depart/arrive at Montparnasse, or at Gare de Lyon via Villeneuve-St-Georges and Massy?


Paris Montparnasse 07:00 - Figueras 13:57 [train change] - Barcelona 16:34
Barcelona 13:30 - Figueras 15:17 [train change] - Paris Montparnasse 22:00

There is also a round trip Barcelona-Béziers (northbound in the morning and back in the evening).

https://www.renfe-sncf.com/Documents/avisos/release.pdf


----------



## Kpc21

https://www.rynek-kolejowy.pl/wiado...o-do-kowna-albo-nie-pojedzie-wcale-94462.html



> MI: Pociąg na Litwę bezpośrednio do Kowna albo nie pojedzie wcale
> 
> *MI: Train to Lithuania directly to Kaunas or not at all*
> 
> Choć trwają rozmowy pomiędzy PKP IC a Kolejami Litewskimi (LG), do uruchomienia pociągów dalekobieżnych na Litwę droga jest bardzo daleka. Jak wskazuje resort odpowiedzialny za infrastrukturę, problemem nadal jest dostępność taboru. Barierą może być też wielkość środków przeznaczonych na pasażerskie połączenia kolejowe w Polsce.
> 
> *Even though talks between PKP IC and Lithuanian Railways (LG) take place, the way to start long-distance train services is very long. As the ministry responsible for the infrastructure indicates, the problem is still the rolling stock availability. A barrier might be also the amount of money spent on passenger railway services in Poland.*


In short – there are talks about starting a Warsaw-Kaunas train service. There is not enough rolling stock, Poland would also have to spend some money from the state budget to subsidize this connection.


----------



## Verso

^^ Isn't there already a local connection over the border?


----------



## Kpc21

There is but it's a local, regional train (with a 250-km long route!), running only on weekends. And the discussion is about a long-distance one.


----------



## Guest

Eurostar to expand to five direct services between Amsterdam and London in 2021. Also, hopefully the direct train between Amsterdam to London will commence end of March 2020.
https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgi...expand-services-between-amsterdam-and-london/


----------



## Gusiluz

*Getlink / Eurotunnel 2019*

Getlink 2019 revenue stable despite difficult context. Getlink web


> Revenue in 2019 showed a small increase to €1.085 billion at a constant exchange rate1 .
> 
> Eurotunnel :
> Revenue from Shuttle Services down 2% to €629.9 million
> Eurostar: a record year with more than 11 million passengers travelling (+1%)
> Europorte: revenues up 4% to €126.5 million




The press release does not show the number of tons on the freight trains, but it does say that:


> Cross-Channel rail freight is up 3% in 2019, thanks in particular to the stimulus assistance policy, the ETICA financing scheme and despite the impact of SNCF strikes in December.


Although with a 6% decrease in truck traffic and a 3% increase in train traffic, the average load has had to rise a lot. Since the first year, the load on the trucks has been calculated at 13 tonnes each, while the train load is the real figure, but it takes longer to provide the data.


> More than 450 million passengers have travelled through the Channel Tunnel on board the Eurotunnel Shuttles and high-speed Eurosstar trains, the equivalent of three times the populations of the United Kingdom and France combined.
> Almost 430 million tonnes of goods have been carried through the Tunnel mainly on board the Eurotunnel Truck Shuttles but also on the freight trains of the Railway Operators.
> More than 90 million vehicles have been transported, of which 60 million cars, coaches, camper-vans and motorcycles by Le Shuttle and 30 million trucks by Le Shuttle Freight.
> Almost 3 million pets (dogs and cats) have travelled on board Le Shuttle since the opening of the service in February 2000.


----------



## woutero

New high speed rail initiative to connect Amsterdam, Hamburg, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Helsinki. Story copied from Dutchnews.nl:



> *Amsterdam part of talks on fast rail route to Stockholm: LC
> *
> Amsterdam and four other European cities are looking into the option of establishing a fast train link between the Dutch capital and Stockholm, the Leeuwarder Courant newspaper said on Friday.
> 
> Amsterdam, Hamburg, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Helsinki have all put the railway plan in their political agendas for the coming period, the paper said, and the five cities will meet in Hamburg in May to discuss the idea.
> 
> They have also approached a lobby company based in Brussels to promote the scheme within the EU, particularly with the aim of generating funding.
> 
> The EU is keen to expand and improve Europe’s international rail network to ensure that trains become a viable alternative to air travel.
> 
> Currently a trip to Stockholm by train from Amsterdam would take at least 22 hours and involve four changes.
> 
> Dutch railway company NS sold 13% more tickets for international trains this year, taking four million passengers to a foreign destination. The NS and Austrian rail company OBB are also planning to bring back the night train service from Amsterdam to Munich, Innsbruck and Vienna next winter.
> 
> A spokesman for the NS told DutchNews.nl that the journey between Amsterdam and Stockholm will be speeded up considerably in 2028 when the fast link between Hamburg and Copenhagen opens.
> 
> ‘We are also looking at the options when it comes to links to northern Europe,’ he said. ‘Support from the different regions involved can give a real positive boost.’
> 
> DutchNews.nl has asked Amsterdam city council to comment on the report.


Source


----------



## sacto7654

From that article, you really wonder is it time to revive the old _Trans-Europ Express_ moniker for longer-distance high-speed trains.


----------



## MarcVD

That's how they should name the result of the future merge between Eurostar and Thalys.


----------



## Suburbanist

This Thalys - Eurostar merge is a bad idea in the sake of Brexit


----------



## da_scotty

Suburbanist said:


> This Thalys - Eurostar merge is a bad idea in the sake of Brexit


We need high-speed-competition like Italy has. Not psuedo competition like SNCF/Ouigo etc. but real proper competition. To drive prices down and increase passenger choice.


----------



## MarcVD

da_scotty said:


> We need high-speed-competition like Italy has. Not psuedo competition like SNCF/Ouigo etc. but real proper competition. To drive prices down and increase passenger choice.


Yes indeed. This is why I hope, for example, that the Flixtrain plans for seven Paris Brussels trains will get through. Or that the Trenitalia competition against french TGV will get through. But Thalys and Eurostar are not competitors, so I don't see why their merge should be an issue...


----------



## LPP68

They are a competitor on the Amsterdam-Brussels (and with some imagination -Lille) corridor.


----------



## MrAronymous

They're both largely owned by SNCB and SNCF.


----------



## MarcVD

LPP68 said:


> They are a competitor on the Amsterdam-Brussels (and with some imagination -Lille) corridor.


With only a few Eurostar trains per day, compared to the almost hourly Thalys schedule,I don't see those two as real competitors. Besides, does Eurostar sell tickets for Amsterdam to Brussels and vv. trips ? Their true competitor is the jointly NS - SNCB IC loco-hauled train, soon to be replaced by ICNG trainsets.


----------



## da_scotty

Eurostar does sell these tickets, they are often inbetween the IC-Brussel/Amsterdam and thaly's pricewise.

In that regard:
Trainguru Seat61 stated that tommorow the date will be announced for the opening of the custom / direct services from Amsterdam -> Londen.


----------



## flierfy

NCT said:


> The high speed side of Euston is planned to eventually have 11 platforms for up to 18 trains per hour. Tokyo has 6 platforms to turn around 8 trains per hour (4 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, and 2 Kodama). Euston sounds pretty efficient to me.


8? Weren't that rather up to 14 in some hours until recently?


----------



## btrs

NCT said:


> I'm not convinced that LGV sud-est is operating at minimum planning headway (by planning headway I mean a level that's sustainable throughout the day).


I guess you are badly informed. Remember that the LGV-SE is still limited with its TVM300 system, which only allows for a 5 minute headway between trains at 300 km/h. It was already tweaked in 1995/1996 by adding the additional 300 km/h speed level (before limited to 270 km/h), and removal of the climbing/coasting restrictions on the 35‰ gradients.
Last year a contract was awarded to Alstom to install a ETCS L2 overlay on the TVM300 (as is currently operated on LGV-SEA & BPL), so trains operating under ETCS L2 can run at a lower headway of 3 minutes (equal to TVM430). In the end, SNCF Reseau plans to be able to operate 16 tph per direction once installation has been completed.









Alstom to supply ETCS for Paris – Lyon high speed line


FRANCE: SNCF Réseau has awarded a framework contract to Alstom for the development, installation and maintenance of ERTMS equipment on LGV Sud-Est between Paris and Lyon. Valued at €52·5m, the contract announced on September 25 was awarded following a negotiated procedure and a prior call for...




www.railwaygazette.com





IMHO this was a waste of money, they could have better used this line as the first commercial application for ETCS L3 (moving blocks). But then all TGV sets would again require new equipment, and even now ETCS-2 retrofits are proving very tedious on existing sets (TGV Duplex batches 1-6, TGV POS. Other single-deck sets are due to be retired by 2025 and will not get any ETCS equipment, save for Thalys which already got it in 2006/2007 due to operating in Belgium/NL which required ETCS anyway).
Maybe a L3 overlay could be possible on existing L2 equipped lines ?


----------



## NCT

btrs said:


> I guess you are badly informed. Remember that the LGV-SE is still limited with its TVM300 system, which only allows for a 5 minute headway between trains at 300 km/h. It was already tweaked in 1995/1996 by adding the additional 300 km/h speed level (before limited to 270 km/h), and removal of the climbing/coasting restrictions on the 35‰ gradients.
> Last year a contract was awarded to Alstom to install a ETCS L2 overlay on the TVM300 (as is currently operated on LGV-SEA & BPL), so trains operating under ETCS L2 can run at a lower headway of 3 minutes (equal to TVM430). In the end, SNCF Reseau plans to be able to operate 16 tph per direction once installation has been completed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alstom to supply ETCS for Paris – Lyon high speed line
> 
> 
> FRANCE: SNCF Réseau has awarded a framework contract to Alstom for the development, installation and maintenance of ERTMS equipment on LGV Sud-Est between Paris and Lyon. Valued at €52·5m, the contract announced on September 25 was awarded following a negotiated procedure and a prior call for...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.railwaygazette.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMHO this was a waste of money, they could have better used this line as the first commercial application for ETCS L3 (moving blocks). But then all TGV sets would again require new equipment, and even now ETCS-2 retrofits are proving very tedious on existing sets (TGV Duplex batches 1-6, TGV POS. Other single-deck sets are due to be retired by 2025 and will not get any ETCS equipment, save for Thalys which already got it in 2006/2007 due to operating in Belgium/NL which required ETCS anyway).
> Maybe a L3 overlay could be possible on existing L2 equipped lines ?


Thank you. Is there a breakdown of the standard hour pattern somewhere? Timetables are hard to find at the moment during the coronavirus restrictions.

A 5 minute headway is a bit limiting - that leaves you with 10 tph (leaving 2 spare paths for recovery). To me a typical standard hour could look like

2 tph Lyon Part-Dieu
2 tph Marseille (1 onto Nice)
1 tph Montpellier via Nimes via the slow route
1 tph Montpellier Sud de France and beyond
1 tph Dijon and Basel
1 tph Geneva
1 tph Valence (central, and onto Montelimar and possibly beyond)
1 tph towards Turin


----------



## 437.001

NCT said:


> Thank you. Is there a breakdown of the standard hour pattern somewhere? Timetables are hard to find at the moment during the coronavirus restrictions.
> 
> A 5 minute headway is a bit limiting - that leaves you with 10 tph (leaving 2 spare paths for recovery). To me a typical standard hour could look like
> 
> 2 tph Lyon Part-Dieu
> 2 tph Marseille (1 onto Nice)
> 1 tph Montpellier via Nimes via the slow route
> 1 tph Montpellier Sud de France and beyond
> 1 tph Dijon and Basel
> 1 tph Geneva
> 1 tph Valence (central, and onto Montelimar and possibly beyond)
> 1 tph towards Turin


You forget Grenoble, which moves a significant number of trains.
Also Chambéry/Annecy.
I think many of these do not call at Lyon-Part-Dieu.
I think there is only one TGV per day to Valence-Ville (and on along the classic line to Montélimar, Avignon-Centre, Arles and Miramas... or there was one some time ago, I don't know whether it's been discontinued or not).


----------



## Gusiluz

btrs said:


> ...
> IMHO this was a waste of money, they could have better used this line as the first commercial application for ETCS L3 (moving blocks). But then all TGV sets would again require new equipment, and even now ETCS-2 retrofits are proving very tedious on existing sets (TGV Duplex batches 1-6, TGV POS. Other single-deck sets are due to be retired by 2025 and will not get any ETCS equipment, save for Thalys which already got it in 2006/2007 due to operating in Belgium/NL which required ETCS anyway).
> Maybe a L3 overlay could be possible on existing L2 equipped lines ?


That's called Hybrid ETCS Level 3 (HL3), and that's what they're suggesting for HS2

HL3 is mounted on normal ETCS 2, but there are no moving blocks (very complex and underdeveloped), but tiny virtual blocks that, in practice, serve the same purpose.


----------



## NCT

437.001 said:


> You forget Grenoble, which moves a significant number of trains.
> Also Chambéry/Annecy.
> I think many of these do not call at Lyon-Part-Dieu.
> I think there is only one TGV per day to Valence-Ville (and on along the classic line to Montélimar, Avignon-Centre, Arles and Miramas... or there was one some time ago, I don't know whether it's been discontinued or not).


Grenoble could be combined with the Valence-Ville, splitting at Lyon St Exupery.

Chambery is my towards Turin path. You could either serve Annecy and Italy on alternate hours (i.e. each direction every 2 hours) or you could run a splitter every hour.

The Valence-Ville train does seem to exist according to Google Maps. I'm surprised it isn't more regular (I'm going by what you are telling me - as I don't know what the full public schedule is at the current time) - this corridor sounds very much like a Warrington - Wigan - Preston market to me.


----------



## Stuu

flierfy said:


> 8? Weren't that rather up to 14 in some hours until recently?


I think you are correct. The current reduced timetable still has 10 each hour


----------



## NCT

Stuu said:


> I think you are correct. The current reduced timetable still has 10 each hour


Can you point me in the direction of this timetable please? I've been generally struggling with finding timetables lately ...


----------



## Stuu

NCT said:


> Can you point me in the direction of this timetable please? I've been generally struggling with finding timetables lately ...


I checked using this site. If you input Tokyo and Nagoya, and then once it has run go to one of the journey options and click 'interval timetable', it will show you the whole timetable for the day


----------



## Suburbanist

What is the maximum speed modern high-speed rail lines in Europe could allow for commercial service if there existed modern >300km/h tilting trains?

Could the Italian main Y-network or Spanish lines accommodate 380 km/h trains? At which speed does air resistance become too problematic for pantographs and/or the heat too impactful on internal carriage temperatures?


----------



## NCT

Stuu said:


> I checked using this site. If you input Tokyo and Nagoya, and then once it has run go to one of the journey options and click 'interval timetable', it will show you the whole timetable for the day


Thank you!

I searched for august and from what I remember I think this is the normal timetable, with the standard off-peak timetable consisting of 4 fasts, 2 semis and 2 slows. The peak pattern is 10 tph of which 6 are Nozomi. Yes, 6 platforms for 10 tph, and 11 platforms for 18 tph, I think are still quite comparable.

I remember an exchange I had in the China thread where I talked about 6 Nozomi in the peaks. Hikari and Kodama stay at 2 tph each all day is also my recollection.


----------



## TER200

Gusiluz said:


> That's called Hybrid ETCS Level 3 (HL3), and that's what they're suggesting for HS2
> 
> HL3 is mounted on normal ETCS 2, but there are no moving blocks (very complex and underdeveloped), but tiny virtual blocks that, in practice, serve the same purpose.


The chosen system for LGV SE can later be migrated in ETCS level 3 hybrid.



NCT said:


> Thank you. Is there a breakdown of the standard hour pattern somewhere? Timetables are hard to find at the moment during the coronavirus restrictions.
> 
> A 5 minute headway is a bit limiting - that leaves you with 10 tph (leaving 2 spare paths for recovery).


The current minimal headway is not 5 but 4 minutes (this is easy to see when you can compare the arrival or departure times of 2 following trains).
This allows a normal capacity of 12 tph, with the possibility to run 13 tph but not several consecutive hours.


NCT said:


> To me a typical standard hour could look like
> 2 tph Lyon Part-Dieu
> 2 tph Marseille (1 onto Nice)
> 1 tph Montpellier via Nimes via the slow route
> 1 tph Montpellier Sud de France and beyond
> 1 tph Dijon and Basel
> 1 tph Geneva
> 1 tph Valence (central, and onto Montelimar and possibly beyond)
> 1 tph towards Turin


Nice normally has separate trains without reversing in Marseille (however since 2-3 years many of those have gotten a stop in Marseille).
There are 2 paths per hour to Dijon/Besançon/Mulhouse/Zürich (but it's rare that both are used).

More importantly, you are forgetting the 2 train paths per hour for the "intersecteurs" trains between Lyon/Marseille/Montpellier and Nantes, Rennes and Lille. Those paths are also used by some of the low-cost Ouigo trains, but often they are built separately in the timetable.

I don't have the standard hourly pattern*, but there are probably many exceptions to it. Also don't forget there is a larger difference between peak and off-peak services than in other countries**, and that some paths are only used in super-peaks (in february to the Alps and in the summer to the coast).


* The LGV Atlantique, which has the same signalling system (in fact the TVM300 was first implemented here, before being retrofitted on the LGV SE to allow a reduction of the headway from 5 to 4 minutes and increase of the top speed from 270 to 300) is used by a maximum of 12 trains per hour (of which 2 are "intersecteurs").

** for example on the LGV Atlantique (on the 2019 timetable), there are 11 trains towards Paris between 8h and 9h (hour of arrival in Montparnasse or equivalent passing time for the intersecteurs), 12 between 9h and 10h, but only 4 between 10h and 11h !


----------



## Gusiluz

^^ Alstom's Atlas system is not ready for ETCS 3

It's another thing to be confused with Baseline 3


----------



## TER200

No, it's not a confusion (I made a mistake in the name however). The system to be used starting from 2025 is ETCS 2 baseline 3, but is made to be migrated later to hybrid level 3 :








A new step forward for the Paris-Lyon high speed line: Alstom’s digital signalling technology chosen by SNCF Réseau


25 September 2019 – Alstom, in a consortium with Setec Ferroviaire




www.alstom.com


----------



## flierfy

NCT said:


> Can you point me in the direction of this timetable please? I've been generally struggling with finding timetables lately ...


JReast-timetable.jp


----------



## dyonisien

AlbertJP said:


> I think it is pretty rare in western Europe to have configurations of more than 12 coaches except for high-speed trains such as the TGV, Thalys, Eurostar and ICE, and some sleeper services.


Most main lines in Europe allow for 400 m long trains (it was internationaly agreed years ago). While secondary lines are often limited to shorter trains, some main line stations had 430 long platforms which where used heavily during some peaks (when railways where still flexible and added as many cars as possible during peaks). In France, all stations served by the TGV Atlantique had 480m long platforms to cope with a double unit (2x240m).
By the way, the Paris-Lyon-Marseille line could have benefited from the possibility of longer TGVs (+12% with one more trailer) IF preference had not been given to unifying the fleet to the shorter european 400m standard...


----------



## dyonisien

Suburbanist said:


> What is the maximum speed modern high-speed rail lines in Europe could allow for commercial service if there existed modern >300km/h tilting trains?


Tilting at speeds above ~250km/h is neither common nor favored by engineers (tilting to raise speeds does increase cant deficiency and track wear). High speed trains generally use lower cant deficiencies than former 'fast' trains


----------



## Gusiluz

TER200 said:


> No, it's not a confusion (I made a mistake in the name however). The system to be used starting from 2025 is ETCS 2 baseline 3, but is made to be migrated later to hybrid level 3 :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A new step forward for the Paris-Lyon high speed line: Alstom’s digital signalling technology chosen by SNCF Réseau
> 
> 
> 25 September 2019 – Alstom, in a consortium with Setec Ferroviaire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.alstom.com


That's exactly what we were talking about: that ETCS Level 3 (mobile blocks) is too far away and now we are working with the Hybrid ETCS Level 3 (HL3).

So, what I was coming to...

250 M € in contracts awarded for the international link Lyon-Turin under the Alps


> The cumulative amount of contracts awarded last month for activities related to the realisation of the cross-border section of Lyon-Turin in France and Italy exceeds €250 million.
> 2.8 billion has already been committed for the work.


----------



## M-NL

dyonisien said:


> Most main lines in Europe allow for 400 m long trains (it was internationaly agreed years ago). While secondary lines are often limited to shorter trains, some main line stations had 430 long platforms which where used heavily during some peaks (when railways where still flexible and added as many cars as possible during peaks). In France, all stations served by the TGV Atlantique had 480m long platforms to cope with a double unit (2x240m).


The 400m standard was put in place just for interoperability between countries (I think it also specifies a loading gauge). There is no reason why you couldn't use longer trains for internal use; they may just not be suited for international use. AFAIK the original TGV Atlantiques are 1500VDC/25kVAC only and only have the French safety systems, which makes it unsuitable for international use anyway, so there is no reason why it should have been shortened.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Gusiluz said:


> And, before anyone asks, some HSTs are prepared to circulate in triple composition: the S-104/114 of Renfe (Non-tilting Pendolino, Alstom/CAF).


Yes, but these EMUs are just 4 car long.

The ETR 600/ETR 610, which are the same model of the S-114, can only run in double because 7+7 cars is already near the 400 m limit.

I have never seen a train with more than two S-104 or S-114 though (8 cars), while on the routes where the ETR 610 are used a double consist (14 cars) is sometimes not enough so they run a 7+7 trains and just before or after it another 7 car train, just because of the length limit (and that even if there is already an half hourly timetable, so that trains are roughly spaced 30', 28', 2' between each other).


----------



## Stuu

NCT said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I searched for august and from what I remember I think this is the normal timetable, with the standard off-peak timetable consisting of 4 fasts, 2 semis and 2 slows. The peak pattern is 10 tph of which 6 are Nozomi. Yes, 6 platforms for 10 tph, and 11 platforms for 18 tph, I think are still quite comparable.
> 
> I remember an exchange I had in the China thread where I talked about 6 Nozomi in the peaks. Hikari and Kodama stay at 2 tph each all day is also my recollection.


