Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[zwk500]

Interesting that Hitachi and Talgo are in the running, any ideas on what model of train they would be offering for a cross channel service? A dozen train sets seems to suggest a fairly comprehensive service from the off, and I would assume given demand the destinations will be established routes like Paris, Brussels and the Netherlands, although if I were a betting man I would put a flutter on Virgin trying something like Geneva.

The 2029 start date no doubt informed by lead times on rolling stock, but also probably HS1’s proposed revamp at St Pancras to allow more space for security, immigration and customs.

My gut instinct is that any new service will want to benefit from existing border control points wherever possible, so I'd suggest that the strategy will either be London-Amsterdam on a regular all-day basis or reactivating some combination of Ebbsfleet, Ashford and Calais. Restoring the Disneyland connection is also an option for anybody new - it is a proven route after all.

Getting the service up and running is probably going to be hard enough, without the complication of a new route. Once they've established themselves, then bidding for the new routes subsidy for Geneva as a second phase will be easier as well.

However this is entirely what I'd do, and so no indication of what Virgin and partners may be planning!

 

[Blindtraveler]

Well, whatever they do they'll be on to an instant win if any of the following apply. Costs less than eurostar, provides a better level of customer care and on-train service than Eurostar, even if it costs more, stops in Kent. Much of eurostar's convenience factor and to a lesser extent it's environmental factor is eroded by its refusal to make Kent calls. A. I'm not trying to reopen this debate. I would imagine it's a top priority for any new start out there to win the custom of people who've been badly served by the current incumbent

 

[StephenHunter]

Geneva is great for conventions.

Also, there are existing customs facilities on Platforms 6 and 7 that could be altered.

 

[Alfie1014]

This last bit seems kind of key, because it implies someone will have to decide whether Virgin or Evolyn gets the space at the depot. I don't think that decision should be down to Eurostar, so maybe it is good that the regulator is involved

It will be up to the ORR to determine depot access though with only one international operator up until now (though originally didn’t SE use Temple Mills for stabling?) doubt there has been much use of the determination process or how bespoke ES depot access agreement is compared to domestic versions?

 

[williamn]

They won’t have to try very hard to beat Eurostar on customer service…

 

[Snow1964]

This is turning into an interesting tussle, I would imagine Eurostar is going to have a hard time convincing the ORR that there isn’t depot space given they are still running fewer services than before the pandemic

I wonder if Eurostar might try to claim that as they are running fewer services they have more trains parked in the depot thus reducing the number of available roads...?

if I remember correctly there are 8 roads in main shed, and 3 each side, plus 2 short sidings (which hold half sets) between depot and the running lines

Fairly sure (but happy to be corrected) that space exists for the short sidings to be extended into 1.5 train lengths. There used to be further former rail yards which would have allowed sideways widening, but roads (Orient Way and Marshall Road) have been built along eastern edge of site (And would have allowed 3 more double length sidings)

I am sure in theory space exists for a couple of minor servicing (as in cleaning) sidings at other locations eg Dagenham or Ebbsfleet. And I have never heard of all 6 International platforms at St Pancras plus the 2 International platforms at Stratford being full overnight, so overnight stabling of more trains based in France might be possible. Somehow I think Eurostar is going to find it hard to claim lack of space exists for handful of extra trains in UK each night.

 

[Austriantrain]

My gut instinct is that any new service will want to benefit from existing border control points wherever possible, so I'd suggest that the strategy will either be London-Amsterdam on a regular all-day basis or reactivating some combination of Ebbsfleet, Ashford and Calais. Restoring the Disneyland connection is also an option for anybody new - it is a proven route after all.

Getting the service up and running is probably going to be hard enough, without the complication of a new route. Once they've established themselves, then bidding for the new routes subsidy for Geneva as a second phase will be easier as well.

However this is entirely what I'd do, and so no indication of what Virgin and partners may be planning!

The most interesting market will always be Paris and I expect any new entrant to focus on that. Vast potential market largely priced off rail by E*. If competitors can find a way to produce more cheaply, it‘s there to be grabbed.

