Virgin through the Tunnel

[Tweed]

After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
today:

Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.

Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.

Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.

Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?

As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

[Recliner]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.

As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.

It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities? If not that would be a
large extra expense. But if they're willing to fund that maybe they could
serve other mid sized cities in France and not compete directly with E*.
Eg I suspect direct services to Bordeaux would be popular, in the summer
anyway. Possibly somewhere in Brittany too.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

[Bob]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

Robin

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:28:02 +0100

Post by Bob

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

Doesn't sound appealing if you have the choice between that and Gare Du Nord
unless you're catching a connection at Gare De Lyon.

[Recliner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:28:02 +0100

Post by Bob

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

It would add a few minutes to the journey, but much pain than crossing
Paris by public transport.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Doesn't sound appealing if you have the choice between that and Gare Du Nord
unless you're catching a connection at Gare De Lyon.

Exactly. It’s a real pain arriving in GdN is your real destination is in
the south of France.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:28:02 +0100

Post by Bob

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

It would add a few minutes to the journey, but much pain than crossing
Paris by public transport.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Doesn't sound appealing if you have the choice between that and Gare Du Nord
unless you're catching a connection at Gare De Lyon.

Exactly. It’s a real pain arriving in GdN is your real destination is in
the south of France.

I used to change at Lille, much easier.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:28:02 +0100

Post by Bob
LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

It would add a few minutes to the journey, but much pain than crossing
Paris by public transport.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Doesn't sound appealing if you have the choice between that and Gare Du Nord
unless you're catching a connection at Gare De Lyon.

Exactly. It’s a real pain arriving in GdN is your real destination is in
the south of France.

It's hard to see that as much of a selling point, unless they're selling
through tickets in conjunction with competitor SNCF. It also won't help
those going to western France via St Lazare / Montparnasse / Austerlitz.

I suppose a connection with CDG could be useful, especially to develop it as
a hub airport for UK passengers (no APD!). Virgin Atlantic have recently
joined Skyteam, so a connection into there would take advantage of Air
France's route network. Maybe it would be more convenient for some than an
AF connecting flight from Heathrow.

There is also the Disney market - not sure how big that really is.

London-Lille-CDG-Marne la Vallee-somewhere in SE France or Switzerland? But
hard to see how all the border checks would work.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:28:02 +0100

Post by Bob
LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

It would add a few minutes to the journey, but much pain than crossing
Paris by public transport.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Doesn't sound appealing if you have the choice between that and Gare Du Nord
unless you're catching a connection at Gare De Lyon.

Exactly. It’s a real pain arriving in GdN is your real destination is in
the south of France.

It's hard to see that as much of a selling point, unless they're selling
through tickets in conjunction with competitor SNCF. It also won't help
those going to western France via St Lazare / Montparnasse / Austerlitz.
I suppose a connection with CDG could be useful, especially to develop it as
a hub airport for UK passengers (no APD!). Virgin Atlantic have recently
joined Skyteam, so a connection into there would take advantage of Air
France's route network. Maybe it would be more convenient for some than an
AF connecting flight from Heathrow.
There is also the Disney market - not sure how big that really is.
London-Lille-CDG-Marne la Vallee-somewhere in SE France or Switzerland? But
hard to see how all the border checks would work.

Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).

So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

I was thinking you might just do it at a single platform you could occupy
for half an hour or so. You could do something with moveable barriers and
staff to move people off the train, through the checks and back onto the
train. eg lock the corridor door and set up a platform barrier between
coach 1 (which has been kept empty) and coach 2 and lock the train doors
apart from coaches 1 and 2. People from coach 2 are told to detrain and are
funnelled through the security check. They reboard in coach 1. Once coach
2 is confirmed sterile, the barrier is moved to between coach 2 and 3 and
checked pax are allowed to board coach 2, meanwhile the doors of coach 3 are
unlocked and pax can leave. Rinse and repeat down the train. Maybe you
could let non-checked pax use the station facilities (cafe, toilets, etc),
although they might be overwhelmed by too many at once.

That takes longer, but means you need less space, no extra platform and
fewer border checking staff, although you need a good number of platform
staff to ensure the protocol is followed.

The TGV Haute-Picardie building is quite small, but you could maybe
improve the platform canopies and fit the security checkpoint inside the
station building, or with a small extension.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

I was thinking you might just do it at a single platform you could occupy
for half an hour or so. You could do something with moveable barriers and
staff to move people off the train, through the checks and back onto the
train. eg lock the corridor door and set up a platform barrier between
coach 1 (which has been kept empty) and coach 2 and lock the train doors
apart from coaches 1 and 2. People from coach 2 are told to detrain and are
funnelled through the security check. They reboard in coach 1.

I don’t think passengers can change carriages—there are three classes of
service, plus bar cars, and even carriages in the same class aren’t all
identical. So passengers need to occupy the same seats in the same carriage
number before and after, and that’s much easier if two trains are parked
parallel alongside, cross-platform.

DB used to do something similar at Aachen, when it was short of
international ICE trains. A domestic train pulled up at one side of an
island platform, and everyone crossed the platform to a seemingly identical
(but electrically different) ICE train parked on the opposite side of the
platform. It only took ten minutes or so, but that was without the security
performance.

Post by Theo
Once coach
2 is confirmed sterile, the barrier is moved to between coach 2 and 3 and
checked pax are allowed to board coach 2, meanwhile the doors of coach 3 are
unlocked and pax can leave. Rinse and repeat down the train.

What about the heavy baggage x-ray machines and passenger hoops? They have
to be in a fixed location, and with 400m long trains, you need several
channels distributed along the train. You have to be able to process about
900 passengers in about half an hour, so you need half a dozen security and
passport channels along the train, each processing about three carriages
worth.

Post by Theo
Maybe you
could let non-checked pax use the station facilities (cafe, toilets, etc),
although they might be overwhelmed by too many at once.

900 passengers would completely overwhelm the minimal facilities in a
remote parkway station!

Post by Theo
That takes longer, but means you need less space, no extra platform and
fewer border checking staff, although you need a good number of platform
staff to ensure the protocol is followed.
The TGV Haute-Picardie building is quite small, but you could maybe
improve the platform canopies and fit the security checkpoint inside the
station building, or with a small extension.

That would probably stop it being used for domestic TGV services, which
would annoy the relatively few passengers that do use it.

I think it would be better to build a dedicated facility separate from any
domestic TGV stations, but close to TGV Haute-Picardie or Calais Fréthun
stations (for staff use).

[Coffee]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

I was thinking you might just do it at a single platform you could occupy
for half an hour or so. You could do something with moveable barriers and
staff to move people off the train, through the checks and back onto the
train. eg lock the corridor door and set up a platform barrier between
coach 1 (which has been kept empty) and coach 2 and lock the train doors
apart from coaches 1 and 2. People from coach 2 are told to detrain and are
funnelled through the security check. They reboard in coach 1. Once coach
2 is confirmed sterile, the barrier is moved to between coach 2 and 3 and
checked pax are allowed to board coach 2, meanwhile the doors of coach 3 are
unlocked and pax can leave. Rinse and repeat down the train. Maybe you
could let non-checked pax use the station facilities (cafe, toilets, etc),
although they might be overwhelmed by too many at once.
That takes longer, but means you need less space, no extra platform and
fewer border checking staff, although you need a good number of platform
staff to ensure the protocol is followed.
The TGV Haute-Picardie building is quite small, but you could maybe
improve the platform canopies and fit the security checkpoint inside the
station building, or with a small extension.
Theo

If you had an hourly service you could off load the passengers on
arrival and board the passengers from the previous service on the same
train. You would need a departure lounge for the full train load.

This would negate the need to berth a train for an hour.

[Recliner]

Post by Coffee

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

I was thinking you might just do it at a single platform you could occupy
for half an hour or so. You could do something with moveable barriers and
staff to move people off the train, through the checks and back onto the
train. eg lock the corridor door and set up a platform barrier between
coach 1 (which has been kept empty) and coach 2 and lock the train doors
apart from coaches 1 and 2. People from coach 2 are told to detrain and are
funnelled through the security check. They reboard in coach 1. Once coach
2 is confirmed sterile, the barrier is moved to between coach 2 and 3 and
checked pax are allowed to board coach 2, meanwhile the doors of coach 3 are
unlocked and pax can leave. Rinse and repeat down the train. Maybe you
could let non-checked pax use the station facilities (cafe, toilets, etc),
although they might be overwhelmed by too many at once.
That takes longer, but means you need less space, no extra platform and
fewer border checking staff, although you need a good number of platform
staff to ensure the protocol is followed.
The TGV Haute-Picardie building is quite small, but you could maybe
improve the platform canopies and fit the security checkpoint inside the
station building, or with a small extension.
Theo

If you had an hourly service you could off load the passengers on
arrival and board the passengers from the previous service on the same
train. You would need a departure lounge for the full train load.