The pattern seems to be 10tph for most of the day for the days I checked, I'm pretty certain there were more peak extras in normal times


----------



## SSCreader

There are normally 12 Nozomi trains per hour at peak times on the Tokyo-Osaka segment. The following link even explains that during 2020 new year holidays, all trains except those starting around 6 am were closed for reservations.









2020年お正月帰りの新幹線予約状況 - 新幹線時刻表


JR東海によれば、お盆期間（2019/08/09～18の10日間）の東海道新幹線の上りの混雑ピーク見込みは08/17(土)です。このピーク日の前後について、当サイト「新幹線時刻表」は独自に指定席の予約状況を調査しました。予約状況は刻々と変化しますが、混雑傾向を把握するためのご参考までお知らせします。 混雑ピーク見込み日前後の指定席の予約状況 12/31時点での指定席予約状況を確認し、東海道新幹線、山陽新幹線、九州新幹線について、混雑見込み日前後の指定席の予約状況をまとめたもの […]




www.tabi-o-ji.com





(The excerpt is in Japanese, but if you follow the link the page is in English !)


----------



## 437.001

From the Italian HSR thread.

An off-topic about an odd proposal for a London to Rome Eurostar service.



Stuu said:


> Those times are impossible - e.g. London to Brussels takes more than 2 hours now, and Brussels to Cologne is 1hr 45. And it's mostly HSR the whole way. And no new infrastucture is planned. The rest of the times are equally unlikely e.g. Barcelona is 8.5 hours from London now, with HSR most of the way, how on earth can Lisbon be reached in 1 hour from Barcelona?


Stuu, aren't you being a bit too optimistic?
Barcelona-Sants to Paris-Gare de Lyon takes a little bit over 6 hours.
Paris-Gare du Nord to London-St Pancras takes a little bit over 2 hours.
Then there's the RER D trip from Paris-Gare de Lyon to Paris-Gare du Nord, which is... 15 minutes at the very least... if the RER D and the RER B behave themselves, that is (touch wood).
Plus boarding in Paris.

I guess 8h 30min Barcelona-Sants to London-St Pancras would only be achievable via a direct service... with very few stops, if any.
And in such a service, skipping Girona (bus and rail links for the Costa Brava and the Maresme), Ashford (for Kent/Surrey/Sussex), probably Marne-la-Vallée, perhaps Lyon-St-Éxupéry and/or Montpellier-Sud de France... and maybe even Stratford (for Essex/East Anglia) would be a crime.

And I'm not counting the non-Schengen stuff, and of course not Brexit.


----------



## parcdesprinces

^^ Brexit is not an issue in that regard.

For the rest.. well OK guys*** as long as you pay taxes when you're going to cross France and using the HSLs funded by the French tax-payers. 😋 Non mais ! 😡


😀


***I mean the companies & the customers using such hypothetical future services to/from London crossing France with no stops.


----------



## Suburbanist

parcdesprinces said:


> ^^ Brexit is not an issue in that regard.
> 
> For the rest.. well OK guys*** as long as you pay taxes when you're going to cross France and using the HSLs funded by the French tax-payers. 😋 Non mais ! 😡
> 
> 
> 😀
> 
> 
> ***I mean the companies & the customers using such hypothetical future services to/from London crossing France with no stops.


RFF collects usage fess from any train company using its infrasftructure, so don't worry.

Maybe they could make that station near Eurodisney a major hub for connecting international services... plenty of space over there. Or better yet, make a large rail hub expanding over the existing TGV station at Charles de Gaulle airport.


----------



## Stuu

437.001 said:


> From the Italian HSR thread.
> 
> An off-topic about an odd proposal for a London to Rome Eurostar service.
> 
> 
> 
> Stuu, aren't you being a bit too optimistic?
> Barcelona-Sants to Paris-Gare de Lyon takes a little bit over 6 hours.
> Paris-Gare du Nord to London-St Pancras takes a little bit over 2 hours.
> Then there's the RER D trip from Paris-Gare de Lyon to Paris-Gare du Nord, which is... 15 minutes at the very least... if the RER D and the RER B behave themselves, that is (touch wood).
> Plus boarding in Paris.
> 
> I guess 8h 30min Barcelona-Sants to London-St Pancras would only be achievable via a direct service... with very few stops, if any.
> And in such a service, skipping Girona (bus and rail links for the Costa Brava and the Maresme), Ashford (for Kent/Surrey/Sussex), probably Marne-la-Vallée, perhaps Lyon-St-Éxupéry and/or Montpellier-Sud de France... and maybe even Stratford (for Essex/East Anglia) would be a crime.
> 
> And I'm not counting the non-Schengen stuff, and of course not Brexit.


The original post was total nonsense so I didn't really bother with much of the detail, the 8.5 hours suggestion was based very roughly on the theoretical quickest time via Marne-la-Vallée just to illustrate the point


----------



## parcdesprinces

Suburbanist said:


> [...]near Eurodisney [...] plenty of space over there


Yep, and more and more opponents over there at Marne-la-Vallée and the in the several old/historic villages around (and they are far from to be hardcore leftists/Greens/etc apparently), since this "space" as you call it, is nowadays considered again as agriculture lands needed to be preserved.


PS: CDG station indeed would be a better Idea (IMHO).


----------



## AlbertJP

In any case, many trains avoiding Paris city centre are calling at both stations. Only the services using the line to/from Strasbourg can only call at one of the two. (EDIT: it appears there are some Strasbourg services turning around in CDG, which do serve both CDG and Marne-la-Vallée.)


----------



## Suburbanist

parcdesprinces said:


> Yep, and more and more opponents over there at Marne-la-Vallée and the in the several old/historic villages around (and they are far from to be hardcore leftists/Greens/etc apparently), since this "space" as you call it, is nowadays considered again as agriculture lands needed to be preserved.
> 
> 
> PS: CDG station indeed would a better Idea (IMHO).


Marne-la-Vallée is not like Fountainbleau with an ancient never-cut forest....


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> Marne-la-Vallée is not like Fountainbleau with an ancient never-cut forest....


No, but it's next to the homeland of the Brie cheese, though.
And as the Paris urban area doesn't stop growing, the neighbours in the area must be a bit concerned about their natural landscape.


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> And as the Paris urban area doesn't stop growing, the neighbours in the area must be a bit concerned about their natural landscape.


You mean Eurodisney and the parking lots ?

the problem of extending those stations, I think, is that they are below ground and surrounded by built-up areas. Widening the station boxes to add platforms under the tarmac of Roissy terminal 2, for example, does not look simple.
One possibility is to add platforms to the seldom-used fast tracks. 
It's already planned for CDG (at the same time as the Roissy-Picardie link for regional services), where they are in the middle : on track will be replaced by a platform, so the station will have 5 tracks all with platforms.
In Marne-la-Vallée however the fast tracks are surrounding the tracks with platforms and I don't think the tunnels are wide enough to add platforms. And the only 3 tracks with platforms might become insufficient, especially when you have some trains reversing here.


----------



## 33Hz

dyonisien said:


> By the way, the Paris-Lyon-Marseille line could have benefited from the possibility of longer TGVs (+12% with one more trailer) IF preference had not been given to unifying the fleet to the shorter european 400m standard...


What happened to this?













parcdesprinces said:


> For the rest.. well OK guys*** as long as you pay taxes when you're going to cross France and using the HSLs funded by the French tax-payers. 😋 Non mais ! 😡



The tax is called the crazy high track access charges from RFF which everyone else complains about and kills off international services...


----------



## TER200

33Hz said:


> What happened to this?
> 
> View attachment 223440


Nothing.
Presumably the loss in flexibility was deemed excessive compared to the gain in capacity.

However the Duplex trainsets delivered since 2016 have 556 seats compared to 509 before so it's almost 10% more, and this just by reducing the share of first class et adding a row in each second class room (in fact, coming back to the comfort level of the pre-Duple single deck TGVs).
The new generation TGV2020 shall have even more seats with a ninth car, but still in standard 200m sets.


----------



## parcdesprinces

33Hz said:


> The tax is called the crazy high track access charges from RFF which *everyone else complains about* and kills off international services...


"everyone else" being? (= please, give us a break)


----------



## Vishek

Are there any particular advantages for choosing standard gauge over broad gauge for high speed railways, other then to maintain international connectivity? I'm having a discussion over on the Indian thread about why allowing the Japanese to choose stand gauge instead of broad gauge is a grave mistake, as India will not avail any of the advantages of choosing standard gauge due to limited international corridors (geopolitics and Himalayas will put a stop to international links for decades, other than Nepal and Sri Lanka). It's better to have the option to allow high speed trains to use regular rail tracks surely?


----------



## AlbertJP

Generally I'd say yes to that, but it may be that high-speed trains are more expensive for broad gauge. The only existing designs for 250+ km/h that would likely work with 5 ft 6 are Spanish designs from Talgo and CAF as their gauge is just one centimetre narrower. Any other manufacturer would need to redesign at least the bogies and probably the whole undercarriage.


----------



## brick84

https://www.thelocal.it/20200619/direct-link-from-sicily-to-brussels-on-proposed-european-ultra-rapid-train-network?fbclid=IwAR03t_eWw5NYhPutIGswWUP4zSyfv0heL4_ggVRIy9mlYQkAm4_d65r8I5k


----------



## Vishek

brick84 said:


> https://www.thelocal.it/20200619/direct-link-from-sicily-to-brussels-on-proposed-european-ultra-rapid-train-network?fbclid=IwAR03t_eWw5NYhPutIGswWUP4zSyfv0heL4_ggVRIy9mlYQkAm4_d65r8I5k


Is that green line proposing a tunnel/bridge from France to Ireland?

A more important transport infrastructure routes would be connecting Denmark to Germany, and Finland to Sweden.


----------



## naruciakk

Vishek said:


> Is that green line proposing a tunnel/bridge from France to Ireland?


Maybe it's some kind of a Celtic connection (Ireland and Brittany) 
But being more serious – there's much more sense in striking a deal with the British (not… y'know, the other type of deal that is fiercely debated right now) to use the infrastructure of HS2 to connect it via tunnel or bridge to Dublin. Then, after the link between HS2 and HS1 is completed, the train from Dublin can use it all the way to EU mainland.


----------



## Gusiluz

^^ The linked text says:


> Paris to Dublin - from Paris to Brest, taking the Brest-Cork ferry then running from Cork to Dublin.


----------



## Coccodrillo

The first three metro lines in New Delhi were built in Indian gauge to allow compatibility with the existing rail network, but the following ones in standard gauge. In Toronto the existing metro and tramway lines were built to the unusual 1495 mm gauge (not used anywhere else), but new lines are being built in standard gauge. IMHO in both cases it is not a wise decision, as it is better to continue using the same gauge if there are no realistic plans to convert the existing lines to a new gauge. That's why in Spain choosing standard gauge fot HSLs was a wise idea: Spanish rail network is not that long and has mostly low traffic, so there are chances that some day it will be all converted to 1435 mm gauge (together with Portugues network). On the other hand, Indian 1676 mm and Russian 1520 mm networks (and thei neighbors) will never be converted to 1435 mm gauge.

@Gusiluz: Panama regauged its line (only ~80 km long) to 1435 mm some years ago, and Finland still uses mm. 1520 mm in Poland is usend only on a separate line which goes around ~500 km into the standard gauge territory.


----------



## Vishek

I think the main reason for not building in standard gauge is, why build in standard gauge at all? 

international railway links (absolutely impossible for the distances involved in India which can only be reasonably achieved through Mag Lev, geopolitics and the Himalayas) 
technical limitations (which is true for narrow gauge railways, but broad gauge is capable of high speeds and the technology has already been developed in Spain, Finland and Russia including by manufacturers from France and Germany)
Otherwise there are plenty of disadvantages to building a dual-gauge system:

Indian Railways is widely used by passengers from smaller cities and towns for long distance journeys without changing trains. It offers point-to-point connections and plenty of luggage space (something that doesn't exist in most foreign railways to the scale it does in India). A dual-gauge system would nullify the point-to-point advantages of the railways and hence open it up for competition from cars, airlines and long distance buses, which could lead to the railways becoming a lead weight. It would also cause problems for passengers from second-tier cities who may face reduced services or even be forced to change multiple trains for a journey that would otherwise have taken only one train. Indians aren't used to traveling by multiple trains, particularly for long distance journeys.
It would require for an overt amount of railway infrastructure to be built due to India's geography, since every city and town needs a new standard gauge railway from terminus to terminus. India has a lot of moderate cities scattered across the country which don't fall into a straight line yet have significant rail usage. Often one corridor would have to take two or three possible paths to reach all small cities and large towns and cannot be engineered through one high speed railway line alone, but of course three high speed railway lines would be too expensive for one corridor. 
Any notion of a "segregated system" will be vanquished by the fact that gauge change trains already exist between broad gauge and standard gauge. These can also be used for hyper-long-distance trains to anywhere that uses standard gauge (far east?). 
The primary reason to build in a single gauge is for passenger convenience. In most systems, a major selling point is that high speed trains would run over legacy tracks for smaller cities and larger towns, which cannot be achieved through a dual gauge system. India has significant usage of point-to-point rail travel and the geography is too complicated. While dual gauge trains exist, surely this is creating a lot of technical failure points which would be better to position for international links which are less likely to be used than domestic links?

I still do not understand the _desire_ to build in standard gauge when it causes so many problems.


----------



## davide84

You just outlined why broad gauge was chosen over standard gauge in India for the national gauge unification effort (project Unigauge). Using standard gauge would have disrupted the service for decades, costing several times the amount and providing little benefits at the end (avoiding gauge-changers at the few borders).
India is big enough to function well with its own gauge.
Now, in 2020, the project is mostly complete...


----------



## eu01

Coccodrillo said:


> Finland still uses mm. 1520 mm


...and has no plans to convert to standard gauge (now Russian trains can use Finnish tracks and vice versa). There is one exception though. The tramway line introduced in Tampere uses 1435mm tracks.


----------



## Shenkey

eu01 said:


> ...and has no plans to convert to standard gauge (now Russian trains can use Finnish tracks and vice versa). There is one exception though. The tramway line introduced in Tampere uses 1435mm tracks.


Rail Baltica will use standard gauge though? So in that case there would in some future be a standard gauge connection to Helsinki.


----------



## eu01

Shenkey said:


> Rail Baltica will use standard gauge though? So in that case there would in some future be a standard gauge connection to Helsinki.


Right, but no further than that, only recently a single study did evaluate laying the four rail double-gauge track until Tampere (not very likely ??).


----------



## ArtManDoo

Shenkey said:


> Rail Baltica will use standard gauge though? So in that case there would in some future be a standard gauge connection to Helsinki.


Yes the Finland will be connected also to standard gauge network. About the connection further to Tampere, probably there is no point to make so long section of double gauge track which will create huge amount of complexity which can be avoided. I am pretty sure when both systems will reach Tampere, the tracks will be separate.


----------



## 437.001

*SPAIN-PORTUGAL*

On July 27, 2020, the electrification of the Spanish side of the Guillarei-Tui-Valença do Minho line was switched on.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1283007143034195968


----------



## 437.001

ArtManDoo said:


> Yes the Finland will be connected also to standard gauge network. About the connection further to Tampere, probably there is no point to make so long section of double gauge track which will create huge amount of complexity which can be avoided. I am pretty sure when both systems will reach Tampere, the tracks will be separate.


One question, is there much freight between Finland and Sweden via Haparanda?


----------



## ArtManDoo

437.001 said:


> One question, is there much freight between Finland and Sweden via Haparanda?


Shortly.... no there isn't. It is due to difference of the gauges.


----------



## Suburbanist

I wonder whether are there any project (EU-financing) to re-open regional international traffic on physically existing but inactive links between France and Belgium. I think they have 4 links where the rail infrastructure is there, but without any passenger traffic for years.


----------



## 33Hz

Sounds like more routes coming for Nightjet:









ÖBB to order more Nightjet trains


ÖBB has been granted permission by the Austrian federal government to purchase an additional 20 seven-car Nightjet trains plus locomotives for around €500m




www.railjournal.com






Does anyone know how many sets of the current stock (single and double deck) they have?


----------



## MarcVD

Suburbanist said:


> I wonder whether are there any project (EU-financing) to re-open regional international traffic on physically existing but inactive links between France and Belgium. I think they have 4 links where the rail infrastructure is there, but without any passenger traffic for years.


There were in the past up to 22 rail connections between Belgium and France. Most of them are now history. What remains, now or in the recent past:

Mouscron - Lille and Tournai - Lille have a service of one train per hour each way.
Mons - Aulnoye and Erquelinnes - Maubeuge only have two round trips per day.
De Panne - Dunkerke and Dinant - Givet are now both dismantled.
Athus - Mont Saint Martin is still in use for freight only.

It would indeed be nice if the connections to Maubeuge and Aulnoye would get some sort of revival. The current skeleton service is a test. Not highly successful till now but COVID did not help. I see only those two as possible candidates, and don't know where you see two others...


----------



## Bikes

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/if4ssq


----------



## Coccodrillo

437.001 said:


> One question, is there much freight between Finland and Sweden via Haparanda?


Half of the Swedish line from Boden was replaced by a new one around ten years ago, and the other half was modernized and electrified. AFAIK today's traffic on the whole line is around one single freight train a day, with some extra train every now and then. There are no regular passenger trains at all. Quite a waste of money.


----------



## VITORIA MAN

437.001 said:


> *SPAIN-PORTUGAL*
> 
> On July 27, 2020, the electrification of the Spanish side of the Guillarei-Tui-Valença do Minho line was switched on.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1283007143034195968


good news


----------



## Mr_Dru

From 26 October, direct trains from the Netherlands to London St Pancras Station.

Eurostar trains from Amsterdam Centraal Station arriving in London in 4 hours 09 minutes, while trains from Rotterdam Centraal Station take 3 hours 30 minutes.









Trains to the Netherlands | Netherlands train tickets


Travel from London to the Netherlands by train with Eurostar. Find cheap train tickets to the Netherlands here!




www.eurostar.com





Travelers no longer need to get off the train for passport and security checks in Brussels, because these checks now take place in Amsterdam and Rotterdam before departure. Tickets for the Eurostar train will go on sale from 1 September and cost a minimum of 46 euros for a single journey. Passengers can postpone their trip free of charge up to two weeks before departure.

The Eurostar ran twice a day in 2018 and has now been increased to three times a day. This train frequency is currently still far behind the flight movements between Schiphol and London. In the period before Covid-19, there were an average of 60 flights a day between Schiphol and London. The Eurostar currently runs via Schiphol train station but does not stop here. Currently, there is no room at Schiphol station to create passport control facilities.

With 110,000 passengers a day, the Schiphol underground Railway Station with six platforms is now one of the five busiest stations in the Netherlands. There are plans to significantly expand Schiphol station. It is also being considered to provide passport control facilities for the Eurostar to the United Kingdom. If this could be created, it could be of interest to passengers on transit flights. The Thalys currently stops at Schiphol and AF/KLM passengers can also opt for the Thalys to Brussels or Paris. An average of 22 Thalys trains run daily from Schiphol to Paris.

The Eurostar does not stop at Schiphol Station.


----------



## yc1000

Mr_Dru said:


> From 26 October, direct trains from the Netherlands to London St Pancras Station.
> 
> Eurostar trains from Amsterdam Centraal Station arriving in London in 4 hours 09 minutes, while trains from Rotterdam Centraal Station take 3 hours 30 minutes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trains to the Netherlands | Netherlands train tickets
> 
> 
> Travel from London to the Netherlands by train with Eurostar. Find cheap train tickets to the Netherlands here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eurostar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travelers no longer need to get off the train for passport and security checks in Brussels, because these checks now take place in Amsterdam and Rotterdam before departure. Tickets for the Eurostar train will go on sale from 1 September and cost a minimum of 46 euros for a single journey. Passengers can postpone their trip free of charge up to two weeks before departure.
> 
> The Eurostar ran twice a day in 2018 and has now been increased to three times a day. This train frequency is currently still far behind the flight movements between Schiphol and London. In the period before Covid-19, there were an average of 60 flights a day between Schiphol and London. The Eurostar currently runs via Schiphol train station but does not stop here. Currently, there is no room at Schiphol station to create passport control facilities.
> 
> With 110,000 passengers a day, the Schiphol underground Railway Station with six platforms is now one of the five busiest stations in the Netherlands. There are plans to significantly expand Schiphol station. It is also being considered to provide passport control facilities for the Eurostar to the United Kingdom. If this could be created, it could be of interest to passengers on transit flights. The Thalys currently stops at Schiphol and AF/KLM passengers can also opt for the Thalys to Brussels or Paris. An average of 22 Thalys trains run daily from Schiphol to Paris.
> 
> The Eurostar does not stop at Schiphol Station.
> View attachment 444355


There are just 11 train pairs between Amsterdam and Paris.


----------



## bifhihher

yc1000 said:


> There are just 11 train pairs between Amsterdam and Paris.


So 11 train pairs is correct


----------



## Sunfuns

Would there be enough capacity on the line to run enough trains to take 60% of the airline passengers traveling between London and Amsterdam in 2019? Absent capacity restrictions or very high prices one would expect 60/40 split for this travel time.


----------



## 437.001

Baron Hirsch said:


> Missing out on Madrid is definitely a mistake in the planning. Even via the present infrastructure, the planned Amsterdam-Barcelona train *could easily be extended to Madrid*.


Not sure that could be done so easily unless you bought lots of Talgos.



Suburbanist said:


> I don't think these trains will succeed, instead, non-stop daily high-speed options should be prioritized, e.g. *Amsterdam Zuid-Bruxelles Midi-(non-stop) Marseille-Perpignan-Barcelona*, or non-stop Berlin-Switzerland train, non-strop Roma-Firenze-Bologna => Switzerland


No way a high-speed train from Amsterdam to Barcelona should call at Marseille, that's total nonsense.
Maybe you meant Montpellier?

I'm not certain about Amsterdam-Barcelona. That's a bit too long a distance.

However, Brussels-Barcelona is perfectly feasible, and I think the only reason it doesn't already exist, is the lack of compatible rolling stock, if I remember correctly.
I think that trains that are able to operate between France and Belgium aren't able to operate between France and Spain.