 

[renegademaster]

Lumo is who need to start running channel tunnel services

 

[Frothy]

This last bit seems kind of key, because it implies someone will have to decide whether Virgin or Evolyn gets the space at the depot. I don't think that decision should be down to Eurostar, so maybe it is good that the regulator is involved

I should have mentioned that, in the article, Virgin are quoted as saying they want to get underway quickly as they assume it will be 'first come, first served'

It doesn't look as if Virgin have released any destination proposals yet.

No I don't think they have, but in a message to potential investors from July, it says the following:

Virgin wants to enter the London-Europe high speed rail market by 2028, with plans to connect London, Paris, Brussels and Amsterdam.

Which sounds specific for those destinations, but perhaps doesn't exclude further destinations.

 

[citycat]

Lumo is who need to start running channel tunnel services

Naah, Flixtrain more like as they're already used to running trains in mainland Europe

Don't you want a £28.00 saver fare on a lime green Velaro?

 

[Bald Rick]

This is turning into an interesting tussle, I would imagine Eurostar is going to have a hard time convincing the ORR that there isn’t depot space given they are still running fewer services than before the pandemic, and have moved their seasonal Marseille and Bourg-Saint-Maurice trains to Brussels and Lille respectively.

It’s not the number of services that matters, but the number of trains in their fleet. How has that changed since before the pandemic?

 

[StephenHunter]

It’s not the number of services that matters, but the number of trains in their fleet. How has that changed since before the pandemic?

Well, they have merged with Thalys since the pandemic, but there's really been no change since the 374s entered service. They've got ten 373s in storage.

 

[LLivery]

It’s not the number of services that matters, but the number of trains in their fleet. How has that changed since before the pandemic?

Wouldn't that just encourage them to deliberately keep more stock in London than they really need to keep competitors away, at least for a some years? They should need to prove that they *need* the space to run the service they currently provide and plan to soon (say within 24 months), to be truly fair to other potential operators. If they have more stock than they need, then other operators should need not suffer for that. It's Eurostar's commercial issue in a free market economy of open access after all.

 

[Fragezeichnen]

There's some interesting information form the ORR on this: https://www.orr.gov.uk/rail-guidanc...ss/station-depot/depot-applications-decisions Evidently the depot access issue is hotting up with them and not just in the press.

These are what VT wants:

1) 7 x 200m trains to stable overnight – 5 in sidings; 2 inside the shed;
2) Two tracks inside the shed for daytime (16 hours) and overnight (8 hours) maintenance & corrective requirements;
4) Three x 400m tracks for daytime stabling;

It seems that Evolyn were also in talks with Eurostar and also wanted two depot roads - but Eurostar said permanent access to two roads would be too much, even if Evolyn were the only non-Eurostar operator. At which point Evolyn turned to the ORR.

There's a very sniffy letter from Eurostar which disputes whether ORR should be involved at all

Due to the nature of VTE’s application, ORR should not and, indeed, is in no position in practice or under the Act to make a direction pursuant to s17. VTE’s application is presumptive and lacking in essential detail. Eurostar considers, moreover, that ORR’s existing standard process for considering access applicationsis not designed or suited to considering an access application that relates ultimately to a cross-border, high-speed passenger rail service

and then on Evolyn

a) strikingly lacking in detail;
(b) entirely unsupported by evidence;
(c) significantly premature and reflective of an under-developed service proposition; and
(d) not a valid s17 application

Evolyn has provided no evidence whatsoever. Evolyn’s position appears entirely presumptive

It would appear they are desperate to stick to their own published process with mutual negotiation and avoid being ordered to do anything by the ORR.

 

[StephenHunter]

The words "primarily abstractive" have turned up, I see.

 

[Trainbike46]

There's some interesting information form the ORR on this: https://www.orr.gov.uk/rail-guidanc...ss/station-depot/depot-applications-decisions Evidently the depot access issue is hotting up with them and not just in the press.

These are what VT wants:

It seems that Evolyn were also in talks with Eurostar and also wanted two depot roads - but Eurostar said permanent access to two roads would be too much, even if Evolyn were the only non-Eurostar operator. At which point Evolyn turned to the ORR.

There's a very sniffy letter from Eurostar which disputes whether ORR should be involved at all


and then on Evolyn




It would appear they are desperate to stick to their own published process with mutual negotiation and avoid being ordered to do anything by the ORR.

Skimming through the documents on the ORR website (thank you for the link!) it appears that both Evolyn and VT have requested 2 roads in the shed each, or 4 indoor roads between them.