900 people with luggage!

Post by Coffee
This would negate the need to berth a train for an hour.

It would add an hour to journey times, whereas my idea would only add half
an hour. It would need minimal facilities in the international station, on
top of the essential security and passport checks. No need for a huge
lounge, or cafe, toilets, escalators, lifts, etc. Just a modest two-track
station with an island platform with security lanes. Trains would only have
to sit waiting for a short time from being emptied, checked, cleaned and
filled again. They spend far longer in the terminus stations.

[Recliner]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9

The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner
Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9

There's a reason it's called 'la gare de betteraves' because it is just
in a beetroot field with nothing else around it. If you wanted to throw
some money at building a facility (and RFF let you) that would be a cheap
place.

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

It would connect with Brussels-Paris Eurostar (formerly Thalys) services
that stop there - might also attract more traffic. It wouldn't help with
direct DE/NL-Brussels-London services, but as you say another location could
help there.

But at that point, why not build the whole facility at Calais, to cover both
lines? Would there be enough space, or would you need to reconstruct the
station building? It would benefit from having the Eurotunnel terminal
around the corner, so could likely be run from the same Border Force
outpost.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9

There's a reason it's called 'la gare de betteraves' because it is just
in a beetroot field with nothing else around it. If you wanted to throw
some money at building a facility (and RFF let you) that would be a cheap
place.

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

It would connect with Brussels-Paris Eurostar (formerly Thalys) services
that stop there - might also attract more traffic. It wouldn't help with
direct DE/NL-Brussels-London services, but as you say another location could
help there.
But at that point, why not build the whole facility at Calais, to cover both
lines? Would there be enough space, or would you need to reconstruct the
station building? It would benefit from having the Eurotunnel terminal
around the corner, so could likely be run from the same Border Force
outpost.

Yes, Fréthun is probably the better location, and it does look like there’s
room to build a dedicated facility just before or after the current
station, leaving the latter unchanged. As you say, being so close to the
Eurotunnel terminal would be a definite advantage for the British and
French Immigration staff.

The availability of this facility would be very liberating for
international rail services to the UK. No longer would any future stations
serving the UK need any international facilities, and the international
trains could serve as normal domestic Schengen services till the last
Schengen station (eg, Lille). Ideally, the facility would have enough
channels to process 900 people in well under 30 minutes, allowing 2tph in
busy periods.

[Bob]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9

There's a reason it's called 'la gare de betteraves' because it is just
in a beetroot field with nothing else around it. If you wanted to throw
some money at building a facility (and RFF let you) that would be a cheap
place.

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

It would connect with Brussels-Paris Eurostar (formerly Thalys) services
that stop there - might also attract more traffic. It wouldn't help with
direct DE/NL-Brussels-London services, but as you say another location could
help there.
But at that point, why not build the whole facility at Calais, to cover both
lines? Would there be enough space, or would you need to reconstruct the
station building? It would benefit from having the Eurotunnel terminal
around the corner, so could likely be run from the same Border Force
outpost.

Yes, Fréthun is probably the better location, and it does look like there’s
room to build a dedicated facility just before or after the current
station, leaving the latter unchanged. As you say, being so close to the
Eurotunnel terminal would be a definite advantage for the British and
French Immigration staff.
The availability of this facility would be very liberating for
international rail services to the UK. No longer would any future stations
serving the UK need any international facilities, and the international
trains could serve as normal domestic Schengen services till the last
Schengen station (eg, Lille). Ideally, the facility would have enough
channels to process 900 people in well under 30 minutes, allowing 2tph in
busy periods.

See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

Robin

Robin

[Tweed]

Post by Bob

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9

There's a reason it's called 'la gare de betteraves' because it is just
in a beetroot field with nothing else around it. If you wanted to throw
some money at building a facility (and RFF let you) that would be a cheap
place.

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

It would connect with Brussels-Paris Eurostar (formerly Thalys) services
that stop there - might also attract more traffic. It wouldn't help with
direct DE/NL-Brussels-London services, but as you say another location could
help there.
But at that point, why not build the whole facility at Calais, to cover both
lines? Would there be enough space, or would you need to reconstruct the
station building? It would benefit from having the Eurotunnel terminal
around the corner, so could likely be run from the same Border Force
outpost.

Yes, Fréthun is probably the better location, and it does look like there’s
room to build a dedicated facility just before or after the current
station, leaving the latter unchanged. As you say, being so close to the
Eurotunnel terminal would be a definite advantage for the British and
French Immigration staff.
The availability of this facility would be very liberating for
international rail services to the UK. No longer would any future stations
serving the UK need any international facilities, and the international
trains could serve as normal domestic Schengen services till the last
Schengen station (eg, Lille). Ideally, the facility would have enough
channels to process 900 people in well under 30 minutes, allowing 2tph in
busy periods.

See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination. Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

[Recliner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train).

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train).

I wonder on what basis the new entrants hope to compete? Price on existing
routes seems to be constrained by cost - ie HS1 charges and tunnel charges
plus whatever all the security costs.

New routes? Will they really be a profitable thing? Isn’t this the whole
north of London saga transposed to the continent ?

I keep looking at getting to Switzerland from the East Midlands (location
not airport) by train. Whichever way you look at it, it’s either an
endurance test getting up very early and arriving late, or staying
overnight in Paris. The plane wins every time, both in journey time and
cost. (A night in a Paris hotel is around £200 for anything reasonably
acceptable and near to the station)

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train).

I wonder on what basis the new entrants hope to compete? Price on existing
routes seems to be constrained by cost - ie HS1 charges and tunnel charges
plus whatever all the security costs.

Plus SNCF would do what the legacy airlines did when Laker challenged them:
undercut it on price till it gave up.

Post by Tweed
New routes? Will they really be a profitable thing? Isn’t this the whole
north of London saga transposed to the continent ?

Clearly, I agree with you, but the recent resurgence of Continental
sleepers suggests there is a (green?) market that prefers trains, even if
the journeys cost more and take much longer.

Post by Tweed
I keep looking at getting to Switzerland from the East Midlands (location
not airport) by train. Whichever way you look at it, it’s either an
endurance test getting up very early and arriving late, or staying
overnight in Paris. The plane wins every time, both in journey time and
cost. (A night in a Paris hotel is around £200 for anything reasonably
acceptable and near to the station)

Yup. The train wins to Brussels and Paris, but is increasingly
uncompetitive on longer routes, unless people just prefer not to fly.

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train).

I wonder on what basis the new entrants hope to compete? Price on existing
routes seems to be constrained by cost - ie HS1 charges and tunnel charges
plus whatever all the security costs.

undercut it on price till it gave up.

Post by Tweed
New routes? Will they really be a profitable thing? Isn’t this the whole
north of London saga transposed to the continent ?

Clearly, I agree with you, but the recent resurgence of Continental
sleepers suggests there is a (green?) market that prefers trains, even if
the journeys cost more and take much longer.

Post by Tweed
I keep looking at getting to Switzerland from the East Midlands (location
not airport) by train. Whichever way you look at it, it’s either an
endurance test getting up very early and arriving late, or staying
overnight in Paris. The plane wins every time, both in journey time and
cost. (A night in a Paris hotel is around £200 for anything reasonably
acceptable and near to the station)

Yup. The train wins to Brussels and Paris, but is increasingly
uncompetitive on longer routes, unless people just prefer not to fly.

I wonder how much repeat business the new sleepers get? Capacity is
extremely limited and you can get through a lot of folk attempting to salve
their green concerns but then vowing never to use it again once they’ve
discovered the reality.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train).

I wonder on what basis the new entrants hope to compete? Price on existing
routes seems to be constrained by cost - ie HS1 charges and tunnel charges
plus whatever all the security costs.

undercut it on price till it gave up.

Post by Tweed
New routes? Will they really be a profitable thing? Isn’t this the whole
north of London saga transposed to the continent ?

Clearly, I agree with you, but the recent resurgence of Continental
sleepers suggests there is a (green?) market that prefers trains, even if
the journeys cost more and take much longer.