Which is a pity, because between Brussels, Lille, Roissy, and Marne-la-Vallée, you can fill more than one train per day from Barcelona.
I think that there is (or has been till recently) a TGV Brussels-Perpignan, and another Brussels-Montpellier.
It just makes all the sense in the world to extend them to Barcelona.

On the other hand, in that aspect, I don't know about the Netherlands, that could complicate things even further in terms of rolling stock compatibility.

Can a Thalys train be easily homologated to enter Spain?
I'm not saying Thalys as a brand should operate, I just mean the technical aspect of it.


----------



## doc7austin

A very important international rail link between Poland and Germany -> the PKP Intercity Nightjet train Przemysl - Krakow - Wroclaw - Berlin. From Dec. 2020 a second daytime train will be introduced between Krakow and Berlin.









Enjoy!


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> Not sure that could be done so easily unless you bought lots of Talgos.


What ? No, standard-gauge AVE S-100 trains run the current Marseille-Mardid service ; any standard gauge trian homologated in Spain should be able to reach Madrid.



437.001 said:


> Can a Thalys train be easily homologated to enter Spain?


Maybe, as they are quite similar to the TGV Euroduplex and AVE S-100 already used. But being old trains not compliant with STI, I'm not sure it's easily possible... maybe better to wait for a nex generation anyway.


----------



## 437.001

TER200 said:


> What ? No, standard-gauge AVE S-100 trains run the current Marseille-Mardid service ; any standard gauge trian homologated in Spain should be able to reach Madrid.


I was talking night trains.



TER200 said:


> Maybe, as they are quite similar to the TGV Euroduplex and AVE S-100 already used. But being old trains not compliant with STI, I'm not sure it's easily possible... maybe better to wait for a next generation anyway.


Oh yes, any next generation should be made compatible for such services.

It makes no sense that a train can't reach Lausanne from Barcelona, or Brussels from Turin, to give but two examples.


----------



## Suburbanist

Maybe what is needed is a new and larger station where the high speed lines intersect at Lille. Sure there is Lille Europa, but it is not that large. That way, Lille could become a hub optimized for fast transfers to/from Begium, Netherlands, London, Frankfurt/Koln, and points south of Paris.

Of couse the pie-in-the-sky solution would be for Paris to have a single, gigantic central underground through station where all High-speed services would converge to, like Berlin.


----------



## 437.001

Suburbanist said:


> Maybe what is needed is a new and larger station where the high speed lines intersect at Lille. Sure there is Lille Europa, but it is not that large. That way, Lille could become a hub optimized for fast transfers to/from Begium, Netherlands, London, Frankfurt/Koln, and points south of Paris.


Or maybe what it would need is a branch on the HSL to make France-Belgium trains call at Lille.
Anyway, with Brexit, I'm not sure it's very important, as Lille becomes less of a hub..



Suburbanist said:


> Of couse the pie-in-the-sky solution would be for Paris to have a single, gigantic central underground through station where all High-speed services would converge to, like Berlin.


Chatelet-St Michel-Notre Dame, huh?   
They should demolish that cathedral (it's half-demolished anyway, and it's far too old), and build a state-of-the-art underground big TGV station in its stead.
(don't throw stones at me, please)


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> I was talking night trains.


There is no reason why a standard gauge night train would not be able to reach Madrid. It would make sense too, as this enables operators to have a standardised fleet that can be used everywhere.



NCT said:


> In a very sane world - for London to be connected by more than Paris/Brussels/Amsterdam the UK would need to join Schengen - the requirement for trains to operate in a 'sterile' environment throughout renders a lot of destinations unviable (Cologne comes to mind).


It is not necessary for the UK to join Schengen. What could be done is move all border formalities to st. Pancras, and abolish the security theatre. That way serving more destinations become possible.
For example you could easily run Amsterdam - Brussel - Londen hourly, if the train would also be permitted to serve the NL - B market... (and even domestic passengers...)



Suburbanist said:


> I don't think these trains will succeed, instead, non-stop daily high-speed options should be prioritized, e.g. Amsterdam Zuid-Bruxelles Midi-(non-stop) Marseille-Perpignan-Barcelona, or non-stop Berlin-Switzerland train, non-strop Roma-Firenze-Bologna => Switzerland


The problem with running trains non stop over very long distances is that this is how you end up running empty trains. 
When the train to Berlin leaves Interlaken Ost in the morning it often has me on board, going to somewhere in Germany. But most people that get on board with me get off again in Bern. Most of the passengers that this train moves only travel a few stations. Cut out the stops between Basel and Berlin and the train will run mostly empty. 
The strength of trains is that they can serve multiple origin-destination pairs with one service. You should not abandon this advantage.


----------



## K_

yc1000 said:


> Full article: Trans-Europ-Express renaissance proposed
> 
> A network of international long-distance high speed passenger services spanning much of western Europe could be launched by 2025 if proposals announced by Germany’s Federal Minister for Transport Andreas Scheuer at a virtual conference of Europe’s transport ministers on September 21 are taken forward.
> 
> 
> TEE1/2: Paris – Brussels – Köln – Berlin –WarszawaTEE3/4: Amsterdam – Köln – Basel – Milano – RomaTEE5/6: Berlin – Frankfurt – Lyon – Montpellier – BarcelonaTEE7/8: Amsterdam – Brussels – Paris – Lyon – BarcelonaTEE9/10: Berlin – München – Innsbruck – Bologna – RomaTEE11/12: Paris – Strasbourg – Stuttgart – München – Wien – BudapestTEE13/14: Paris – Brussels – Hamburg – København – StockholmTEE15/16: Stockholm – København – Berlin – München


I am missing this important link:


TEE 17/18 Amsterdam - Brussel - Luxembourg - Strasbourg - Basel - Milano

In fact, given that this train would connect the European Capitals it ought to have nrs. 1/2...


----------



## NCT

K_ said:


> It is not necessary for the UK to join Schengen. What could be done is move all border formalities to st. Pancras, and abolish the security theatre. That way serving more destinations become possible.
> For example you could easily run Amsterdam - Brussel - Londen hourly, if the train would also be permitted to serve the NL - B market... (and even domestic passengers...)


This is still a border question and not a transport one.

There is no precedence, in the UK at least, where inbound passengers are not screened at the origin. The UK government has been very clear that, because we are talking land transport, it does not want anyone on UK soil without their legality checked. The point of entering UK soil is considered to be when the train crosses the border at the Channel Tunnel, not St Pancras. The Home Office will not in a million years consider St Pancras 'air-side'.


----------



## K_

M-NL said:


> When you have Eurostars that currently depart from Brussels depart from Amsterdam instead platform capacity in Brussels shouldn't be a problem. The major problem is likely track capacity between Antwerp and Brussels.


The same problem with track capacity exists for example for the Zürich - Paris TGVs between Zürich and Basel. SBB solved this in a sensible way by just letting the TGVs use an existing IC path, and allowing domestic passengers to use these trains too. 
You could run an hourly train from Amsterdam to London, that takes over the current current Benelux path between Amsterdam and Brussel. Would be easy if the UK could be moved to drop the security theatre and allow the border control to be moved to st. Pancras.


----------



## davide84

NCT said:


> The Home Office will not in a million years consider St Pancras 'air-side'.


Understandable. But it also kills efficiency, creating several screening points and adding complications also for passengers who get off before the tunnel (in a healthy model there are such services).
I would even prefer to have checks on board with possibility of a technical stop just before the tunnel to disembark people.
Switzerland is very strict about immigration but controls on international trains are done onboard.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> There is no reason why a standard gauge night train would not be able to reach Madrid. It would make sense too, as this enables operators to have a standardised fleet that can be used everywhere.


Well if you ask me, and if daytime high-speed routes such as Barcelona-Turin-Milan,
Barcelona-Geneva or Barcelona-Lille/Brussels are not to be considered (or so it seems), because of not-so-understandable (but real) lack of capacity between Paris and Lyon in the case of Lille/Brussels, because of the lengthy trip along the Alps in the case of Turin-Milan, and because of... other reasons, in the case of Geneva (and btw Barcelona-Geneva is a shorter distance than Barcelona-Seville)...

...then I'd much rather have back the night Talgos (Barcelona-Paris, Madrid-Paris,
Barcelona-Turin-Milan, and Barcelona-Geneva-Zürich), which are routes that have existed in the past, and which in certain aspects, are much missed.

I'd do that first, and then try and work out whether a night route from Barcelona to Amsterdam or from Barcelona to Berlin would be feasible.
They could do it on classic lines anyway, I believe, as the cost would be much lower, rather than pay the (much more expensive) slots of a few HSL's, which by night usually have the maintenance done.

That's my two cents.


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Well if you ask me, and if daytime high-speed routes such as Barcelona-Turin-Milan,
> Barcelona-Geneva or Barcelona-Lille/Brussels are not to be considered (or so it seems), because of not-so-understandable (but real) lack of capacity between Paris and Lyon in the case of Lille/Brussels, because of the lengthy trip along the Alps in the case of Turin-Milan, and because of... other reasons, in the case of Geneva (and btw Barcelona-Geneva is a shorter distance than Barcelona-Seville)...


The solution to the "lack of capacity" is to combine existing services. There are trains from Geneva to Lyon, and from Lyon to Barcelona. So a Geneva - Lyon - Barcelona service can be created by just combining them. Equally for Brussels - Lille - Montpelier - Barcelona.
This is how SBB and DB run long distance trains between their countries, on some of the most congested tracks in Europe. Just combine services you would be running anyway. 



> ...then I'd much rather have back the night Talgos (Barcelona-Paris, Madrid-Paris,
> Barcelona-Turin-Milan, and Barcelona-Geneva-Zürich), which are routes that have existed in the past, and which in certain aspects, are much missed.


SBB wants to have a night train to Barcelona. They also want night trains to Rome and other destinations. I can imagine that they would prefer to use a unified fleet for that. In the near future the easiest way to get modern night train rolling stock is just to tag along on ÖBB's order.



> I'd do that first, and then try and work out whether a night route from Barcelona to Amsterdam or from Barcelona to Berlin would be feasible.
> They could do it on classic lines anyway, I believe, as the cost would be much lower, rather than pay the (much more expensive) slots of a few HSL's, which by night usually have the maintenance done.


When I travelled on the Trenotel from A Coruna to Barcelona I noticed that it was routed over the HSL between Madrid and Barcelona. So if RENFE even does this with domestic night trains, so why not with international ones?


----------



## K_

davide84 said:


> Understandable. But it also kills efficiency, creating several screening points and adding complications also for passengers who get off before the tunnel (in a healthy model there are such services).
> I would even prefer to have checks on board with possibility of a technical stop just before the tunnel to disembark people.
> Switzerland is very strict about immigration but controls on international trains are done onboard.


Switzerland is actually a member of Schengen, so normally there are no immigration controls on international trains. And even before Schengen these controls were rare.
However, doing the ID controls on board on the way to the UK would be convenient.


----------



## AndreiB

I fully agree with all your points, but I’m afraid I see little chance of the UK political establishment moving to a sensible solution in the current environment.


----------



## davide84

K_ said:


> Switzerland is actually a member of Schengen, so normally there are no immigration controls on international trains.


Careful, Schengen means "right to enter", not "no controls".
Swiss border police boards every train and does random checks. Illegal immigrants, as well as smugglers, are spotted this way and taken off at the first useful station (I witnessed a few). Of course there is an agreement between CH and I, F, D.
It's totally not as systematic as it's done for Eurostars, but it could be taken as a working idea and improved.

Another example is passport control on night trains, which is stricter than Swiss controls and carried on while the train is running.


----------



## K_

davide84 said:


> Careful, Schengen means "right to enter", not "no controls".


Actually it is the other way round.. The "right to enter" existed before Schengen. EU citizens had free movement around the EU before, and with the bilateral treaties also between the EU an Switzerland. Schengen was and is about removing border controls.



> Swiss border police boards every train and does random checks. Illegal immigrants, as well as smugglers, are spotted this way and taken off at the first useful station (I witnessed a few). Of course there is an agreement between CH and I, F, D.
> It's totally not as systematic as it's done for Eurostars, but it could be taken as a working idea and improved.


Customs will indeed board most trains, and often they will be accompanied by border police. But I have been on many trains where neither were present.



> Another example is passport control on night trains, which is stricter than Swiss controls and carried on while the train is running.


The only night trains I have been on recently where from Basel to Germany. I never saw any passport control on them.


----------



## AlbertJP

In the Schengen area passport controls should be incidental, not regular. But as France is already checking some international trains and buses like half of the time, there is apparently a lot of leeway as to what is considered 'incidental'.

Customs is a different matter as they are concerned with goods (including luggage), not passports. The customs union does not coincide with the Schengen area.


----------



## 33Hz

I note that they talk about these night train proposals having a top speed of 230 km/h for "standard" coaches and 250 km/h for Talgos. However the Siemens Viaggio coaches that the OeBB Nightjet order consists of are rated for 249 km/h top speed. Is that the case for the sleeper versions as well and if so, why not use them?



https://assets.new.siemens.com/siemens/assets/api/uuid:65e137d93be4ff8bb4120242196bccb5db88cc55/image-viaggio-comfort-english.pdf


----------



## Suburbanist

The Berlin-Interlaken Ost intercity takes 10 hours for a mere ~900km.

Amsterdam - Bruxelles Midi - Lyon - Montpellier - Barcelona can be completed in 9h and they are separated by 1800km.


K_ said:


> The same problem with track capacity exists for example for the Zürich - Paris TGVs between Zürich and Basel. SBB solved this in a sensible way by just letting the TGVs use an existing IC path, and allowing domestic passengers to use these trains too.
> You could run an hourly train from Amsterdam to London, that takes over the current current Benelux path between Amsterdam and Brussel. Would be easy if the UK could be moved to drop the security theatre and allow the border control to be moved to st. Pancras.


I also think that, given the current situation, such arrangements would be asking for trouble (i.e. would-be crosses that currently try to latch on trucks of dingies just buying tickets and creating a mass incident, maybe including armed storming of the driver's cab, to force such train to stop somewhere in Kent while dozens escape).


----------



## hkskyline

*Eurostar: France vows financial support to 'maintain this strategic link' with UK * 
Sky News _Excerpt_
Jan 22, 2021

French authorities have said they are ready to give financial support to the struggling Eurostar.

The country's junior transport minister, Jean-Baptiste Djebbari, told a parliamentary hearing in Paris he was talking with the UK government about ensuring the cross-Channel train operator survives the coronavirus pandemic.

He said the French state would be "at Eurostar's side in order to maintain this strategic link between our two countries".

Support will be given "based on our involvement in Eurostar, so that we can financially sustain its business model", he added.

Eurostar is 55% owned by French state rail company SNCF and the UK government sold its 40% stake to private companies in 2015.

More : https://news.sky.com/story/eurostar...maintain-this-strategic-link-with-uk-12195674


----------



## btrs

Wouldn't it be better if the proposed Eurostar-Thalys merger be executed now ? This way Eurostar losses could be made up by Thalys, even if they're also running on a reduced service now.


----------



## [email protected]




----------



## doc7austin

A trip report on a recent journey aboard the ÖBB Nightjet train NJ 457 Berlin-Vienna via Wroclaw.
The train was basically deserted due to the pandemic.







Enjoy!


----------



## 437.001

*Sleeping Car on Twitter: "French government study about recovering night trains is published. And here are the maps!!! https://t.co/nUxicx18T0" / Twitter*


----------



## Xorcist

IN THE NORTH OF FRANCE, on the outskirts of Valenciennes, sits a strange sight: an abandoned high-speed train that, not so long ago, was speeding its way through the Channel Tunnel.
The train in question is the Eurostar 373018, one of many Eurostar Class 373 trains that started operating in 1994. Eurostar 373018 is officially in storage, but the word “abandoned” seems more appropriate. 
































pics by ATW/Urbex








Abandoned Eurostar Train


This is what trains will look like after the zombie apocalypse.




www.atlasobscura.com


----------



## AndreiB

I presume they did not want to sell them to prevent a competitor appearing, no?


----------



## zidar fr

Night Train lines to Brussels, a proposal by Back on Track Belgian chapter (Accueil | Back On Track Belgium) to bring back sleeper trains to Western Europe.









Map design inat (Works : inat)


----------



## 437.001

*Spain-Portugal*

If you click here...

*Sentinel Playground | Sentinel Hub (sentinel-hub.com)*

...you'll see how the whole of the new line between Elvas and Evora is in works by now.
This is excellent news.


----------



## 437.001

*France/Spain*

I'm thinking whether it would be a good idea or not to remove the freight trains from part of the HSL between Barcelona and Perpignan.

That could be achieved with a gauge change of Figueres-Portbou on the classic line, and third rail between Vilamalla and Figueres.

That could allow direct regional trains Perpignan-Cerbère-Portbou-Figueres.

To change gauge, special provisory falicities for freight gauge change could be installed at the Girona freight yard, which right now is underused, and maybe also at Barcelona-Can Tunis and/or Vilamalla.

What do you think?


----------



## 437.001

*News

Spain/France*

The newly upgraded *Canfranc* railway station will open on Saturday 17, 2021. 
The famous historical passenger building will be turned into a hotel and maybe also some other stuff (it is a listed building, but it is so big it's really not fit for railway purpose on such line).

On the following video you can see a class 596 autorail doing some test runs on the new tracks.
Note that the new platforms are under a new shed, which is great for the Pyrenean winter.
On the downside, the new platforms will be further away from the street, but not a lot.








In this other video, you get to see a bit more of the works, including the historical station building, plus two old Renfe carriages (class 1000, and class 3000/5000/6000), as part of the station site will become a railway museum.


----------



## 437.001

*News

Spain/Portugal*

A Portuguese test train on the Minho bridge between Tui (Spain) and Valença (Portugal).
The Portuguese side of the electrification is about to enter service.
However, for the time being, the international services Vigo-Porto and Vigo-Valença will continue to be suspended (Covid).


----------



## JumpUp

437.001 said:


> *News
> 
> Spain/Portugal*
> 
> A Portuguese test train on the Minho bridge between Tui (Spain) and Valença (Portugal).
> The Portuguese side of the electrification is about to enter service.
> However, for the time being, the international services Vigo-Porto and Vigo-Valença will continue to be suspended (Covid).


What sort of electric trains (Spanish / Portugese?) are scheduled for the international service?


----------



## 437.001

JumpUp said:


> What sort of electric trains (Spanish / Portuguese?) are scheduled for the international service?


Diesel, for the time being, as there aren't any electric trains which are compatible (particularly signalling-wise, but there's also a lack of bi-tension trains on both sides of the border, particularly the Portuguese which hasn't got any, but also on the Spanish side as all of the ones they've got are engaged in services that require them, like Alvia).

Although perhaps that could be overcome with locomotive + Arco carriages, by changing the loco at Valença or Tui, I don't know.

On the Spanish side, there's the plan to change the tension of Monforte de Lemos-Ourense-Guillarei-Redondela-Vigo Guixar plus Guillarei-Tui. Once that achieved, the problem would be of a much lesser nature.

It must be added that the electrification of Salamanca-Vilar Formoso (which is happening), and later on, of Évora-Elvas-Badajoz-Mérida-Cáceres-Plasencia (to be continued later towards Toledo and Madrid), plus the planned electrification of Mérida-Puertollano (albeit this one's mainly for freight) should lead Spain and Portugal to come up with some kind of rolling stock that would be compatible for both countries, both tension-wise and signalling-wise.


----------



## geogregor

437.001 said:


> Diesel, for the time being, as there aren't any electric trains which are compatible (particularly signalling-wise, but there's also a lack of *bi-tension* trains on both sides of the border, particularly the Portuguese which hasn't got any, but also on the Spanish side as all of the ones they've got are engaged in services that require them, like Alvia).
> 
> Although perhaps that could be overcome with locomotive + Arco carriages, by changing the loco at Valença or Tui, I don't know.
> 
> On the Spanish side, there's the plan to change the tension of Monforte de Lemos-Ourense-Guillarei-Redondela-Vigo Guixar plus Guillarei-Tui. Once that achieved, the problem would be of a much lesser nature.
> 
> It must be added that the electrification of Salamanca-Vilar Formoso (which is happening), and later on, of Évora-Elvas-Badajoz-Mérida-Cáceres-Plasencia (to be continued later towards Toledo and Madrid), plus the planned electrification of Mérida-Puertollano (albeit this one's mainly for freight) should lead Spain and Portugal to come up with some kind of rolling stock that would be compatible for both countries, both tension-wise and signalling-wise.


Do you mean voltage?


----------



## Sunfuns

Are you saying they invested a significant amount of money in electrification without having a any plan on how to take advantage of it in a medium term? Sounds crazy to me...


----------



## alserrod

CP has enlarged Entroncamento-Elvas daily train to Entroncamento-Badajoz.

It is possible, therefore, to make an international link.


----------



## alserrod

I have checked and it is possible to travel in a same day

Lisboa-Sevilla (even enlarging to some Andalusian cities)
Lisboa-Madrid (even enlarging to Valencia or Barcelona by HSL or to Valladolid-Palencia by classic line). It is possible even to link with last daily Ouigo


----------



## geogregor

https://twitter.com/unsereOEBB


----------



## kokomo

Great night services by ÖBB


----------



## kokomo

How is that service comprised? I mean connecting mainland Russia to Kaliningrad exclave. That is, they circulate through Lithuania and you need ID to cross the border?


----------



## maginn

That’s right, and through Minsk in Belarus too.


----------



## alserrod

kokomo said:


> How is that service comprised? I mean connecting mainland Russia to Kaliningrad exclave. That is, they circulate through Lithuania and you need ID to cross the border?



I read an article a loooong time ago. 
I remember about a train calling in several stations. There were rough passport controls in stations and I do not remember if it was passport-free to go to Kaliningrad by train or you need to have a passport.

Hint... I think I read something about Moscow-Kaliningrad was a bit cheaper than to any other intermediate calls, thus a lot of people bought a point-to-point ticket

But as said... a long time ago


----------



## rheintram

Such graphics and statistics should always be taken cum grano salis. Nevertheless they do provide some interesting insights, e.g. when comparing similiar region such as Central Europe and South-Eastern Europe, which are both characterized by comparatively small states (with Germany being the exception, though through its federalism it has many urban centers). While Central Europe has many rail connection the opposite is true in South Eastern Europe, although it would be predestined for great international rail routes.