As the shed has 8 roads, if both were approved that would take up half the space in the shed. I think it is unlikely that half the space in the shed is currently surplus, so it appears likely that Virgin Trains is right that it will be one or the other (at best).

Evolyn also refers to a commitment by Eurostar to the European Commission made in June 2010 for 10 years (so this has now expired), which suggests that Eurostar considered at that point that there was space for one train by a competitor at the depot at any time - if this was accurate, and I interpreted Evolyn's interpretation of a 15-year old commitment correctly, that implies that there isn't sufficient space to provide even close to the amount of capacity requested by either party.

Wouldn't that just encourage them to deliberately keep more stock in London than they really need to keep competitors away, at least for a some years? They should need to prove that they *need* the space to run the service they currently provide and plan to soon (say within 24 months), to be truly fair to other potential operators. If they have more stock than they need, then other operators should need not suffer for that. It's Eurostar's commercial issue in a free market economy of open access after all.

Well, given that the lead time for new stock is well in excess of 24 months, such a period would be rather short, don't you think?

It appears as though at least some of what Eurostar is doing is trying to delay things - possibly until their order for new trains has been placed, so they can say with certainty how much more space than at present they expect to need in Temple Mills themselves?

I am sure in theory space exists for a couple of minor servicing (as in cleaning) sidings at other locations eg Dagenham or Ebbsfleet. And I have never heard of all 6 International platforms at St Pancras plus the 2 International platforms at Stratford being full overnight, so overnight stabling of more trains based in France might be possible. Somehow I think Eurostar is going to find it hard to claim lack of space exists for handful of extra trains in UK each night.

Eurostar doesn't own any of the sidings or stations outside Temple Mills you mention, so it seems unlikely Eurostar will consider them.

However, what you say does raise an interesting question: Would it be possible to operate a cross-channel train service without any use of Temple Mills - either by using alternatives for overnight stabling in the UK as you mention, whether sidings or in station platforms, or by not stabling in the UK at all, and instead running the entire service from the Mainland Europe end, just like how some existing GB services are entirely run from one end.

The option may be worth considering for whichever operator doesn't get space in Temple Mills.

 

[Frothy]

It's interesting to consider if all the space was used up up Temple Mills, perhaps one operator or even HS1 would consider building a new depot.

 

[HS2isgood]

Skimming through the documents on the ORR website (thank you for the link!) it appears that both Evolyn and VT have requested 2 roads in the shed each, or 4 indoor roads between them.

As the shed has 8 roads, if both were approved that would take up half the space in the shed. I think it is unlikely that half the space in the shed is currently surplus, so it appears likely that Virgin Trains is right that it will be one or the other (at best).

Evolyn also refers to a commitment by Eurostar to the European Commission made in June 2010 for 10 years (so this has now expired), which suggests that Eurostar considered at that point that there was space for one train by a competitor at the depot at any time - if this was accurate, and I interpreted Evolyn's interpretation of a 15-year old commitment correctly, that implies that there isn't sufficient space to provide even close to the amount of capacity requested by either party.


Well, given that the lead time for new stock is well in excess of 24 months, such a period would be rather short, don't you think?

It appears as though at least some of what Eurostar is doing is trying to delay things - possibly until their order for new trains has been placed, so they can say with certainty how much more space than at present they expect to need in Temple Mills themselves?


Eurostar doesn't own any of the sidings or stations outside Temple Mills you mention, so it seems unlikely Eurostar will consider them.

However, what you say does raise an interesting question: Would it be possible to operate a cross-channel train service without any use of Temple Mills - either by using alternatives for overnight stabling in the UK as you mention, whether sidings or in station platforms, or by not stabling in the UK at all, and instead running the entire service from the Mainland Europe end, just like how some existing GB services are entirely run from one end.

The option may be worth considering for whichever operator doesn't get space in Temple Mills.

Trenitalia wants to run service mostly off the Amsterdam/Paris end, and they seem to be annoyed at the suggestion they're getting behind because of the Temple Mills dispute between other prospective operations, as their 66 ETRs (20 for Italy, 46 for foreign operations including signalling for lots of countries) are indeed already ordered as of 2023/4.