Post by Tweed
I keep looking at getting to Switzerland from the East Midlands (location
not airport) by train. Whichever way you look at it, it’s either an
endurance test getting up very early and arriving late, or staying
overnight in Paris. The plane wins every time, both in journey time and
cost. (A night in a Paris hotel is around £200 for anything reasonably
acceptable and near to the station)

Yup. The train wins to Brussels and Paris, but is increasingly
uncompetitive on longer routes, unless people just prefer not to fly.

I wonder how much repeat business the new sleepers get? Capacity is
extremely limited and you can get through a lot of folk attempting to salve
their green concerns but then vowing never to use it again once they’ve
discovered the reality.

"The carriage you are booked in is not in the train consist
today. You may be seated al night/not travel tonight. Spend
more $$$ if you want to be re-booked for tomorrow."

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

Obviously. That’s the sole purpose of it, and one of the main reasons for
all this hassle (passport checks along could be done on the train)

They could, and they tried, but it didn't work. Couldn't get the staff,
mainly.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:20:32 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.
Robin
Robin

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people particularly if they had to change trains
again to get to their final destination.

It would be, as suggested, for the less frequent destinations, and only
required in the inward direction.

Yes, could work for E* not coming from the major destination so customs doesn't
have to be built in every small city and town it could go to. OTOH it could
end up being a way to get Achmed Asylum Seeker to his boat faster.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people

If you discontinue the four-capitals through services...

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
particularly if they had to change
trains
again to get to their final destination. Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

And the Frech side might not accept pax
arriving from the UK without previous
immigration.

[Recliner]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:31:36 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

Trouble is you increase travel time for existing routes. At the moment you
need to arrive in good time for your booked train to account for possible
delays on your route to the E* station. Doing the security and passports
there uses up some of that dead time. So a Calais shuffle would add to
total journey time. Perhaps retain the existing system for the existing
routes and add the Calais shuffle for extras?

Indeed. Having to change trains at calais would kill E* stone dead as a
viable option for a lot of people

If you discontinue the four-capitals through services...

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
particularly if they had to change
trains
again to get to their final destination. Plus I imagine part of the reason for
security at StP is to catch anyone taking anything dodgy into the tunnel.

And the Frech side might not accept pax
arriving from the UK without previous
immigration.

The UK departure and Schengen entry checks would still be done in St
Pancras. But for secondary destinations, all the Schengen departure/UK
arrival/tunnel security checks would be done at Calais.

[Theo]

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.

If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.

If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.

I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.

I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys
train. I don't know if this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that route?

I still think the best bet is direct trains from London to various European destinations, with the return involving a
relatively quick, painless train swap at a dedicated cross-platform facility near Calais. That time would be made up by
having minimal (basically, no) check-in times from the distant starting points, so the overall time will be little
affected.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner
I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which
involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys train. I don't know if
this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that
route?

Isn't just that the newly-merged E* is running the TGV from Brussels to the
Alps anyway, so they just advertise a connection into it from London? That
way it's just a regular domestic train with no complicated formalities. On
the return it's the E* TGV to Lille and then go through formalities in order
to board your e320.

(there's also some electrification/signalling reasons why you need a
particular TGV to go deeper into France - I think there's some 1.5kV on
the Bourg St Maurice route; I'm unclear if that's compatible with 1.5kV as
used in .nl)

Post by Recliner
I still think the best bet is direct trains from London to various
European destinations, with the return involving a relatively quick,
painless train swap at a dedicated cross-platform facility near Calais.
That time would be made up by having minimal (basically, no) check-in
times from the distant starting points, so the overall time will be little
affected.

If it's a guaranteed connection with no 'turn up 2 hours before travel in
case there are horrendous queues' (as at St Pancras), then that could work.
I suppose the guaranteed connection assumes that only one train is occupying
the facility at a time (potentially problematic at time of disruption), and
that the border facility doesn't have so many people with complicated visa
paperwork that they might delay the train. Perhaps there would need to be
fallback transport for them if that was the case? (stop the next E*? A
bus on Le Shuttle?)

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which
involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys train. I don't know if
this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that
route?

Isn't just that the newly-merged E* is running the TGV from Brussels to the
Alps anyway, so they just advertise a connection into it from London? That
way it's just a regular domestic train with no complicated formalities. On
the return it's the E* TGV to Lille and then go through formalities in order
to board your e320.
(there's also some electrification/signalling reasons why you need a
particular TGV to go deeper into France - I think there's some 1.5kV on
the Bourg St Maurice route; I'm unclear if that's compatible with 1.5kV as
used in .nl)

Post by Recliner
I still think the best bet is direct trains from London to various
European destinations, with the return involving a relatively quick,
painless train swap at a dedicated cross-platform facility near Calais.
That time would be made up by having minimal (basically, no) check-in
times from the distant starting points, so the overall time will be little
affected.

If it's a guaranteed connection with no 'turn up 2 hours before travel in
case there are horrendous queues' (as at St Pancras), then that could work.
I suppose the guaranteed connection assumes that only one train is occupying
the facility at a time (potentially problematic at time of disruption), and
that the border facility doesn't have so many people with complicated visa
paperwork that they might delay the train. Perhaps there would need to be
fallback transport for them if that was the case? (stop the next E*? A
bus on Le Shuttle?)

That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from, say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.

So, there might need to be a few extra facilities such as:

- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely to be accepted, and if not, why not.

- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.

- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which
involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys train. I don't know if
this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that
route?

Isn't just that the newly-merged E* is running the TGV from Brussels to the
Alps anyway, so they just advertise a connection into it from London? That
way it's just a regular domestic train with no complicated formalities. On
the return it's the E* TGV to Lille and then go through formalities in order
to board your e320.
(there's also some electrification/signalling reasons why you need a
particular TGV to go deeper into France - I think there's some 1.5kV on
the Bourg St Maurice route; I'm unclear if that's compatible with 1.5kV as
used in .nl)

Post by Recliner
I still think the best bet is direct trains from London to various
European destinations, with the return involving a relatively quick,
painless train swap at a dedicated cross-platform facility near Calais.
That time would be made up by having minimal (basically, no) check-in
times from the distant starting points, so the overall time will be little
affected.

If it's a guaranteed connection with no 'turn up 2 hours before travel in
case there are horrendous queues' (as at St Pancras), then that could work.
I suppose the guaranteed connection assumes that only one train is occupying
the facility at a time (potentially problematic at time of disruption), and
that the border facility doesn't have so many people with complicated visa
paperwork that they might delay the train. Perhaps there would need to be
fallback transport for them if that was the case? (stop the next E*? A
bus on Le Shuttle?)

That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten
passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at
UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these
indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from,
say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted
for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely
to be accepted, and if not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be
left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

Presumably a gripper could be trained to perform this task, it’s not much
different to gate staff at the airport checking documents for UK bound
flights.

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which
involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys train. I don't know if
this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that
route?

Isn't just that the newly-merged E* is running the TGV from Brussels to the
Alps anyway, so they just advertise a connection into it from London? That
way it's just a regular domestic train with no complicated formalities. On
the return it's the E* TGV to Lille and then go through formalities in order
to board your e320.
(there's also some electrification/signalling reasons why you need a
particular TGV to go deeper into France - I think there's some 1.5kV on
the Bourg St Maurice route; I'm unclear if that's compatible with 1.5kV as
used in .nl)

Post by Recliner
I still think the best bet is direct trains from London to various
European destinations, with the return involving a relatively quick,
painless train swap at a dedicated cross-platform facility near Calais.
That time would be made up by having minimal (basically, no) check-in
times from the distant starting points, so the overall time will be little
affected.

If it's a guaranteed connection with no 'turn up 2 hours before travel in
case there are horrendous queues' (as at St Pancras), then that could work.
I suppose the guaranteed connection assumes that only one train is occupying
the facility at a time (potentially problematic at time of disruption), and
that the border facility doesn't have so many people with complicated visa
paperwork that they might delay the train. Perhaps there would need to be
fallback transport for them if that was the case? (stop the next E*? A
bus on Le Shuttle?)

That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten
passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at
UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these
indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from,
say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted
for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely
to be accepted, and if not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be
left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

Presumably a gripper could be trained to perform this task, it’s not much
different to gate staff at the airport checking documents for UK bound
flights.

I don't think so. For example, I don't think the ETA shows up in the passport? It resides in the cloud, like an ESTA.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten
passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at
UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these
indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from,
say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted
for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely
to be accepted, and if not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be
left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

Presumably a gripper could be trained to perform this task, it’s not much
different to gate staff at the airport checking documents for UK bound
flights.