----------



## [email protected]




----------



## CornelM




----------



## davide84

Does anybody know what is the status of the EuroNight / NightJet from Muenchen to Rijeka? I can't find a solution for late June. Is it suspended, fully booked, not yet loaded into the systems...?


----------



## kokomo

Supposedly summer timetable does not come into effect after the third Sunday of June? Maybe is that?


----------



## Theijs

As far as I recall, I read at the German Forum ‘Drehscheibe Ausland’ that this service between München and Rijeka has completely been cancelled.


----------



## davide84

I found the official NightJet web page, it reports this
_
Trains run daily from Aug 01, 2021; sleeper car only available Aug 01 - Oct 3, 2021_

So basically it is a seasonal service, and the first half of the season is probably canceled due to Covid. I can understand.


----------



## Sunfuns

Just noticed a particularly ridiculous scheduling between Switzerland and Italy. The local train from Lugano to Milano Centrale with 7 stops takes 1 h 15 min, there as the intercity train (coming from Basel) takes 1 h 30 min for the same stretch while making only 3 stops. Any of you know why is that and will this craziness be fixed anytime soon? With minimum stops 1 h or few min more between Lugano and Milan is probably possible.


----------



## davide84

I never noticed this, crazy indeed!

The EuroCitys from Geneva and Base are 12' slower between Lugano and Chiasso, 2' between Chiasso and Como, 2' between Como and Monza, and 2' faster between Monza and Milano (but forget about this last one, Milano is a delay generator of its own).

I find it weird that the SBB is wasting so much time between Lugano and Chiasso. Long distance trains should have higher speed, or at least equal to local traffic, as it is for any EC from Zurich. Maybe there is a timetable conflict and these two single trains were not worth the effort of rearranging the other traffic... then I'm looking forward to the new Lugano - Chiasso line... 

Other improvements will come (it was said) from the optimization of the procedures at the border, namely the dynamic transition of power supply and harmonization of signalling. The ECs could then skip Chiasso (but not sure if they actually will).


----------



## Coccodrillo

In the mid 2000s it was decided to recast all regional timetables around Milan, especially on the Milan-Monza line with all its branches (Chiasso, Tirano, Carnate-Bergamo, the S9 suburban service running around Milan on its belt line, ...). The redesigned timetable entered into service in December 2008. This timetable reserved a slot for EC trains leaving Milano Centrale towards Zürich (or RE services towards Lugano-Bellinzona/Locarno) at minutes .10 and .40 of each hour, and a slot for arrival at .20 and .50. This meant that a Zürich-Milano trip was planned to be 3h41, which was a tight timetable considering the infrastructure of the time. In fact, on average the first Zürich-Milano train of each day arrived with 20 to 30 minutes delay (say at 11:20 instead of the planned 10:50). However, the planned waiting time at the terminus was around 20': the train planned to arrive at 10:50 in Milan should have departed backwards to Zürich at 11:10. But as I said, it mostly arrived in Milan at 11:10 to 11:20, so it almost never departed Milan on time at 11:10, but later. This meant that the train arrived in Zürich with 40' delay, and so on the whole day, the lasts trains of the day having an average 60' delay (I know perfectly that, because at the time I was commuting once or twice a week from Lugano to Milano).

Why I am saying that? Because after the opening of the AlpTransit tunnels the departure/arrival slots in Milan have not been modified, as modifiying them would mean modifying all the timetables of nearby lines. This would be a big work, complicated by the fact that RFI is less skilled than SBB at running many trains on a limited infrastructure (and the infrastructure north of Milan is exactly that - full of limitations).

Modifying arrival/departure slots on the Swiss stations north of Arth Goldau is equally difficult (there are a lot of trains, with a lot of limitations because of the single track sections around Zürich and Lucerne).

So EC trains are tied to use the existing slots, which leads to a low commercial speed. Take EC 313 as an example: Zürich HB 7:33-Lugano 9:32-Milano Centrale 10:50. At 3h17 travel time it is not particularly fast, but the previous available arrival slot is 10:20 in Milano Centrale. But choosing to arrive earlier in Milano while keeping the same departure from Zürich (so a Zürich HB 7:33-Lugano x:xx-Milano Centrale 10:20 timing) would mean with certainty that 100% of trains would arrive in Milan with a delay, because 2h47 of travel time is too short (3h17 of the actual travel time minus 30 mintues because of the use of the earlier arrival slot).

You could now say "well, if the 3h17 is too long and 2h47 is to short let's take 3h02 as a travel time". This would mean arriving in Milano at 10:35. On an empty line it would be easy, on heavily used and partially single track lines is not. Between Bellinzona and Milano (either Centrale, Garibaldi, or Lambrate stations) in addition to the EuroCitys there are between 4 and 6 suburban or regional trains per hour per direction*, plus one and sometimes two additional IC trains north of Chiasso, plus up to 4 long distance freight trains, plus every now and then local freight trains and work trains. Finally there are all other trains coming from other lines on the final section between Monza and Milano.

However, a travel time of 3h02 is exactly what SBB is trying to promote, but wants that without modifiying anything south of Chiasso (the border station) or maybe south of Lugano. What does that mean if this becomes reality? It means that there will be _enormous_ conflicts between the ECs and the other trains between Chiasso and Milano, leading to delays on regional trains (making their passengers rightfully unhappy), which will then induce delays to the following ECs. The end result will likely be an advertised Zürich-Milano (and viceversa) travel time of 3h02, but with most EC trains having a delay of 10 to 20 minutes and with also suburban/regional trains with more delays than now.

SBB also wants to skip Chiasso (but not Como) but this would not clearly be enough to reach a Zürich-Milan travel time of 2h47. On the other hand, it would make more difficult buying tickets for people going to intermediate stations like Mendrisio, because changing train in Como means having to use an international regional ticket (which can't be sold with discounted tariffs like the halbtax) or having to buy three different tickets ratehr than two (EC Somewhere to Como + Italian ticket Como to Chiasso + Swiss ticket Chiasso to Mendrisio).

*3 between Como and Seregno, but this doesn't ease the problem



437.001 said:


> and then at Modane only the TGV cross the border.


The France-Italy border crossings are 4.

A few years ago Trenitalia/Piemonte Region decided to extend line S3 trains from Bardonecchia to Modane, but only on Saturdays and Sundays. Not on workdays because this would have meant usign an additional trainset (on weekends they just sent to Modane a train that otherwise would have waited nearly two hours in Bardonecchia). Apparently they don't do that anymore.

On the Tenda railway there used to be a train every two hours on average between (Turin-)Cuneo, Limone Piemonte, Breil (where there is the junction of the line to Nice) and Ventimiglia, plus additional trains from Cuneo to Limone Piemonte and from Tende-Breil to Nice. Now (before the pandemic and the landsldies that blocked the line on the French side) the service has been reduced to two Cuneo-Ventimiglia round trips a day, sometimes three, plus the additional trains north of Limone Piemonte and from Breil to Nice. As there are no bimode multiple units there, only trains limited to Limone Piemonte are electric powered, those doing the full line use diesel traction also under the wires. In the past there were even a train going beyond Ventimiglia to Imperia, thus passing both the 7 km Tenda tunnel and the 13 km Sanremo tunnel. The use of the Sanremo tunnel (which itself is electrified and has an underground station) might have been the longest tunnel used in Europe by a diesel passenger train on a scheduled service.

The line is electrified until Limone Piemonte with 3 kV DC, and in the past was electrified with the three phase system until Ventimiglia.


----------



## Sunfuns

Thanks for the explanation Coccodrillo. Do you think there is a solution leading to shorter travel times and no delays on Zurich-Milan route without building any new infrastructure? 3 h to Milano would be very useful and popular. 

Right now, from Basel at least, it is faster to change to a regional train in Lugano.


----------



## Coccodrillo

No, I can't see any clean solution without new infrastructure, except changing the timetable of all other trains in the north of Milan, or south of Zürich. And changing that timetables would't be easy, and without new infrastructure might worsen travel times elsewhere.

Note, however, that a shorter travel time would not automatically make trips to stations beyond Milano Centrale faster, because most trains leave it a few minutes (up to 20) after the full hour. So arriving earlier would mean just making connections longer (for instance, arrival of the EC at xx.35 instead than xx.50, train to Venice at .15 and to Cremona at .20 ==> 40' waiting in Milano on trips to Venice rather than 25, but end-to-end travel time equal). This because both Zürich and Milan are both 00-30 nodes (Milan having fewer trains at the 30 node than at the 00 node*): trains before the full hour (or half hour), swap their passengers, and leave before the full hour (or half hour).

*so if you arrive at .35 you can't take the .50 train to Cremona (50 = 20 + half an hour) because it doesn't exist, you have to wait xx.20; there are trains to Venice at xx.45 (45 = 15 + half an hour) but a conenction of 10 minutes (xx.35 > xx.45) isn't reliable in Italy and Trenitalia doesn't even sell it

What could maybe be done is skipping Como station (using its bypass tunnel OpenStreetMap) with the first 1-2 and last 1-2 trains of the day, and trying to keep a tight timetable elsewhere. It is still bad for the stability of the train traffic, but obviously less than having all trains with an unstable timetable. Connections to trains beyond Milan would still be large, but at least Swiss people on a day trip to Milan would have an extra half hour for their visit (15' in the morning, 15' in the evening).

Note that I know this matter from the inside (although I'm not working directly on the railway timetable), so I know what SBB is planning, and if they manage to realize it, I can predict constant delays on both the ECs and regional trains. The Gotthard line is not an HSL, where traffic has more or less the same speed and trains have more or less the same acceleration, the Gotthard line is a mixed traffic line with intercity, regional, suburban, and freight traffic, and not only that, it has many sections with a single track where there should be two and two tracks where there should be four. It has four tracks only in the first ~12 km on each side, and on the Milan side, their are built the dumb way.

Look at here: Milan · Milan, Metropolitan City of Milan, Italy

Between Milan and Monza there are two parallel double track lines, linked each other with slow switches (points) limited to 30 km/h, and in addition to that they swap sides in the middle. You can think of them as two parallel "one lane per direction" roads, not as a 2+2 lanes motorways. If a train is delayed (as it would likely, if the EuroCitys used a time slot other than their designed ones), this train or another one in the same direction might have to switch to the other track in the same direction to allow overtaking. But the tracks aren't placed 1 northbound-2 northbound-3 southbound-4 southbound, but 1 northbound-2 southbound-3 northbound-4 southbound: so, for instance, a northbound train running on track #1 that has to overtake another northbound train also on track #1 can't just move to the parallel track #2, but has to use track #3 and doing so it has to cross track #2 on flat level, maybe causing a southbound train to stop.

Sure, the 4 tracks on the section Zürich-Thalwil are built the same way: but there, traffic is divided by speed: all suburban trains run on the surface tracks, and all intercity/interregio trains run on the tunnel tracks. In Milan there are IC/IR trains on both pairs of tracks and (slower) suburban trains on both pairs of tracks. Beside that, south of Thalwil there is the single track to Zug-Arth Goldau.

In short: faster trains between Switzerland and Italy would be nice, and as the Swiss are very keen to use trains, they would also be well used. But if the price to cut 15 minutes on EuroCity passengers is to induce delays to passengers of other trains or even making them loose their connection in a transfer station, then no, thank you, it is better to have an EuroCity slower than a RegioExpress. There are also other things to make EuroCity passengers happier: the most easy one would be to add trains also on the Simplon line. I know of people that regularly (pre-covid, at least) travel from Milan to Geneva via Zürich because when they want to book a direct Milan-Geneva train (or at least a Milan-Brig-Basel train with a change in Brig) all Simplon trains are full.


----------



## NCT

I do wonder if religious application of the Swiss taktfahrplan concept for a country like Italy (at least the core, highly urbanised parts) is actually appropriate and doesn't create unnecessary constraints.

The two corridors radiating out of Milan towards Venice and Bologna are dense enough that they ought to warrant semi-metro frequencies. Applying GB or Dutch philosophy you'd probably have a 4-train-per-hour (tph) all-principle-stations service between Milan and Venice, and a 4-tph express service Milan-Verona-Trieste. Towards Rome you'd probably have a set of point-to-point services with 2tph to Bologna (extending east towards the coast), 3tph to each of Florence and Rome and 2tph to Naples.

You are running enough trains to fill the whole hour and 00/30 becomes almost meaningless. Large cities like Milan act as a break point, journeys to/from Milan I would imagine outnumber those through it, and planning shouldn't go out of its way to placate the latter at the expense of a former. Also passengers are more willing to hang around in a large city when interchanging - you can get out and have a coffee on the square before getting your next train, unlike on a windswept rural station. If you have a modular timetable, and there is a clear 'first on the graph' hierarchy, then you should be able to move an entire timetable to accommodate the most optimal international paths.


----------



## Sunfuns

@Cocodrillo: are there any medium term plans to run the Zurich-Milan trains further south? Let's say to Bologna or Florence via the high speed line. Would be very convenient, but I guess the rolling stock is not appropriate and Trenitalia high speed trains can't go to Zurich either. A pity... 

Generally speaking I have a feeling international traffic between Switzerland and Germany/France is better arranged than with Italy. Munich was an exception for a long time, but soon not anymore.


----------



## Coccodrillo

Highly urbanised means a lot of traffic, and here is exactly where a symmetric taktfahrplan is more useful, as it optimizes timetable planning (note that a taktfahrplan can also not be symmetric). Note that "symmetric taktfahrplan" doesn't mean "a train every hour (or half an hour)", but "the same timetable is repeated everyhour in one direction, and symmetrically in the other". It is far easier to manage train conflicts (who has to run first on a flat junction, where overtakings have to ben, where trains have to cross each other on single track sections, ...) once and then repeat it every hour, rather than planning them for the whole day. On the 60 km Geneva-Lausanne line SBB is planning to have 4 tph no-stop (IC), 4 tph with two stops (IR), 4 tph with several stops (RE) and on the end sections 4 tph alls tops (S), plus 2 tph reserved for freight and work trains. All this on a double track line with a couple of short 3 and 4 track sections, except where the S trains run where there will be 3 tracks (one dedicated to S trains in both directions, two for all other trains).

Usually the timetable is built starting from the faster long distance trains of the full hour, then on those of the half hour (or viceversa, first he 30 then the 00), then the additional trains.

As example, the main slot from Zürich to Lugano-Milano is at minute .05 of every hour, then on peak hours there is another train at .33 (not .35 because of some conflicts). There are no hours with a train at .33 but not at .05 (except during the nights on weekends, because of conflicts due to maintenance).

The main slots from Zürich to Bern for no-stop trains are at .02 and .32, the additional slot used on peak hours is at .49. There is a plan to add a fourth no-stop slot, and run 4 tph all day (in addition to them there are at least 2 semi-fast trains, which will also be likely more frequent in the future).

Swiss cities are smaller but Swiss use trains much more than Italians. For example, on the old Milano-Bologna line (non-HSL) the service (not an exact taktfahrplan) is 1 tph fast train stopping in all bigger cities (100.000+ inhabitants) and 1 tph or 2 tph semi-fast stopping also in smaller cities (30.000+). It is still a good frequency compared to the rest of the world, but with Swiss train usage there would be 2-4 tph and 2 tph respectively.

@Sunfuns: yes, there already is a Zürich-Genova train, and after covid restrictions ends there will be trains to Bologna (via the old line) and Venice. Trains to Genova and Bologna skip/will skip Milano Centrale station and call at Milano Lambrate and Milano Rogoredo instead. This however will not mean a faster journey: because of traffic conflicts, they crawl around Milan at a snail's pace.

Traffic conflicts not easily manageable also mean that some ECs to Milano Centrale are even slower:
EC 317 leaves Bellinzona at 13.14 and arrives in Milano Centrale at 14.50
EC 151 leaves Bellinzona at 13.44 and arrives in Milano Centrale at 15.50 (and not 15.20)
This because the slot to enter Milano Centrale at 15.20 is used by a Locarno-Lugano-Milano Centrale train.


----------



## davide84

NCT said:


> I do wonder if religious application of the Swiss taktfahrplan concept for a country like Italy (at least the core, highly urbanised parts) is actually appropriate


From a geographical point of view, yes, why not? Population density would allow it, see posts above.

But there is a cultural problem inside the railway administration. The current state service operator, which is officially separate but still much bound to the infrastructure operator, still has the habit of launching individual services here and there at every timetable change, or add/remove stops to existing ones, or extending/limiting them. It is partly understandable since the physical network is expanding and new services can be launched every now and then, but there clearly is no nation-wide plan, for sure not one that goes further than 6 months in the future. This can be seen mostly in the long-haul segment.
In this condition of constant improvisation, a taktfahrplan ("orario cadenzato") is impractical to enforce to the minute. Officially they claim it's the way they build the timetable and it roughly looks so, but there are so many localized adjustments and when you actually plan a travel you need to proof every single solution, what is valid at 8:34 is not valid at 10:34 and probably not at 13:34.

In Switzerland this crazyness does not exist. If a train does Zurich - Bern, it does so every hour, without minute changes, extensions, limitations. It's Zurich - Bern, period. You don't have Zurich - Bern - Geneva at 14.50, Zurich - Basel not calling in Bern at 15.48 and a missing slot at 16.50 - that is how Italian railways would do it.


----------



## Sunfuns

Coccodrillo said:


> Swiss cities are smaller but Swiss use trains much more than Italians. For example, on the old Milano-Bologna line (non-HSL) the service (not an exact taktfahrplan) is 1 tph fast train stopping in all bigger cities (100.000+ inhabitants) and 1 tph or 2 tph semi-fast stopping also in smaller cities (30.000+). It is still a good frequency compared to the rest of the world, but with Swiss train usage there would be 2-4 tph and 2 tph respectively.


Right, but I think in this case it would be proper to count both Milano-Bologna lines together. Same as we do with Basel-Zurich via Rheinfelden and via Aarau.


----------



## Fatfield

TokyoImperialPalace said:


> Renfe currently used the TGV for international operations to France. It does not have any Velaros as far as I know.


I travelled on one from Girona to Barcelona in 2018.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renfe_Class_103


----------



## AAPMBerlin

Yes, they have Velaros:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renfe_Class_103


----------



## M-NL

The class 103 is 25 kV AC only, has no KVB/TVM430 and probably lacks all kinds of equipment required for operation in France. They're also already 15 years old and operating the German baureihe 406, on which these trains were based, in France wasn't a succes either, so retrofitting the class 103 is likely not a good idea. That pretty much rules out their operation in France. A new order for a series of Avril or Oaris (or something completely different altogether) would make more sense for this purpose.


----------



## Gusiluz

My question is:
In June 2013 did IGC admit that DB would operate trains in double set without meeting the 375m inner aisle?
Or is this illusory and they need 375 metre long trains as this is the distance between emergency exits?





__





Unified safety rules consultation - Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission


The Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission, assisted by the Safety Authority and the Joint Security Committee, supervise all matters concerning the Fixed Link.




www.channeltunneligc.co.uk


----------



## btrs

Indeed, I have read on some German forums (ICE-Treff) DB wants to get rid of the ICE-3M ASAP because they really are a kind of "Sondertyp" in the whole fleet. Apart from one single set (4651, the former NS one) they don't have the Redesign (interior overhaul), they still struggle from reliability issues because of the multi-system equipment (many failures under DC power, so in NL and Belgium) and tons of safety systems to cope with (similar to Thalys PBKA and the Eurostar Velaro's).






ICE 3 Redesign: Auch die 2. Bauserie? - ICE-Treff


Von und für Freunde des ICE, des schnellen Bahnverkehrs und der Eisenbahn überhaupt




www.ice-treff.de





Most suggest a withdrawal of ICE-3M units somewhere between 2028 and 2030: so DB will try to keep the sets as much alive as they can (similar as they do with the current IC1 coaches until the Talgo's and the final batch of ICE-4's are there), but they won't put any extra effort to "upgrade" the sets.

Renfe's version is a little less complicated since it's only a single-voltage version (25kV instead of 15kV of the Class 403) but still needs to be fitted with the additional systems and adjusted for procedures in France. Remembering the authorization process of the ICE-3M in France: the French insisted on a huge big red emergency plunger in the cabin alongside the already present (but smaller) emergency brake/alarm switch.😁 Or the "prison cell" in the service compartment in case the Gendarmerie/Police had to detain someone. And the list was just endless..
Guessing Renfe is not looking forward for the same shenanigans for 15 year old sets. Although they did adapt their (by then) 25-year old S-100 sets for operation in France, but I guess the French gave a little more leeway since those were cousins of the TGV Atlantique, and were in a degree French "enough" 😛


----------



## geogregor

Why we need a new golden age of European rail | Timothy Garton Ash


Short-haul flights around the continent are big carbon emitters – trains are the answer, says Guardian columnist Timothy Garton Ash




www.theguardian.com


----------



## M-NL

DB could consider basically turning the ICE3M class 406 into the ICE3 class 403 by removing the DC related equipment and removing all the safety systems not needed for operations in Germany. They're not that old, so as long as you're running 15 kV AC and PZB/LZB only (and also keep ERTMS) they seem to work just fine.

France has all kinds of weird differences compared to the rest of Europe. Did you for instance notice that the French driver DMI is split into two separate portrait screens, instead of one landscape screen double the size? That's because the French demand redundancy on that specific screen. Simple transferring the image to another screen to the screens on the left or right is (was?) not allowed in France, the speedo and ATC info must be in the drivers direct view.


----------



## TokyoImperialPalace

M-NL said:


> France has all kinds of weird differences compared to the rest of Europe. Did you for instance notice that the French driver DMI is split into two separate portrait screens, instead of one landscape screen double the size? That's because the French demand redundancy on that specific screen. Simple transferring the image to another screen to the screens on the left or right is (was?) not allowed in France, the speedo and ATC info must be in the drivers direct view.


I wouldn't say that they were weird per se. They just have a higher standard of safety and focus on certain aspects more.


----------



## TER200

btrs said:


> Guessing Renfe is not looking forward for the same shenanigans for 15 year old sets. Although they did adapt their (by then) 25-year old S-100 sets for operation in France, but I guess the French gave a little more leeway since those were cousins of the TGV Atlantique, and were in a degree French "enough" 😛


At least the S-100 were already prepared to run under DC power, although 3 kV (which was necessary in Spain at first), so fitting for 1,5 kV was maybe easier. The S-103 (Velaro E) would maybe need more changes for that.