Hitachi Rail: €861m deal with Trenitalia for 30 high speed trains : November 13, 2023

Hitachi Rail: €861m deal with Trenitalia for 30 high speed trains

www.hitachi.com

Here is the order of 30.

In arrivo nel 2025 il nuovo Frecciarossa 1000

Presentato in anteprima a Berlino nel corso di InnoTrans 2024. Oltre 1,3 miliardi di euro di investimento per 46 treni

www.fsnews.it

And here a further 36.

 

[zwk500]

if I remember correctly there are 8 roads in main shed, and 3 each side, plus 2 short sidings (which hold half sets) between depot and the running lines

Temple Mills Facility Description available here: https://highspeed1.co.uk/media/kpfhrm2h/eil-tmi-sfd-final-2022-v1.pdf

Which has the following info: Number of tracks which are completely electrified x22 (inc. wheel lathe road) of 400m (my bold). Given the limitations on other maintenance roads (e.g. only 6x roof inspection roads, only 2x CET equipped roads) it is reasonable to assume that at least some roads need to be left clear for shunting at any time.

It is also relevant that Temple Mills explicitly cannot undertake 'heavy' maintenance and so any operator would still need a second depot to undertake the jobs beyond the capability of Temple Mills.

Fairly sure (but happy to be corrected) that space exists for the short sidings to be extended into 1.5 train lengths.

From satellite imagery, the space exists for the 2x short roads to be extended to 400m length but not within the current boundary fence of the site (which could of course be moved, subject to wrangling between HS1 Ltd and NR). However those roads would require additional shunting to access what appear to be the cleaning roads. Remember Depot capacity isn't just about how many vehicles you can physically fit, but the ability of the depot to do all required tasks.

I am sure in theory space exists for a couple of minor servicing (as in cleaning) sidings at other locations eg Dagenham or Ebbsfleet. And I have never heard of all 6 International platforms at St Pancras plus the 2 International platforms at Stratford being full overnight, so overnight stabling of more trains based in France might be possible.

Stabling at St Pancras should be possible, from RTT Eurostar already do.
At Stratford the layout raises it's ugly head again - stabling in the 400m platforms would require a lengthy wrong-road move at one end of the day or the other if the train is leaving/entering service at St Pancras, or to run down to Ebbsfleet and back. The question of where the driver depot would be is also present here.
At Ebbsfleet the layout isn't as problematic but the assumed lack of a driver depot would be an issue (although not unsolvable).
Dagenham is unlikely to be used as a stabling point, there's barely enough space for the sidings as it is and they're used for accessing the freight terminals there. It's also not accessible to HS1 trains from the St Pancras Direction, so trains would need to be taken out of service at Ebbsfleet.
Stabling at Ebbsfleet or Stratford Int'ls would also then require track maintenance to be accommodated. Certainly not impossible, but an additional issue to overcome. The HS1 Sectional Appendix does explicitly allow stabling of trains in St Pancras, Stratford and Ebbsfleet Platform Lines as per the relevant UK Rulebook modules. Also each station only has 2 platforms to stable trains at, which is quite restrictive - especially if either operator wanted to call at the stations early in the morning or late at night.

Somehow I think Eurostar is going to find it hard to claim lack of space exists for handful of extra trains in UK each night.

Tbf Eurostar aren't claiming there's a lack of space in the UK, just in their depot. I do agree that they're going to find it hard to defend their claim that no solution to the depot question is possible though. However the question of depot capacity is also dependent on the service plan for either prospective operator. If they need trains ready for the first morning services from London that's a different problem to if they're planning to do the maintenance in the afternoons between a morning and evening run.

Within all this is the business side of things - a new operator is not going to want to drive costs up by scattering trains up and down the length of HS1, because then they'd be unable to compete on price with Eurostar.

 

[Wolfie]

Temple Mills Facility Description available here: https://highspeed1.co.uk/media/kpfhrm2h/eil-tmi-sfd-final-2022-v1.pdf

Which has the following info: Number of tracks which are completely electrified x22 (inc. wheel lathe road) of 400m (my bold). Given the limitations on other maintenance roads (e.g. only 6x roof inspection roads, only 2x CET equipped roads) it is reasonable to assume that at least some roads need to be left clear for shunting at any time.

It is also relevant that Temple Mills explicitly cannot undertake 'heavy' maintenance and so any operator would still need a second depot to undertake the jobs beyond the capability of Temple Mills.