I think you'll find those staff are vetted to a higher level than train
grippers, and have people they can escalate to as soon as something
awkward crops up. They can also simply tell transgressors to "go away".

Not quite so easy when you are both on a High Speed Train.

[Tweed]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten
passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at
UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these
indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from,
say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted
for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely
to be accepted, and if not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be
left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

Presumably a gripper could be trained to perform this task, it’s not much
different to gate staff at the airport checking documents for UK bound
flights.

I think you'll find those staff are vetted to a higher level than train
grippers, and have people they can escalate to as soon as something
awkward crops up. They can also simply tell transgressors to "go away".
Not quite so easy when you are both on a High Speed Train.

We are talking about a service to passengers to check they don’t get to the
last stop before the tunnel without documents, not enforcement. A simple

If Brit do you have a passport?
If from country that needs electronic travel authorisation do you have one?
If from country that needs visa do you have one?

It’s even something you could do with a pre departure app questionnaire
that then issues a barcode to say you’ve answered all the questions, to be
shown to gripper.

If you lie when answering then you have no comeback when stopped at the
hard border. Some of this is partially done anyway as part of the pre
travel information process.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the
UK, either because of an insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten
passport) or a potentially fixable problem but
not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the moment, such problems are spotted at
UK passport control at GdN, Lille, Brussels or
Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted with these
indirect trains till the international transfer
station near Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from,
say, Geneva, to get there and then be turned
back.
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted
for UK entry, such as a UK government site that
will check an uploaded passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely
to be accepted, and if not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA
on-line. The booked train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be
left on trains to allow for passengers delayed
en-route.
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at
their own expense.

Presumably a gripper could be trained to perform this task, it’s not much
different to gate staff at the airport checking documents for UK bound
flights.

I think you'll find those staff are vetted to a higher level than train
grippers, and have people they can escalate to as soon as something
awkward crops up. They can also simply tell transgressors to "go away".
Not quite so easy when you are both on a High Speed Train.

We are talking about a service to passengers to check they don’t get to the
last stop before the tunnel without documents, not enforcement.

The problem is that people get on the train *with* documents (presumably
as tourists), then flush them down to loo so they can claim asylum
without any proof of where they should be "sent back to".

Post by Tweed
A simple
If Brit do you have a passport?
If from country that needs electronic travel authorisation do you have one?
If from country that needs visa do you have one?
It’s even something you could do with a pre departure app questionnaire
that then issues a barcode to say you’ve answered all the questions, to be
shown to gripper.
If you lie when answering then you have no comeback when stopped at the
hard border.

Yes, you do. Simply claim asylum.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the UK, either because of an
insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten passport) or a
potentially fixable problem but not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the
moment, such problems are spotted at UK passport control at GdN, Lille,
Brussels or Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted
with these indirect trains till the international transfer station near
Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from, say, Geneva,
to get there and then be turned back.

I'm not sure that's any different from someone who gets the Flixbus to
London and is turned away at the ferry port. Flixbus is not going to take
them back to Geneva, they are just stuck at Calais and left to their own
devices.

The difference here is that the timescale for checking legit pax with a
'guaranteed' connecting train is quite tight, so they could be overwhelmed
if the entire North Korean Olympic Team shows up and lots of time consuming
paperwork is required. If the paperwork is in order but it takes a long
time they might miss the connecting train, in which case they shouldn't be
stranded at Calais with no onward options. If the connection is
'guaranteed' then it's up to the operator to provide such options for people
with valid paperwork, not unlike providing a hotel for a cancelled flight.
Something like a bus through the tunnel to Ashford from whence Southeastern
could suffice here.

Post by Recliner
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted for
UK entry, such as a UK government site that will check an uploaded
passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely to be accepted, and if
not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA on-line. The booked
train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be left on trains to
allow for passengers delayed en-route.

I suppose that's a wider class of people who are actually legit but need
extra time to sort themselves out. Having a bit of non-booked space on
successive trains is probably a good plan, even if they are 2-4 hours later
it's better than nothing. Then deploy the bus if the number is too great.

Post by Recliner
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at their own expense.

Calais Frethun already has domestic services.

Theo

[Coffee]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the UK, either because of an
insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten passport) or a
potentially fixable problem but not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the
moment, such problems are spotted at UK passport control at GdN, Lille,
Brussels or Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted
with these indirect trains till the international transfer station near
Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from, say, Geneva,
to get there and then be turned back.

I'm not sure that's any different from someone who gets the Flixbus to
London and is turned away at the ferry port. Flixbus is not going to take
them back to Geneva, they are just stuck at Calais and left to their own
devices.
The difference here is that the timescale for checking legit pax with a
'guaranteed' connecting train is quite tight, so they could be overwhelmed
if the entire North Korean Olympic Team shows up and lots of time consuming
paperwork is required. If the paperwork is in order but it takes a long
time they might miss the connecting train, in which case they shouldn't be
stranded at Calais with no onward options. If the connection is
'guaranteed' then it's up to the operator to provide such options for people
with valid paperwork, not unlike providing a hotel for a cancelled flight.
Something like a bus through the tunnel to Ashford from whence Southeastern
could suffice here.

Post by Recliner
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted for
UK entry, such as a UK government site that will check an uploaded
passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely to be accepted, and if
not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA on-line. The booked
train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be left on trains to
allow for passengers delayed en-route.

I suppose that's a wider class of people who are actually legit but need
extra time to sort themselves out. Having a bit of non-booked space on
successive trains is probably a good plan, even if they are 2-4 hours later
it's better than nothing. Then deploy the bus if the number is too great.

Post by Recliner
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at their own expense.

Calais Frethun already has domestic services.

I'm sure E* have something to cover a refused passenger in their T&Cs.
A delayed one is probably covered by CIV.

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
That's actually part of a bigger problem that struck me: some percentage
of travellers will be refused entry into the UK, either because of an
insurmountable problem (eg, expired or forgotten passport) or a
potentially fixable problem but not immediately (eg, no ETA). At the
moment, such problems are spotted at UK passport control at GdN, Lille,
Brussels or Amsterdam, before any train is boarded, but won't be spotted
with these indirect trains till the international transfer station near
Calais. The passengers might have travelled a long way from, say, Geneva,
to get there and then be turned back.

I'm not sure that's any different from someone who gets the Flixbus to
London and is turned away at the ferry port. Flixbus is not going to take
them back to Geneva, they are just stuck at Calais and left to their own
devices.
The difference here is that the timescale for checking legit pax with a
'guaranteed' connecting train is quite tight, so they could be overwhelmed
if the entire North Korean Olympic Team shows up and lots of time consuming
paperwork is required. If the paperwork is in order but it takes a long
time they might miss the connecting train, in which case they shouldn't be
stranded at Calais with no onward options. If the connection is
'guaranteed' then it's up to the operator to provide such options for people
with valid paperwork, not unlike providing a hotel for a cancelled flight.
Something like a bus through the tunnel to Ashford from whence Southeastern
could suffice here.

Post by Recliner
- an easy way to check in advance whether a passport will be accepted for
UK entry, such as a UK government site that will check an uploaded
passport scan/photo and indicate if it is likely to be accepted, and if
not, why not.
- a business lounge in the transfer station, with help available at a
price to, for example, apply for an immediate ETA on-line. The booked
train would be missed, but a few spare seats may be left on trains to
allow for passengers delayed en-route.

I suppose that's a wider class of people who are actually legit but need
extra time to sort themselves out. Having a bit of non-booked space on
successive trains is probably a good plan, even if they are 2-4 hours later
it's better than nothing. Then deploy the bus if the number is too great.

Post by Recliner
- a way of removing passengers rejected by the UK to a domestic rail
station to make their way back home, presumably at their own expense.

Calais Frethun already has domestic services.

Yes, but this facility would be separate from that station, perhaps a
minibus ride away.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
I notice that e* advertises ski/snow trains from London, all of which
involve a transfer at Lille, to a former Thalys train. I don't know if
this is for technical reasons? Perhaps only Thalys trains can use that
route?

Isn't just that the newly-merged E* is running the TGV from Brussels to the
Alps anyway, so they just advertise a connection into it from London?
That
way it's just a regular domestic train with no complicated formalities.
On
the return it's the E* TGV to Lille and then go through formalities in order
to board your e320.
(there's also some electrification/signalling reasons why you need a
particular TGV to go deeper into France - I think there's some 1.5kV on
the Bourg St Maurice route; I'm unclear if that's compatible with 1.5kV as
used in .nl)

Or new ETCS line equipment Paris to Lyons.