----------



## M-NL

TokyoImperialPalace said:


> I wouldn't say that they were weird per se. They just have a higher standard of safety and focus on certain aspects more.


I think the story was that the French required a bigger emergency stop plunger than the ICE3 403 was originally designed with, so the ICE3M 406 has two, the original small one, just like the 403, and an extra big one to comply with the French rules.

In Germany the driver desk has three identical display, usually configured as tech info screen on the left, speedo/ATC in the middle and EBULA (electronic timetable and speed restriction) display on the right. If one of those displays fails, you can switch around the displays on the remaining two screens, which shouldn't be a problem in France, because the EBULA is not even used there. 
TGVs did not have displays like that. It only used to have a small monochrome diagnostic display, that could not double as a redundancy for the speedo and ATC, hence they put in the split display in the newer models and models with ERTMS. That split display made it into the French rules, multiple displays did not, despite the potential to work just as well.

This is not a French thing by the way. All countries have their own specific rules when it comes to railroading. Hence in the EU it is very hard to build a single train model that could run in more than five or so countries, just because of contradictory rules and different technical requirements. And because most trains stay within their own countries there is little incentive to change this quickly. ERTMS was an attempt at this, but instead of one single European ATC system, we are still heading to multiple country specific variants of ERTMS.


----------



## M-NL

TER200 said:


> At least the S-100 were already prepared to run under DC power, although 3 kV (which was necessary in Spain at first), so fitting for 1,5 kV was maybe easier. The S-103 (Velaro E) would maybe need more changes for that.


The S-100 is likely technically very identical to a TGV capable of running in Belgium. Those TGVs are capable of running on both 1500 VDC and 3000 VDC.
The Velaro E is basically an improved ICE3 403 and AC power only. Retrofitting DC capability is probably just as much work as building an entirely new train.


----------



## btrs

TER200 said:


> At least the S-100 were already prepared to run under DC power, although 3 kV (which was necessary in Spain at first), so fitting for 1,5 kV was maybe easier. The S-103 (Velaro E) would maybe need more changes for that.


Aha, but I was under the assumption that by this time the Velaro's could remain AC-only if the line between the CNM and the LGV Perpignan-Spain was finished. Or riding on the other coast, when the LGV Bordeaux-Toulouse is finished. But this also bars these sets from serving the city main stations (Bordeaux, everything between Bordeaux and Tours, on the other side Perpignan, Sète, Nîmes..).
So indeed a sub-batch of the new Avril sets which will have DC capability will probably be a more realistic solution.


----------



## TER200

btrs said:


> Aha, but I was under the assumption that by this time the Velaro's could remain AC-only if the line between the CNM and the LGV Perpignan-Spain was finished.


It's not even planned (only the first phase between Montpellier and Béziers may be built before 2030).


btrs said:


> Or riding on the other coast, when the LGV Bordeaux-Toulouse is finished.


Even if the branch to Dax is built (which doesn't look certain), I don't thin the international line is seriously planned. So the border crossing in Hendaye will remain under 1500V.
Also, no bypass is planned in Bordeaux. And at the other hand, you're stuck in Massy (unless they decide to re-electrify Montparnasse, but this won't help you go further).


However, if you just want to operate a Paris-London service, DC power supply is not needed. Just make sure that the train can be maintained somewhere in norther France or England and you're done.


----------



## geogregor

A little gem:


----------



## 437.001

btrs said:


> Guessing Renfe is not looking forward for the same shenanigans for 15 year old sets. Although they did adapt their (by then) 25-year old S-100 sets for operation in France, but I guess the French gave a little more leeway since those were cousins of the TGV Atlantique, and were in a degree French "enough" 😛


Am I wrong if I suppose that France has to be a bit "picky" about what can or cannot come into its rail network?

I mean, Spain has a railway border with only two countries (France and Portugal, both not really very much used, although in the past it also had direct services to both Switzerland and Italy). With only the France services being high-speed nowadays (although the Trenhotel Talgos could reach 200/220 km/h in certain sectors, at least within Spain).

Britain has a rail border with only one (France, with services reaching to Belgium and the Netherlands).

Italy has a rail border with four countries (France, Switzerland, Austria, Slovenia), but I'm not sure whether services currently enter Slovenia, or whether they reach Germany or not (they used to, I believe).

But France has a rail border with seven countries, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium, and Britain (with services reaching to the Netherlands, and I think also Austria), each with its own particularities, and, leaving aside the cross-border regional services, all of them but the Austria and some of the Italy ones being fully high-speed (mostly with TGV sets, that's true, Velaros only operate on some of the Eurostar and the Germany services, plus AVE "TGV-ish" sets on some of the Spain services, and then Thalys and TGV-Lyria are joint ventures featuring Sncf).
So I guess that an incident of a foreign train within France in the wrong place at the wrong time, has the power to screw up operation in half the country or more, and with less possibilities of a quick repair than an Sncf train.
And France being a relatively more centralized network than Germany, I suppose that an incident at the wrong time in the wrong place (=peak hour anywhere in the Paris region or in Lyon Part-Dieu) has a much higher disruptive power than a similar incident in Germany.
And I suppose that the disruption can "overflow" into other countries as well, in certain cases.
That's just my guess, though.

That said, Germany has a rail border with even more countries (Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, and the Czech Republic, with services reaching even furher), but as far as I'm aware, only the services to Belgium, Netherlands, France, Switzerland, and Austria can be considered high-speed (correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure about the Berlin-Prague-Vienna service, and I'm not certain whether the Germany-Sweden services include transshipment of the train itself, I think they do, or at least they used to, from I believe Puttgarden and/or Sassnitz).


----------



## AlbertJP

The Railjet is considered a high-speed train in the sense that ICE fares apply to it within Germany (and the services to Frankfurt do use the Stuttgart-Mannheim high speed line.)
Germany-Denmark/Sweden does not include transshipment anymore and doesn't run as a high-speed train at the moment.

France might be picky, but sometimes rules don't appear to make sense in other countries and are there because they've always been that way (and a general reluctance to adapt to private/foreign operators unless there's political weight behind a new service.) In Belgium some of this can be seen as well; the Netherlands and Belgium had issues when introducing loco-hauled trains over their joint high speed line. In Belgium, all loco-hauled stock was until ~10 years ago legally required to have physical door handles, while the Netherlands explicitly forbade these on the high-speed line. In the end the Netherlands won here, the coaching stock used for the Amsterdam-Brussels IC has buttons to open the doors instead of handles.

So I don't completely rule out that you might run into conflicting rules if you want to run international high-speed services that don't exist yet, and that you may need to convince politicians in the involved countries that they need to work out a joint solution if they want this service at all.


----------



## 437.001

M-NL said:


> I think the story was that the French required a bigger emergency stop plunger than the ICE3 403 was originally designed with, so the ICE3M 406 has two, the original small one, just like the 403, and an extra big one to comply with the French rules.


Is this emergency plunger like the Spanish "mushroom" ("seta" in Spanish)?


----------



## 437.001

M-NL said:


> The S-100 is likely *technically very identical to a TGV capable of running in Belgium*. Those TGVs are capable of running on both 1500 VDC and 3000 VDC.


Minus the Belgian signalling and Sncb/Infrabel homologation (and the Sncf homologation north of Lyon).
Otherwise there probably would already exist a Brussels-Barcelona direct service.

And minus the fact that Thalys or TGV's designed to run in Belgium came like that of origin, while the AVE S-100's, to be able to run in France, had to be retrofitted after many years of service (and would need to be retrofitted again to be able to enter Belgium, which I'm not sure if it makes much sense for trains that are nearly 30 years old).



M-NL said:


> The Velaro E is basically an improved ICE3 403 and AC power only. Retrofitting DC capability is *probably just as much work as building an entirely new train*.


Yes.


----------



## Baron Hirsch

437.001 said:


> Italy has a rail border with four countries (France, Switzerland, Austria, Slovenia), but I'm not sure whether services currently enter Slovenia, or whether they reach Germany or not (they used to, I believe).
> ...
> That said, Germany has a rail border with even more countries (Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, and the Czech Republic, with services reaching even furher), but as far as I'm aware, only the services to Belgium, Netherlands, France, Switzerland, and Austria can be considered high-speed (correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure about the Berlin-Prague-Vienna service, and I'm not certain whether the Germany-Sweden services include transshipment of the train itself, I think they do, or at least they used to, from I believe Puttgarden and/or Sassnitz).


Direct trains from Italy to Slovenia resumed a few years ago, initially as local EMUs, now also with a EuroCity Vienna-Ljubljana-Trieste. There are several EuroCity trains daily between Munich and several Italian cities and one daily ETR 610 Frankfurt-Milan. As far as interoperability issues are concerned, to my knowledge, NightJet, which runs both services from Vienna and from Munich to Italian destinations, will have to introduce new rolling stock in order to comply with new Italian regulations for night trains (I no longer recall what the issue was). 
As for Germany's list of international services, the privately-run night train Stockholm-Berlin now runs via Denmark using bridges rather than ferries, but is a single train. As for high-speed, you are quite correct, there is no actual border-crossing high-speed rail section, and only those to Belgium and France run predominantly on high-speed lines before and after. As for high-speed train sets, there have been several issues. Both Polish and Czech state operators had wanted to replace their Eurocity sets with Pendolinos, but were told these would not be operable on the German grid, I forget the reason though, it's been a while.


----------



## M-NL

437.001 said:


> Is this emergency plunger like the Spanish "mushroom" ("seta" in Spanish)?


I meant the red button on the left, next to the handset (this is a ICE3 407 cab). Yes, they often refer to it as a mushroom button.








ICE 407 VELARO D FÜHRERSTAND by 1304stephan from Wikimedia Commons

You can also see that this cab has three identical displays and a split one in the middle required to run in France.


----------



## 33Hz

Gusiluz said:


> My question is:
> In June 2013 did IGC admit that DB would operate trains in double set without meeting the 375m inner aisle?
> Or is this illusory and they need 375 metre long trains as this is the distance between emergency exits?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unified safety rules consultation - Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission
> 
> 
> The Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission, assisted by the Safety Authority and the Joint Security Committee, supervise all matters concerning the Fixed Link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.channeltunneligc.co.uk


The 375 metre thing is a myth that refuses to die - the NoL Eurostar sets were not compliant with it anyway, being 325 metres.

By the time DB got approval, all sorts of rules had been relaxed.


----------



## M-NL

Is the rule that a train transiting the tunnel must have at least two people qualified to drive the train on board still in effect? This meant the conductor/guard was qualified as an emergency driver to comply with this rule. And in case you would have two coupled sets (which DB intended to use), that emergency driver must be in the second set, because the rule was meant for reversing the train in case something happened and the original driver was incapable or incapacitated.


----------



## Gusiluz

^^^^
"*Requirement for second train driver on passenger trains*

On 3 June 2014, the IGC wrote to Eurotunnel and Eurostar to inform them that it had decided to modify the current rule relating to the driving competence of the second train manager (TM2) on board high speed passenger trains.

The existing rule requiring that a second train crew member is competent to drive the train in the event of an emergency has been removed, and new rules related to the procedure for swiftly reversing passenger trains created. Eurotunnel has been invited to make the consequential amendments to the relevant documents."




__





IGC decisions - Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission


The Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission, assisted by the Safety Authority and the Joint Security Committee, supervise all matters concerning the Fixed Link.




www.channeltunneligc.co.uk





@*33Hz*

"a myth "








21 July 2009 consultation letter on Channel Tunnel-specific safety rules 
Source already cited in my original post.

Eurostar Regional (NOL, 3301/3314) complied with the 1995 standards.


----------



## 33Hz

Gusiluz said:


> Eurostar Regional (NOL, 3301/3314) complied with the 1995 standards.


So if 325m was good enough in 1995 but by 2009 the IGC was "insisting" trains were at least 375m long, when did that change happen and was it formalised?


----------



## 437.001

Relief of *Paris-Madrid* on the classic line (that is, via Orleans, Blois, Altsasu/Alsasua and Avila).
The HSL isn't/won't be much different, although it runs/will run via Voves, Vendôme, Bergara and Segovia instead, but that's not much of a difference.
As you can see, the relief of the line on the Spanish side is much more complicated than on the French side.

Image posted by @pozinhossc.


----------



## Slartibartfas

^^ What is the status of this project? The Spanish parts still missing are almost entirely under construction, aren't they? But on the French side, is there anything happening at all south of Bourdeaux?


----------



## Sunfuns

It seems to me Paris-Madrid full distance is the province of night trains. Should be possible comfortably in 10-12 h, just the right timeframe for those kinds of trains.


----------



## 437.001

Slartibartfas said:


> What is the status of this project? The Spanish parts still missing are almost entirely under construction, aren't they?


Not exactly.

-*Madrid Chamartin-Venta de Baños (next to Palencia)* has been open for a few years now.

-*Venta de Baños-Burgos (and a chord to Palencia city for Leon-Palencia-Burgos trains)* is in tests, but they're taking very long. They're doing test runs, notably with the new class 106.

-*Burgos-Vitoria* is in planning stage, only paper by now. What we know is that Miranda de Ebro station will be the current station, and the main HSL will loop it from the outside. Also a few nimbys here and there have recently appeared out of thin air.

-The *Basque Y* from Vitoria to/and Bilbao and/to Astigarraga (next to San Sebastian) is under construction, but the Spanish government gave priority to the Galicia HSL (for a number of reasons, including Northern Portugal, and some other reasons), and also the Mediterranean Corridor (Barcelona-Valencia-Villena-Alicante-Murcia-Almeria) and the (Madrid-)Toledo-Badajoz-Lisbon HSL (which is in service between Madrid and Toledo, and under advanced construction between Plasencia and Badajoz, and under less advanced construction between Navalmoral and Plasencia, and also between Elvas and Évora in Portugal - remember that Madrid and Lisbon are well within HSR ideal territory, but they're Western Europe's two worst-connected capitals, in terms of railway).
So the Basque Y will have to wait a little longer, but it's advancing slowly, inch by inch.
Part of the Spanish delay also probably has to do with the French decision to not build their part of the HSL to the Basque Country.

-*Astigarraga-Irun/Hendaye* is planned, but won't be executed until the French government stands up to the nimbys and decides to build the missing bit of the HSL between Dax and Hendaye.
Instead, a 3rd rail in standard gauge, for both freight and passengers, is being installed on the classic line between Irun and Astigarraga (and which is taking forever to finish, partly because they have to adapt the loading gauge of three tunnels, while keeping the commuter rail, freight, mid-distance/regional, and long-distance service going, but partly also because of delays of some other kind).
It remains to be seen how a TGV Duplex can be homologated to run on the Spanish classic network, but I guess a TGV that is capable of running in Belgium or Italy could do the trick, if they tweaked a thing or two.
Or perhaps it's Spain's way of saying _"we let you TGV Paris Gare de Lyon to Barcelona Sants and OUIGO Barcelona Sants to Madrid Atocha, you let us AVE to Paris Montparnasse"_, I (really) don't know.



Slartibartfas said:


> But on the French side, is there anything happening at all south of Bordeaux?


South of Bordeaux there's nothing going on, although there are plans to build a HSL *between* *Bordeaux and Dax* (only paper, for now). The French government gives priority to Bordeaux-Toulouse.
*Between Dax and Hendaye/Irun* there's nothing at all, since the French government does not want to build a HSL there, after nimby pressure became a bit more transversal than expected.





Sunfuns said:


> It seems to me Paris-Madrid full distance is the province of night trains. Should be possible comfortably in 10-12 h, just the right timeframe for those kinds of trains.


It is a distance that's best suited for night trains, yes.
And I wish they hadn't eliminated the Paris-Madrid Talgo Trenhotel. That was a pity.

However, overlapping high-speed services such as AVE Madrid Chamartin-Bordeaux St Jean, or TGV Paris Montparnasse-Bilbao Abando would do rather well, methinks.
Plus one or two Paris Montparnasse-Vitoria-Valladolid-Madrid Chamartin services per day, once and if the HSL is completed.


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> I guess a TGV that is capable of running in Belgium could do the trick


Forget those, by 5 years they will probably have reached their end of life.



437.001 said:


> It remains to be seen how a TGV Duplex can be homologated to run on the Spanish classic network


Why not ? It would probably have to be the next generation, since the current sets are not meant to be compatible with 3kV (but a retrofit is maybe possible). Loading gauge should not be an issue.



437.001 said:


> South of Bordeaux there's nothing going on, although there are plans to build a HSL between Bordeaux and Dax (only paper, for now). The French government gives priority to Bordeaux-Toulouse.


The whole project (3 branches Bordeaux, Toulouse and Dax) was designed as a whole. However there's more will from Toulouse and more opposition on the other side (and also less traffic potential so maybe modernizing the existing line could do the job). Now there's the mayor of Bordeaux who refuses to pay his part (typical anti-everything green).


----------



## 437.001

TER200 said:


> Forget those, by 5 years they will probably have reached their end of life.
> 
> Why not ? It would probably have to be the next generation, since the current sets are not meant to be compatible with 3kV (but a retrofit is maybe possible). Loading gauge should not be an issue.


I don't necessarily mean the current TGV's.

I'm just indicating that a TGV that is capable of running into Belgium and Italy would have it easier to run into the Spanish Basque Country along the classic line on the 3-rail track section between Irun and Astigarraga, and even easier if equipped with Spanish signalling (like the Spanish TGV Duplex that run on the OUIGO services, but with 3kV).

That said, if a TGV service would run on Paris to Bilbao I don't necessarily think the air conditioning should be compulsory on paper, as the Basque Country usually doesn't get much warmer than Normandy or Brittany, but then that's something to question Adif (again the _"different country, different rules"_ issue, perhaps there should be a Standard European Rail Infra Board, or something that made things easier for all to interoperate cross-border services. However, the climate difference is an element that's more and more relevant, and Spain is by far the hottest EU country... just not usually northern Spain, which has more British-like weather).



TER200 said:


> The whole project (3 branches Bordeaux, Toulouse and Dax) was designed as a whole. However there's more will from Toulouse and more opposition on the other side (and also less traffic potential so maybe modernizing the existing line could do the job). Now there's the mayor of Bordeaux who refuses to pay his part (typical anti-everything green).




How they can be "green" and anti-public transport is something that I really cannot understand.


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> How they can be "green" and anti-public transport is something that I really cannot understand.


He isn't anti public transport, just anti any new infrastructure. He also decided to stop building new tram extensions in Bordeaux because it's too expensive and too crowded. Those people basically consider we should just do with what we have (the need for more rail capacity for modal share is a completely foreign concept for them).



437.001 said:


> I'm just indicating that a TGV that is capable of running into Belgium and Italy would have it easier to run into the Spanish Basque Country along the classic line on the 3-rail track section between Irun and Astigarraga, and even easier if equipped with Spanish signalling (like the Spanish TGV Duplex that run on the OUIGO services, but with 3kV).


The signalling and approval to run in another country is likely a bigger subject than the voltage (especially when it's just adding 3 kV on a train that already manages 1,5 kV). Modern trains are mostly designed tri- or quadi-voltage from the beginning, then useless systems are removed (ex : Euroduplex sets, including those running in Spain, all have a transformer fit for 15 kV 16 Hz 2/3).
I think it's very likely that the future TGV M will have 3 kV compatibility as an option, for Belgium (and maybe Italy). However I have no idea what the plans are for Spain, the subject about the basque connection seems a bit ignored in France in general.


----------



## M-NL

TER200 said:


> I think it's very likely that the future TGV M will have 3 kV compatibility as an option, for Belgium (and maybe Italy).


TGV M needs to be multisystem for France anyway. It would be very stupid of Alstom not to design the trains for all 4 European systems from the start. Contrary to just 20 years ago current power electronics can handle that with ease. Just enable the systems you need (and add the required safety systems) and you're set. SNCF knows it will be a matter of time before the TGV M will start running abroad, so why not make it as easy as possible for yourself from the start? In fact, I would be very interested to know how much differences there are between a TGV M (Avelia Horizon) and an Acela (Avelia Liberty) power car from an electric point of view, since the Liberty needs to run on three different AC systems.


----------



## flierfy

A BBC series from 2019 about the Eurotunnel was recently uploaded on Youtube. The episodes give an inside to the structure as well as the operation of the tunnel. I learnt something new while watching it. For anyone who is interested and hasn't seen it yet, here are the links:

Episode 1
Episode 2
Episode 3


----------



## 437.001

TGV or AVE Barcelona-Toulouse to be discontinued.

*La ligne TGV Toulouse-Barcelone définitivement arrêtée - ladepeche.fr*

For some reason, this service didn't work as well as expected.
Although initially planned to run as far as Bordeaux, it was limited to Barcelona-Toulouse right from the start.
First it was operated by AVE's class 100, and it run non-stop from Perpignan to Carcassonne.
Then it was operated by TGV's Duplex, and it had a reversal at Narbonne, becoming a high-season-only train.

Both Barcelona and Toulouse complained about the few number of trains per day (one per day and direction).
They believed that the timetable did not favour any of the two cities, who would have liked at the very least three trains per day and direction.

But, alas, no.


----------



## Theijs

437.001 said:


> -The *Basque Y* from Vitoria to/and Bilbao and/to Astigarraga (next to San Sebastian) is under construction…
> 
> So the Basque Y will have to wait a little longer, but it's advancing slowly, inch by inch.
> Part of the Spanish delay also probably has to do with the French decision to not build their part of the HSL to the Basque Country.
> 
> *Astigarraga-Irun/Hendaye* is planned…
> 
> However, overlapping high-speed services such as AVE Madrid Chamartin-Bordeaux St Jean, or TGV Paris Montparnasse-Bilbao Abando would do rather well, methinks.
> Plus one or two Paris Montparnasse-Vitoria-Valladolid-Madrid Chamartin services per day, once and if the HSL is completed.


News coming in about the Basque link: Basque links funded under Atlantic Corridor programme


----------



## dyonisien

437.001 said:


> TGV or AVE Barcelona-Toulouse to be discontinued.
> 
> *La ligne TGV Toulouse-Barcelone définitivement arrêtée - ladepeche.fr*
> 
> For some reason, this service didn't work as well as expected.