From satellite imagery, the space exists for the 2x short roads to be extended to 400m length but not within the current boundary fence of the site (which could of course be moved, subject to wrangling between HS1 Ltd and NR). However those roads would require additional shunting to access what appear to be the cleaning roads. Remember Depot capacity isn't just about how many vehicles you can physically fit, but the ability of the depot to do all required tasks.

Stabling at St Pancras should be possible, from RTT Eurostar already do.
At Stratford the layout raises it's ugly head again - stabling in the 400m platforms would require a lengthy wrong-road move at one end of the day or the other if the train is leaving/entering service at St Pancras, or to run down to Ebbsfleet and back. The question of where the driver depot would be is also present here.
At Ebbsfleet the layout isn't as problematic but the assumed lack of a driver depot would be an issue (although not unsolvable).
Dagenham is unlikely to be used as a stabling point, there's barely enough space for the sidings as it is and they're used for accessing the freight terminals there. It's also not accessible to HS1 trains from the St Pancras Direction, so trains would need to be taken out of service at Ebbsfleet.
Stabling at Ebbsfleet or Stratford Int'ls would also then require track maintenance to be accommodated. Certainly not impossible, but an additional issue to overcome. The HS1 Sectional Appendix does explicitly allow stabling of trains in St Pancras, Stratford and Ebbsfleet Platform Lines as per the relevant UK Rulebook modules. Also each station only has 2 platforms to stable trains at, which is quite restrictive - especially if either operator wanted to call at the stations early in the morning or late at night.

Tbf Eurostar aren't claiming there's a lack of space in the UK, just in their depot. I do agree that they're going to find it hard to defend their claim that no solution to the depot question is possible though. However the question of depot capacity is also dependent on the service plan for either prospective operator. If they need trains ready for the first morning services from London that's a different problem to if they're planning to do the maintenance in the afternoons between a morning and evening run.

Within all this is the business side of things - a new operator is not going to want to drive costs up by scattering trains up and down the length of HS1, because then they'd be unable to compete on price with Eurostar.

Re your last para l absolutely agree. Conversely, of course, Eurostar will strongly resist "solutions" that adversely impact their operations or increase their costs.

 

[SeanG]

Geneva seems a good bet.

I also wouldn't rule out a small part of the fleet doing some holiday specials (in conjunction with Virgin airlines, and/or Virgin cruises), possibly two or three trains a week to a cruise port like Barcelona, Trieste, or Civitavecchia etc.

This sounds like a great idea on the face of it and something that I would do, however having been on a Virgin Voyage and given the target market (eg luxury cruise for younger cruisers) I think that many would just prefer to hop on the next flight. I don't think anyone who goes on a cruise cares about their carbon footprint that much!!

 

[LLivery]

VTE = Virgin Trains Europe(an)?

Very interesting letters; I was still a little skeptical that things were actually moving until seeing them.

I do wonder how the French (and any other potential country) are dealing with this and I'm sure the ORR love having their involvement questioned by Eurostar. A rather cheeky.

Well, given that the lead time for new stock is well in excess of 24 months, such a period would be rather short, don't you think?

It appears as though at least some of what Eurostar is doing is trying to delay things - possibly until their order for new trains has been placed, so they can say with certainty how much more space than at present they expect to need in Temple Mills themselves?

It is a short time and I agree with you, noting Eurostar want new stock. Half seriously, the 24 months would be for proving it genuinely needs the space for the stock it currently has, and that said stock needs to be kept at Temple Mills for reasonable operational reasons to provide their timetable (using half of their argument against them), rather than having a questionably low stock utilisation, keeping trains in the depot and then saying 'we've got no room' for competition.

I'm no legal expert, but they're absolutely trying it. Those letters read a little nervous to me.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Having read the exchange between Eurostar and ORR I suspect that none of the would be operators really know what they want and therefore neither Eurostar nor the ORR are in a position to go much further. I can imagine a meeting between Eurostar and an aspiring competitor.
Eurostar
So you would like access to our depot?
Competitor
Yes please
Eurostar
OK. What type of train will you have?
Competitor
Er pass
Eurostar
What kind of maintenance regime will you have?
Competitor
Er pass
Eurostar
How many staff will you need?
Competitor
Er pass
Eurostar
What about spares?
Competitor
Er pass.
And the list goes on.
Eurostar cannot really give any thoughts without the vital information.