[Tweed]

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

I suppose there's scope for a new, more luxurious service at an affordable price. The current Eurostar 'Plus' service is
much reduced from the old Leisure Select, while Premier is too expensive for leisure travellers. I doubt that they saved
much money from the reduced service. Virgin is alert to this sort of thing — its Upper Class was deliberately designed
to be much better than BA Club World, but much cheaper than BA First. If Virgin really does get involved with cross
Channel trains, I'm sure it'll deliver a much better First class, for not much more than Eurostar Plus. Virgin knew that
BA couldn't improve Club just on the routes where it competed with Virgin, and so it simply lagged behind.

Post by Tweed
For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

If from East Asia, shopping. To many Chinese visitors, European culture, food and religious art/buildings aren't of very
much interest, but luxury goods (both for themselves and as gifts/bribes) are of great interest.

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

I suppose there's scope for a new, more luxurious service at an
affordable price. The current Eurostar 'Plus' service is
much reduced from the old Leisure Select, while Premier is too expensive
for leisure travellers. I doubt that they saved
much money from the reduced service. Virgin is alert to this sort of
thing — its Upper Class was deliberately designed
to be much better than BA Club World, but much cheaper than BA First. If
Virgin really does get involved with cross
Channel trains, I'm sure it'll deliver a much better First class, for not
much more than Eurostar Plus. Virgin knew that
BA couldn't improve Club just on the routes where it competed with
Virgin, and so it simply lagged behind.

Post by Tweed
For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

If from East Asia, shopping. To many Chinese visitors, European culture,
food and religious art/buildings aren't of very
much interest, but luxury goods (both for themselves and as gifts/bribes)
are of great interest.

The E* tier just below business seemed ok last October to Brussels. Same
seating type as per business and a pretty good meal including a couple of
small bottles of wine. Any more and I’d be falling off the train at the
end. The facial recognition entrance at StP circumvented the queue. I did
go to Amsterdam using Business class around a year ago. The only real
difference is you got to use a separate lounge at StP. Nothing special at
the Amsterdam Portakabin on the way back other than a slightly shorter
checkin queue.

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

I suppose there's scope for a new, more luxurious service at an
affordable price. The current Eurostar 'Plus' service is
much reduced from the old Leisure Select, while Premier is too expensive
for leisure travellers. I doubt that they saved
much money from the reduced service. Virgin is alert to this sort of
thing — its Upper Class was deliberately designed
to be much better than BA Club World, but much cheaper than BA First. If
Virgin really does get involved with cross
Channel trains, I'm sure it'll deliver a much better First class, for not
much more than Eurostar Plus. Virgin knew that
BA couldn't improve Club just on the routes where it competed with
Virgin, and so it simply lagged behind.

Post by Tweed
For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

If from East Asia, shopping. To many Chinese visitors, European culture,
food and religious art/buildings aren't of very
much interest, but luxury goods (both for themselves and as gifts/bribes)
are of great interest.

The E* tier just below business seemed ok last October to Brussels. Same
seating type as per business and a pretty good meal including a couple of
small bottles of wine.

It's much less than you used to get, both in terms of food and drink. The breakfast, in particular, is pathetic now. The
light dinners are a bit better, but still not a patch on Leisure Select.

Post by Tweed
Any more and I’d be falling off the train at the
end. The facial recognition entrance at StP circumvented the queue. I did
go to Amsterdam using Business class around a year ago. The only real
difference is you got to use a separate lounge at StP. Nothing special at
the Amsterdam Portakabin on the way back other than a slightly shorter
checkin queue.

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

I suppose there's scope for a new, more luxurious service at an
affordable price. The current Eurostar 'Plus' service is
much reduced from the old Leisure Select, while Premier is too expensive
for leisure travellers. I doubt that they saved
much money from the reduced service. Virgin is alert to this sort of
thing — its Upper Class was deliberately designed
to be much better than BA Club World, but much cheaper than BA First. If
Virgin really does get involved with cross
Channel trains, I'm sure it'll deliver a much better First class, for not
much more than Eurostar Plus. Virgin knew that
BA couldn't improve Club just on the routes where it competed with
Virgin, and so it simply lagged behind.

Post by Tweed
For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

If from East Asia, shopping. To many Chinese visitors, European culture,
food and religious art/buildings aren't of very
much interest, but luxury goods (both for themselves and as gifts/bribes)
are of great interest.

Most of the tourists seemed to be European. There was a party of Poles
being guided across the Grand Place/Grote Markt, Spaniards etc. The centre
few square km of Brussels are nice enough, but I can think of better places
to go. We went to see a friend.

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed

Post by Theo

Post by Bob
See my post on another thread suggesting exactly this. Rebuild Calais
Frethun as a hub station, run London-Calais shuttles through the tunnel,
with all the securty an immigration stuff there, and use Calais as a hub
for services into Europe more widely. No need to fill full long trains
or worry about all the tunnel related or HMG related special rules.

If you're going to make people change trains, there is the existing
interchange at Lille Europe - domestic/Thalys TGV to there, then E* (or
competitor) connection to London.
If you're operating a 'through' service with a UK-bound border stop
somewhere, with pax getting on the same or a coordinated-transfer train,
then Calais gives you the most options as to Continental origin and space to
add extra platforms, especially if you need to park up a train for a long
time.
If you just run London-Calais shuttles then it's not a through train London
to X anymore, it's a connection in both directions. That you can get today
at Lille. I don't know how many pax you can hold in the security area
there until their train arrives, but presumably enough for the ski/etc
trains of the past.
I suppose the competitor could try adding more capacity to Lille and
coordinating connections there. But that's a different proposition to 'now
you can get a direct train from London to X*! [*the train from X to London
involves a transfer]'.
Theo

As you say, there’s already opportunities for those who are willing to
change train.
The question is what new can a competitor bring to the market?
The possibilities I see are
1) lower fares
2) new direct routes

I suppose there's scope for a new, more luxurious service at an
affordable price. The current Eurostar 'Plus' service is
much reduced from the old Leisure Select, while Premier is too expensive
for leisure travellers. I doubt that they saved
much money from the reduced service. Virgin is alert to this sort of
thing — its Upper Class was deliberately designed
to be much better than BA Club World, but much cheaper than BA First. If
Virgin really does get involved with cross
Channel trains, I'm sure it'll deliver a much better First class, for not
much more than Eurostar Plus. Virgin knew that
BA couldn't improve Club just on the routes where it competed with
Virgin, and so it simply lagged behind.

Post by Tweed
For direct routes I can see something akin to the Amsterdam solution. By
that I mean a glorified Portakabin at the end of a platform to house
security and passports and to pen in cleared passengers. Currently E*
manages to serve Lille, Rotterdam and Amsterdam (and the occasional
Disneyland) on top of the main 3 capitals. Probably a route that has both
business and tourist traffic. Perhaps a daily through service to either
Geneva or Zurich? There’s an awful lot of non European tourists in
Switzerland “doing Europe” (I found a surprisingly large number of tourists
in Brussels last October. It was very crowded. Not sure why they come).

If from East Asia, shopping. To many Chinese visitors, European culture,
food and religious art/buildings aren't of very
much interest, but luxury goods (both for themselves and as gifts/bribes)
are of great interest.

Most of the tourists seemed to be European. There was a party of Poles
being guided across the Grand Place/Grote Markt, Spaniards etc. The centre
few square km of Brussels are nice enough, but I can think of better places
to go. We went to see a friend.

I suppose it could still be part of the post-Covid recovery?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed
The E* tier just below business seemed ok last October to Brussels. Same
seating type as per business and a pretty good meal including a couple of
small bottles of wine.

It's much less than you used to get, both in terms of food and drink. The
breakfast, in particular, is pathetic now.

I remember travelling quite a bit on the 'First train to Paris', having
stayed at a motel in Ashford overnight.

The ticket price was the same as Waterloo, and also breakfast included.
But the staff had always "finished doing" breakfast by the time we
boarded, and were really grumpy about doing a second sitting.

Meanwhile at Peterborough, where boarding to travel to Edinburgh the
staff refused to take an order for the free breakfast on the grounds
"we are still doing the ones from London".

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed
The E* tier just below business seemed ok last October to Brussels. Same
seating type as per business and a pretty good meal including a couple of
small bottles of wine.