What else could THEY expect ?
Toulouse and Montpelier are roughly 3h away from the big city of Barcelona. Both are important dynamic cities. None had an early connection to Barcelona with an arrival before 9h30 ! The departure from Toulouse at 8h would have allowed at least a good connection from Bordeaux. But NO. Neither could you frome Barcelona (or Girona) hope to attend some meeting in the morning in M. or T.
Or you could have imagined alternate services from Montpelier (coming from Marseille, Lyon or Paris) or from Toulouse (Bordeaux) with a good connection from the other one either in Perpignan or in Narbonne. But NO.
The opposite direction shows the same pity.
You cannot attract passengers on a line restarting from nought if you do not offer them the new possibilities the line was built for. THEY just showed how to nip the new line in the bud.


----------



## btrs

TER200 said:


> Why not ? It would probably have to be the next generation, since the current sets are not meant to be compatible with 3kV (but a retrofit is maybe possible). Loading gauge should not be an issue.


EuroDuplex-sets suited for 3kV already exist for a number of years: hop over the Mediterranean to Morocco. Al-Boraq trains still operate over classic lines because only the first section of the HSL is finished for now. The other part runs on conventional lines and those are still powered at 3kV, even though Morocco is also considering converting to 25kV sometime in the future. Most of the new OHLE lines are equipped with poles and insulators that can be converted quickly to 25kV.


----------



## TER200

btrs said:


> EuroDuplex-sets suited for 3kV already exist for a number of years: hop over the Mediterranean to Morocco.


Yes I know, but I guess you don't suggest to buy them back from ONCF.
So existing trains in France would need a retrofit.


----------



## Aim9X

Nice review of the new Thalys interior:


----------



## Dorfmeister

M-NL said:


> Is the rule that a train transiting the tunnel must have at least two people qualified to drive the train on board still in effect?


Depends if you're based in UK (one driver is enough) or on the Continent (Belgium/France) where two drivers on the train were mandatory up to recently.


----------



## K_

Gusiluz said:


> The existing rule requiring that a second train crew member is competent to drive the train in the event of an emergency has been removed, and new rules related to the procedure for swiftly reversing passenger trains created.


The new transalpine tunnels in Switzerland have the requirement that a train be able to reverse quickly as well. But here this was done by making it possible for a driver to reverse a train without leaving his driving cabin, driving the train backwards. 



Dorfmeister said:


> Depends if you're based in UK (one driver is enough) or on the Continent (Belgium/France) where two drivers on the train were mandatory up to recently.


I think two drivers on a train have not been mandatory in Belgium for a long time...


----------



## Dorfmeister

K_ said:


> I think two drivers on a train have not been mandatory in Belgium for a long time...


Being a train driver working for Eurostar, I do think that "I know what I'm talking about" 

Two train drivers have been mandatory (up to very recently) for all Eurostar trains *manned by continental crews* (so belgian and french based). Rules are different for the trains manned by UK based crews.


----------



## M-NL

@K_ and @Dorfmeister: It seems like you are approaching the statement from different angles.


K_ said:


> I think two drivers on a train have not been mandatory in Belgium for a long time...


This is probably the general rule for pretty much any train in Belgium, except for...


Dorfmeister said:


> Two train drivers have been mandatory (up to very recently) for all Eurostar trains *manned by continental crews* (so belgian and french based). Rules are different for the trains manned by UK based crews.


trains operated by Eurostar, which, up until very recently, did need two drivers, except when manned by a UK based crew.


----------



## Dorfmeister

M-NL said:


> trains operated by Eurostar, which, up until very recently, did need two drivers, except when manned by a UK based crew.


The original quote whose I was responding too was indeed talking about Eurostar trains (which is "kinda" the topic right here): if someone doesn't take the time needed to read properly and then reacts wrongly, I can't help him 

For SNCB/NMBS trains: one man crew have been the rule for - at least - the last 40-45 years with the dead man's switch installed on all train sets. Our eldest colleague working in Brussels for Eurostar has been a train driver for the last 41 years (SNCB/Thalys/Eurostar) and he has never know any trains manned by two drivers/assistant (except on Eurostar, of course).


----------



## M-NL

This also goes hand in hand with other rules changes around the continent.
When Germany still used Indusi they also had to have two drivers when driving over 140 km/h. With the introduction of PZB (improved Indusi) and LZB that rule was dropped.
In the Netherlands for instance, thirty years ago it was perfectly acceptable to disable the ATB system (Dutch ATC) when it had a malfunction and continue to use that train in normal operation, not in the least because there were still multiple lines lacking any ATC. Nowadays all lines with track speeds over 40 km/h must have ATC and a train with malfunctioning ATC has to be taken out of service at the first possible opportunity (which is usually at the next bigger station, where all passengers can be disembarked). I wouldn't be surprised that the more recently trained drivers probably feel very uncomfortable driving a train at speed without ATC, despite that being normal just a decade ago.


----------



## Dorfmeister

M-NL said:


> This also goes hand in hand with other rules changes around the continent.
> When Germany still used Indusi they also had to have two drivers when driving over 140 km/h. With the introduction of PZB (improved Indusi) and LZB that rule was dropped.
> In the Netherlands for instance, thirty years ago it was perfectly acceptable to disable the ATB system (Dutch ATC) when it had a malfunction and continue to use that train in normal operation, not in the least because there were still multiple lines lacking any ATC. Nowadays all lines with track speeds over 40 km/h must have ATC and a train with malfunctioning ATC has to be taken out of service at the first possible opportunity (which is usually at the next bigger station, where all passengers can be disembarked). I wouldn't be surprised that the more recently trained drivers probably feel very uncomfortable driving a train at speed without ATC, despite that being normal just a decade ago.


When I started on the belgian railways about 15 years ago we were driving alone at 160 Km/h without any specific ATC (neither TBL nor Gong-Fluit were mandatory): Pecrot and especially Buizingen disasters have been massive wake up calls for the cruel lack of safety systems on the network (despite funds allocated for it). Even if things are definitely better now than 10 years ago with the TBL1++, and will be better with the ETCS in a few years time: belgian railways network is still the only one I know where you can ride 140 Km/h on a 70 Km/h speed restriction without being "busted" by a safety system...


----------



## M-NL

Dorfmeister said:


> belgian railways network is still the only one I know where you can ride 140 Km/h on a 70 Km/h speed restriction without being "busted" by a safety system...


That could also be possible in the UK with AWS without TPWS. Maybe somebody can shed a light if such speed restrictions are fitted protected with TPWS? And all of them or just some? And it TPWS mandatory onboard equipment?


----------



## M-NL

Interesting observation regarding the Thalys/Eurostar merger:
In 2019 Thalys carried 11 million passengers with a fleet of 26 200m trains and Eurostar 7.5 million passengers with a fleet of 28 375m trains.
Two Thalys sets combined have roughly the same capacity as one Eurostar set, so in essence the Eurostar fleet has twice the passenger capacity of the Thalys fleet and Eurostar operates more services per day on slightly longer routes, yet Eurostar carries a lot less passengers. 
Apart from the length requirement in the past is there an additional explanation for this seeming discrepancy? Does Thalys use their fleet more efficient or does Eurostar use theirs inefficient?


----------



## TokyoImperialPalace

M-NL said:


> Interesting observation regarding the Thalys/Eurostar merger:
> In 2019 Thalys carried 11 million passengers with a fleet of 26 200m trains and Eurostar 7.5 million passengers with a fleet of 28 375m trains.
> Two Thalys sets combined have roughly the same capacity as one Eurostar set, so in essence the Eurostar fleet has twice the passenger capacity of the Thalys fleet and Eurostar operates more services per day on slightly longer routes, yet Eurostar carries a lot less passengers.
> Apart from the length requirement in the past is there an additional explanation for this seeming discrepancy? Does Thalys use their fleet more efficient or does Eurostar use theirs inefficient?


Eurostar has a lot of limitations thanks to the UK border control (which I think is obvious for you as well). 

Google tells me that Thalys makes _over _50 return trips per day, whereas Eurostar makes _around_ 60 trips per day.


----------



## Stuu

M-NL said:


> Interesting observation regarding the Thalys/Eurostar merger:
> In 2019 Thalys carried 11 million passengers with a fleet of 26 200m trains and Eurostar 7.5 million passengers with a fleet of 28 375m trains.
> Two Thalys sets combined have roughly the same capacity as one Eurostar set, so in essence the Eurostar fleet has twice the passenger capacity of the Thalys fleet and Eurostar operates more services per day on slightly longer routes, yet Eurostar carries a lot less passengers.
> Apart from the length requirement in the past is there an additional explanation for this seeming discrepancy? Does Thalys use their fleet more efficient or does Eurostar use theirs inefficient?


There's no intermediate passengers on Eurostar, so each seat can only be used once per journey. An Amsterdam to Paris journey can carry someone from Amsterdam-Rotterdam, someone else to Antwerp, someone else to Brussels, and someone else to Paris, in the same seat on a single train


----------



## ABWera

Summary of 2020 in figures - Rail transport severely impacted by COVID-19 in 2020


----------



## 437.001

*SPAIN/PORTUGAL

Madrid-Porto*

This is a new potential international route which is about to become possible right from next month (to all the interested, I suppose, starting with Renfe and CP I guess?).
That can happen if they buy mixed-gauge (Iberian/standard) and dual voltage (3kV DC/25kV AC) rolling stock that is compatible in both Spain and Portugal.

The service would have to change gauge at Ourense, then follow the classic line to Guillarei, then head south across the Minho via Viana do Castelo, Barcelos and Nine towards Porto.

The travel time doesn't look all that uninteresting, as Madrid-Ourense will be:
-2h15 on AVE (vmax 300km/h).
-2h38 on Alvia (vmax 250km/h) calling only at Zamora.
-3h10 on Alvia (vmax 300km/h) calling at all stations.

It is to be noted that certain smaller stations located in Spain but not far from (or right next to) the Portuguese border could give a good service to a region in northern Portugal which is rail-less (namely Sanabria station for Bragança, A Gudiña station for Chaves, and Salvaterra station for Monçâo).

So there's two types of service that seem to have some kind of potential:

1) a faster one, calling only at a few stations (probably only Zamora, Ourense, Valença, and Viana do Castelo), and thought for a Madrid-Porto passenger.

2) a slower one, calling at all the main stations along the route, thought for passengers of intermediate stations, particularly those which are close to the Portuguese border.

Knowing that Ourense-Valença-Porto isn't really that long a trip, could it be worthwhile?


----------



## Sunfuns

Interesting idea... What would a likely travel time for a faster service between Ourense and Porto be?

Maybe better to make a good connection in Ourense with a Madrid bound AVE? That will allow a faster connection from all the smaller towns beyond Ourense with Madrid and also maybe logistically easier and less prone to delays.


----------



## 437.001

Sunfuns said:


> Interesting idea... What would a likely travel time for a faster service between Ourense and Porto be?


Somewhere around 2h40/3h, more or less, calling only at Valença, Viana do Castelo, and Nine.
Less if less stops along the way, of course.



Sunfuns said:


> Maybe better to make a good connection in Ourense with a Madrid bound AVE? That will allow a faster connection from all the smaller towns beyond Ourense with Madrid and also maybe logistically easier and less prone to delays.


Could be, but I also feel that Madrid-Ourense point-to-point makes sense.
Those are two of the most important cities in the Iberian Peninsula, and two of the 15 most visited cities in Europe.

And it's really been a long time since there's no direct train between each other.

Spain-Portugal railway routes have always been crap, and from next month onward there will be a good opportunity to start improving that.


----------



## Stuu

I had a look at the existing times, there appears to be one train a day between Ourense and Vigo. It's not even all that remote and empty, especially at the Vigo end. Spanish train frequencies do surprise me, although France isn't much better

So is the train service poor because no one wants to use it, or does no one use the train because the service is so bad? This applies to the international journey too. If there are trains available to run the service then it makes sense to give it a try, but it needs to offer something good to beat 1hr flight times


----------



## 437.001

Stuu said:


> I had a look at the existing times, there appears to be one train a day between Ourense and Vigo. It's not even all that remote and empty, especially at the Vigo end. Spanish train frequencies do surprise me, although France isn't much better


Did you mean between Ourense and Vigo, or between Porto and Vigo?

If the former, now most long-distance trains have been moved to the HSL, and I think there's (or should be, I'm not very aware) some kind of works going on between Ourense and Guillarei. So the remaining service (regional) is now poor.

If the latter, the pandemic has had an effect on cross-border transit, like everywhere else I suppose.

That said, Renfe seems to act only when demand really pushes for it, and sometimes not even then.
The problem is that I'm not certain that Renfe has ever completely understood the concept of supressed demand.
If there's a line that's good, but for whatever reason the service is poor and infrequent, people will turn away from the train, even if the line is in good state.

Two examples:

1) it is taking forever to get Renfe to introduce more frequent and commuter-fared services between Alicante and Villena, even when there's a city of 90,000 in the middle (Elda-Petrer - technically two different towns, but if not told you wouldn't notice), and another of around 50,000 (San Vicente del Raspeig). The service is now not as poor as a few years ago, but it still suffers from several troubles, not the least Renfe's apparent reluctance to offer a better service, for whatever reason.

2) there was never a railway line between Cuenca and Albacete until they built the Alicante HSL.
Okay, so now we do know that since it opened, Albacete-Cuenca has been a success, so much so that Renfe has decided to put Avant fares on Alicante (and Orihuela?) trains for Albacete-Cuenca.
Why didn't they foresee that, I do not know.

There are many more, of course.
And sometimes this isn't even down to Renfe, as for instance, on the Renfe-operated services in Catalonia they just do what the Catalan government tells them to do.
And if the Catalan politicians tell them "few trains", then it's few trains.

I don't know.
Sometimes I think Renfe only acts when it is so blatantly obvious that it really wouldn't do to keep on not acting.



Stuu said:


> So is the train service poor because no one wants to use it, or does no one use the train because the service is so bad?


Although Spain's rather car-centric, the latter.
There's a simple explanation to that, where there's a reasonably good and frequent service, people use it (AVE Madrid-Barcelona and etc, Cercanías Madrid, Barcelona and etc).

I only know about one new line that was a failure in Spain, that was a commuter rail line in Madrid (the San Martin de la Vega branch), and it basically failed because its service was very badly planned, and Adif and Renfe seemed to reject the line right from the start (it wasn't designed or built by them).

But there are many other potentially well-used routes that Renfe operates, but not to full effect.

Then there's a counter-case, a line that Adif wanted to close, and which FGC took over, modernized, and even though the service is far from perfect there, the passenger numbers have increased (and number of trains too).



Stuu said:


> This applies to the international journey too. If there are trains available to run the service then it makes sense to give it a try, but it needs to offer something good to beat 1hr flight times


In the case of Spain, there's the fact of being not just a peninsula, but one which has a strong physical barrier on the wealthy end (the Pyrenees), and having Spain and Portugal's poorest regions near the common border, and I suppose that being politically isolated during much of the 20th century, and above all, the Iberian gauge question (and also the metric gauge along the northern coast).
But the gauge thing applies only to Spain to France or Spain to non-Peninsular Europe.
Not to Spain to Portugal, where there's no break of gauge.

In cases such as Vigo-Porto or Madrid-Porto it's not so much against short-haul flights that you're battling, but against private cars and sometimes even buses.

That said, Vigo-Porto trains are operated with CP rolling stock, but I understand it probably is a joint venture between Renfe and CP (I believe).

But for international railway travel, Spain remains more isolated than Britain.
I guess there must be some psychological stuff on the Spanish side (and the French and Portuguese too? they don't seem to push for better services to/from Spain, either, because there's nearly 200 years of habit of not doing so), but I do not know whether that is the only cause or not.

Bad management from the top? Unconscious reluctance? Dunno.

Because when (and where) there's a good service, it usually is good enough, rather solid. But...


----------



## 437.001

437.001 said:


> But the gauge thing applies only to Spain to France or Spain to non-Peninsular Europe.
> Not to Spain to Portugal, where there's no break of gauge.
> 
> In cases such as Vigo-Porto or Madrid-Porto it's not so much against short-haul flights that you're battling, but against private cars and sometimes even buses.





437.001 said:


> That said, Vigo-Porto trains are operated with CP rolling stock, but I understand it probably is a joint venture between Renfe and CP (I believe).


In the case of Spain-Portugal, we seem to have another problem - signalling and blockage compatibility.

We find ourselves in the surrealistic situation of having Vigo-Porto completely electrified at last, but with crappy 1980's DMU's (class 592 Camellos, ex-Renfe's, now CP's) running on its cross-border services because there's no other rolling stock available that is homologated on both sides of the border.

This is a bit surrealistic, but I'm aware of other similar cases happening away from the Iberian Peninsula (TER Mulhouse-Bantzenheim-Mullheim, TER Strasbourg-Kehl-Offenburg, to name but two).


----------



## dyonisien

437.001 said:


> Did you mean between Ourense and Vigo, or between Porto and Vigo?
> 
> If the former, now most long-distance trains have been moved to the HSL, and I think there's (or should be, I'm not very aware) some kind of works going on between Ourense and Guillarei. So the remaining service (regional) is now poor.
> 
> If the latter, the pandemic has had an effect on cross-border transit, like everywhere else I suppose.
> 
> That said, Renfe seems to act only when demand really pushes for it, and sometimes not even then.
> The problem is that I'm not certain that Renfe has ever completely understood the concept of supressed demand.
> If there's a line that's good, but for whatever reason the service is poor and infrequent, people will turn away from the train, even if the line is in good state.
> 
> Two examples:
> 
> 1) it is taking forever to get Renfe to introduce more frequent and commuter-fared services between Alicante and Villena, even when there's a city of 90,000 in the middle (Elda-Petrer - technically two different towns, but if not told you wouldn't notice), and another of around 50,000 (San Vicente del Raspeig). The service is now not as poor as a few years ago, but it still suffers from several troubles, not the least Renfe's apparent reluctance to offer a better service, for whatever reason.
> 
> 2) there was never a railway line between Cuenca and Albacete until they built the Alicante HSL.
> Okay, so now we do know that since it opened, Albacete-Cuenca has been a success, so much so that Renfe has decided to put Avant fares on Alicante (and Orihuela?) trains for Albacete-Cuenca.
> Why didn't they foresee that, I do not know.
> 
> There are many more, of course.
> And sometimes this isn't even down to Renfe, as for instance, on the Renfe-operated services in Catalonia they just do what the Catalan government tells them to do.
> And if the Catalan politicians tell them "few trains", then it's few trains.
> 
> I don't know.
> Sometimes I think Renfe only acts when it is so blatantly obvious that it really wouldn't do to keep on not acting.
> 
> 
> 
> Although Spain's rather car-centric, the latter.
> There's a simple explanation to that, where there's a reasonably good and frequent service, people use it (AVE Madrid-Barcelona and etc, Cercanías Madrid, Barcelona and etc).
> 
> I only know about one new line that was a failure in Spain, that was a commuter rail line in Madrid (the San Martin de la Vega branch), and it basically failed because its service was very badly planned, and Adif and Renfe seemed to reject the line right from the start (it wasn't designed or built by them).
> 
> But there are many other potentially well-used routes that Renfe operates, but not to full effect.
> 
> Then there's a counter-case, a line that Adif wanted to close, and which FGC took over, modernized, and even though the service is far from perfect there, the passenger numbers have increased (and number of trains too).
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of Spain, there's the fact of being not just a peninsula, but one which has a strong physical barrier on the wealthy end (the Pyrenees), and having Spain and Portugal's poorest regions near the common border, and I suppose that being politically isolated during much of the 20th century, and above all, the Iberian gauge question (and also the metric gauge along the northern coast).
> But the gauge thing applies only to Spain to France or Spain to non-Peninsular Europe.
> Not to Spain to Portugal, where there's no break of gauge.
> 
> In cases such as Vigo-Porto or Madrid-Porto it's not so much against short-haul flights that you're battling, but against private cars and sometimes even buses.
> 
> That said, Vigo-Porto trains are operated with CP rolling stock, but I understand it probably is a joint venture between Renfe and CP (I believe).
> 
> But for international railway travel, Spain remains more isolated than Britain.
> I guess there must be some psychological stuff on the Spanish side (and the French and Portuguese too? they don't seem to push for better services to/from Spain, either, because there's nearly 200 years of habit of not doing so), but I do not know whether that is the only cause or not.
> 
> Bad management from the top? Unconscious reluctance? Dunno.
> 
> Because when (and where) there's a good service, it usually is good enough, rather solid. But...


Very rightful observations, which alas apply on the northern side of the Pyrenees as well. To stay on an international level, just think how the new Perpignan-Barcelona line is underused, to the point that they are now closing Barcelona-Toulouse (~3h apart). How on earth could they imagine they could launch a new rail "habit" with just one train a day ? Barcelona-Lyon or Barcelona-Marseille, joining millions inhabitants must be content with one train a day, while Montpellier, although better served has neither an early train to Barcelona nor an evening return train... If two cities are 3h apart you should at least be able to spend a whole (working) day at destination. As a result of such a poor offer the new line is used by 4 HS trains a day in each direction and very few, if any, freight trains. Some sort of a scandal.