Running international (very) high speed trains is a very expensive and meticulous operation. You have to meet the safety and other regulations of the various networks.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Given all the shenanigans around Temple Mills, is there any realistic chance of Evolyn or Virgin scraping together enough to build their own depot, either separately or jointly? Looking along the route of HS1 there aren’t any obvious brownfield places to put one given the space required. I imagine greenfield would be a nightmare due to the planning and consultation required.

 

[zwk500]

Given all the shenanigans around Temple Mills, is there any realistic chance of Evolyn or Virgin scraping together enough to build their own depot, either separately or jointly? Looking along the route of HS1 there aren’t any obvious brownfield places to put one given the space required. I imagine greenfield would be a nightmare due to the planning and consultation required.

Almost certainly not until they are established operators, the confidence of any return on such an investment would be very low. And remember the UK is only part of the discussion - as other posts have mentioned.

IMO the most likely outcome is a compromise where units are parked at St Pancras and 1 or 2 at a time cycle through Temple Mills for inspection and tanking in reasonably tightly defined slots. The majority of the maintenance burden would then be done by the continental end depot. However a lot depends on what service the operator wants to run, bearing in mind HS1 shuts from the Tunnel boundary overnight for maintenance (roughly Midnight-5AM, slightly varying between weekends and midweek) and it's half an hour from the tunnel to St Pancras with 300kph stock.

 

[SynthD]

Restoring the Disneyland connection is also an option for anybody new - it is a proven route after all.

Unless the improvements to St Pancras close off the ability to deal with arrivals who need customs.

However, what you say does raise an interesting question: Would it be possible to operate a cross-channel train service without any use of Temple Mills - either by using alternatives for overnight stabling in the UK as you mention, whether sidings or in station platforms, or by not stabling in the UK at all, and instead running the entire service from the Mainland Europe end, just like how some existing GB services are entirely run from one end.

The option may be worth considering for whichever operator doesn't get space in Temple Mills.

It feels like the UK government are more concerned about security of trains than the other relevant countries, and might impose Temple Mills-like security requirements. As a basic idea of what this involves, see this sign on the Temple Mills road entrance, which refers to the Channel Tunnel Security Order of 1994. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5...try=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDExMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

 

[Blindtraveler]

Removing access to arrival customs at the UK end would definitely not be an improvement. Are there firm plans for the refurb at St P Or is it all a jumble of ideas and speculation? And is it going to have a detrimental effect on circulation space on the main concourse or any major changes to access to other platforms?

 

[Trainbike46]

Removing access to arrival customs at the UK end would definitely not be an improvement. Are there firm plans for the refurb at St P Or is it all a jumble of ideas and speculation? And is it going to have a detrimental effect on circulation space on the main concourse or any major changes to access to other platforms?

HS1 has selected designers for the express purpose of increasing passenger capacity for international services.

Capacity has already increased due to the second departure lounge used at busy times, and by increasing the number of French border officer booths and the (re)-introduction of ePassport gates.

 

[Meerkat]

Do ORR have the right to allocate part of the depot to a particular operator, or would they just declare that Eurostar must make X amount of space available and then leave Eurostar to open a bidding process?

 

[TheWierdOne]

Do ORR have the right to allocate part of the depot to a particular operator, or would they just declare that Eurostar must make X amount of space available and then leave Eurostar to open a bidding process?

Virgin Group speeds up train order to compete with Eurostar challenge

Virgin Group says it is close to placing a significant order for high-speed trains that is expected to shake up Eurostar's 30-year monopoly on the Channel Tunnel.

www.euronews.com

Although Virgin Group is optimistic that the depot is likely to announce that it can accept one more train company, it is unlikely to be able to cater for more than two companies in total. As such, the company who finalises a contract for new trains first is likely to get the spot, thereby increasing the need to hurry.

The UK Office of Rail and Road (ORR) is also expected to reveal whether the UK has the maintenance capacity required to extend Channel Tunnel operations.

Based off this article I would assume that the ORR does have the power to force Eurostar to allow access to Temple Mills.

The other interesting titbit from this article is that Virgin are looking to finalise their train order by Q1 of 2025, i.e. in less than 70 days.