It's much less than you used to get, both in terms of food and drink. The
breakfast, in particular, is pathetic now.

I remember travelling quite a bit on the 'First train to Paris', having
stayed at a motel in Ashford overnight.

Do you remember any suitable PT between motel
and station?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Tweed
The E* tier just below business seemed ok last October to Brussels. Same
seating type as per business and a pretty good meal including a couple of
small bottles of wine.

It's much less than you used to get, both in terms of food and drink. The
breakfast, in particular, is pathetic now.

I remember travelling quite a bit on the 'First train to Paris', having
stayed at a motel in Ashford overnight.

Do you remember any suitable PT between motel and station?

Certainly not at 6am! But I'd driven to the motel, so simply drove the
next mile to the station car park.

[Bevan Price]

Post by Recliner

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

Why is is we British who need such crazy complicated systems?

Even crossing to/from former East Germany was much simpler. Seated
passengers were checked in their compartments on the train; any standing
passengers had to temporarily alight and pass through a building to be
checked.

[Tweed]

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie. Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

Why is is we British who need such crazy complicated systems?
Even crossing to/from former East Germany was much simpler. Seated
passengers were checked in their compartments on the train; any standing
passengers had to temporarily alight and pass through a building to be
checked.

That border didn’t involve luggage security checks. People needed to be
properly documented and the train itself checked for stowaways. If we could
do away with the tunnel security checks I think passport checks could be
managed on train with a bit of will. But nobody is ever going to sign off
on reducing security.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
Outbound from the UK, none needed. Inbound, do them in Lille. That would
need some investment in Lille Europe station to increase the international
departures capacity, but I think there’s room.

Hmm, that could work. Is there enough platform capacity to hold more trains
at Lille? There appear to be 4 platforms and 6 tracks. Assuming you make
best use of the through tracks, you're going to have to occupy a platform
for the best part of an hour to do checks of the whole train, which only
leaves a single platform in each direction. Given there's also Eurostar
London, ex-Thalys and TGV services, won't increased use cause a bottleneck?

Yes, its capacity might be a limiting factor.

Post by Theo
I suppose, if you're willing to build something you could do checks
elsewhere that has space, maybe Calais Frethun or TGV Haute-Picardie.
Or,
perhaps, since you're going to be detained for some time anyway, somewhere
else off the LGV.

I can think of a couple of quiet stations, Arras and TGV Haute-Picardie.
The latter is on the main line, but in the middle of nowhere, with few
stopping services on the platform loops. There’s probably room to build a
couple more roads and a wide platform for international trains to park
while passengers are checked, either alongside, or at the end of, the
current station (basically a small parkway station out in the countryside).
So, for example, UK-bound trains could stop in one road, with a wide, high
platform for the security/passport theatre performance between it and the
departure platform, where another, identical train would be waiting.
Passengers would file through multiple passport+security lanes between the
trains, then get straight back on the second train, in the same seat
numbers. Meanwhile, their emptied train would be searched and cleaned, then
become the next departure train. Ideally, the central platform would be at
train floor height, so providing completely level boarding. It would be all
under cover, on one level, and shouldn’t take more than about 10-15 minutes
per passenger.

Even better, I now see there’s a dead-end siding just north of the TGV
Haute-Picardie station. It wouldn’t be hard to widen this into two tracks
with a wide central platform for the security theatre. It wouldn’t
interfere with the current parkway station or the LGV main line tracks, and
there’s only a couple of agricultural buildings adjacent to the site. So it
would probably be cheaper than enhancing Lille station, and much cheaper
than adding international departure facilities in France.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D7Sg2QfNS4NCixog9
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

Why is is we British who need such crazy complicated systems?
Even crossing to/from former East Germany was much simpler. Seated
passengers were checked in their compartments on the train; any standing
passengers had to temporarily alight and pass through a building to be
checked.

That border didn’t involve luggage security checks. People needed to be
properly documented and the train itself checked for stowaways.

IIRC, it took 40 minutes in the last decades of GDR,
with possible corrency, book and newspaper checks.

Was much easier in these decades on Berlin transit trains
where luggage was of no interest for them. However, I did not
try to spread flyers...

[Roland Perry]

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

Why is is we British who need such crazy complicated systems?

Not being in Schengen to start with, and not having suitable deportation
treaties with France for undocumented travellers. But this has been
covered over and over again, most recently a couple of weeks ago.

Post by Bevan Price
Even crossing to/from former East Germany was much simpler.

The past is a different country, they did things differently there.

And they probably simply shot anyone who was undocumented.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner
The one downside is that it wouldn’t be accessible to trains coming from
Brussels. But there’s room near Calais-Fréthun for an equivalent facility
that could serve all UK-bound international trains. Build both of those and
it could transform international rail services to the UK.

Why is is we British who need such crazy complicated systems?

Not being in Schengen to start with, and not having suitable deportation
treaties with France for undocumented travellers. But this has been
covered over and over again, most recently a couple of weeks ago.

Post by Bevan Price
Even crossing to/from former East Germany was much simpler.

The past is a different country, they did things differently there.
And they probably simply shot anyone who was undocumented.

You might well believe this but to me it
seems that reality is a different country.

[Recliner]

Post by Bob

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:40:11 +0000

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes, my mistake. Looking at its rail connections on the map, it doesn't look
easy to get to from the north unless theres a tunnel link I'm not seeing.

LGV Interconnexion. Come off LGV Nord just north of Charles de Gaulle,
throuhg Marne-la-Vallée, and there's a triangular junction with LGV PSE
that allows trains to run into Gare de Lyon. Bit of a roundabout route,
but it exists.

There’s something that doesn’t ‘smell’ right with this. Virgin Group is
just a holding and brand management company. It doesn’t actually operate
anything, and mostly has minority shareholdings in companies run by others.
When it ran UK TOCs, it took over the operation of fully-staffed, working
bits of BR. It didn’t have to create them from scratch. It now has no
railway people on the payroll, no railway facilities and no real appetite
for actually running things.

So to me it looks like this is a case of Branson establishing a paper
branded entity, that will then be largely created, funded and staffed by
someone else, who pays to use the Virgin brand. Perhaps he has someone
already lined up for this? I always assumed it was National Express.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:56:34 GMT

Post by Recliner
already lined up for this? I always assumed it was National Express.

Can't imagine they'd want to dive back into to UK railways again anytime soon.

[Recliner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:56:34 GMT

Post by Recliner
already lined up for this? I always assumed it was National Express.

Can't imagine they'd want to dive back into to UK railways again anytime soon.

That’s Evolyn.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner
There’s something that doesn’t ‘smell’ right with this. Virgin Group is
just a holding and brand management company. It doesn’t actually operate
anything, and mostly has minority shareholdings in companies run by others.
When it ran UK TOCs, it took over the operation of fully-staffed, working
bits of BR. It didn’t have to create them from scratch. It now has no
railway people on the payroll, no railway facilities and no real appetite
for actually running things.
So to me it looks like this is a case of Branson establishing a paper
branded entity, that will then be largely created, funded and staffed by
someone else, who pays to use the Virgin brand. Perhaps he has someone
already lined up for this? I always assumed it was National Express.

The Cosmen brothers, who are behind Evolyn, own about 25% of National
Express. So they're the competition in this case.

I suppose it's possible they could separately bid for rights and then sell
them/merge afterwards when the outcome is known. Question is, who is in the
market for a ready to go operating licence?

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner
There’s something that doesn’t ‘smell’ right with this. Virgin Group is
just a holding and brand management company. It doesn’t actually operate
anything, and mostly has minority shareholdings in companies run by others.
When it ran UK TOCs, it took over the operation of fully-staffed, working
bits of BR. It didn’t have to create them from scratch. It now has no
railway people on the payroll, no railway facilities and no real appetite
for actually running things.
So to me it looks like this is a case of Branson establishing a paper
branded entity, that will then be largely created, funded and staffed by
someone else, who pays to use the Virgin brand. Perhaps he has someone
already lined up for this? I always assumed it was National Express.

The Cosmen brothers, who are behind Evolyn, own about 25% of National
Express. So they're the competition in this case.

Supposedly. I always assumed they were in cahoots.

Post by Theo
I suppose it's possible they could separately bid for rights and then sell
them/merge afterwards when the outcome is known. Question is, who is in the
market for a ready to go operating licence?

Trenitalia? Renfe? Italo/MSC?