----------



## Stuu

437.001 said:


> Did you mean between Ourense and Vigo, or between Porto and Vigo?
> 
> If the former, now most long-distance trains have been moved to the HSL, and I think there's (or should be, I'm not very aware) some kind of works going on between Ourense and Guillarei. So the remaining service (regional) is now poor.
> 
> If the latter, the pandemic has had an effect on cross-border transit, like everywhere else I suppose.
> 
> That said, Renfe seems to act only when demand really pushes for it, and sometimes not even then.
> The problem is that I'm not certain that Renfe has ever completely understood the concept of supressed demand.
> If there's a line that's good, but for whatever reason the service is poor and infrequent, people will turn away from the train, even if the line is in good state.
> 
> Two examples:
> 
> 1) it is taking forever to get Renfe to introduce more frequent and commuter-fared services between Alicante and Villena, even when there's a city of 90,000 in the middle (Elda-Petrer - technically two different towns, but if not told you wouldn't notice), and another of around 50,000 (San Vicente del Raspeig). The service is now not as poor as a few years ago, but it still suffers from several troubles, not the least Renfe's apparent reluctance to offer a better service, for whatever reason.
> 
> 2) there was never a railway line between Cuenca and Albacete until they built the Alicante HSL.
> Okay, so now we do know that since it opened, Albacete-Cuenca has been a success, so much so that Renfe has decided to put Avant fares on Alicante (and Orihuela?) trains for Albacete-Cuenca.
> Why didn't they foresee that, I do not know.
> 
> There are many more, of course.
> And sometimes this isn't even down to Renfe, as for instance, on the Renfe-operated services in Catalonia they just do what the Catalan government tells them to do.
> And if the Catalan politicians tell them "few trains", then it's few trains.
> 
> I don't know.
> Sometimes I think Renfe only acts when it is so blatantly obvious that it really wouldn't do to keep on not acting.
> 
> 
> 
> Although Spain's rather car-centric, the latter.
> There's a simple explanation to that, where there's a reasonably good and frequent service, people use it (AVE Madrid-Barcelona and etc, Cercanías Madrid, Barcelona and etc).
> 
> I only know about one new line that was a failure in Spain, that was a commuter rail line in Madrid (the San Martin de la Vega branch), and it basically failed because its service was very badly planned, and Adif and Renfe seemed to reject the line right from the start (it wasn't designed or built by them).
> 
> But there are many other potentially well-used routes that Renfe operates, but not to full effect.
> 
> Then there's a counter-case, a line that Adif wanted to close, and which FGC took over, modernized, and even though the service is far from perfect there, the passenger numbers have increased (and number of trains too).
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of Spain, there's the fact of being not just a peninsula, but one which has a strong physical barrier on the wealthy end (the Pyrenees), and having Spain and Portugal's poorest regions near the common border, and I suppose that being politically isolated during much of the 20th century, and above all, the Iberian gauge question (and also the metric gauge along the northern coast).
> But the gauge thing applies only to Spain to France or Spain to non-Peninsular Europe.
> Not to Spain to Portugal, where there's no break of gauge.
> 
> In cases such as Vigo-Porto or Madrid-Porto it's not so much against short-haul flights that you're battling, but against private cars and sometimes even buses.
> 
> That said, Vigo-Porto trains are operated with CP rolling stock, but I understand it probably is a joint venture between Renfe and CP (I believe).
> 
> But for international railway travel, Spain remains more isolated than Britain.
> I guess there must be some psychological stuff on the Spanish side (and the French and Portuguese too? they don't seem to push for better services to/from Spain, either, because there's nearly 200 years of habit of not doing so), but I do not know whether that is the only cause or not.
> 
> Bad management from the top? Unconscious reluctance? Dunno.
> 
> Because when (and where) there's a good service, it usually is good enough, rather solid. But...


I meant the route between Ourense and Vigo.

It's strange that a route like Vigo to Coruna was built and Renfe don't even run hourly services. There's about a million people along there, and it's only 160km long, with an important intermediate stop. Given the journey time it would only need four trains to run an hourly services which isn't a huge investment. 

Will local/regional services be opened to competition as well as the LAV services? Elsewhere regions tender for services they want to run, perhaps that might be the way to get better services like the Alicante example?


----------



## TokyoImperialPalace

What top speed does the Eurostar attain before it hits Ashford International? I was wondering about the technicalities of dealing with acceleration and deceleration over smaller "commuter" distances on HSR.


----------



## K_

TER200 said:


> Through Nice and Marseille ? This is panfully slow and almost a guarantee to get a huge delay. Two things you don't want on a "high speed" long distance train.
> If it is integrated in the regional Nice-Marseille train offer, you'd likely have an overcrowded train on this part of the line, or need to add unnecessary the capacity on the whole route.


Integrating regional and long distance services is the norm in most of Europe. Why could that not work in France? Especially since it has worked before. The Thello services on Marseilles - Nice - Milan were integrated in the PACA TER offer...


----------



## Axelferis

I heard that Spain wants to operate Eurostar route between London & Paris.
How they intend to do it when you know that Eurostar services have separate commodities + customs offices.

How could a non Eurostar's mother company operate in that road with all this specific line??

It will take years to be profitable!!


----------



## Stuu

Axelferis said:


> I heard that Spain wants to operate Eurostar route between London & Paris.
> How they intend to do it when you know that Eurostar services have separate commodities + customs offices.
> 
> How could a non Eurostar's mother company operate in that road with all this specific line??
> 
> It will take years to be profitable!!


Eurostar don't own the facilities at the stations - DB were thinking about running to London in the past so there is no reason that another company cannot do so. They would have to pay to use the stations. Whether Eurostar have exclusive rights to things like the business class lounge might be an issue though


----------



## Axelferis

Technically you have to adapt the trains to the tunnel.
None high speed train can run like this if they don't have the technical certification.

For the commodities it's sure that it is a problem if you can offer business & lounges services.


----------



## K_

Axelferis said:


> Technically you have to adapt the trains to the tunnel.


Theoretically a train that is safe in eg. the Gotthard tunnel would be safe in the Channel tunnel as well. And so about any TSI compliant train ought to be acceptable. 

But the main problem is that complete absence of common sense in the organisation that is responsible for tunnel safety, and the lack of incentives to have something done about it.


----------



## Axelferis

I repeat the 'normal' TGV cannot cross the tunnel. It is forbidden because it needs some specifications.
When the Ice-Eurostar won the last bid for renew the fleet it had to present some technical spécifications that differ a little from ICE normal german version.

A Thalys can't cross the channel


----------



## M-NL

The TSIs have changed a little over the years. By now nearly all the differences that made the Eurostar TMST special are now mandated for every high speed train. The Thalys PBA/PBKA predate the latest TSIs, but the new TGV M (Avelia Horizon) will probably meet all criteria to use the tunnel. A German ICE3M (406) has been to London, so it had to meet the criteria to be safe in the tunnel.


----------



## AndreiB

The tunnel special requirements are more protectionism, populism (UK) and security theatre, not actual justifiable restrictions.


----------



## yc1000

Faster trains and cheaper tickets to boost European rail travel in new strategy


European Commission proposals aim to encourage cross-border and long-distance train journeys




www.theguardian.com


----------



## doc7austin

After the withdrawal of the ÖBB EuroNight train "Orient Express" Vienna-Paris in mid-2007 -> on Dec 13, 2021 the very first ÖBB Nightjet train Vienna-Paris started it's maiden voyage:







Enjoy!


----------



## TokyoImperialPalace

I've wondered if whether naming trains after planes subconsciously makes people think planes are better and that trains are a less worthy product? Surely it should be the other way around?


----------



## Riley1066

These travel restrictions between countries during the pandemic should not be implemented without some kind of plan to assist and maintain the businesses affected by the restrictions.


----------



## doc7austin

A trip report on a very special summer seasonal train, travelling through Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Croatia:
Regiojet Train RJ 1047 Praha hl.n. - Split via Havlíčkův Brod, Brno, Brevlac, Kuty, Rajka, Budapest-Kelenföld, Siófok, Gyékényes, Koprivnica, Zagreb, Ogulin, and Knin.









Enjoy!


----------



## 33Hz

RENFE and SNCF ending their cooperation.









La SNCF met fin à sa coopération avec l'espagnol Renfe


Les accords croisés entre la SNCF et la Renfe pour desservir en TGV Madrid et Barcelone depuis la France seront dénoncés à la fin 2022. Cette commercialisation croisée a toujours été déficitaire depuis 2013, et l'opérateur français préfère arrêter les frais, dans un contexte de concurrence...




www.lesechos.fr


----------



## K_

33Hz said:


> RENFE and SNCF ending their cooperation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> La SNCF met fin à sa coopération avec l'espagnol Renfe
> 
> 
> Les accords croisés entre la SNCF et la Renfe pour desservir en TGV Madrid et Barcelone depuis la France seront dénoncés à la fin 2022. Cette commercialisation croisée a toujours été déficitaire depuis 2013, et l'opérateur français préfère arrêter les frais, dans un contexte de concurrence...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lesechos.fr


Let's hope somebody comes along now that know how to actually run such a service...


----------



## dyonisien

K_ said:


> Let's hope somebody comes along now that know how to actually run such a service...


There are many such "somedbodies", but, strangely (or rather not at all), they all want to operate... Barcelona-Madrid or Lyon-Paris, but not the less juicy parts in-between... While what is needed to attract passengers is an integrated service present at MOST times of the day. This does not seem to be trendy : FS and SNCF do run 5 trains Paris-Milano daily, but the time slots are so similar that they actually offer just 3 travel possibilities.


----------



## K_

dyonisien said:


> There are many such "somedbodies", but, strangely (or rather not at all), they all want to operate... Barcelona-Madrid or Lyon-Paris, but not the less juicy parts in-between... While what is needed to attract passengers is an integrated service present at MOST times of the day. This does not seem to be trendy : FS and SNCF do run 5 trains Paris-Milano daily, but the time slots are so similar that they actually offer just 3 travel possibilities.


The start should be a good regional service Barcelona - France, eg. every hour from Barcelona to Perpignan, with stops at Girona and Figueres. Then continue these trains north in different directions. And pay attention to integration.
One of the biggest issues with the current Paris - Barcelona service is that it does not stop in Lyon Part Dieu. This way it cannot collect connecting passengers from eg. Switzerland.


----------



## 437.001

K_ said:


> The start should be a good regional service Barcelona - France, eg. every hour from Barcelona to Perpignan, with stops at Girona and Figueres. Then continue these trains north in different directions.


Perpignan is a bit of a dead end, so extending services from Spain to Perpignan only, is something that would do little to improve the services between southern France and eastern Spain.
At the very least, these services should reach Narbonne, ideally Toulouse and Montpellier, and if possible, Bordeaux and Marseille (Toulon and Nice too, but that's a bit too much to ask, the way the Côte d'Azur line is now, very saturated).

That is, if Spanish trains from Madrid, Valencia or Alicante could be able to enter Perpignan station, as now it is able for 1.5kV trains only, so they can't, I guess the station and the tracks between it and the HSL junction at Le Soler should be made switchable between 1.5kV and 25kV.
That would be an improvement indeed, but like I said, in France it's not about Perpignan only (or the same in Spain, it's not about Barcelona only, there's also Madrid, Zaragoza, Valencia, Alicante, in the coming years also Murcia and maybe even Almeria)...



K_ said:


> And pay attention to integration.


Integration?  Which kind of integration? Fare integration, do you mean? 😶



K_ said:


> One of the biggest issues with the current Paris - Barcelona service is that it does not stop in Lyon Part Dieu. This way it cannot collect connecting passengers from eg. Switzerland.


I do not really see that as an issue.
And I don't think I agree with this view, although I understand the reasoning behind, but there are three drawbacks to this theory.
1) Paris-Barcelona should be as fast as possible, so it's not bad that they skip Lyon (and Mâcon, and also Le Creusot) along the way.
2) Lyon Part-Dieu is already one of the most saturated stations in France.
3) The Paris-Lyon HSL is the busiest in Europe, and the timetable there has to be extremely well planned, otherwise there might be capacity issues, as far as I'm aware.

For Lyon-Barcelona there already is a definite pattern of service, which should be expanded whenever possible.
That service should also be extended twofold, one towards Switzerland (Geneva, and beyond if possible), and another one towards Alsace/Germany (Mulhouse, and then Freiburg, Basel, and/or Strasbourg).

That said, one can expect little improvement to Spain/France services (and thus, to Spain/Italy, Spain/Switzerland, Spain/Belgium, Spain/Germany, etc) if there's no continuous HSL, so the missing links between Montpellier and Perpignan, and also between Bordeaux and Hendaye, and also between Bordeaux, Toulouse and Narbonne are rather important.

One extension I would do, though, would be the one of the Brussels-Montpellier/Perpignan services towards Barcelona.
That would be a significant improvement, as the number of passengers could increase significantly.
Maybe Sncf would like to try that? Or Thalys, perhaps?


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> One extension I would do would be the one of the Brussels-Montpellier/Perpignan services towards Barcelona.
> That would be a significant improvement, as the number of passengers could increase significantly.
> Maybe Sncf would like to try that?


With the Paris-Barcelona already considered too long, I'm not sure they have any interest in it. But i'ts true it's not that much further when it already reaches Perpignan.
Anyway no rolling stock is suitable for that yet, but we don't know what the future plans are for Belgium (no information about the possibility for Euroduplex or TGV M to run in Belgium, and afaik Trenitalia or Renfe haven't shown interest for this destination either).


----------



## 437.001

TER200 said:


> With the Paris-Barcelona already considered too long, I'm not sure they have any interest in it.


Barcelona-Malaga is even longer, although it is made entirely on a HSL.

If Paris-Barcelona could be done entirely on a HSL, that would open up a door for services to/from beyond Paris (or beyond Barcelona).



TER200 said:


> But i'ts true it's not that much further when it already reaches Perpignan.


Yeah, and if it already does, I think it makes little sense in terminating it just there, as by extending it to Barcelona, the number of passengers would increase by quite some margin (an extra connection between Barcelona and the Costa Brava and the Île-de-France, plus the Roissy airport, plus Disneyland, plus Brussels and its EU workers and businesses, plus the stops between Marne-la-Vallée and Perpignan). .



TER200 said:


> Anyway no rolling stock is suitable for that yet, but we don't know what the future plans are for Belgium (no information about the possibility for Euroduplex or TGV M to run in Belgium, and afaik Trenitalia or Renfe haven't shown interest for this destination either).


I think the TGV's reaching Montpellier/Perpignan from Brussels could maybe be given green light to reach at least Figueres-Vilafant with a special license or something.
To go beyond Figueres would maybe complicate things even further, but as far as I'm aware, for some time the TGV Dasye trains reached Barcelona-Sants, so maybe this could happen again for the trains able to reach Brussels.
What do you think?  

Or maybe we should start thinking about a TEE company for all the international services, or a certain given standards.
Europe may be a thing, but the different standards of voltage, signalling, etc, is sometimes much more or a labyrinth than things such as the euro.


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> I think the TGV's reaching Montpellier/Perpignan from Brussels could maybe be given green light to reach at least Figueres-Vilafant with a special license or something.
> To go beyond Figueres would maybe complicate things even further, but as far as I'm aware, for some time the TGV Dasye trains reached Barcelona-Sants, so maybe this could happen again for the trains able to reach Brussels.


The TGV Réseau don't even have ETCS, so they're not able to go further than Perpignan. Technically the Thalys and Eurostar e320 trains would be able to run this route if they were allowed in Spain (and fitted the necessary Spanish systems if needed).



437.001 said:


> Or maybe we should start thinking about a TEE company for all the international services, or a certain given standards.


The SNCF-Renfe alliance just went bust... we're going on the other direction, the one with national companies competing against each other (at least in southern Europe ; in the northern half the allience still hold and new cooperations are created thanks to Nightjet).


----------



## K_

437.001 said:


> Perpignan is a bit of a dead end, so extending services from Spain to Perpignan only, is something that would do little to improve the services between southern France and eastern Spain.
> At the very least, these services should reach Narbonne, ideally Toulouse and Montpellier, and if possible, Bordeaux and Marseille (Toulon and Nice too, but that's a bit too much to ask, the way the Côte d'Azur line is now, very saturated).


Narbonne would be better yes, and then from then alternate towards Toulouse and Marseilles, with some going to Paris. The way you solve the "saturation" of the Côte d'Azur line is by a) defining what you call "saturated" (the line is not saturated by Swiss standards, not even close) and be, running the International services as part of the local services.



> Integration?  Which kind of integration? Fare integration, do you mean? 😶


Timetable integration.
For example: The way SBB fits the Zürich - Paris services in the (really saturated) Zürich to Basel mainline is by just having them take over an IC service. That way they save a train path. Anybody with a domestic ticket or pass can take that TGV to get to Basel as well.
So you could run a Barcelona - Ventimiglia service via Marseilles, where those trains also take the role of the Intercités along the route. 
This is how DB/SBB/ÖBB run a lot of long distance services. There is a two hourly Zürich - Wien service. Why would a two hourly Barcelona - Marseilles not work? You need to see it as not just about Barcelona and Marseilles.


----------



## TER200

K_ said:


> The way you solve the "saturation" of the Côte d'Azur line is by a) defining what you call "saturated" (the line is not saturated by Swiss standards, not even close) and be, running the International services as part of the local services.


a) Swiss standards aren't designed for a line which, like, half of the trains leave delayed.
b) There are 2 or 3 paths per hour for fast trains (ie, not as slow as the locals, but still slower as what they would be if they were alone on the line), which are used by TER (Interregio equivalent) every hour soon (7 return trips currently, 14 starting in 2025), and by TGVs. There are indeed free paths to run long distance trains, but not every hour and not necessarily when you want it, but it's possible.

btw, there's usually not second S in Marseille (I found in English both are possible, strangely, but it feels very bizarre).


----------



## Nik name

Funding agreement advances high speed link to Perpignan


FRANCE: A memorandum of understanding covering the financing of construction of the first phase of the LGV Montpellier-Perpignan mixed-traffic high speed line was signed in Narbonne on January 22 in the presence of Prime Minister Jean Castex,




www.railwaygazette.com


----------



## K_

TER200 said:


> a) Swiss standards aren't designed for a line which, like, half of the trains leave delayed.


The way you run train on time is to carefully work out a a timetable for one hour, and then just repeat it ad infinitum. The SNCF principle of "never run the same timetable two days in a row" is the problem.



> b) There are 2 or 3 paths per hour for fast trains (ie, not as slow as the locals, but still slower as what they would be if they were alone on the line), which are used by TER (Interregio equivalent) every hour soon (7 return trips currently, 14 starting in 2025), and by TGVs. There are indeed free paths to run long distance trains, but not every hour and not necessarily when you want it, but it's possible.


If there are 2 or 3 fast paths per hour, of which usually only one per hour is used, than the line is anything but saturated. And again, just run a IC Barcelona - Marseille, using the LGV where possible. 
Combine that with a IC Bordeaux Marseille, and one Barcelona - Bordeaux, each every 2 hours, and with proper correspondances in Narbonne you have an hourly service in all directions.


----------



## TER200

K_ said:


> The way you run train on time is to carefully work out a a timetable for one hour, and then just repeat it ad infinitum. The SNCF principle of "never run the same timetable two days in a row" is the problem.


That's not the point. The punctuality on this line is just awful, and it has nothing to do with "running the same timetable two days in a row" (the timetable of regional services are quite regular here, in theory).
The problems are due to rolling stock maintenance problems, infrastructure unreliability, incivilities, and flexibility (the signalling is not as efficient as in Switzerland, far from it).


K_ said:


> If there are 2 or 3 fast paths per hour, of which usually only one per hour is used, than the line is anything but saturated. And again, just run a IC Barcelona - Marseille, using the LGV where possible.
> Combine that with a IC Bordeaux Marseille, and one Barcelona - Bordeaux, each every 2 hours, and with proper correspondances in Narbonne you have an hourly service in all directions.


This makes sense


----------



## Gusiluz

33Hz said:


> The 375 metre thing is a myth that refuses to die - the NoL Eurostar sets were not compliant with it anyway, being 325 metres.
> 
> By the time DB got approval, all sorts of rules had been relaxed.
> 
> View attachment 2306204


He refuses to die, yes.

Explains Jacques Gounon, director of Getlink:


> the train must be long enough so that one end of the train is always placed in front of an evacuation. The train must be as long as two TGVs, but it cannot consist of two TGVs hooked one behind the ‘other





https://blazetrends.com/towards-a-new-competition-for-the-eurostar-between-france-and-england/


----------



## eu01

The last passenger connection from Russia to the Western world will be terminated tomorrow. On Saturday 26th of March two pairs of trains circulate (two departures from both Helsinki and St. Petersburg), next day we'll see just one pair and, in addition, the evening "Allegro" will return to Finland. That's it.


----------



## 437.001

From April 8, 2022 on, the AVE Madrid-Marseille restarts its operation.
With its usual stops (Madrid Atocha, Zaragoza Delicias, Camp de Tarragona, Barcelona Sants, Girona, Figueres-Vilafant, Perpignan, Narbonne, Béziers, Montpellier St Roch, Nimes Centre, Avignon TGV, Aix-en-Provence TGV, Marseille St Charles).
Not sure about the Guadalajara-Yebes stop which existed only for the Marseille-bound trains, though.

Source (official press release): *Se incorpora nueva frecuencia Ave por sentido Madrid-Barcelona (renfe.com)*

=================================================

Aaand...

According to this article (*La alta velocidad vuelve a unir Madrid con Europa (economiadigital.es)*), from tomorrow on, a second TGV Paris-Barcelona and vv will run (all-year round? The article's not clear about it).
Not sure about the stopping pattern (mainly whether it will call at Béziers, Agde, Sète, or not).

It also says that a third Paris-Barcelona train could be created by 2023, but again, it's not clear enough whether that would be a year-round service, or a seasonal train (and it's also not clear whether this would be ran by a Renfe-Sncf joint venture, or Sncf alone, or Renfe alone).

The article says nothing about the much missed Barcelona-Toulouse, by the way... 

According to the article, the passagers of the cross-border high-speed services between France and Spain would be French (30%), Spanish (26%), from the USA (12%), from other EU countries (8% -I suspect a large part might be Belgians, Dutch, Luxembourgers and Germans-), British (5%), Argentinians (4%), and from other countries (15% -I suspect a large part might be Swiss-).
And out of the total, the 55% would be tourists.


----------



## Nik name

Will travel on this route soon from Vienna to Cadiz, but it´s a touristic one of course. I´m waiting for the Nightjet-service from Zürich to Barcelona soon


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> whether this would be ran by a Renfe-Sncf joint venture


The Elipsos joint-venture will end at the end of this year ; SNCF announced in February they will continue to run their Paris-Barcelona services alone.


----------



## 33Hz

Gusiluz said:


> He refuses to die, yes.
> 
> Explains Jacques Gounon, director of Getlink:
> 
> 
> 
> https://blazetrends.com/towards-a-new-competition-for-the-eurostar-between-france-and-england/


What about two ICE 3s hooked one behind the other? 

If they continue to insist on this, I wonder how much it would cost to add new cross-passages between all the existing ones?


----------



## 33Hz

European Commission approves Eurostar - Thalys merger


The European Commission (EC) has approved the merger of high-speed operators Eurostar and Thalys under the Green Speed project.




www.railjournal.com


----------



## Gusiluz

33Hz said:


> What about two ICE 3s hooked one behind the other?
> ...





> "The train must be as long as two TGVs, but it cannot consist of two TGVs hooked one behind the ‘other”


explains Jacques Gounon, director of Getlink,


----------



## Stuu

33Hz said:


> What about two ICE 3s hooked one behind the other?
> 
> If they continue to insist on this, I wonder how much it would cost to add new cross-passages between all the existing ones?


Enormously, as tens, if not hundreds of times more expensive than buying longer trains. Even more cost-effective is to convince the safety regulator to change their minds


----------



## 33Hz

33Hz said:


> What about two ICE 3s hooked one behind the other?



I guess the smilie didn't work. My point is that two ICE 3s were approved to work through the tunnel in multiple. Why is that now different to two TGVs?


----------



## geogregor

33Hz said:


> My point is that two ICE 3s were approved to work through the tunnel in multiple.


Are you sure of that? When did that happen? 

A few shots from recent return from Paris to London:

P1150581 by Geogregor*, on Flickr


P1150582 by Geogregor*, on Flickr

Onboard bar always make journey more civilized  

20220405_203753 by Geogregor*, on Flickr

It is such a convenient connection comparing with flying.


----------



## 33Hz

geogregor said:


> Are you sure of that? When did that happen?


2013.









DB secures Channel Tunnel access


The latest news and analysis of the global railway industry from the world's leading international publication.




www.railjournal.com





After successful tests in 2010.





__





ICE Channel Tunnel trials a success says Eurotunnel


The latest news and analysis of the global railway industry from the world's leading international publication.




www.railjournal.com







> THE CEO of Eurotunnel, Mr Jacques Gounon, says the evacuation trials conducted in the Channel Tunnel last weekend with two ICE trains belonging to German Rail (DB) "were more successful than we expected." Gounon says two trials to evacuate 300 people from the trains were conducted. The more complicated evacuation involving people moving from one train to the other was completed in 20 minutes, while what he describes as the "more obvious way to evacuate a train" through the doors to the cross passages took just 15 minutes. The requirement is to evacuate a train within 90 minutes.
> 
> "We have done all the tests with ICE that are needed for us and the IGC," he says. "We are now writing the final analysis of the tests and will report back to the IGC by the end of the year."



DB Schenker Rail UK was issued with the updated certificate which included passenger and high speed services.





__





ERADIS - European Railway Agency Database of Interoperability and Safety







eradis.era.europa.eu






"This certificate is delivered in the following conditions:
1. The operator only uses rolling stock authorised by IGC in accordance with Chapter V of the bi-national regulation on safety of the Fixed Link"


Which is: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...8QFnoECAYQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2N12irbtcP9Qa2YkONikcy

"CHAPTER 5
Provisions relating to additional authorisation for placing in service of vehicles

61 .A vehicle which has a first authorisation for placing in service in a Member State of the European 
Union, where the first authorisation was not issued by the Intergovernmental Commission shall not 
be operated on the Fixed Link unless it has an additional authorisation from the Intergovernmental 
Commission or unless Article 62 applies.

62 .Vehicles in complete conformity with TSIs covering all aspects of the relevant subsystems 
without specific cases and without open points strictly related to technical compatibility between 
vehicle and network shall not be subject to any additional authorisation for placing in service if the 
Fixed Link conforms with all TSIs or if the vehicles run under the conditions specified in any 
corresponding TSIs."


----------



## bifhihher

Is the next card not the best backbone for Europe:

max. 4:30 between big cities or capitals (Paris = Madrid, Paris = Prague, Prague = Berlin, Edinbourg = Paris, etc.


----------



## kokomo

👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼 when you take a look at that map, a fast connection between Brussels and Vienna seems a need, as well as Vienna to Rome


----------



## 437.001

Hello.
Anybody here who is knowledgeable about German railways and DB, do you know or have read about any DB plans for an ICE Frankfurt-Barcelona (or Stuttgart-Barcelona)?
ICE, not night train (that's another story).
I've just read about that, but it was a youtube comment, so I'd like to check whether that was a typical unfounded youtube comment, or something more realistic.

How long would it take a direct trip to Barcelona from Frankfurt and from Stuttgart, respectively, and at which stations do you think it should call?


----------



## Yellow.l

437.001 said:


> How long would it take a direct trip to Barcelona from Frankfurt and from Stuttgart, respectively, and at which stations do you think it should call?


These are some planned connections. Journey times are around 10 to 11 h.


Barcelona Sants13:01Girona13:3913:42Figueres Vilafant13:5613:59Perpignan14:2214:27Narbonne15:0115:06Montpellier Saint-Roch15:5916:03Lyon Part-Dieu17:4817:56Strasbourg21:4121:50Karlsruhe Hbf22:2522:28Mannheim Hbf22:5022:54Darmstadt Hbf23:1423:16Frankfurt(M)Hbf23:32


Frankfurt(M)Hbf06:25Darmstadt Hbf06:4406:46Mannheim Hbf07:0607:10Karlsruhe Hbf07:3207:35Strasbourg08:1008:19Lyon Part-Dieu12:0312:12Montpellier Saint-Roch14:0914:13Narbonne15:1815:21Perpignan15:5315:57Figueres Vilafant16:2016:23Girona16:3716:40Barcelona Sants17:18

However, the plan seems to be to have these run by SNCF with a TGV.
There is also another daily pair Barcelona - Berlin.
Source is fernbahn.de


----------



## doc7austin

> Interesting, thanks.
> For some reason, I've always pictured Alaska as a more northerly place than Norway...


Yes, this was also my notion.
The reason why most people locate Alaska much more North than Norway is the Atlantic Gulf Stream.
Norway's climate is broadly speaking very mild in the winter, which makes it bearable for humans to live here. Moreover, Narvik is a ice-free port (the same is true for Murmansk). So many people associate Norway with a region much more to the South.
At the same latitude other areas (Siberia, Alaska, Canada) is super cold due to the Continental climate.


----------



## TCM_091

doc7austin said:


> Yes, this was also my notion.
> The reason why most people locate Alaska much more North than Norway is the Atlantic Gulf Stream.
> Norway's climate is broadly speaking very mild in the winter, which makes it bearable for humans to live here. Moreover, Narvik is a ice-free port (the same is true for Murmansk). So many people associate Norway with a region much more to the South.
> At the same latitude other areas (Siberia, Alaska, Canada) is super cold due to the Continental climate.


Yes, people usually think Europe is much southern than it really is. For Example New York is as North as Madrid (40° 40' vs 40° 23' North). People usually freak out with this Information, because Madrid is much warmer (specially in winter) than New York, eventhough Madrid is 667m above Sea level.


----------



## 437.001

Yellow.l said:


> These are some planned connections. Journey times are around 10 to 11 h.
> 
> [...]
> 
> However, the plan seems to be to have these run by SNCF with a TGV.


Okay... a bit of a long travel time, but nothing unheard of in Spain...



Yellow.l said:


> There is also another daily pair Barcelona - Berlin.
> Source is fernbahn.de


Barcelona-Berlin? 😶 As a daytime train? That looks unfeasible, I guess. Very very long.
Barcelona-Berlin would be rather welcome as a night train, that yes.

I'd rather do Barcelona-Stuttgart, Barcelona-Freiburg, or something similar.

Barcelona-Munich would also be very long, wouldn't it?


----------



## bifhihher

Those times seem bogus, as Montpelier - Lyon is quicker with the TGV


----------



## Theijs

European Sleeper would like to run a normal gauge nighttrain Amsterdam - Barcelona. The question with all these proposals is if the protective French railway authorities will grant trainpaths.


----------



## 437.001

bifhihher said:


> Those times seem bogus, as Montpelier - Lyon is quicker with the TGV


Do you mean Montpellier Sud-de-France to Lyon (HSL end to end), or Montpellier St Roch to Lyon (HSL only between Nimes and Lyon), which is what is stated on that post?
I say so, because 2h by using the HSL only between Nimes and Lyon makes sense, to me.


----------



## doc7austin

Theijs said:


> European Sleeper would like to run a normal gauge nighttrain Amsterdam - Barcelona. The question with all these proposals is if the protective French railway authorities will grant trainpaths.


The more urgent question: Where would European Sleeper source the rolling stock from that is allowed to run both in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Spain? Is there a locomotive that is allowed to run on the Perpignan-Barca high-speed line?


----------



## Theijs

doc7austin said:


> Is there a locomotive that is allowed to run on the Perpignan-Barca high-speed line?


locomotive run cargo trains already use the 1435mm track between Perpignan and Barcelona.


----------



## NCT

If that schedule is indicative of what's being proposed, then that train looks more like a few slow routes stitched together than something that actually tries to attract long-distance travellers.

I guess it's logical the train goes to Lyon Part Dieu - the cross-Lyon journeys are too long to attract serious volumes so you don't want to lose the Lyon custom. I'd still have thought it'd go the fast way via Sud-de-France than trundle on the old line through Nimes and Montpellier. And by going via Darmstadt it's not even trying...

Really shows up the lack of a fast route between Lyon and Strasbourg too. What's the status of the Lyon - Dijon (roughly) high-speed line? Is it still being actively planned?


----------



## 437.001

NCT said:


> If that schedule is indicative of what's being proposed, then that train looks more like a few slow routes stitched together than something that actually tries to attract long-distance travellers.
> 
> I guess it's logical the train goes to Lyon Part Dieu - the cross-Lyon journeys are too long to attract serious volumes so you don't want to lose the Lyon custom.


Indeed. But that's only logical if you stitch together several overlapping routes.



NCT said:


> I'd still have thought it'd go the fast way via Sud-de-France than trundle on the old line through Nimes and Montpellier.


The problem is that Montpellier is by far the largest city between Lyon and Barcelona.
The old Montpellier-St Roch station is very very central, but has only six platforms and is at capacity.
The new Montpellier-Sud de France-TGV station has the problem of being outside Montpellier (at a town called Boirargues), and being disconnected from both regional TER trains, and the Montpellier tramway.
No one in Montpellier seems to like it.



NCT said:


> And by going via Darmstadt it's not even trying...


What's the downside of going via Darmstadt, and which is the alternative?
I followed the lines into Frankfurt through Google Maps, and the one via the Frankfurt Airport looked like trains needed a reversal there, which is a rather big no-no for such a long route.
You seem to know Germany better than I do, so there must something I don't know about it.



NCT said:


> Really shows up the lack of a fast route between Lyon and Strasbourg too.


Yes, travel times between Strasbourg, southern Germany and Switzerland on one hand, and southern France and Spain on the other are still horrendous, even with the HSL between near Dijon and Belfort.



NCT said:


> What's the status of the Lyon - Dijon (roughly) high-speed line? Is it still being actively planned?


It's between shelved and scrapped.


----------



## NCT

437.001 said:


> The problem is that Montpellier is by far the largest city between Lyon and Barcelona.
> The old Montpellier-St Roch station is very very central, but has only six platforms and is at capacity.
> The new Montpellier-Sud de France-TGV station has the problem of being outside Montpellier (at a town called Boirargues), and being disconnected from both regional TER trains, and the Montpellier tramway.
> No one in Montpellier seems to like it.


I guess the long-distance journeys are not yet air-competitive to warrant sacrificing shorter-distance flows. One would hope that once Montpelier - Perpigan is done it would then make sense to run Barcelona - Lyon trains that are as fast as possible.



> What's the downside of going via Darmstadt, and which is the alternative?
> I followed the lines into Frankfurt through Google Maps, and the one via the Frankfurt Airport looked like trains needed a reversal there, which is a rather big no-no for such a long route.
> You seem to know Germany better than I do, so there must something I don't know about it.


Via Darmstadt is the slower of two routes. You can go from Manheim to Frankfurt without reversing at the airport.



> It's between shelved and scrapped.


Oh FFS. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## 437.001

NCT said:


> I guess the long-distance journeys are not yet air-competitive to warrant sacrificing shorter-distance flows. One would hope that once Montpelier - Perpignan is done it would then make sense to run Barcelona - Lyon trains that are as fast as possible.


And Barcelona-Paris, etc.
But Montpellier-Perpignan is taking forever. 2040 at least, they say.
Besides, it will be split into two halves, Montpellier-Beziers, and Beziers-Perpignan, the priority being given to the former.



NCT said:


> Via Darmstadt is the slower of two routes. You can go from Manheim to Frankfurt without reversing at the airport.


Thanks.



NCT said:


> Oh FFS. 🤦‍♂️


The Rhine-Rhone HSL was conceived as a sort of "Y".

Only part of the eastern branch was executed, between Villers-les-Pots (some 20km west of Dijon) and Petit-Croix (just east of Belfort), leaving the easternmost part, between Petit-Croix (east of Belfort) to Lutterbach (west of Mulhouse), officially for somewhere between 2028 and 2038, and the westernmost part, from Genlis (some 5-10km west of Dijon) to Villers-les-Pots, for a later date, if ever (in all likelihood, it's been scrapped as it's only 15km long).

The western and southern branches are officially still being planned, but they seem to be actually shelved.

The western branch, the most expensive, would run from near Montbard (more exactly from Aisy-sur-Armançon, where the HSL from Paris joins the classic line Paris-Dijon) to Genlis (theoretical western end of the eastern branch), with a completely rebuilt station at Dijon-Porte Neuve (today a secondary station without even connection to the Dijon tramway, the main station being Dijon-Ville).
But its execution is very uncertain, if it ever happens. There's no date at all.
However, its route seems to be safeguarded, at least to a degree.

The southern branch is even more uncertain, and its exact route is not even defined.
It would run from Auxonne (where it would join the eastern branch, allowing movements both towards Belfort and Dijon), to... somewhere unclear in the eastern outskirts of Lyon, where it would join the Lyon-Valence HSL.
There were three planned intermediate stations (Dole, Lons-le-Saunier, Bourg-en-Bresse), its exact location and execution being unclear.
There seemed to be a will to make it mixed freight-passengers between Bourg-en-Bresse and Lyon (220 km/h), and 270km/h on the remainder of the branch (which is a bit odd, considering it should become the backbone to connect Germany, Luxembourg, and much of Switzerland to the Mediterranean).
The last news is that perhaps a simple chord at Mâcon, a new branch line allowing the connection between Montchanin station and Le Creusot-Montchanin-TGV station, and an improvement for 220km/h would be realised.

That said, there's no denial that if it were ever built, capacity would be released on the very congested Paris-Lyon HSL... except on the key sector, the most congested stretch of HSL in Europe, the one between Pasilly (where the Rhine-Rhone HSL, nowadays just a spur between Pasilly and Montbard, joins the Paris-Lyon HSL) and Crisenoy (where the link to Marne-la-Vallée and on towards Lille, Belgium and Britain branches off the main line to Paris), where I'm not sure whether a four-tracking would be advisable or not.

Besides, its execution also seems to clash, to a degree, with the plan of the LGV POCL (Paris-Orleans-Clermont Ferrand-Lyon, a new HSL from Paris-Austerlitz with branches to the aforementioned cities), which would also release capacity from Paris-Lyon, probably much more so.
Of course, also with other HSL plans.


----------



## 437.001

One thing I find a bit strange, though, is how there seems to be no talk of a TGV between Paris and La Chaux-de-Fonds, which is the largest French-speaking Swiss city without a direct link to Paris, largely because of the lack of electrification of the line between Besançon and Le Locle.


----------



## Coccodrillo

To serve La Chaux-de-Fonds it would be enough to improve regional passenger services. Which aren't that bad, compared to many other French regional connections, where there is simply nothing (or nearly nothing) at all.

There was once a narrow gauge railway between Nyon/CH and Morez/F. The Swiss section until La Cure has been preserved and improved, the French section between La Cure and Morez has been closed half a century ago. I once wanted to do a tourist trip in that region of France, to travel on the Oyonnax-St Claude-Morez-Andelot railway before its partial clousure. It was a Saturday, and I found there was a train every hour between Nyon and La Cure, and a single bus between La Cure and Morez, which ran on midday and had to be booked in advance at least the day before. It is useless to say that I rented a car to do that trip, and all the following years I limited my holidays on the Swiss side travelling by public transport.

I agree that rebuilding the La Cure-Morez railway would be too costly for the expected passenger numbers, even if suddenly the French started to use trains as much as the Swiss, but still, a "service" of a single daily bus on midday is just a mockery. The bare minumum would be one bus in the morning, one in the evening, and two in between, which by the way is what Swiss law requires to be offered to any village with at least 100 inhabitants.

Also connections between bigger cities like Geneva, Lausanne, Dijon and Besançon sucks, although Flixbus added e little and welcome extra.

OSM: OpenStreetMap


----------



## hkskyline

* Spectacular interiors of rediscovered Orient Express carriages revealed *
_Excerpt_
Oct 14, 2022

(CNN) — For years, several vintage Orient Express train carriages lay, forgotten, at a small railway station on the border between Poland and Belarus called Malaszwewicze.

One day in 2015, French railway fan Arthur Mettetal spotted the distinctive blue carriages in a YouTube video, kickstarting a journey across Europe to track down the lost trains.

Hospitality group Accor purchased the rediscovered carriages and enlisted Parisian architect Maxime d'Angeac to meticulously restore them, ready for operation on a Paris to Istanbul rail route that's set to operate from 2025.

More : Spectacular interiors of rediscovered Orient Express carriages revealed


----------



## TER200

437.001 said:


> Yes, travel times between Strasbourg, southern Germany and Switzerland on one hand, and southern France and Spain on the other are still horrendous, even with the HSL between near Dijon and Belfort.


That's mostly due to the number of stops (and reversals at Strasbourg, Mulhouse and Dijon).



437.001 said:


> The southern branch is even more uncertain, and its exact route is not even defined.
> 
> There seemed to be a will to make it mixed freight-passengers between Bourg-en-Bresse and Lyon (220 km/h), and 270km/h on the remainder of the branch (which is a bit odd, considering it should become the backbone to connect Germany, Luxembourg, and much of Switzerland to the Mediterranean).


Well the current traffic is so low on the north-south branch of Rhin-Rhône (5 trains daily in each direction, so less than 3000 seats each way) than investing into it is a political no, when there are more needs on other lines currently congested (Marseille-Nice, Le Mans-Nantes, etc.).



437.001 said:


> The last news is that perhaps a simple chord at Mâcon, a new branch line allowing the connection between Montchanin station and Le Creusot-Montchanin-TGV station, and an improvement for 220km/h would be realised.


Rebuilding the existing line to improve speed and capacity can be very expensive also, considering it runs through several cities. It's maybe more sensible... but would not provide enormous time savings.



437.001 said:


> That said, there's no denial that if it were ever built, capacity would be released on the very congested Paris-Lyon HSL... except on the key sector, the most congested stretch of HSL in Europe, the one between Pasilly (where the Rhine-Rhone HSL, nowadays just a spur between Pasilly and Montbard, joins the Paris-Lyon HSL) and Crisenoy (where the link to Marne-la-Vallée and on towards Lille, Belgium and Britain branches off the main line to Paris), where I'm not sure whether a four-tracking would be advisable or not.


I don't really see how Rhin-Rhône west + south would relieve capacity on LGV Sud-Est, which is anyway needed to reach RR west.
Anyway, POCL project is now also shelved, with the combination of improved signalling (16 tph with ETCS level 2 or 3 hybrid) and increased train capacity (+ 20% with TGV M compared with Duplex) considered enough for foreseeable future (and no budget for so many new lines either).


----------



## 437.001

*News

Spain/France*

Class 106F Avril already in France.
On the Tweet below you can see images of it at Narbonne station.
*Nicholas Brooke en Twitter: "Mais qui voilà ? #TalgoAvril https://t.co/lv10lp8v0u" / Twitter*

From Narbonne, it will be hauled towards Plouaret-Trégor station in Brittany, for tests on the line between Plouaret-Trégor and Lannion.
And also other tests elsewhere, probably also including on some HSL, most probably the LGV between Lyon and Montpellier, and also between Nîmes and Marseille (or maybe elsewhere, I don't know).


----------



## 437.001

*Rumour

Spain/France*

Apparently, from December 10, 2022, the AVE Barcelona-Lyon and vv, and the AVE Madrid-Marseille and vv, will be discontinued.

Only the TGV Barcelona-Paris and vv will remain, two per day and direction, maybe with a third one in high season.


----------



## NCT

AndreiB said:


> HS1 is such a wrong way of doing business. We built a hugely expensive tunnel (on a PFI equivalent deal too, because the Tories were too cheap despite ample North Sea oil revenues).
> 
> Then, we do everything possible (irrational border/security controls, selling off UK stake, zero HS1/HS2 connection) to make sure we end up with an underutilised expensive piece of infrastructure.
> 
> MBA 101, really.


As soon as the UK voted for Brexit HS1 was doomed. Throttling international travel aside, Kent is Brexit central and any hope of places like Ramsgate and Dover to produce Brighton kind of commuter numbers into London is dashed.

The only way of exploiting the full value of HS1 is UK joining Schengen, so that services like London - Cologne/Frankfurt could run without relying solely on point-to-point demand and you don't have to install border facilities at Cologne. This goes far beyond just a transport problem - it'll be at least another generation until the UK electorate would vote for a Schengen supporting Home Secretary.


----------



## NCT

geogregor said:


> I had mixed experiences in Paris, from horrendous queues to smooth passage in a few minutes, but I think they actually have more space there. Also, I heard they have plans for expansion in Gare du Nord.


Now that the works at Gare du Nord is done, I think the Paris experience is generally fine. Post Brexit there's only one train per hour to London at best and processing 1000 passengers in an hour is easy. When I went through Paris this summer the Eurostar area even felt desolate - there wasn't even a bar to have a beer. If they ever restore the pre-Brexit timetable with consecutive 30-minute intervals things might get busy again. Obviously if trains get severely delayed it would be a different matter.

St Pancras gets busy when you have Brussels, Amsterdam and Paris trains departing in quick successions, especially the 0801, 0816, 0855 and 0931 period.


----------



## K_

geogregor said:


> I had mixed experiences in Paris, from horrendous queues to smooth passage in a few minutes, but I think they actually have more space there. Also, I heard they have plans for expansion in Gare du Nord.


I think it is really a pity they did not use the opportunity the construction of the CDG express offers to also connect the LGV Nord to Paris Est. So that Eurostar and Thalys could be moved to Paris Est, which has a lot of spare capacity, and is in general more pleasant as well. Could turn Paris Est in to the main hub for international services to/from Paris.


----------