[Marc Van Dyck]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:18:49 GMT

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

Yes, definitely, plus the depot space.
As Eurostar is majority-owned by SNCF, I think we can confidently predict
that it will be as uncooperative as possible with the new operator(s),
whether using GdN, finding paths on the LGV or finding depot space in
France.
It does occur to me that a new operator could benefit from offering
different routes from the incumbent, which could probably offer a higher
frequency and could afford to discount to undermine a challenger’s
viability. For example, offering direct services to Gare de Lyon would be
possible and may appeal to a different market.

Does Lyon have any passport processing facilities?

Gare de Lyon is a Paris station with
very little spare capacity if at all.

Yes but in case of lack of capacity, isn't the regulator expected to
distribute the existing capacity among all the requestors, instead of
giving all capacity to one operator and none to the other ? Look at
what
happened in Belgium recently, where SNCB has been forced to abandon one
of its 6 paths between Brussels and Antwerp, to make way for the new NS
Eurocity Direct train to Amsterdam Zuid... That same scenario could
very
well happen elsewhere too.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?

Regards, ULF

[Tweed]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?
Regards, ULF

But not with post Brexit passport processing. Hopefully once the entry exit
scheme finally gets going we should be back to proper eGate processing.
There will be an initial hiatus as folk have to get registered.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 07:31:50 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?
Regards, ULF

But not with post Brexit passport processing. Hopefully once the entry exit
scheme finally gets going we should be back to proper eGate processing.
There will be an initial hiatus as folk have to get registered.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that. Technology like this seems to take
forever to get working properly - to whit the E gates at UK airports - so
I suspect it'll be years before things flow as smoothly as before this me-too
nonsense was brought it.

And as for the channel vehicle ports.... oh dear.

[Tweed]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 07:31:50 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?
Regards, ULF

But not with post Brexit passport processing. Hopefully once the entry exit
scheme finally gets going we should be back to proper eGate processing.
There will be an initial hiatus as folk have to get registered.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that. Technology like this seems to take
forever to get working properly - to whit the E gates at UK airports - so
I suspect it'll be years before things flow as smoothly as before this me-too
nonsense was brought it.
And as for the channel vehicle ports.... oh dear.

UK airport E gates seem to be pretty good these days.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:28:11 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 07:31:50 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?
Regards, ULF

But not with post Brexit passport processing. Hopefully once the entry exit
scheme finally gets going we should be back to proper eGate processing.
There will be an initial hiatus as folk have to get registered.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that. Technology like this seems to take
forever to get working properly - to whit the E gates at UK airports - so
I suspect it'll be years before things flow as smoothly as before this me-too
nonsense was brought it.
And as for the channel vehicle ports.... oh dear.

UK airport E gates seem to be pretty good these days.

Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or bus.
Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk over to
the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down. All so the EU
can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase EU security when
thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt include terrorist sleepers
rock up on italy and spain every month is just farcical.

[Tweed]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:28:11 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 07:31:50 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?
Regards, ULF

But not with post Brexit passport processing. Hopefully once the entry exit
scheme finally gets going we should be back to proper eGate processing.
There will be an initial hiatus as folk have to get registered.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that. Technology like this seems to take
forever to get working properly - to whit the E gates at UK airports - so
I suspect it'll be years before things flow as smoothly as before this me-too
nonsense was brought it.
And as for the channel vehicle ports.... oh dear.

UK airport E gates seem to be pretty good these days.

Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or bus.
Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk over to
the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down. All so the EU
can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase EU security when
thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt include terrorist sleepers
rock up on italy and spain every month is just farcical.

I’m surprised the whole thing seems to apparently hinge on finger prints.
Facial recognition is extremely good these days and that’s what e-gates
depend on. Wind the car windows down, as is usually required these days,
and let the cameras do their thing. You could use finger prints as a backup
if face recognition fails.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:38:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or bus.
Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk over to
the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down. All so the EU
can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase EU security when
thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt include terrorist sleepers
rock up on italy and spain every month is just farcical.

I’m surprised the whole thing seems to apparently hinge on finger prints.
Facial recognition is extremely good these days and that’s what e-gates
depend on. Wind the car windows down, as is usually required these days,
and let the cameras do their thing. You could use finger prints as a backup
if face recognition fails.

Thats fine for cars, but doesn't solve the bus problem. You'd still need
someone to walk through with a portable scanner or get everyone off.

[Tweed]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:38:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or bus.
Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk over to
the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down. All so the EU
can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase EU security when
thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt include terrorist sleepers
rock up on italy and spain every month is just farcical.

I’m surprised the whole thing seems to apparently hinge on finger prints.
Facial recognition is extremely good these days and that’s what e-gates
depend on. Wind the car windows down, as is usually required these days,
and let the cameras do their thing. You could use finger prints as a backup
if face recognition fails.

Thats fine for cars, but doesn't solve the bus problem. You'd still need
someone to walk through with a portable scanner or get everyone off.

Don’t coach passengers have to get off now? How is passport scanning and
stamping handled?

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:21:25 -0000 (UTC)

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:38:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or bus.
Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk over to
the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down. All so the EU
can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase EU security when
thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt include terrorist sleepers
rock up on italy and spain every month is just farcical.

I’m surprised the whole thing seems to apparently hinge on finger prints.
Facial recognition is extremely good these days and that’s what e-gates
depend on. Wind the car windows down, as is usually required these days,
and let the cameras do their thing. You could use finger prints as a backup
if face recognition fails.

Thats fine for cars, but doesn't solve the bus problem. You'd still need
someone to walk through with a portable scanner or get everyone off.

Don’t coach passengers have to get off now? How is passport scanning and
stamping handled?

Don't know TBH.

[Clank]

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Thats a whole different kettle of fish to people sitting in a car or
bus. Either there's going to have to be some handheld scanner for
border guards,
or the pax are all going to have to get out of the bus/car and walk
over to the scanners. You can imagine how that will slow things down.
All so the EU can one up the USA. The idea that its going to increase
EU security when thousands of undocumented migrants who no doubt
include terrorist sleepers rock up on italy and spain every month is
just farcical.

I’m surprised the whole thing seems to apparently hinge on finger prints.
Facial recognition is extremely good these days and that’s what e-gates
depend on. Wind the car windows down, as is usually required these days,
and let the cameras do their thing. You could use finger prints as a
backup if face recognition fails.

Facial recognition is good for "does the person in this picture match the
person in that picture" (so, verifying the person holding the passport is
probably the same person standing in front of you.)

It is *much* less good at "given this picture, search for matches in this
database of millions of other pictures" - it brings up too many false
matches. Fingerprints are thus much better for doing things like criminal
record or other background checks. Which is one of the intended goals of
things like EES/ETIAS.



Now, bear in mind that (based on an undated reference unfortunately, but
the direction is only one-way so it's unlikely to have changed in favour of
no-fingerprint) of 101 countries issuing biometric passports, 54 of them
*already* include the fingerprint data in the passport, and 10 already have
plans to do so. So relying on fingerprints is only an inconvenience to a
minority, and it will be a shrinking minority.

That the UK didn't bother including fingerprints in biometric passports is
the usual UK story of "doing it on the cheap". The UK didn't want to
require people to actually have to come in for biometrics to be collected
at passport renewal (because that would require employing staff...), so
decided to go with the cheaper option of not including the fingerprint
biometric. That this appears short-sighted and creates inconvenience years
later is... Well, c'est la vie.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?

It was also planned while we were still in the EU.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

There aren’t any available. Eurostar scraps them immediately they’re
retired.

4 years is enough time to acquire the start-up fleet to operate the
initial service. Big problem is not going to be the trains or the paths
through the tunnel, but being able to process the increase in passengers
in the restricted space at St Pancras and, presumably, Gare du Nord.

You may well be right but E* was planned with much higher
train & pax frquencies as I read here?

It was also planned while we were still in the EU.

Yes. The passport checks and queues were minimal, and there weren’t any
customs checks.

[Tweed]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:31:58 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

This last July:

https://ionanalytics.com/insights/infralogic/virgin-issues-teasers-for-cross-channel-rail-capital-raise/

Virgin Group has kicked off its quest for investors to back a new
high-speed rail service on the Channel Tunnel route, the first likely
challenger to Eurostar’s monopoly in the region.

Two separate teasers, for the equity and debt processes, were distributed
to the market earlier this month, with information memorandums due to be
issued next week, according to sources.

Under the codename Project Bullet, Virgin is gauging interest from
infrastructure investors on a GBP 200m equity raise, with the Sir Richard
Branson-founded company providing another GBP 50m equity cheque, according
to a teaser seen by Infralogic.

“It’s a huge undertaking to establish a new cross-Channel operator but the
route is ripe for change and would benefit from competition,” a Virgin
Group spokesperson told Infralogic in an emailed statement.

“Virgin is not committing to launching a service just yet, however, we can
confirm that Virgin continues to advance it’s planning and preparation,
which includes seeking an equity raise, and we are delighted with the
progress so far,” the spokesperson added.

Virgin wants to enter the London-Europe high speed rail market by 2028,
with plans to connect London, Paris, Brussels and Amsterdam. Eurostar has
had a monopoly over cross channel foot passenger rail services for three
decades, though it competes with the car shuttle service Eurotunnel.

In a parallel process, Virgin is also looking to raise hundreds of millions
of debt to finance the procurement of 12 brand new trains, with a target of
bringing them to service in 2028.

The selection of equity partners, with an IRR target of over 20%, is slated
to be complete by October, with the debt financing and the order of the
rolling stock due to follow in December, according to the teaser.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:58:37 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

https://ionanalytics.com/insights/infralogic/virgin-issues-teasers-for-cross-ch
annel-rail-capital-raise/
Virgin Group has kicked off its quest for investors to back a new
high-speed rail service on the Channel Tunnel route, the first likely
challenger to Eurostar’s monopoly in the region.
Two separate teasers, for the equity and debt processes, were distributed
to the market earlier this month, with information memorandums due to be
issued next week, according to sources.
Under the codename Project Bullet, Virgin is gauging interest from
infrastructure investors on a GBP 200m equity raise, with the Sir Richard
Branson-founded company providing another GBP 50m equity cheque, according
to a teaser seen by Infralogic.

Sounds to me like Branson is asking investor to chuck their money down a
black hole. Railways rarely make anyone rich even if they do make a profit
as successive TOCs have found out.

[Recliner]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:58:37 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

https://ionanalytics.com/insights/infralogic/virgin-issues-teasers-for-cross-ch
annel-rail-capital-raise/
Virgin Group has kicked off its quest for investors to back a new
high-speed rail service on the Channel Tunnel route, the first likely
challenger to Eurostar’s monopoly in the region.
Two separate teasers, for the equity and debt processes, were distributed
to the market earlier this month, with information memorandums due to be
issued next week, according to sources.
Under the codename Project Bullet, Virgin is gauging interest from
infrastructure investors on a GBP 200m equity raise, with the Sir Richard
Branson-founded company providing another GBP 50m equity cheque, according
to a teaser seen by Infralogic.

Sounds to me like Branson is asking investor to chuck their money down a
black hole. Railways rarely make anyone rich

Some of the promoters of the early railways did make money, not always
honestly, but you’re right that it’s rare these days.

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
even if they do make a profit as successive TOCs have found out.

Actually, almost no UK TOC has generated a true, bottom line profit. The
‘profits’ and dividends were really just recycled taxpayer subsidies.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:56:30 GMT

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:58:37 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
Who's going to pay for them? I doubt virgin group has a spare 500m knocking
around. Presumably a loan but who would pony up in the current economic
climate?
As for the startup, give me a break. What are they going to do, give a
recently retired 373 a refurb and hope passengers don't notice its an old
E* train?

https://ionanalytics.com/insights/infralogic/virgin-issues-teasers-for-cross-ch

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org

Post by Tweed
annel-rail-capital-raise/
Virgin Group has kicked off its quest for investors to back a new
high-speed rail service on the Channel Tunnel route, the first likely
challenger to Eurostar’s monopoly in the region.
Two separate teasers, for the equity and debt processes, were distributed
to the market earlier this month, with information memorandums due to be
issued next week, according to sources.
Under the codename Project Bullet, Virgin is gauging interest from
infrastructure investors on a GBP 200m equity raise, with the Sir Richard
Branson-founded company providing another GBP 50m equity cheque, according
to a teaser seen by Infralogic.

Sounds to me like Branson is asking investor to chuck their money down a
black hole. Railways rarely make anyone rich

Some of the promoters of the early railways did make money, not always
honestly, but you’re right that it’s rare these days.

True, but even then a lot of the time they sold their shares just before
reality intervened and the railway went backrupt.

[Clive Page]

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has thought of running international trains from Waterloo. After all, it used to be possible.

[Tweed]

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo. After all, it used to be possible.

The trains won’t fit and I seriously doubt anyone wants to build another
fleet of thin trains with 3rd rail shoe gear. And you have to evict the
existing users of the old international platforms.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo. After all, it used to be possible.

The trains won’t fit and I seriously doubt anyone wants to build another
fleet of thin trains with 3rd rail shoe gear. And you have to evict the
existing users of the old international platforms.

Which is largely a two storey shopping mall now.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:20:22 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has thought of
running international trains from Waterloo. After all, it used to be possible.

The 373s had their 3rd rail gear removed and the 374s didn't have it to start
with plus they're too large for NR lines anyway.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

Not any more, all the facilities below platform level have been removed
and replaced by shops. I suspect the paths no longer exit either.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

Not any more, all the facilities below platform level have been removed
and replaced by shops. I suspect the paths no longer exit either.

Is the flyover still usable? I assumed not.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr
Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

Not any more, all the facilities below platform level have been removed
and replaced by shops.

At platform level too. It's quite a long walk, through a somewhat
deserted shipping mall, to get to the domestic platforms at the country
end of the old International ones.

Post by Graeme Wall
I suspect the paths no longer exit either.

And probably the same for the upgraded 3rd rail power.

[Bob]

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.

Robin

[Tweed]

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.
Robin

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.
Robin

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

[Tweed]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.
Robin

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

Sorry, I meant the Circle at StP.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.
Robin

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

Sorry, I meant the Circle at StP.

Oops! Misunderstood. There was a tunnel connecting the Midland Railway
to the Metropolitan Line, originally intended to link the Midlands to a
putative channel tunnel. In fact it proved commercially successful to
allow coal trains to reach south London depots.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page

Post by Tweed
After a flurry of speculation last November this appears in the Telegraph
Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is preparing an order for a dozen
high-speed trains as it bids to break Eurostar’s monopoly on services
through the Channel Tunnel.
Virgin aims to sign a contract for the trains before March to get ahead of
startup Evolyn, which is also putting together plans to run trains from
London to the continent.
Project lead Phil Whittingham said Virgin will choose between two suppliers
it has shortlisted and is evaluating models from Alstom, Siemens, Hitachi
and Talgo. The order is likely to be worth more than £500m, based on the
value of recent deals for similar rolling stock.
Virgin aims to commence services through the Channel Tunnel in 2029, with
the project requiring close to £1bn in launch funding, Mr Whittingham said.
Sir Richard will take as big an equity stake as possible, potentially
supported by a partner or partners.

If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

Sorry, I meant the Circle at StP.

Oops! Misunderstood. There was a tunnel connecting the Midland Railway
to the Metropolitan Line, originally intended to link the Midlands to a
putative channel tunnel. In fact it proved commercially successful to
allow coal trains to reach south London depots.

Which led me to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widened_Lines

But why did they give up coal traffic that early?
Because of the impossibility to run long trains?

Regards, ULF

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:10:28 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed
What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

It took them something like 10 years just to remove the facilities and get the
platforms back into use for suburban services. A damning indictment of modern
britain if another were needed. God knows how long it would take to put them
back. Some time in the 22nd century probably.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Bob

Post by Clive Page
If there's a lack of capacity at St.Pancras I wonder if anyone has
thought of running international trains from Waterloo.  After all, it
used to be possible.

The platforms have been repurposed for suburban services and all the
facilities to handle international travel have been replaced by other
stuff at Waterloo. That is aside from needing uk loading gauge trains
that can operate on 3rd rail and interface with AWS/TPWS signalling. To
bring international services back to Waterloo would be a huge undertaking.
Robin

What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into
that space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps
that could go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

No point, Waterloo is never going to be used for tunnel services again.
Far too much would need changing.

<cough> The Circle is at St Pancras. Country end of the departure lounge
which is the other dise of the so-called "Farmers Market".

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed
What about getting rid of the shops in the Circle and expanding into that
space? I know there’s an entrance route in the way but perhaps that could
go down a level? Not sure what’s under there.

Famously there's the Fleet River, which was diverted around the north of
the SPILL station box, and then heads south under international
platforms 11 & 12.

But there has to be some odd under there because the toilets at the far
end of the Circle have two steps *up*, which makes them hugely less
accessible and must have some very good reason.